WEBVTT 1 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:00:22.950 --> 00:00:42.950 Welcome everyone to the hubble Community town hall. We still have an increasing number of attendees, so we're gonna wait another minute or two and then get started. Thank you all for joining. 2 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:00:42.950 --> 00:01:02.950 Okay, uh. 3 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:01:02.950 --> 00:01:04.320 Okay. 4 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:03:30.600 --> 00:03:45.780 Welcome everyone to this important community town Hall on the status and future of the Hubble Space telescope. I'm Jennifer Lotz, the director of the space Telescope Science Institute. 5 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:03:45.780 --> 00:04:04.830 Maybe before we get started here on hubble, for those of you joining who are writing JWST proposals yesterday, say congratulations, really had a record breaking response, and we really look forward to beating and and evaluating all of the great ideas that came in yesterday. 6 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:04:04.830 --> 00:04:23.220 Can we move to the next slide with today's agenda? So I'm gonna give about a 10 min overview on the current status of Hubble and our thinking about how we're going to address the budget challenges we're facing. Then I will hand it over to Julia Roman deball. 7 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:04:23.220 --> 00:04:43.220 Who is our interim hubble mission office head here at the space Telescope Science Institute. She's gonna give an overview of the updates, status of cycle 32, our transition to reduce dyro mode. She'll talk in more detail about how we're managing the current hubble budget impacts. 8 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:04:43.220 --> 00:04:47.639 And our planning for the NASA 2025 senior review? 9 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:04:47.639 --> 00:05:07.639 And then finally, we will end with some specific questions for the community in which we're seeking more input. And then at the end, we will have a Q and A, which will be moderated through our Webex chat. So please save your questions for the end and we will do our best to answer those at that time. 10 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:05:08.279 --> 00:05:28.279 Next slide. So let me start by saying the one key takeaway that I hope people will have from today's discussion is that hubble remains an important scientific powerhouse, and it has done so over the past decade with. 11 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:05:28.279 --> 00:05:30.989 Flat and effectively shrinking budgets. 12 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:05:30.989 --> 00:05:50.989 So if you go back about ten years to 2014, we had 820 hubble publications in total. The last calendar year in 2023, we had over a thousand hubble publications, which represents about a 30 % increase in publications over the past ten years. 13 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:05:50.989 --> 00:06:06.749 Oh while yes, a large number of those are with our archive. We're seeing that publications with new hubble data through our GEO program is tracking at roughly the same race, the 27 % increase in GEO related papers. 14 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:06:06.749 --> 00:06:26.749 So this is to me that hubble science and all of you writing hubble papers have figured out how to adapt in the evolving scientific landscape. Hubble continues to do new and exciting, important science, attract new users, support those young career researchers and. 15 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:06:26.749 --> 00:06:33.089 Find new and innovative ways to do the science with it only that only Hubble can do. 16 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:06:33.089 --> 00:06:50.369 If we have a look at the budget allocated to hubble over that time frame, you see a, a different story. So in 2014, the budget allocated to hubble was 93.3 million in FY $14. 17 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:06:50.369 --> 00:07:10.369 In 2024, the budget allocated to Hubble was 93.3 million in FY $24. So anybody can go in online and type in an inflation calculator and you can see that effectively with those flat budgets, Hubble has absorbed a 30 % decrease. 18 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:07:10.369 --> 00:07:11.879 Use in its budget. 19 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:07:11.879 --> 00:07:31.879 Year after year efficiencies have been found so that we can manage the growth with inflation inflation. But as we're moving forward here, the next few years, we're looking at a scenario with guidance from NASA, from the operations paradigm change review, and now with the senior review. 20 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:07:31.879 --> 00:07:37.109 Which has larger cuts to hubble budgets proposed in just the next few years. 21 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:07:37.109 --> 00:07:53.519 Next slide, please. So science productivity has increased despite shrinking effective budgets. We're literally doing more with less, and we've been doing that for a decade. 22 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:07:53.519 --> 00:08:13.519 Bubble also has a very bright future and has a high probability of productive science operations well into the 2030s. We've looked carefully at the projections for the orbital decay. We've looked carefully at the lifetimes for the remaining two enhanced gyros, and we've looked at the expected. 23 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:08:13.519 --> 00:08:22.139 Good lifetimes for hubbles instruments, and all of those suggests that we should be able to do hubble science well into the 2030s. 24 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:08:22.139 --> 00:08:42.139 Finally, hubbly, hubble remains scientifically vital and important and unique. It's alter violent and visible capabilities that are high precision, high resolution, will be unsurpassed until the habital world observatory supplies. 25 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:08:42.139 --> 00:08:46.259 Which won't happen until the late 2030s. 26 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:08:46.259 --> 00:09:04.799 So the current challenges that we're facing are not driven by hubble science, not driven by hubble scientific outlook, it's not driven by hubble's efficiencies. It's purely driven by the pressures that NASA is facing at the very top line for its science budget. 27 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:09:04.799 --> 00:09:20.039 But you're trickling down to astrophysics and trickling down to its older missions, Pablo and Chandra. So with those pressures in mind, NASA called for an operations paradigm change review, which happened earlier this year. 28 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:09:20.039 --> 00:09:36.929 Very quickly as well as well as the Chandrak project put together a packet and had that reviewed today. The outcome of that was announced in July and really I would say the results were were inconclusive and and quite challenging. 29 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:09:36.929 --> 00:09:56.279 For hubble, they found that there were NO easy solutions for future reductions, but they're really limited areas in which there are left to find cost savings and that all of the scenarios presented would have significant impacts for the hubble mission going forward. 30 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:09:56.279 --> 00:10:12.179 There are really just very few levers left in which we could push and and here I have a, a very rough cartoon of what those levers look like. Julia will go through this in somewhat more detail, but we have a core mission that must be protected. 31 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:10:12.179 --> 00:10:32.179 So the very few things left that we could tweak would be outreach support, support for instruments, and support the direct support that goes to the community through grants and hubble fellows. Next slide please. So, going forward, we have been very mindful of the fact that. 32 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:10:32.179 --> 00:10:51.359 That the future mission for hubble needs to be continue to be scientifically impactful and productive. Those strong hubble publications, those unique science results need to continue in the future so that hubble. 