Panel created in 2001 as part of restructuring of PPARC Advisory Structure

One of five advisory panels:

Astronomy Advisory Panel (AAP)

Solar System Advisory Panel (SSAP)

Particle Astrophysics Advisory Panel (PAAP)

Particle Physics Advisory Panel (PPAP)

Technology & Industry Advisory Panel (TIAP)

Astronomy Advisory Panel:Astronomy Advisory Panel:

Current MembershipCurrent Membership• Mike Edmunds (Chair) - Cardiff• Peter Coles - Nottingham• Cathie Clarke - IoA• Melvin Hoare - Leeds• Seb Oliver - Sussex• Mark Cropper - MSSL• Simon Morris - Durham• Trevor Ponman - Birmingham• Keith Horne - St Andrews

Terms of Reference• maintain a prioritised long-term strategy for

Astronomy, excluding solar systems science, within PPARC;

• advise on the facilities and missions required to deliver that strategy;

• review the success of PPARC in meeting the strategy;

• report to the Science Committee, and provide input to the annual update of the Road Map and to the Science Committee’s strategy discussions;

• advise the Science Committee on proposals and priorities.

AAP StrategyAAP Strategy

Framework for:• Priority setting & finance by Science

Committee• Working with the community – making

PPARC’s priorities clear and the views of the community clear to PPARC

• Panels judging proposals and awarding grants

Developing a strategy

AIM:

To provide a summary of the science priorities and requirements in the area of astronomy and astrophysics, as viewed by the AAP, over the coming ten years

PhilosophyPhilosophy

• Presupposes that funding will only be given for excellent research.

• Promote research in areas of strategic importance• Promote research which will have significant

international impact• Promote research which will clearly lead to development

of new areas of strategic importance• Don’t exclude research in areas not directly within the

key science priority areas where its real significance can be demonstrated and in particular, where breakthroughs would have a wide implication for astrophysics in general

The strategy must:The strategy must:• Enable production of world-leading, high impact

science • Ensure access to a range of relevant, world-

competitive facilities• Recognise areas of UK strength• Meet the broader requirements of the PPARC

strategy, interacting with other areas of the programme where appropriate

• Maximise the return from UK’s ongoing investment in existing facilities and projects

The strategy must:The strategy must:

• Allow appropriate prioritisation between new and diminishing science areas and associated facilities

• Provide a balanced programme including ground- and space-based instrumentation, technology development and theoretical work

• Provide a route to developing and encouraging long-term, ‘blue-sky’ projects (e.g. far-IR missions beyond Herschel/Planck; sub-mm surveys; innovative space missions)

Science Committee prioritiesScience Committee priorities  What are the basic properties of the fundamental particles

and forces?Is there a ‘Theory of Everything’, and if so what form

does it take? What is the origin of the Universe? How did it evolve?  Can we understand the origin of the observed structure? What constitutes the dark mass and dark energy of the

Universe?  How does the Universe work? What is the present and future influence of the Sun on our

solar system? How do stars and planetary systems form and evolve? Has life existed elsewhere in the Universe, and does it exist

elsewhere now?

AAP priority science areas:

• Cosmology

• The formation and development of galaxies

• Star formation and the formation and evolution of planetary systems

• Extreme environment astrophysics

Underpinning; Theory, modelling (incl. HPC), GRID (data)Underpinning; Theory, modelling (incl. HPC), GRID (data)

Implement strategy by:

• Linking the science requirements to the provision of the necessary facilities

• Ensuring that the overall resources into particular areas are appropriate, in particular ensuring that the necessary research personnel are available to achieve the science goals

• Maximising world impact by either the direct visibility of the UK role, for example by PI-status, lead authorship, or by playing a smaller, but critical role (by virtue of specialist expertise) in large projects where the scientific return will be outstanding

Implement strategy by:Implement strategy by:• Being supportive of and centrally involved in high

UK priority science, ESA missions. Only where a high priority scientific area cannot be addressed by an ESA mission should the UK seek other partnerships

• Exploiting the UK’s membership of ESO. We should be seen as a key influence in the development of ESO’s strategic vision and seek to become a significant partner in new developments, where these match UK science goals and utilise UK technological and/or instrumentation expertise. (eg. VLT instruments, VLTI, ELT)

Implement strategy by:Implement strategy by:

• Viewing support for the grants line as critical for the programme overall.

• Engaging in maximum exploitation of current UK world-class facilities, including the JCMT, UKIRT, ING and AAT on the ground, and observatories such as XMM-Newton in space. Capability should be upgraded where appropriate, but decreasing involvement should be sought where a facility is no longer globally competitive.

CosmologyCosmology

Key science questions:Key science questions:

• What is the origin of the Universe?• Can we understand the origin of the observed

structure?• What constitutes the dark mass and dark

energy of the Universe?

Cosmology

• 8-m telescope time• Planck

• e-MERLIN• Herschel

• JWST• ALMA• GAIA• SKA• LISA

• Darwin• OWL/ELT

• XEUS

The Formation and development of galaxies

• 8-m telescope time• Planck

• Wide-field surveys• e-MERLIN

• Herschel• JWST• ALMA• GAIA• SKA• LISA

• OWL/ELT• XEUS

Star formation and the formation and development of planetary systems

• 8-m telescope time

• Wide-field surveys

• e-MERLIN

• Herschel

• JWST

• ALMA

• GAIA

• SKA

• Darwin

• OWL/ELT

Extreme environment astrophysics

• 8-m telescope time• Wide-field surveys

• e-MERLIN• JWST• ALMA• GAIA• SKA• LISA

• Darwin• OWL/ELT

• XEUS

Questions 1

• Regarding the AAP strategy:• Are the core science headings correct (slide 10) ?• If you were able to replace one of these headings, which one

would you remove? What would you replace it with?• What are your views on the balance between the level of grant

support against that used for facilities/missions etc? Do you have suggestions on how this level should be set?

• Within the grants line (or otherwise?) how do we ensure sufficient science exploitation effort for future large projects (ALMA, JWST…) so that we are not out-performed by our partners?

• How far should grant awards reflect the strategy? Should some areas receive ring-fenced funding for projects/grants? Which ones and why?

Questions 2

• Facilities and missions:• Taking into account their different timescales, which of the

facilities and missions shown in the previous slides, would you designate as of particularly high or particularly low priority? Why?

• What gaps are there in the programme of future facilities and missions seen as high priority by the Panel? These might include:

• What should follow Herschel in the far IR?• How should the UK move forward until the next

generation of X-ray space observatories (XEUS/Constellation-X)?

Questions 2 continued

• What are your views on the priorities within the ESO programme? (i.e. ELT, VLTI, ALMA, VLT 2nd generation, La Silla)

• In the next generation of ESO/Gemini instruments, what should the UK be pushing for?

• Do you have particular, and important, observing requirements that are not presently met, and will not be met within the current strategy?

• What is the optimum way for the community to interface with ALMA (and other observatories)? Is it through regional support centres or university-based support groups?

Questions 3• Software and computing• What are your views on astronomical software

provision?• Will the advent of the Virtual observatory and e-

science developments alter your scientific requirements? How should we influence any changes?

• How should support for high performance computing infrastructure be provided? Is the current model/level correct?

Questions 4

• Applying and developing the strategy

• What do you think is the best way for PPARC to apply the strategy?

• What is the best way for the community to participate in the development of the strategy?