Exec/Board Paris February 2008

WP3.1 Infrastructure Roadmap:WP3.1 Infrastructure Roadmap:

Progress ReportProgress Report

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Activities Since Last Activities Since Last BoardBoard

Panel membership completed.Panel membership completed.

5 Working Group and 25 Panel meetings held to-date.5 Working Group and 25 Panel meetings held to-date.

Panels A-C: Questionnaire sent to 112 facilities (>90% Panels A-C: Questionnaire sent to 112 facilities (>90% returns by early July; facilities’ list posted on ASTRONET returns by early July; facilities’ list posted on ASTRONET website).website).

Evaluation template formulated and completed by each Evaluation template formulated and completed by each assigned Panel rapporteur for each facility. assigned Panel rapporteur for each facility.

Evaluation Criteria developed to give first-pass rankings, Evaluation Criteria developed to give first-pass rankings, then each facility further discussed and judgements then each facility further discussed and judgements refined (e.g. in the light of the Cosmic Vision results).refined (e.g. in the light of the Cosmic Vision results).

Science Vision launched 28 Sept 2007; Cosmic Vision Science Vision launched 28 Sept 2007; Cosmic Vision results available 17 October 2007 to Panels.results available 17 October 2007 to Panels.

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Activities Activities (cont.)(cont.)

Roadmap Symposium contract signed, event Roadmap Symposium contract signed, event widely publicised and draft programme widely publicised and draft programme formulated (see below).formulated (see below).

First draft including all Panel Reports and First draft including all Panel Reports and introductory chapter completed.introductory chapter completed.

Meeting held in London with the Agencies (Feb Meeting held in London with the Agencies (Feb 12 2008) and actions (including further 12 2008) and actions (including further prioritisation, cost/funding envelopes, detailed prioritisation, cost/funding envelopes, detailed comments on individual chapters) now being comments on individual chapters) now being worked on to enable completion of the draft for worked on to enable completion of the draft for release.release.

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

InterrelationshipInterrelationshipss

ESO and ESA representatives on the WGESO and ESA representatives on the WG

Similarly for OPTICON and RadioNetSimilarly for OPTICON and RadioNet

Europlanet representation on Panel C (and on Europlanet representation on Panel C (and on WG in initial phases)WG in initial phases)

Information exchange with ASPERA, including Information exchange with ASPERA, including round-table meetings (latest 22 Jan 2008)round-table meetings (latest 22 Jan 2008)

ESFRI links, but need to be strengthenedESFRI links, but need to be strengthened

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Working Working GroupGroup

June 7 (second meeting - initial meeting in June 7 (second meeting - initial meeting in March discussed e.g. Panel membership, ToR): March discussed e.g. Panel membership, ToR): – Received progress reports of Panels. Received progress reports of Panels. – Agreed criteria for inclusion and list of facilities to Agreed criteria for inclusion and list of facilities to

survey (Panels A-C).survey (Panels A-C).– Discussed form of questionnaire.Discussed form of questionnaire.

October 30: October 30: – Received and commented on initial findings of each Received and commented on initial findings of each

Panel, particularly with respect to initial rankings.Panel, particularly with respect to initial rankings.– Referred back to Panels any issues as appropriate.Referred back to Panels any issues as appropriate.– Agreed the next steps in formulation of the Roadmap.Agreed the next steps in formulation of the Roadmap.

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Working Group Working Group (cont.)(cont.) December 14:December 14:

– Reviewed amended version of Panel Reports, focusing on Reviewed amended version of Panel Reports, focusing on narratives related to high priority projects (A-C) and main narratives related to high priority projects (A-C) and main recommendations (D, E). recommendations (D, E).

– Provided further feedback.Provided further feedback.– Discussed form of final report.Discussed form of final report.– Agreed preparation for meeting with the Agencies.Agreed preparation for meeting with the Agencies.– Cost profiles, technological readiness further pursued.Cost profiles, technological readiness further pursued.

February 11/12:February 11/12:– Preparatory, main and summary meetings held wrt the Agencies’ Preparatory, main and summary meetings held wrt the Agencies’

Workshop.Workshop.

Additional WG meeting scheduled March 13th to consider Additional WG meeting scheduled March 13th to consider actions resulting (Panel telecons in between also).actions resulting (Panel telecons in between also).