33 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:10:51.359 --> 00:11:06.809 Budget is protected. If we stop having the same level of productivity and impact, then hubble's future is at risk. So what are the elements to maintaining hubbles, scientific impact? 34 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:11:06.809 --> 00:11:22.949 Well, you have to have a functioning telescope. We have to protect the telescope's health and safety. Puble cannot be in safe mode, a large fraction at the time. You have to have unique and impactful science capabilities, the science that only hubble can do forward. 35 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:11:22.949 --> 00:11:39.089 The data that's collected has to be usable. There have to be calibrations, the data reduction pipelines need to be maintained and functioning and things that early career researchers can use so that they can create their publications. 36 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:11:39.089 --> 00:11:55.289 That data needs to go into the archive. Archival science with Hubble has been incredibly important, both as standalone combination with new programs, and in combination with other facilities half of the web publications use hubble archival. 37 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:11:55.289 --> 00:12:12.029 For those of you who just completed the JWST cycle four proposals, you know that proposal, preparation, tools, documentation, exposure time calculators are all vitally important as is a fair and robust process for evaluating those proposals. 38 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:12:12.029 --> 00:12:29.579 There are still 365 days in a year. We have to plan and execute these programs. And I want to give a shout out to everybody who helped support the recent transition to reduce gyro load. My impression is that this went incredibly well. 39 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:12:29.579 --> 00:12:49.579 A lot of this work was invisible to the community over 90 % of the programs were translated, and that did not happen by accident. There were a number of people working overtime to make that possible, as well as a lot of planning and preparation over the years just to even see if of an operations of. 40 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:12:49.579 --> 00:12:56.279 Couple on a single gyro mode with NO significant impacts to the science quality. 41 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:12:56.279 --> 00:13:13.979 Rent foreign funding, of course, is a vital part of our program. We want to make sure that the researchers who want to do hubble science and afford to do hubble science. And then last but not least is the general public support for Hubble and NASA science overall. 42 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:13:13.979 --> 00:13:33.979 Ultimately, it's taxpayers that are paying the bill here and they need to understand the importance of what we do. So I've drawn this line here, and this is above the things above this line are where if we degrade the support for these activities, we're gonna end up. 43 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:13:33.979 --> 00:13:36.419 Increasing the barriers to science. 44 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:13:36.419 --> 00:13:56.419 Ultimately degrading hubble's scientific impacts and impacting hubble's future. Now there are additional things below this line, which the hubble operations budgets also support right now. Do you have some duplicated scientific capabilities, and we have some support for non. 45 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:13:56.419 --> 00:13:59.609 In hubble Science to the hubble Sigan Einstein Philip. 46 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:13:59.609 --> 00:14:19.609 These are areas where some of this support could be shifted to other resources and would have a lesser impact on science, double science going. Next slide please. So let me finally acknowledge the frustration that the community has had with this process up to. 47 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:14:19.609 --> 00:14:36.269 We're frustrated. Our partners at NASA are frustrated, and I know, I know you're frustrated with the uncertainty and the seemingly lack of input into the decision making process. We're simply living in a. 48 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:14:36.269 --> 00:14:52.739 State of real uncertainty. We don't know what hubble state will be until after the 2025 senior review is and really until NASA science budgets are finalized for 25 and 26. 49 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:14:52.739 --> 00:15:10.589 What does that mean? Well, we think that it is likely that we will not be able to support all the things that we've done in the past, and in particular, we may not be able to support the ACS widefield channel and the wide Field three infraretch channel. 50 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:15:10.589 --> 00:15:29.429 Programs going forward, starting in cycle 33. We don't know whether we'll be able to support these and we don't know, we won't be able to know this until we have the outcomes of the senior review or guidance from NASA, which we don't think will come now until the middle of 2025. 51 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:15:29.429 --> 00:15:45.179 So while we're really hoping for the best possible outcomes here, we want to be prepared and prepare the community in case we do need to stop support for these channels. So with that in mind, we have recently released a mid cycle. 52 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:15:45.179 --> 00:16:05.179 HST bridge program call with the idea of supporting an orderly transition of science programs from these channels to other instruments on hubble and web. So the idea behind this is two fold. One, we want proposals for people who feel that their science can only be. 53 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:16:05.179 --> 00:16:07.799 Done with these to instrument channels. 54 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:16:07.799 --> 00:16:25.499 So some examples of that might be if your object is simply too bright for James Webb and it's better suited to the wide Field channel on or sorry, the with C three IR channel or that there is a particular filter or mode that's only available through these instruments. 55 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:16:25.499 --> 00:16:45.499 This gives you a last opportunity to propose for those observations that we'll be able to guarantee that happens in cycle 32. Another class of category, proposals that we're looking for are proposed observations that could help with the transition from these scientific modes to other instruments. 56 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:16:45.499 --> 00:16:55.319 On Hubble and web. E.g., you may need cross calibrations between the wide Field channel IR and instruments on James Web. 57 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:16:55.319 --> 00:17:15.319 So we're making available not just a limited amount of hubble time, but also some time on web if that is something that you need to do. So this call for proposals I think is one of the best ways the community can let us know, what the demand is for these modes and what the needs are if we are to transition in the future. 58 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:17:15.319 --> 00:17:33.119 So the proposal deadline is 7 November. I recognize that that comes at a challenging time when there are other proposals that are also due, but it's really important for us to move forward with this so that we can guarantee that these can start to be executed in cycle 32 as soon as possible. 59 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:17:33.119 --> 00:17:50.159 So Julia will at the end present other ideas that opportunities to present to give us feedback on this process. And at this time I'm gonna hand it over to Julia for for her updates and discussion of detailed discussion of budgets. 60 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:17:50.159 --> 00:18:05.219 Thanks Julia. Thank you Jen. Hi everyone, I'm Julia Roman Deval. I'm the interim harboral Mission Head at space telescope. And I want to acknowledge some contributions from Nearly, the multimission project scientist, to these slides. 61 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:18:05.219 --> 00:18:25.219 So as Jed said, I wanted to 1st of all give you a status update of what's been going on with hubble. And so, basically, it's continuing to produce outstanding science with high impact. In 2023, we had a record number of peer reviewed publications at 1000. 