Comments on: HST Proposals: How High Will it Go? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/ Random samplings from a universe of ideas. Sun, 05 Jul 2009 07:00:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Roelof http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37951 Roelof Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:18:05 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37951 So, the semi-official proposal count for cycle 17 is 961 proposals. That is somewhat funny, because I am co-I on proposal 961. Not my idea to submit in the very last minute... So, the semi-official proposal count for cycle 17 is 961 proposals. That is somewhat funny, because I am co-I on proposal 961. Not my idea to submit in the very last minute…

]]> By: Julianne http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37952 Julianne Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:26:22 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37952 And with the return of spectroscopy in this Cycle, the numbers went right back to the 900-1000 level. My thought was that there would be pent up demand for all the projects that didn't get done in those cycles, and that the "missing" 200 proposals a year would show up on top of the baseline level. But, I think Steinn is right that around 1000 is the full capacity for proposal-writing that the astronomy community has. For non-insiders, the initial cycles were <600 because of the spherical aberation problems that were fixed with later cameras. And with the return of spectroscopy in this Cycle, the numbers went right back to the 900-1000 level. My thought was that there would be pent up demand for all the projects that didn’t get done in those cycles, and that the “missing” 200 proposals a year would show up on top of the baseline level. But, I think Steinn is right that around 1000 is the full capacity for proposal-writing that the astronomy community has.

For non-insiders, the initial cycles were <600 because of the spherical aberation problems that were fixed with later cameras.

]]> By: Ben http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37950 Ben Sun, 16 Mar 2008 02:50:14 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37950 STIS went into safe mode (inoperative) in August 2004 and the Cycle 14 deadline was May 2005, so maybe that accounts for why cycles 14,15,16 were lower. STIS went into safe mode (inoperative) in August 2004 and the Cycle 14 deadline was May 2005, so maybe that accounts for why cycles 14,15,16 were lower.

]]> By: mollishka http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37937 mollishka Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:40:25 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37937 Just heard of a proposal ID #940 with 2 minutes remaining. Just heard of a proposal ID #940 with 2 minutes remaining.

]]> By: Julianne http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37948 Julianne Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:28:03 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37948 Oooooh! Tasty data! Thanks Caryl! Oooooh! Tasty data! Thanks Caryl!

]]> By: Caryl http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37949 Caryl Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:37:39 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37949 Because I obviously don't have enough work to do over spring break, I went digging through the STScI newsletters and found most of the historical numbers. Cycle 1 -- ?? Cycle 2 -- 483 Cycle 3 -- ?? Cycle 4 --501 Cycle 5 -- ?? Cycle 6 -- 1025 Cycle 7 -- 1298 Cycle 8 -- 1053 Cycle 9 -- 914 Cycle 10 -- ?? Cycle 11 -- 1078 Cycle 12 -- 1046 Cycle 13 -- 949 Cycle 14 -- 727 Cycle 15 -- 733 Cycle 16 -- 821 Cycle 17 -- ~942 Of course the next thing to go look at would be # of orbits requested. Because I obviously don’t have enough work to do over spring break, I went digging through the STScI newsletters and found most of the historical numbers.

Cycle 1 — ??
Cycle 2 — 483
Cycle 3 — ??
Cycle 4 –501
Cycle 5 — ??
Cycle 6 — 1025
Cycle 7 — 1298
Cycle 8 — 1053
Cycle 9 — 914
Cycle 10 — ??
Cycle 11 — 1078
Cycle 12 — 1046
Cycle 13 — 949
Cycle 14 — 727
Cycle 15 — 733
Cycle 16 — 821
Cycle 17 — ~942

Of course the next thing to go look at would be # of orbits requested.

]]> By: NGC3314 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37947 NGC3314 Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:55:00 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37947 How about that? I was guessing 1200, mostly from my guess that oversubscription in time will be 11-12. Certainly trying to do my part. The STIS ETC was crazy? Well, that explains why one observation went from easy in an orbit to requiring a megasecond when I went back to double-check. That piece of a proposal was certainly one that didn't get submitted. (And, Julianne - sorry about that, no UV imaging proposal for the ANGST overlapping pair. Barely got the Galaxy Zoo overlap proposals done. Of course, our IT folks picked last week to "rationalize" all the network's IP addresses, which had the side effect of removing my workstation from email contact for two days and making all my machines incommunicado for several hours. I threatened to return with mediaeval cutlery if the local Unix support guy didn't get it all back and soon.) How about that? I was guessing 1200, mostly from my guess that oversubscription in time will be 11-12. Certainly trying to do my part.

The STIS ETC was crazy? Well, that explains why one observation went from easy in an orbit to requiring a megasecond when I went back to double-check. That piece of a proposal was certainly one that didn’t get submitted. (And, Julianne - sorry about that, no UV imaging proposal for the ANGST overlapping pair. Barely got the Galaxy Zoo overlap proposals done. Of course, our IT folks picked last week to “rationalize” all the network’s IP addresses, which had the side effect of removing my workstation from email contact for two days and making all my machines incommunicado for several hours. I threatened to return with mediaeval cutlery if the local Unix support guy didn’t get it all back and soon.)

]]> By: Julianne http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37946 Julianne Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:48:54 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37946 If you give me a timestamp, I'll add it on! I'm trying to find the historical data, but didn't turn it up in 3 minutes of googling. If you give me a timestamp, I’ll add it on!

I’m trying to find the historical data, but didn’t turn it up in 3 minutes of googling.

]]> By: Sangeeta http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37945 Sangeeta Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:39:55 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37945 Ours was 942....Oh come on, you cannot stop counting 10 minutes before the deadline! Ours was 942….Oh come on, you cannot stop counting 10 minutes before the deadline!

]]> By: The AstroDyke http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37944 The AstroDyke Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:32:47 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/03/07/hst-proposals-how-high-will-it-go/#comment-37944 Don't forget the NOAO deadline, 31 March. Never ends, does it? Don’t forget the NOAO deadline, 31 March.

Never ends, does it?

]]>