Thirty Meter Telescope

Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee Feb 6, 2007

Edward C. Stone

TMT Precursor Studies

Independently-conceived & independently-reviewed, point designs representing ~$6M total effort

CELT (UC+Caltech)VLOT (Canada)GSMT (NOAO/Gemini)

PUBLIC/PRIVATE/INTERNATIONAL partnership formed- June 2003

–Single reference design established by TMT in Nov 04

TMT Reference Design

30m filled aperture, highly segmentedRitchey Chretien two-mirror telescopef/1 primaryf/15 final focusField of view 15 arcminElevation axis in front of the primaryWavelength coverage 0.31 – 28 µmOperational zenith angle range 1° thru

65°Instruments (and their associated AO

systems) are located on large Nasmyth platforms, addressed by an articulated tertiary mirror.

Both seeing-limited and adaptive optics observing modes

AO system requirements and architecture defined

First generation instrument requirements defined

OverviewTelescope Mounted Systems

M1 segment and its support assembly

M2 assembly

M3 assembly

Laser Guide Star Facility

Primary Mirror Segments

• TMT segmented primary is a natural evolution of the Keck mirror

• Keck: 36 segments, 1.8m dia• TMT: 492 segments, 1.4m dia

(size independently selected by ESO) • Polishing and segment module

fabrication must be “mass produced” to cost and quality

• TMT is working with several industrial partners to compete production design, testing and cost

• There are opportunities to save costs by coordinating with ESO

Keck segment

Keck and Gemini Laser Guide

Star Facilities

The Adaptive Optics Era is Here!

TMT.TEL.PRE.06.008.REL01

KECK Courtesy: L. Sromovsky HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE

TMT.TEL.PRE.06.008.REL01

73 x 73 Actuator TMT AO Deformable Mirror

Tested Prototype Meets TMT Performance

Enclosure Configuration

Calotte chosen :

- Structurally efficient, most cost-effective

- Minimum vignetting and best wind protection

TMT AO & Instrument Feasibility Studies

• North American community invited to propose TMT instruments in early 2005– 41 institutions responded, 16 collaborative proposals

emerged• 12 feasibility studies were supported

– NFIRAOS (HIA)– IRIS (UCLA and Caltech)– MIRES (NOAO and U Hawaii)– WFOS (HIA) and GLAO at Caltech– PFI (LLNL, JPL, U de Montreal)– HROS: 2 studies - UCSC and U Colorado– IRMOS: 2 studies - U Florida and Caltech

• ~ 200 scientists and engineers involved at 34 US, 10 Canadian, and 2 French institutions

Site Testing• Robotic data collection underway at 3 sites in Chile, San

Pedro Martir (Mexico), and Mauna Kea, HI• The most comprehensive astronomical site survey work

ever undertaken• Site Requirements Document:

– includes data evaluation/figure of merit strategy– primarily astronomical “weather” data under

consideration: clear nights, atmospheric stability, mean temperature and temperature variations, etc.

• Site data evaluated quarterly

• Clear differences between the sites are now evident

• Final site selection in 2008

TMT Design & Development Phase

Jun 2003: Caltech & UC (CELTCO), AURA & Canada form TMT Board and agree to pursue equal shares of funding for DDP

Apr 2004: DDP begins: Gary Sanders appointed PM, HQ in Pasadena

Moore Foundation $35M, ACURA $17.5M, AURA $17.5M NSF Grant

Nov 2004: Established Reference Design

May 2006: Conceptual Design Review

Sep 2006: Cost Review

Nov 2006: NSF announced AURA’s withdrawal from TMT to assume role as GSMT Program Manager

Jan 2006: Restructured DDP

External Advisory Panel Reviews

• Panel - Bill Frazer, Chair– Reinhard Genzel, MPE– Roger Davies, Oxford– David Tytler, UCSD– Hilton Lewis, Keck– Peter Gray, Gemini– Paul Gilbert, Parsons

Brinkerhoff– Torben Andersen, Lund– Mark Sarazin, ESO– Mark Warner, ATST– Jose Castro, GTC– Bob Fugate, USAF– Mariana de Kock, SALT– Mark Colavita, JPL Keck

• Conceptual Design Review May 8 - 10 2006

Evaluate requirements, whether reference design meet requirements, technical feasibility, risk etcObservers: NSF, NRC Canada, Moore Foundation, Japan, GMT

• Cost Review Sep 26-29 2006

Assess cost estimation methods & contingencyObservers: NSF, NRC Canada, Moore Foundation

Cost Review Report

• “The Panel was extremely impressed by the quantity and quality of work that has been accomplished since the CoDR in May. You have a really excellent project team! In general, the cost estimating methodology is credible, and the risks appear to be well addressed in developing the contingency fund. The operations model is generally appropriate, and is a suitable basis for further planning.”

What’s Ahead

• Complete Design & Development Phase (mid 2009)

• Develop and review implementation proposal (mid 2007)

• Expand current three-way partnership to realize the required funding for the facility, instruments/AO, and operations (public, private, or international)

• Select site (mid 2008)

• Construction phase (2009-2016)

• First light with full mirror (2016)

• Initial science nights (2016)

Goals

• Timely implementation (JWST overlap, ESO 42m telescope)

• Justify readiness and cost of GSMT to establish its priority in next Decadal Survey (2009)

• Realize a public/private/international partnership for GSMT• Develop an NSF role during initial implementation that

doesn’t require commitment of MREFC funds

A Way Forward

• Develop criteria and process for selecting the GSMT design (including operations model, implementation approach, and funding plan) that will be evaluated and prioritized by the Decadal Survey– Criteria and process May 15, 2007– Submit Implementation Plan mid 2008– Selection mid 2009

• Robustly fund the current AURA grant for the design development of TMT and GMT through selection (funding to date has been limited)

• Establish follow-on GSMT technology development program, leading to major equipment construction (e.g., instrumentation, AO) at later time (2013?)

Distant Galaxies – TMT+AO

Credit: M. Bolte

M. Bolte

Hubble Deep Field

Hubble Resolution

TMT Resolution with Adaptive Optics