62 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:18:25.219 --> 00:18:43.409 Hundred 56 papers, the mission is now up to over 21000 papers that have been cited over 1.2 million times. With web app and running, the hubble demands remains really high with an oversubscription of about six to one steadily. 63 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:18:43.409 --> 00:19:03.409 And I wanted to also acknowledge that Pavo is an international mission, it's partnership between NASA and ISA and ISA is actually supplying 13 staff at STSEI to perform science operations. So we recently had the cycle 32 outcome and I wanted here to put. 64 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:19:03.409 --> 00:19:06.509 Provide some information on this outcome. 65 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:19:06.509 --> 00:19:26.369 So there were over 900 proposals that were submitted from over 50 countries and, 44 US states and territories. The over subscription was 61, so over a hundred and 60 programs were accepted, and it's worth pointing out that as part of those accepted programs, over a 3rd. 66 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:19:26.369 --> 00:19:42.119 At 1st time principal investigators. This is a trend that started when the dual dual anonymous review process started in cycle, 27. And you can see in the bar chart here on the right, the fraction of 1st time PI is as a function of the public cycle. 67 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:19:42.119 --> 00:19:57.569 It has been studied at 30 % over the last few years. It's also worth pointing out that within the hundred and 6060 plus accepted programs, almost 20 % of the approved institutions are min are minority serving. 68 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:19:57.569 --> 00:20:17.569 Also since the review process, the gender gap in acceptance rates has closed, and in fact, in cycle 302I believe women were slightly more successful than men. For cycle 32, we did something that we haven't done in a few years, which is to offer opportunities for multi cycle treasury programs, which are. 69 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:20:17.569 --> 00:20:22.769 There are very large programs that execute over multiple cycles typically three. 70 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:20:22.769 --> 00:20:42.769 And that could typically not get through a time allocation committee process. So two FCT programs were selected in cycle 32. The 1st one is called Clutch. The cosmos legacy UV optical treasury campaign with hubble. And this program is mapping the cosmos field with the. 71 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:20:42.769 --> 00:20:45.899 Tableau UV visible and infract channels. 72 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:20:45.899 --> 00:21:03.989 And it's complementing JBSC coverage of the same area. The 2nd MCT program is Stella survey of transiting exopenics in lamonalpha, which is looking at exopenic transits with tests to study atmospheric escape escape in particular. 73 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:21:03.989 --> 00:21:23.989 And for cycle 32, NASA has allocated $15 million in grand funding including geo and AR programs. There are several observing opportunities currently with hubble. 1st I want to point out that all cycle 32 programs will be. 74 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:21:23.989 --> 00:21:43.529 Executed as planned, and that includes observations with the ACS white fill camera, and do we see three IR channels. Some changes are required for a small fraction of the programs due to one jaro science, which is also called reduced Jira mode. 75 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:21:43.529 --> 00:22:01.889 And we're addressing those with the, the pis, but the the programs are going ahead. As Jane mentioned in cycle 32, we also had this special call for bridge programs that was issued in September with a deadline of 7 November. These programs. 76 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:22:01.889 --> 00:22:17.189 Are the scope is limited to those programs that it can only be achieved with the ACS with C and we see three IR or that can help transition area of science from those modes to other modes either on HSD, like we see three Uvez Or SD. 77 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:22:17.189 --> 00:22:37.189 So those include cases where cross calibration of instruments or missions is necessary. And with those bridge programs we're basically preparing for the worst and hoping for the best and are trying to, in the eventuality that we could not support those modes in cycle 33 and beyond. 78 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:22:37.189 --> 00:22:40.709 Prepare for a graceful transition. 79 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:22:40.709 --> 00:23:00.709 The cycle 33 call will be released in December of this year. And also another initiative that we are just starting now is the Rocky world's Exoplanet large disc director's discretionary program which is joint between and the program is kicking off right now. It's investigating the cosmic shore line that's separating out. 80 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:23:00.709 --> 00:23:03.569 The planets that have atmospheres and those that don't. 81 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:23:03.569 --> 00:23:23.569 And this program is a perfect example of synergy between JWSC and HSC, where GWC is looking directly at the atmosphere to eclipses, and HSC is characterizing the stellar hosts and in particular the UV radiation environment that's influencing atmospheric. 82 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:23:23.569 --> 00:23:43.109 And planet habitability. I wanted to reiterate that hubble is the bridge to the habitable world's observatory. There's tremendous overlap in the science, basically all science that are prioritized in the digital survey, so this includes drivers of galaxy growth. 83 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:23:43.109 --> 00:24:02.699 The evolution of elements of a cosmic time, solar system in a galactic context and living worlds. HW technology also builds on HST technology. The capabilities will be better but similar. It will include UV optical specialty results petroscopy, high contrast imaging, and coronography. 84 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:24:02.699 --> 00:24:22.049 So it is crucial that we continue supporting this science that relies on new V optical capabilities in order to develop our worlds and maintain the expertise through the launch of this extraordinary mission. 85 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:24:22.049 --> 00:24:42.049 A lot of you may have heard that hubble recently transitioned to one jaro science, which is the same as reduced jaro mode. There are three jaros on hubble. One of them had been giving us trouble for a while, and it became very challenging to continue operating with this jowel and the control loop, and so in May 2024. 86 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:24:42.049 --> 00:24:42.659 Sure. 87 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:24:42.659 --> 00:25:02.339 We decided to transition to Onejava science. The transition is now complete. One key element to understand is the the change to OGS does not affect data quality. In fact, we had been operating in Onejava for science exposures since 2021. 88 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:25:02.339 --> 00:25:20.969 So we would use three jaros to slow, but only would use one Jara for science exposures. So under reduced java mode or one science, the main impact is that the instantaneous field of regard is reduced from over 80 % to about half the sky, which is similar to that of the James Webs based telescope. 89 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:25:20.969 --> 00:25:40.969 Of course over the course of a year, the entire sky is available. There are limitations for objects closer to mars, and generally targets that move fast, and the fact that the limited field of regard also means that there are some scheduling and orientation in. 90 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:25:40.969 --> 00:25:46.979 Accessibility so e.g. parallel imaging that used a hundred and 80 degree flips. 91 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:25:46.979 --> 00:26:02.249 We'll NO longer be possible, but tiling of large areas of parallel imaging is still is still possible, and actually some of our cycle 32 users have already implemented that. So we expect some impacts, minimal impacts. 