Good LARP has grown significantly in size since it started Gained credibility both here and at CERN US Labs like it as a way to support work CERN is admitting they’ve bitten off more than they can chew Reports are visitors are integrating well at CERN Poised to play an increasingly important role in the future Needs improvement Magnet effort needs a clear path to convergence Accelerator physics effort needs alignment with CERN priorities “Process” growing baroque Too many committees, reviews, and org chart boxes! Integrated project management tools Challenge Maintain R&D strength while insuring success in designated deliverables 5/7/08 LARP Meeting
Why was I picked (my opinion)? Two years as LARP reviewer Pretty good “big picture” Structured similar to Proton Plan Management structure outside of line authority Have successfully made correct, but unpopular decisions Guidance from DOE (LK Len and Bruce Strauss) Lots of autonomy Need a solid plan to make magnet effort converge Can’t support two paths indefinitely Get a handle on accelerator physics effort Growing out of control Keep R&D component Avoid “works projects” for labs 5/7/08 LARP Meeting
Insure the near term deliverables and commissioning effort go well, and make sure LARP gets credit. Schottky detector Luminosity monitor Tune tracker LTV program Make sure the significant projects have a high probability of success Ni 3 Sn for Phase II Rotatable collimators for Phase I Integrate accelerator effort with CERN planning Become players in IR upgrade planning Articulate goals of electron cloud effort Take a lead role in injector chain. 5/7/08 LARP Meeting
Components NbTi separation dipoles, based on RHIC Nb 3 Sn out. NbTi quads not well meshed (maybe make plug compatible Nb 3 Sn for later installation?). Collimators SLAC prototype vs. two nonexistent CERN designs Instrumentation Laser profile monitors Linac LLRF My goal is to decouple LAUC from LARP as much as possible. 5/7/08 LARP Meeting