Jay Elias1 1plus bits plagiarized from Steve Heathcote and others SOAR Overview Jay Elias1 1plus bits plagiarized from Steve Heathcote and others

Operated by a Consortium BRAZIL U. North Carolina Michigan State University NOAO Chile Partner Time Share 30.7% 12.5% 16.7% 30.0% 10.0% 2

Telescope & Site Site properties Original site survey suggested: 25%: 0.34” 50%: 0.47” 75%: 0.63” More data + re-analysis indicates (adjusted to 4-m aperture): 25%: 0.50” 50%: 0.62” 75%: 0.75” Telescope and enclosure should degrade top quartile seeing by no more than 10% Active optics tune mirror to achieve this DIQ performance, but it is hard to maintain See later slides….

Telescope & Site Sunset at SOAR: Note Gemini-S just behind, LSST construction site on peak to right

Facility Architectural Design by M3 2-story lower enclosure (18-m diameter) Approximately 300 m2 control & instrument handling areas Pier (6m diameter & 6-m high) Mechanical equipment Receiving & mirror handling

Telescope 4.1 m clear aperture f/16 Ritchey-Chrétian Active control of M1 & M2 30Hz Tip-Tilt correction using M3 Best possible images over Isokinetic Patch 8.5 arcmin science field 10x10 arcmin guide field Somewhat larger field potentially possible, but not much Large Instrument Payload 2 Nasmyth ports Up to 3 instruments on each Max weight = Gemini weight limit 3 Bent Cass Facility wavefront sensor 1 instrument per port Fiber feed to SIFS Optical pick-off to STELES Rapid switching between instruments 6

Telescope Initial commissioning effort completed in 2006 with improvements to primary lateral supports Recent work: Upgraded telescope control system (TCS), bring to same level as Blanco/Mayall Started replacement of older computers associated with the telescope; continuing task Started upgrade of cassegrain wavefront sensor (needed to tune optics); hoping to complete this year

Telescope & Instrument Layout

Telescope Performance DIQ data Old SOI data from 2008-9 Should be the same now but we have not re-examined the data (also much less imaging these days) But still room for improvement – in particular, still see ellipticity in images WFS guider project intended to help with this along with more consistent focus Want to monitor DIQ more consistently in future

Down Time Technical down time (“failures”) typically close to 4% Engineering time 12% -> 9% Weather loss quite variable – 15-30% Note - Failures include remote-observing failures – not separated out, but under 1% of scheduled time

Instruments (Current) Four facility instruments currently available to users: Goodman High-Throughput Spectrograph (optical) SOI (optical imager) Spartan (NIR imager) SOAR Adaptive Module (SAM) + optical imager (SAMI) “Visitor” instruments with community access Tokovinin speckle camera (HR-Cam) SAM + Fabry-Perot (campaign mode) Decommissioned: OSIRIS IR imager/spectrometer Failed on last scheduled night in 2016 and computer hardware now spare parts at CTIO

Instruments (Current) Goodman Offers long slit, MOS mode, and direct imaging, UV to 900 nm+ Multiple spectral resolution – few hundred to few thousand Second “red” camera now available Acquisition camera now available Upgrades underway (blue camera computer, user interfaces, possible reductions in scattered light) Data pipelines under development (see S. Torres talk) ADC also available for programs requiring a specific position angle Most-used instrument – 70% of science time or more SOI Available for science since 2005A, working reliably CCD imager, approx. 5x5 arcmin, variety of filters But contains obsolescent components, long-term viability requires action Can it be replaced by Goodman imaging mode? SOAR External Review

Instruments (Current) Spartan Available for general user science starting in 2010A 5x5 arcmin NIR (YJHK + narrowband) High-resolution imaging mode is never used, over-optimistic expectations from site+telescope Not viable in long-term without electronics upgrade, which is feasible but not trivial Pipeline to be available “soon” SAM (only working 2nd gen instrument) Visible wavelength GLAO over 3x3 arcmin field Regular science use since 2013B; support has not been difficult but Andrei Tokovinin remains critical on technical side Demand is variable, has been ~20% of time but usually <10%. Basic pipeline exists, run by SOAR staff

Instruments (Coming Soon) SIFS (IFU spectrograph) Delivered in Dec 2009 & installed on telescope; multiple problems requiring re-work; re-commissioning starting mid-2015 About to issue call for SV time for 2 modes (after workshop, 2 nights in May plus maybe also July) Needs user-friendly pipeline STELES (2nd gen, Echelle spectrograph) Tested in lab (LNA) Delivered to SOAR August 2016 Assembly and alignment with science detectors nearly complete Need to complete various interface tasks and complete lab testing Install on telescope before end of semester? SV possible in 2017B Will have a pipeline

Instruments (Coming Soon) ARCOIRIS (ex Tspec 4, NIR spectrograph, R~3000) Currently operational on Blanco NSF now supports transfer to SOAR Need to put in place contracts to modify fore-optics Need NOAO engineering support for interfaces Availability in 2018?

Instruments (Coming Later) No additional approved facility instruments “Visitor” instruments in various stages of development: several talks here – including: SAMOS SORCERESS Robo-SOAR (for these the builders have opened discussions with the observatory)

Telescope (Coming Soon) Wavefront-Sensing Guider Long time on wish list, now under development Intended to provide automatic focus and astigmatism correction – should produce better DIQ Better field of view, user software should reduce acquisition overheads as well Phase II TCS Upgrades Support for scripting (observing sequences) Informational displays Computer upgrades Continuing tasks, useful (safe) lifetime for a computer <10 years

Telescope (Coming Later) Mount Control Upgrade Mount electronics 10+ years old; technology even older Additional spares increasingly hard to find Delivered as “black box” Developing a replacement plan; aiming for more commonality with Blanco/Mayall Completion 2-3 years? Active Optics Control Upgrade to primary could reduce overheads Tertiary control another “black box” M1 is higher priority

Observing Modes Classical, in-person (on mountain) Classical, remote At this point, maybe 10% of total time Classical, remote Can result in reduced productivity – Connection problems Inadequate observing set-up at remote location Most observing done this way nonetheless Target of Opportunity Observer connects remotely – currently used for events with advance notice (days to hours) but faster response possible in theory (done in the past) Service/Queue SOAR staffing levels can’t support this

Looking Ahead to 2020+ Telescope itself should be viable if the “coming later” projects are completed Still need to replace computers as they age Facility (shutter, for example) will need smaller upgrade projects Realistic expectation is that all of the original electronics should be gone by 2025 Instruments All of the instruments need reliability upgrades on scales of 5-10 years This is happening for Goodman and SAM Partial upgrade for Spartan underway Decision needed on long-term SOI use Will be needed in a few years for SIFS, STELES, ARCOIRIS

Looking Ahead to 2020+ Previous slide considered only current capabilities – what else? Additional instruments? Several proposed but these are not general-purpose instruments (go to the talks!) Are there current instruments that should be replaced (Spartan? SOI?) Is there a missing general-purpose capability (e.g, optical/NIR low resolution spectrograph)? Better interfaces for time-domain work Remember that with fixed staffing anything that gets added requires subtracting something else (increased automation can help some, but only so far)

Looking Ahead to 2020+ This workshop is intended to provide input from the general community – this is your (first) opportunity to influence what SOAR does over the next 5-10 years!