92 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:26:02.249 --> 00:26:22.139 To trans in science, of course, with a limited field of regard. Exoplanets which are typically highly constrained in the schedule and solar system because of faster moving targets. But in general, is continuing to produce a high impact science program across the entire field. 93 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:26:22.139 --> 00:26:42.139 So the 2nd part of this update is regarding hubble budgets and in particular, the impacts that the cuts that Jen has outlined are having on the mission and how we are addressing that. So at 1st I wanted to give a bit of background on what the. 94 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:26:42.139 --> 00:26:46.319 The hubble budget funds and what the different components of the missions are. 95 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:26:46.319 --> 00:27:03.239 There are three. The 1st one, is based at the Garden space Flight Center, includes project management, mission operations and mission stewardship, engineering. So things like flight software updates and test environments. 96 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:27:03.239 --> 00:27:19.589 As well as public outreach. At STSEI, we perform science operations, and so that includes the entire life cycle of observations all the way from science selection to user support before and after observations. 97 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:27:19.589 --> 00:27:36.449 All the planning and scheduling and commenting of the observations, we have to be able to schedule all those APT files. We also perform all the data calibration and data processing. We archive the data in ways that are streamlined and easily accessible to our users. 98 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:27:36.449 --> 00:27:56.449 We administer the grant funding that is supporting research in the community, and we also performed public outreach, which is which is a key element to maintain public support and funding for hubble. The 3rd component is research support in the community, which comes through two avenues. 99 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:27:56.449 --> 00:28:12.809 There are general observers and archival program research grants, GOAR, as well as the NASA hubble fellowship program in HFP, which includes hubble, Sagan and Einstein fellows. 100 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:28:12.809 --> 00:28:32.809 So Hubo has been operating for over 34 years now, and in terms of the people that have been staffing the mission and doing all this work, it's gone down tremendously. So right now our staffing levels out about at about a quarter of what you there used to be after servicing the. 101 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:28:32.809 --> 00:28:50.429 Option two. So that means that really we've already exploited all the efficiencies we possibly possibly could to continue operating using the same operational model all these years with flat budgets and strong inflation. 102 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:28:54.629 --> 00:29:14.629 So here's a bit of history on the hubble budget over the last decade or so. So for a long time, between 2012 and 2019, the hubble budget was mostly flat at 98.3 million. In 2020 until 2024, there was a bit of a decrease in the average fun. 103 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:29:14.629 --> 00:29:19.859 Thing during those years was roughly 94 million. 104 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:29:19.859 --> 00:29:38.219 One of the roots of the issue that and of the challenges we're facing right now is that the mission costs are increasing with inflation and in FY 23, which is cycle 30, those mission costs were at about a hundred and 5 million. So in 2022. 105 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:29:38.219 --> 00:29:55.949 Hubble received an outstanding evaluation as part of the senior review. And the panel acknowledged the tremendous impact and productivity of the observatory. And so the recommendation from that panel was to increase the HSC budget for inflation to allow it to continue operating and producing this amazing science. 106 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:29:55.949 --> 00:30:15.719 Following those recommendations NASA headquarters directed guardered NSTEI to plan for 98.3 million of funding with the removal of the NHSP program which costs about $8 million a year from the HSD guideline, and the goal of that was to mitigate inflation. 107 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:30:15.719 --> 00:30:32.819 In FY 23 and 24, what actually happened was our operational plans were at 93.3 million, including the NHFP program. And then in 2024, NASA reinstated the requirement to maintain 24 new NHFP fellows each year. 108 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:30:32.819 --> 00:30:49.199 That's overwhelming the 2022 guidance that was meant to provide, DOAR funding within the flat budget. So this led to the operations part on change review earlier this year or OPCR. 109 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:30:49.199 --> 00:31:09.199 And again, this is driven by the need for NASA to rebalance his portfolio of missions including new missions, under reduced budgets. It is not driven by the scientific or operational performance of hubble. The OPCR charged charge was released in March 2020 in March 2024. 110 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:31:09.199 --> 00:31:11.279 March 2020 06:26. 111 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:31:11.279 --> 00:31:31.279 For both Havo and Chandra, and the goal of the OPCR was to provide NASA with information they needed to assess proposed options and approaches that would continue operations of those missions that are in the extended operations phase, but with reduced funding and the. 112 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:31:31.279 --> 00:31:34.919 Driver here is the reduced funding in the 2025. 113 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:31:34.919 --> 00:31:54.919 Present budgets request. So the hubble team put together an AD slide package in the three weeks that we had between March 26 and the submission deadline on April 19. And so this left absolutely NO time for community input, which is why I understand the community. 114 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:31:54.919 --> 00:32:12.839 Is frustrated and we are frustrated. The panel findings were presented at the APAC meeting in July, and they recognized three things. 1st, as I mentioned, operations are highly streamlined after 30 plus years of improvements. 115 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:32:12.839 --> 00:32:28.439 And so even small budget cuts require some loss of capability. 2nd, the operation costs are mostly labor for staff, and so significant cuts require reductions in force. 116 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:32:28.439 --> 00:32:45.239 That have legal implications and irreversibility. And 3rd, ending either of these missions would have a very large and permanent impact on science and in general on the astronomical community, again, one driver is bridging the gap to have worlds. 117 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:32:48.929 --> 00:33:06.689 So following this, we, we received some budget guidance from NASA, but NO direction or guidance with respect to the nature of the cuts or reductions in terms of capability. So for cycle 20, for cycle 32, which is FY 25. 118 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:33:06.689 --> 00:33:23.279 We have been directed to plan for flat funding, basically the same as FY 23 and 24. And I will remind you that those operational plans in 23 and 24 were at 93.3 million. And the mission costs are growing with inflation. 119 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:33:23.279 --> 00:33:39.689 And that amounts to more than 20 % since 2020. So as a consequence of this, the grant funding in cycle 32 and 31 was reduced to $15 million. You can compare this to the historical baseline, which was. 120 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:33:39.689 --> 00:33:58.649 Upward of 30 million over the years, and that typically included about $6 million for archival programs. Again, I'll reiterate we're not doing any reductions in capability for cycle 32 and we'll execute all the programs that's submitted. Module are some changes that maybe required for GS. 121 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:34:01.859 --> 00:34:20.729 Furthermore, to address the budget reductions in FY 25, we have had to cut some components of public outreach at STSCI, but that includes general outreach, social media, and hubble site. Hubbosite is the database and website that hosts all our press releases. 