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Outline Outline Timetable Timetable

Appointment of Panel (Co-)Chairs and constitution of Working GroupAppointment of Panel (Co-)Chairs and constitution of Working GroupJan 2007Jan 2007

Appointment of Panel Members and schedule first Panel meetingsAppointment of Panel Members and schedule first Panel meetingsMar 2007Mar 2007

First Draft Panel ReportsFirst Draft Panel Reports Oct 2007Oct 2007

First Draft Working Group ReportFirst Draft Working Group Report Dec 2007Dec 2007 Workshop with AgenciesWorkshop with Agencies Feb 2008Feb 2008

Draft to BoardDraft to Board Apr 2008 Apr 2008 Public Draft Roadmap releasedPublic Draft Roadmap released Apr/May 2008Apr/May 2008 Roadmap Symposium – LiverpoolRoadmap Symposium – Liverpool Jun 2008Jun 2008 Final Roadmap Document producedFinal Roadmap Document produced Sep 2008Sep 2008

Roadmap Symposium:Roadmap Symposium:June 16-19 2008, June 16-19 2008,

LiverpoolLiverpool

European Capital of Culture 2008 European Capital of Culture 2008

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Main Criteria for Inclusion in Main Criteria for Inclusion in Ranking Ranking (of Panels A-C) (of Panels A-C)

Main focus is on future facilities (includes well-defined Main focus is on future facilities (includes well-defined major upgrades and significant operational major upgrades and significant operational prolongations).prolongations).

Only facilities with a significant European content (likely Only facilities with a significant European content (likely funding requirement) are included.funding requirement) are included.

Funding requirement > €10M capital cost and/or > €10M Funding requirement > €10M capital cost and/or > €10M operational cost over 5 years (unless special reason).operational cost over 5 years (unless special reason).

Only those facilities where a major European funding Only those facilities where a major European funding decision was expected to be required from 2009- were decision was expected to be required from 2009- were included in the rankings.included in the rankings.

It is however better to have too much than too little It is however better to have too much than too little information overall!information overall!

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Evaluation Evaluation FrameworkFramework Broad categories of prioritisation (High, Medium and Low; Broad categories of prioritisation (High, Medium and Low;

only High normally discussed in detail in final report; other only High normally discussed in detail in final report; other facilities may be included for “context” and some smaller scale facilities may be included for “context” and some smaller scale current facilities have been grouped).current facilities have been grouped).

Sub-divided into cost categories (unfunded European cost): Sub-divided into cost categories (unfunded European cost):

Small €10M-€50M; Medium €50M-€400M; Large >€400M Small €10M-€50M; Medium €50M-€400M; Large >€400M

(Small: cf. last Decadal Survey for Ground-based; Medium, (Small: cf. last Decadal Survey for Ground-based; Medium, Large: ~fits with Cosmic Vision wrt “M” missions and Large: ~fits with Cosmic Vision wrt “M” missions and “Flagships” for Space-based, including instruments)“Flagships” for Space-based, including instruments)

Timescale division (to “full operation”): Short-term (-2015); Timescale division (to “full operation”): Short-term (-2015); Medium Term (2016-2020); Long-term (2020+)Medium Term (2016-2020); Long-term (2020+)

Evaluation criteria included Scientific Impact (relation to Evaluation criteria included Scientific Impact (relation to delivering SV), uniqueness, European involvement, user delivering SV), uniqueness, European involvement, user base, industrial relevance - gave a first-pass ranked listbase, industrial relevance - gave a first-pass ranked list

Exec/Board Paris February 2008

Panels D and Panels D and EE

Terms of reference somewhat different from Panels A, Terms of reference somewhat different from Panels A, B, CB, C

Specific questions on the questionnaire to facilities, Specific questions on the questionnaire to facilities, but also undertook information gathering as detailed in but also undertook information gathering as detailed in Chapters 6 and 7 of the draft ReportChapters 6 and 7 of the draft Report

Panel D gave members responsibility for specific Panel D gave members responsibility for specific areasareas

Panel E sub-divided into Task GroupsPanel E sub-divided into Task Groups

Information exchange with other PanelsInformation exchange with other Panels