Talk Outline

1. Vision
2. Polar Astrophysics Management Issues
3. Need for an organization
4. Existing Models
5. Strategic Planning

Vision Statement

Management Issues for Polar Astrophysics

• wide range of science programs
• wide range of instruments

• Limited resources
  • at site
    • personnel, equipment, power
  • accessibility to site
    • difficult travel
    • not physically accessible 9 months/year
    • size & weight shipping constraints
    • communications
• Environment
  • require new techniques
  • failures can cause large delays
• Antarctica is the frontier in Astrophysics
  • between temperate ground based facilities and satellites
  • natural progression from Kitt Peak to Mauna Kea to South Pole to Moon

Need for an organization

• coordinate logistics, communication
• manage limited & shared resources
• manage limited accessibility
• build on experience in Polar environment
  • avoid reinventing the wheel
  • develop robust solutions
  • provide continuity
• provide an interface with NSF/OPP, ASA, and Astronomical Projects

Optimize Scientific Output

• well defined long term scientific plan
• scientifically driven management
• responsivity to, inclusion of, the astronomical community
• support for small-scale CARA-like projects
• site characterization
  • new wavelength bands and new techniques
  • long term testing, archival
• coordinated outreach and education

Are there existing models for the IAO?

• manages limited resources
• characterization of the site
• education and outreach
• accessibility to community
  • T.A.C. for AST/RO & IR/NOAO program
• submm example:
  • site testing -> AST/RO -> 10 meter proposal
• beginning international collaborations

A model for the IAO?
Institute of Astronomy: Mauna Kea

• manages infrastructure, shared resources
• autonomous observatories
  • separately reviewed and funded
  • autonomy has increased as site developed (started with I of A member on each observatory board, TAC etc.)
• 10 year development plan (to be renewed shortly)
• observatories negotiate with the I of A:
  • fraction of time to I of A
  • financial support to I of A
• Board of Directors (extremely powerful lobby)
  • meet once a year, provide advice to I of A Director

but,

• less constrained resources in comparison to S. Pole (people, power, equipment, access, . . .)
• state supported, not federal
• more forgiving environment - continuity less important
• site characterization, techniques, instruments left to individual observatories

Other Existing Models

• NRAO (also tremendously successful)
  • internal projects, focused on an instruments
  • instruments deployed at different sites
• University Observatories: BIMA, OVRO, CSO, Arecibo, Keck, . . .
  • focused on single instruments

Strategic Planning

• appoint committee membership (now)
• with community input and support, identify long term science goals and required facilities
  • hold workshop "Future of Antarctica Astrophysics" at June 1998 AAS meeting (announcement by 10/1/97)
• establish collaborations
• formulate management plan
• IAO proposal to NSF/OPP by June 1999

Scientific Opportunities for a Long Term Plan

• Large scale structure
• Epoch of Galaxy Formation
• Star Formation

Summary

• discussions within CARA, Inter-Institutional Board, Ad-Hoc Management Review Team

• strawman proposal
  
• IAO Planning Committee
  
• Vision Statement
  
• definite timeline to a NSF/OPP proposal
  

CARA's research and education programs are supported in part by the National Science Foundation under a cooperative agreement, grant number NSF OPP 89-20223. © Copyright 1998,1999,2000 by Center for Astrophysical Research in Antarctica. This copyright applies to all web pages and images created by CARA.