122 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:34:20.729 --> 00:34:39.209 As well as educational material. Budgets are one driver for this change, but it's also a willingness by NASA to consolidate their platform for social media and websites. In addition, we have already compressed science operation costs. 123 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:34:39.209 --> 00:34:59.209 In FY 25 by about $4 million, and that was achieved through efficiencies and reductions in calibration, user support, data processing and archive. So we're now at the minimum level where we can continue providing our user community with the kind of impactful science data. 124 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:34:59.209 --> 00:35:18.149 That that they need to continue maintaining the productivity and impact of a hubble. And so I will say that by now our instrument teams cost this with C three and ACS have NO contingency, and that's important because we are still going through lifetime extension efforts with very limited personnel. 125 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:35:18.149 --> 00:35:34.649 Again, we will not apply any changes in capability until after the 2025 senior review outcome is known and that's expected sometime in spring or early summer 2025. This approach of. 126 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:35:34.649 --> 00:35:53.939 Picking the can down the road a bit delays the reversible changes until after we know the senior review outcome and we know how much funding is appropriated for FY 25. So Hubo is now going through the senior review, which will be addressing. 127 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:35:53.939 --> 00:36:11.939 Budgets and program programmatic direction by NASA for the next few years. The Hubo senior review is due in December. NASA again will use those results to give programmatic direction to the mission to Hubbo but also to all the missions in the extended phase of operations. 128 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:36:11.939 --> 00:36:30.989 And that covers the next five fiscal years, so FY 26 through FY 30. And other missions did to demonstrate a few things as part of this senior review. We need to demonstrate that we provide a unique high value set of scientific capabilities to the community to do science. 129 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:36:30.989 --> 00:36:48.539 We need to demonstrate that we can support an accessible, well calibrated data archive. That archive needs to maintain the high level of scientific productivity and impact that is typically measured through publications and citations. 130 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:36:48.539 --> 00:37:04.439 Bubble needs to demonstrate that they are supporting the research objective in NASA, and in particularly sastrophysics division. There's a lot of overlap with digital priorities in those objectives. And then we need to demonstrate that we can operate our mission in a cost effective manner. 131 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:37:04.439 --> 00:37:21.179 So unlike the previous senior review, there will be one review panel for all missions in the extended phase of operations. At STSEI, we are currently collecting community input in all silence areas as part of the senior review proposal. 132 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:37:21.179 --> 00:37:39.059 And we have reviewed received budget guidance from NASA for the senior review. As part of the senior review, we need to submit three budgets and in guide, which is basically the budget guidance received by NASA, an overguide, and an underguide. I will just mention that. 133 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:37:39.059 --> 00:37:55.199 So the senior review will cover the next five fiscal years FY 26th of 30. As part of the senior review, the budget guidance that we have received from NASA is to plan towards the president budget request numbers, PBR numbers. 134 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:37:55.199 --> 00:38:14.880 That are outlined here. So in FY 26, that's 87 million, same as FY 27. In FY 28, the PBR drops to 83 million, and then the outer years of FY 29 and FY 30 have much bigger cuts at 64 million for both years. 135 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:38:15.930 --> 00:38:35.670 So let's 1st look at FY 26 to 28. Those numbers are over 20 % lower than our current mission costs, including at the NHFP program. And so we basically cannot continue operating the way we have in the past, within those budget numbers. 136 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:38:35.670 --> 00:38:55.670 So addressing those reductions will require significant cuts in all components of the hubble mission, and that includes mission operations, science operations, and grant funding for cycle 33 and beyond. For the outer years of FY 29 and FY 30, we're looking at a very severely reduced operation model. 137 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:38:55.670 --> 00:38:56.790 That will. 138 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:38:56.790 --> 00:39:16.650 Not really fit the description of a great observatory. Within those budget numbers, there would be NO grant funding. The instrument support would be limited to core capabilities. There would be very minimum observer support in a greatly increased mission risks. 139 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:39:16.650 --> 00:39:32.220 And by that, I mean, things that we've been able to work around so far, like, the failure of the site, the electronics, we would not be able to respond to. So the bottom line is within those budget numbers. 140 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:39:32.220 --> 00:39:48.660 There's NO path to maintaining all of hubble's unique capabilities, the current mission risk posture, and the historical GOL grant funding levels within the budget guidance that we've received from NASA. So. 141 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:39:48.660 --> 00:40:03.810 Within this, within this context, we have established some principles to devise the strategy moving forward. Hubbo is vital for several reasons. It has unique capabilities that address. 142 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:40:03.810 --> 00:40:20.310 All science areas of astrophysics and that were prioritized in the digital survey. It's an international observatory that's producing science from all over the worlds and that is supporting a very diverse scientific community. We have a mandate. 143 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:40:20.310 --> 00:40:39.060 To provide equitable access to well calibrated science ready data for all users regardless of expertise and resources. And so based on those three pillars, we aim to maintain a critical mission operations for hubble, that is keeping a functioning observatory that is efficient. 144 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:40:39.060 --> 00:40:58.230 We aim to support the unique UV optical science capabilities of the event observatory, as well as a well calibrated vibrant archive. And we also may aim to maintain a GOAR grant program to support research in the community. 145 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:40:58.230 --> 00:41:15.240 Those elements really constitute the foundation of hubble's productivity and impact which we need to protect to ensure its future. We also want to avoid disparity and maintain support for this diverse diverse research community for hubble. 146 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:41:15.240 --> 00:41:31.680 A lot of this is driven by the fact that about a 3rd of the pis each cycle are new pis and need support to do their science. And then finally, we really want to minimize the capability back gap to hub worlds. 147 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:41:31.680 --> 00:41:47.010 And hubble science is the foundation for hubble science. And so we need to protect some science unique science elements of the hubble mission, and I've included some examples here. 148 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:41:47.010 --> 00:42:05.250 That rely on UV spectroscopy and UV optical imaging. Those address all three digital priorities in the fields of worlds and sons and constan context, new messengers, new physics, and cosmic echo systems. So this science goes anywhere from exoplanet atmospheres. 