Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Phase I changes needed for planning HST large programs
Author(s): Denise C. Taylor; David Soderblom; William M. Workman; Ronald Downes; Karla Peterson
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper Abstract

Over one-third of HST observing time in the past two cycles has been dedicated to proposals with allocations greater than 100 orbits. This has led to scheduling difficulties in HST's traditional two-phase proposal process. We describe the changes that were made to the Cycle 13 Phase I proposal process that were needed to assist users and planners later on in Phase II. Some traditionally Phase II information is now requested with large proposals submitted in Phase I so users (and planners) can determine the feasibility of scientific constraints in planning the large observations. Since HST proposers use the Astronomer's Proposal Tool (APT) for both Phases, moving Phase II processing into the Phase I interface was more straightforward than would have been possible with RPS2 (the old Phase II tool). We will also describe the expected changes to internal procedures in planning these large proposals after Phase I acceptance.

Paper Details

Date Published: 16 September 2004
PDF: 8 pages
Proc. SPIE 5493, Optimizing Scientific Return for Astronomy through Information Technologies, (16 September 2004); doi: 10.1117/12.549016
Show Author Affiliations
Denise C. Taylor, Space Telescope Science Institute (United States)
David Soderblom, Space Telescope Science Institute (United States)
William M. Workman, Space Telescope Science Institute (United States)
Ronald Downes, Space Telescope Science Institute (United States)
Karla Peterson, Space Telescope Science Institute (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 5493:
Optimizing Scientific Return for Astronomy through Information Technologies
Peter J. Quinn; Alan Bridger, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top