R&D for FD, Radio and the layout of an infill array do we need FD in the North ? Yes, may be one eye only can we improve the FD telescopes ? probably, but how much ? is Radio detection a viable option ? may be - let´s try what R&D is needed for Radio ? still a lot do we need an infill array for this ? Yes, we do ! a possible layout in the South my simple minded view H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

R&D for the next generation FD systems improved S/N ? is possible better resolution ? not needed extended FOV ? important ? cost reduction ? may be ? a new design ?? probably not ! H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

MORE COLLECTED LIGHT (S/N) ? increasing the collected light requires larger aperture diameter a a problem with Mercedes walls : limited acceptance angle increasing the aperture only is not a solution M. Palatka – Feb. 2005

H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005 increasing of collected light requires larger aperture diameter and all other construction parameters all construction parameters of the FD have to be increased linearly – the aperture, corrector ring , mirrors, camera body and the building  $$$ ! H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

which „parameters“ can be improved ? filters ~ o. k. figure of merit ? range ? filter layer on PMTs ? corrector rings ? size ? transmission ( BK 7 ) mirrors o. k. high R, small halo ( CZ ) PMTs ? QE ?, WLS on PMTs ? window material ! camera layout ~ o. k. 16 x 16 pattern ? resolution ~ o. k. < shower „size“ ! field of view ~ o. k. smaller fov ? higher (variable) elevation ? H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

shower „size“ ~ 300m ; ~ 10mrad @ 30km 90 % H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

a possible technical solution with small R&D effort an independent housing for each telescope : lightweight but stable (steel) construction light walls with insulation, air condition etc. aperture system, mirrors, cameras, DAQ ---- unchanged improved (stable) mechanical mounts for installation (and calibration) in horizontal position ~ 16 or 45 degree tilt angle for total system  cheaper infrastructure, very flexible H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005 „tilted telescopes“ 16 or 45 deg easy installation, very flexible ! cost effective ? H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

a possible „test“ layout at Loma Amarilla site Comms Tower + H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

EAS detection by radio signals radio detection works at ~ 1017 eV several experiments : o. k. signal depends on shower energy ? power law ? signal (range) depends on zenith angle ? frequency dep. ! signal depends on magnetic field angle ? sin, 1-cos ? signal depends on weather ! E – field ? ionization ? calorimetric signal ? curvature radius ? little information on long. dev. ( X ) „integral“ electron detector !  a lot more R&D on a larger E-scale is required H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

Monte Carlo, Analytics & Data: Frequency Dependence data rescaled spectra depend on shower parameters spectra steepen at larger distances 10 MHz : very coherent 55 MHz : coherence limited thin: analytics thick: MC Ep=1017 eV centre rf noise 100 m 250 m H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

EAS detection at larger core distances ?  = 40±  = 50±  = 60±  = 70± 40 MHz sim. range important for possible use at PAO sites mainly useful for the detection of inclined showers ???? MC simulation estimated sensitivity limit for 4 antennas H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

KASCADE - Grande and LOPES 10 / 30 measurements of air showers in the energy range E0 = 100 TeV - 1 EeV

LOPES 10 : Interplay of radio and particle measurements search for Event: maximum coherence = 302.18o = 301.58o q = 41.01o = 40.61o a = 57.91o Xc = -142.85 m = -137.85 m Yc = 40.27 m = 30.28 m lg(E/eV) = 17.73 ln(A) = 3.16 curvature = 3250 m = 4250 m Coherence! Improvement of shower core and arrival direction estimate in Grande by LOPES !

electron number and Nµ ( ~ Energy ) radio pulse height divided by the results from previous fits (alpha, r) no clear dependence on electron number ( ~ A , Q ) power law fit seems o.k. for radio signal vs. Nmu ( ~ E )

LOPES 10 : Analysis of distant events : Results signal depends on shower parameters Allan‘s formula : en = 20•( E / 1017eV) • sin a • cos q • exp( - R / R0(n,q) ) [ mV / m MHz ] scaling with primary energy including geomagnetic field angle, zenith angle, core distance H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

R&D studies for Radio detection of EAS on site field studies noise level at both sites, find best frequency range antenna design frequency, polarisation, directional characteristics front end electronics band width filters, amps, power, costs trigger data reduction, threshold for self trigger field tests flying transmitter, array or FD trigger beam forming shower geometry, angular resolution external effects day-night, sun, weather dependence range studies shower energy, zenith angle, magnetic angle etc. etc. etc. ??? H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

Radio signal calibration response at large zenith angles important for large arrays ! for calibration at least one decade in shower energy necessary !  high Xmax ( ~ 10 km at 1018 – 1019 eV )  increase vertical f.o.v. for FD telescopes must study day/night behaviour and weather effects  compare triggered events with (graded) infill array array size ? defined by event rates needed : f(E) H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

Longitudinal Shower Development - Energy Deposit - average of 100 simulated showers ⇒ same EAS in Ne(X) for all atmospheres

FD telescopes : vertical field of view vs. minimal distance ~ Xmax for 60 deg zenith 10.0 600 viewing angle Height a.s.l. [km] 300 7.5 summer atm. winter X ~ 430 g/cm² vertical  ~ 500 g/cm² at 300 zenith angle 5.0 ~ 3 km 2.5 ~ 9 km ~ eye level 1400 m distance from eye [km] 5 10

a useful graded infill array for R&D take 19 regular tanks with their center about 7 km from FD eye add 24 infill tanks inside this hexagon to form a regular 866m grid array add 24 tanks more around the center to form a regular 500m grid array 48 tanks  6 km² dense array + 24 km² medium dense array if possible, add more tanks on the 866m grid (towards South) 83 tanks  6 km² + 58 km² arrays ~> very good size  rates and reconstruction quality o. k. ( < 1018 to ~ 1019 eV ) H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

a simple layout for the infill array 1,5 km

What else to do with the infill array ? R&D for SD on the 866m grid ( 3 arrays ) frontend, Comms, trigger, … test other proposed detectors AMIGA, UCLA scintillators, … even CR physics at 1017 to 1019 eV … if you like … together with 60O FD telescopes H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 2005

H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 2005 Conclusions / Outlook continue with radio R&D ; test installations on both sites in 2006 develop technical solutions for FD upgrade in 2006 search FD upgrade and radio funding for 2007 in the South: finish Loma Amarilla in 2006 build and deploy remaining of 1600 tanks in 2006 if problems with land owners persist, put 50 - 100 tanks as infill install FD upgrade in 2007 „full size“ radio antenna array in 2007 finish R&D for Auger North ( FD and SD ) in 2007 H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 2005