149 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:42:05.250 --> 00:42:25.250 To stellar pops and the ISM who the gas flows within and around galaxies as well as solar system, planetary emission support etc et cetera. We need to protect this science to ensure that we minimize the gap to have worlds and maintain the impact and productivity of. 150 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:42:25.250 --> 00:42:43.470 These science results from hubble don't happen by accident. They happened because all the science operations and mission operations that we pursue are guarded and STSEI provide our user community with. 151 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:42:43.470 --> 00:42:59.580 A lot of really well calibrated data, so I've given you two examples here of recent results that rely on the high precision of hubble. The 1st one is the discovery of inter an intermediate mass black hole in omega sent, from the poor promotions of a few fast moving stars. 152 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:42:59.580 --> 00:43:18.480 The precision that was needed in those measurements that were used by, that used the 20 year baseline of hubble was something like 6.6 mic micro ox seconds per year. And this is a big deal because it provides some constraints and insight on black hole formation in the early universe. 153 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:43:18.480 --> 00:43:36.990 The 2nd example, is about reverberation mapping around, agns. This was done as past part of the cost AGN storm campaign, where they monitored the AGN very frequently over a long period of something like six months. 154 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:43:36.990 --> 00:43:54.540 And that actually required percent level of flux calibration, and it allowed them to measure super massive black hole masses, the geometry and kinematics of the gascious regions around the black hole, and those are responsible for. 155 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:43:54.540 --> 00:44:10.440 Feedback and so it's important for galaxy evolution. Okay, the other component that we absolutely must retain in the hubble mission is research support for the community. I mentioned briefly before that this is done through two avenues. 156 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:44:10.440 --> 00:44:28.620 The DOAR grant funding program has been at a historical level of 30 million, but in the last two cycles has been down to $15 million a year. It supports a diverse community that is located in 40 states and over a hundred and 50 unique institutions. 157 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:44:28.620 --> 00:44:44.490 We have about over 400 awards that go to pis and every year, and those support, something like 80 students take over 60 post docs and almost 40 faculty per year. 158 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:44:44.490 --> 00:45:01.170 The other avenue for research support is through the NHFP program, the Hubble Heinzone 2nd program costs about $8 million a year, provides fellowships to fellows about 65 fellows per year that are located in about 15 states. 159 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:45:01.170 --> 00:45:21.170 And 35 unique institutions. The last component that is critical to maintain is equitable access to a science ready data archive. Couple of publications are through the roof, and that's only possible because the data in. 160 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:45:21.170 --> 00:45:24.090 The archive is very well calibrated and science ready. 161 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:45:24.090 --> 00:45:41.670 You can see some statistics on publications here. There were almost there was almost 6000 people, 6000 papers that were published in the four years between 2019 and 2023. Over half of those including new data from a geo program. 162 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:45:41.670 --> 00:45:56.790 Half of january C papers right now use some form of archival data from hubble. And so it is critical that we maintain a vibrant and growing archive that ingests constantly ingests well calibrated data at all times. 163 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:45:56.790 --> 00:46:12.630 And enables papers in all science categories to be published from all over the world. So these are the things we absolutely need to maintain for the hubble mission. But of course our funding is shrinking and inflation is. 164 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:46:12.630 --> 00:46:30.270 Borrowing our mission costs and so something has to give. And so within the senior review, budget that guidance that we receive, we will have to apply some reductions. So for cycle 33 and beyond, there's a very high risk of reduction in capability and grants. 165 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:46:30.270 --> 00:46:48.840 Given the funding level that we have to work with, which is about $87 million, and the need for continued research support for the community and the incompressible cost of the mission, such as science operations and some aspects of critical mission operations. 166 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:46:48.840 --> 00:47:08.040 So against this backdrop, we have to retains productivity and impact. That is the most important aspect of ensuring the mission's future. We, and to do that, we have to protect the unique UVO capabilities that will not be replaced until hot Worlds is up and running sometimes in the 2040s. 167 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:47:09.210 --> 00:47:29.210 And so as a result, we are considering reduction in support and potentially operations for the IR channel and the ACS with C channel. The reason that those two modes were selected, is that they have a little more redundancy with other channels on HSD, like we see three. 168 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:47:29.210 --> 00:47:48.810 And also other missions like JWSD. You see three years is preferred over ACS because it has UV filters that are unique, and it also has redundancy in its electronics. ACS has been single string and is a higher risk. 169 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:47:48.810 --> 00:48:08.810 That is not to say that there will be NO impacts to this, right? Some science will be lost or become more difficult. So e.g., without ACS wipsy, tiling large areas on the sky using parallel imaging will become much harder. Parallel imaging will become impossible and tying those areas will be much more costly. 170 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:48:08.810 --> 00:48:27.780 ACS also has some unique spectral parametric and rem filters that are not redundant and will not be replaced, so that science will not be possible any longer. But we see three IR it is still observing bright targets in the IR that are too bright for GWST, and so. 171 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:48:27.780 --> 00:48:45.000 Those will become much more difficult or perhaps impossible. And then finally, the contemporaneous UV visible neara coverage of transients will also become more challenging since the overlap between the web and hubble fill in regards is pretty small. 172 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:48:45.000 --> 00:49:03.090 And so to try in the event that we have to stop operating those two channels, we have prepared some, as, as graceful as a closeout as possible, in particular through the bridge programs, that the community should really respond to. 173 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:49:03.090 --> 00:49:23.090 As part of the overguide budget scenario of the senior review, we will restore operations for those two channels. So here's a little bit more detail on the distribution of funding across the different components of the missions and the different aspects of the work that we do to. 174 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:49:23.090 --> 00:49:26.280 Find our users with groundbreaking data. 175 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:49:26.280 --> 00:49:43.110 Though at its core are the incompressibles, and this includes critical mission operations, as again we have to have a function named telescope. They are also critical aspects to science operations, in particular, all the planning and scheduling that allows. 