A global approach to ELT instrument developments

1
A global approach to ELT instrument developments

• J.-G. Cuby
• for the French ELT WG

2
ELT Instruments timeline

• The construction of an Extremely Large Telescope
  on a competitive time scale will be addressed by
  radical strategic planning (Council resolution)
• Calls for a schedule compatible with other
  projects, TMT, GMT, ALMA, JWST, etc.
• Assume 2016
• Calls for forefront instrumentation
• Key to science, e.g. the VLT success
• Reverse schedule

• FP7 (2008-2012) in parallel with the instrument
  study
• No time left for generic studies for the first
  generation instruments
• First / Main instruments need to be started NOW
  (2-4 years of demonstration)

3
A key word demonstration

• Some concepts for workhorse ELT instruments
  remain to be demonstrated
• E.g. MOAO, XAO instruments
• Demonstration requires focused and integrated
  studies at system level
• Science
• Top Level Requirements, Simulations, Simulators,
  Data Reduction, etc.
• Adaptive Optics
• TLRs, Simulations feeding science, AO system
  analysis, tests on existing systems, etc.
• Instrumentation
• TLRs, concepts, interfaces with AO, at least 2
  prototyping cycles, etc.
• System
• Putting it all together, budgets, etc.
• Demonstrators, either in lab (e.g. AO benches) or
  on-sky (e.g. VLT)
• Synergy with transverse AO developments
• Requirements
• Interfaces
• Synergy with telescope developments

4
A key word demonstration

• Demonstration by
• Study (simulations, concepts, etc.)
• Prototypes
• Demonstrators (benches, on-sky, etc.)
• Demonstrations on existing infrastructures (e.g.
  VLT) for the next infrastructures
• Develop new demonstrators in lab or on sky
• Use existing or planned instruments as
  demonstrators (e.g. SPHERE)
• Structuring activity
• Teams with various competence, etc
• Access to lab, possibly sky, demonstrators
• Networks highly desirable, e.g. for the science
  activities
• FP7 ideal for the demonstration phase until
  instrument FDR ( 2012)
• JRAs, networks, access (to demonstrators)

5
Examples

• WFSPEC, MOMFIS etc.
• High-z and mass assembly of galaxies
• Complex
• To be demonstrated (MOAO)
• Major interface aspects with telescope and AO,
  etc.

6
Examples
MOMFIS WFSPEC WBS for the Instrument study
7
Example MOMFIS / WFSPEC demonstration

• Potential Participants F, UK, I, tbd.
• Timescale 2008-2012 for the bulk of the
  activities
• Cost 8 M all inclusive (included in N.
  Hubins presentation)
• Deliverables reports, conceptual studies,
  several prototypes (hw sw), Demonstrators (1
  bench, 1 VLT)
• Industrial dimension interest in short term
  applied RD
• EU dimension use of existing infrastructures,
  demonstration for future infrastructures,
  structuring activity, synergy with ELT Design
  Study

8
EPICS A Planet Finder instrument for the European
ELT (slides from J.-L. Beuzit)
9
EPICS Design philosophy

• General approach -gt Integrated concept
• Science-driven detection of exoplanets
• Very detailed system analysis
• Lessons learned from SPHERE on VLT (as
  demonstrator)
• Globally optimized instrument (AO, corono, focal
  WFS control, observing modes)
• Open concept, explore several options (corono,
  IFS...)
• Settle on well-established competences
  distributed in the XAO community
• Extensive simulations -gt end-to-end model
• Prototyping, validations, test benches,
  demosntrator

10
EPICS Design Strategy
Prototypes
HOT extension
Aggressive Calibration Post-processing
Spatially Filtered SH
FP6 Point design Simulations experiments
EPICS System Dimensioning
Experiments Simulations
Advanced PYR
Active suppression of Systematic speckles
Theory
SPHERE feedback
Conceptual Preliminary Design Reviews
11
Conclusions

• FP7 to support the design phase of E-ELT
  instruments in period 2008-2012 (JRAs, network
  access)
• Global approach to instrument developments highly
  desirable
• Better focus, better synergy
• Allows smaller (integrated) teams
• Higher efficiency, faster
• Structuring activity
• Not exclusive of transverse / generic activities
• Activities in essence transverse, e.g. detectors,
  etc.
• Upfront activities with longer development
  timescales
• Synergy with ELT DS
• Instrumentation currently severely under funded
• Which call ? Preparatory phase or I3 ?