176 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:49:43.110 --> 00:50:00.000 The observations to be scheduled on the telescope. All the engineering that we do to maintain, healthy instruments, all the broad object protection checks that our contact scientists perform to make sure that our detectors UV detectors are safe. 177 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:50:00.000 --> 00:50:20.000 All design selection to select programs out of over 900 and something submissions. We administer the grants. We have to make sure that our IT systems are secure. So all these have over the years basically becoming incompassible and that's about $60 million. 178 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:50:20.000 --> 00:50:22.230 S. 179 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:50:22.230 --> 00:50:42.230 On top of that, we support unique UV optical capabilities, so the UV spectrographs, the UV optical imaging, et cetera. That's about a 9 million chunk of the budget. The cost of operating ACS we've seen we see three IR is about $3 million. 180 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:50:42.230 --> 00:51:00.690 A year. We also have to continue performing outreach. That's extremely important to maintain public support and funding for hubble. The cost of that over the years has been about 3 million, but we are already making reductions in that area as soon as FY 25. 181 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:51:00.690 --> 00:51:18.360 Then on the more community facing aspect, we have to continue support supporting the hubble fellowship program. That's about $8 million a year. And then we have to continue providing grants to the community to analyze the Hubble data and publish it. 182 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:51:18.360 --> 00:51:36.180 Over the last cycles, there's been 15 millions, but it historically has been something like 30 million. So in FY $25, continuing operations, with 30 million in grants, would cost about a hundred and $13 million. 183 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:51:36.180 --> 00:51:51.840 So on the left here, I'm showing you some notionable funding scenarios. For the senior review, we are constrained to the guidance from NASA, which is the PBR. But these scenarios are meant to show you what we could do with different levels of funding. 184 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:51:51.840 --> 00:52:09.900 So with the flat 88 million, which is the yellow-circle on the right here, we cannot continue operating the way we have in the past. And so in this case, we would have to stop operations and support for ACS with C and we see three IR. 185 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:52:09.900 --> 00:52:27.330 And the grant level of funding, the grant funding level would come down to about 10 million in FY 26 through 28. If we had a flat $93.3 million budget, which is the same that we've received in the last couple of years. 186 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:52:27.330 --> 00:52:45.000 Then there's a trade off. It would be, the trade off would be between prioritizing, grants and so keeping the, keeping the grant funding at 15 millions for the next three years at the cost of stopping operations for the two channels. 187 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:52:45.000 --> 00:53:01.230 Or, we could support all capabilities, but this would come at the cost of a dip in the grandfunding level in FY 26. In this case it would come down to something like 12 million in FY 26 and then rebound to 15 million in FY 2728. 188 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:53:01.230 --> 00:53:17.670 The reason for that is grants are obligated for several years and we are still paying for grants in cycle 2930 and fire. And with a flat 98.3 million budget, we would be able to support. 189 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:53:17.670 --> 00:53:37.670 All capabilities and keep $15 million in grants. Again, that's all notional, but those different budget level budget funding levels are outlined on the right here in the-circles. So we understand things have been moving pretty fast, even for our. 190 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:53:37.670 --> 00:53:38.370 Yes. 191 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:53:38.370 --> 00:53:58.370 Things have been changing from week to week, basically until last week. And so I think now we have a strategy for the senior review, but we really do want to collect community input, and so we have prepared some questions for you all. I will, I will go through that. 192 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:53:58.370 --> 00:54:03.750 Number 1st I wanted to say that we've created an email address which is listed at the top of the slide here. 193 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:54:03.750 --> 00:54:22.260 Where you can provide your input on those questions and more, and I encourage everyone to take a screen grab of this slide so they can have the questions and the email address. We will be posting the recording and the slides and emailing that to the community at a later point. 194 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:54:22.260 --> 00:54:41.100 So the 1st question is, what key science cases should or will hubble pursue in the 2020s and beyond, and what capabilities are needed to support those science cases? This is important and should include science and observations that are supporting preparations for hub worlds. 195 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:54:41.100 --> 00:55:00.930 Question number two, we would like the community to comment on the strategy that we have devised to protect the unique UV optical capabilities of hubble, prioritize maintaining an incredible approach approach for community access to a well calibrated science ready, data archive. 196 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:55:00.930 --> 00:55:17.610 And the flip side, the flip side of that question is, does the community favor extended operations with we see three and ACS recognizing that the data might be of much lower quality and potentially only usable by experts? 197 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:55:17.610 --> 00:55:35.130 That would be located primarily at well resourced in the institutions. Question number three, if we only had funding to support ACS we see off with C three IR but not both. 198 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:55:35.130 --> 00:55:54.060 Which one should be prioritized? And can the community provide some input on that? We would also like to know whether the community is supportive of NASA potentially moving our programs to the roses annual call, which includes ADAP, ATP and XRP. 199 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:55:54.060 --> 00:56:14.060 Under those reduced funding scenarios, question five, we would, this is about the trade off I showed with the budget onion onion. What would the committee prioritize between research grant funding and capability? 200 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:56:14.060 --> 00:56:31.650 Especially in FY 26. And so e.g., if we were to have a flat funding level of 93.3 million, would the community prioritize maintaining capabilities at the cost of a dip in the grant funding level in FY 26 or would they prioritize? 201 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:56:31.650 --> 00:56:48.330 Flat grant funding over those years. And then finally, we'd like to know if the community is supportive of nasa's balance in research support between grant funding and the HFP program. So with that, we will open the Q and A in Webex. 202 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:56:48.330 --> 00:57:04.500 And people can type in, their questions or input, in the Q and A box. Thank you. There's a few in there already. We got a couple beforehand. The. 203 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:57:04.500 --> 00:57:23.340 Sent to the email there and you should follow up afterwards as well. One from Olivia Lupey, why has NASA headquarters not called for a National Academy of Science Review of their plans to significantly cut continue to cut the budgets such that working your peak performing instrument modes will be cut off. 204 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:57:23.340 --> 00:57:43.340 I think. Yeah, that's the question for headquarters. I think the answer is that there is budget pressure That's that we all recognize. Another question from Peter Blanchur online, what will be the impact on multi cycle programs with already approved time for ECS? Why. 205 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:57:43.340 --> 00:57:46.800 Field camera in cycles 33 and 34. 206 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:57:46.800 --> 00:58:06.800 Will those programs be able to switch the entire program to aC3u vis, including cycle 32 observations? Yeah so what we are currently working with the PI of the one MCT program that is potentially affected by this. In this case, we, we have found a workaround that makes the. 207 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:58:06.800 --> 00:58:25.590 And it's still achievable, without having to move the program to other instruments. And that's, that is feasible thanks to the very intelligent structure of the program that the PI has devised. So we don't expect that to be a problem for this particular case. 208 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:58:25.590 --> 00:58:43.980 One other question, what would be the posture for ACS wire true camera for cycle 33? So, we will, you will see in the call for proposals for cycle 33 that we are allowing people to submit proposals with observations with this mode. 209 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:58:43.980 --> 00:59:02.730 In the event that we cannot support, operations in the long term for those two channels because of reduced funding, what we would do is, allow for a graceful transition. So in cycle 32, they would be full support. 210 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:59:02.730 --> 00:59:20.520 We have instructing our instructed our teams to basically close out all calibrations as much as possible so that includes special calibration programs to tie astrometric influx calibration to other instruments, other missions, documentation etc. 211 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:59:20.520 --> 00:59:39.720 Then in cycle 33, if we don't have the resources to fully support this channel, we would allocate a fraction of an FTE to perform a very basic calibration through cycle 33. So this would include anills and the daily CCD monitor darks, hot pixels, things like that. 212 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:59:39.720 --> 00:59:57.240 And so that would allow the calibration and the science data to still be usable at a level that is close to what we have now. So that's with cycle 33. Beyond cycle 33. 213 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 00:59:57.240 --> 01:00:17.240 We would not have any resources to continue supporting that channel even at the basic level and expect that in that case the calibration would start going stale, and potentially the calibration pipeline without maintenance would break. But for cycle 33 science data would still be usable and supported at a. 214 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:00:17.240 --> 01:00:18.540 Very basic level. 215 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:00:18.540 --> 01:00:38.540 There's one, one other comment from Eric Powerman that the way that this has been handled has been unacceptable. It is not true that there was NO time for community input. For Chandra there was time and this was particularly important. I will notice that the Chandra is planning to the same budget effectively as, as it was given in the OPC. 216 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:00:38.540 --> 01:00:39.510 PR. 217 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:00:39.510 --> 01:00:59.510 Subtracting unique capabilities requires community input. The fact that these two things were not done completely arose my faith in the financial implications withdraw. The bridge is helpful, but the amount of orbits is not anywhere near adequates and without funding you are saying implicitly that the science is not worthy. There will be funding for the bridge programs. 218 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:00:59.510 --> 01:01:17.070 They have a specific purpose. Let me comment on that concern there. 1st of all, let, let me make it clear. We are not shutting down these capabilities until we get direction from senior review and ultimately NASA. 219 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:01:17.070 --> 01:01:33.930 Oh. So we don't, we do not have that yet and we will not have that for some time. But we are concerned about the time scales in which we've had to pivot, but our guidance has changed on a very regular basis. 220 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:01:33.930 --> 01:01:49.080 So we've been living with a great deal of uncertainty. These bridge programs, even just getting the ideas, even if we cannot fully support all of them, will help make the argument that these resources are vital. 221 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:01:49.080 --> 01:02:07.140 So I strongly encourage people to submit their proposals. There are a couple of questions about the ACS AC solar blind channel, ACS solar blind channel. I think I've answered that online, that's that's not. 222 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:02:07.140 --> 01:02:22.260 The plans are to are to continue that without change. We'll support. There were also a couple of questions about how does one advocate for increased funding for hubble. I think I will give one answer and Jen will give an I hope the same answer. 223 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:02:22.260 --> 01:02:42.260 It's sometimes counterproductive to advocate for a specific mission. It is better to advocate for science as a whole, and a rising tide lifts all boats, and that is actually the most effective way going forward. Otherwise, we can end up with conflict within an organization within a. 224 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:02:42.260 --> 01:02:59.250 Disciplines that do not help. Yeah, let, let me reiterate, we absolutely do not want this to be a zero some game, don't want to get in a hubble versus chandra conflict. NASA science overall has dramatically decreased. 225 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:02:59.250 --> 01:03:19.250 And there are real real issues across the board. Our, our partners at NASA are really, really struggling with this. So we need the community to show just how important these resources are, how important hubble is, how important Chandra is, how important Web is, and if we don't. 226 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:03:19.250 --> 01:03:34.860 Don't have those loud voices which are not just advocating for individual science, but, but for the broader picture, this whole community is gonna be in serious serious trouble. 227 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:03:34.860 --> 01:03:54.860 One more question through the email from Casey Papach. Are there he's concerned about potential decrease in productivity through publications as the grant funding reduces? So he was, he was asking if there are considerations to normalize publications per year or other metrics by the amount of grant support. 228 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:03:54.860 --> 01:04:15.320 This would be seen to be more useful than only watching publications for other metrics. I think that that's it's certainly something that we will track and look at and monitor the impact in the community. I think it's obviously going to be a lagging indicator. Yes. Yeah, we're we're really concerned about. 229 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:04:15.320 --> 01:04:26.040 A negative feedback loop in which less funding less support results in less productivity, which then is further arguments for cutting hubble even more. 230 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:04:26.040 --> 01:04:45.000 I would say we are also open to other ideas about how to make the most scientific impact with both the limited grant funding and the lack of support for being able to do the the scale of big ambitious programs that we've done in the past. 231 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:04:45.000 --> 01:05:05.000 So that would be welcome feedback to be sent to this email address. One more question from Marks later, if we stop instrument anils from an extended period of time, would instrumental performance be permanently degraded? Right, very good question. So actually we're, we're not playing, if, if we have to stop support. 232 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:05:05.000 --> 01:05:08.940 Learning those two channels in cycle 33 and beyond, which again. 233 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:05:08.940 --> 01:05:25.980 We're not doing right now, we're waiting for the outcome of the senior review, but if that happens, we will not turn off those channels. We will keep them on and in particular for ACS, we will continue doing the monthly anils to make sure that the detector stays in a usable state. 234 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:05:25.980 --> 01:05:44.010 In particular in case there's some hardware failure on VC three in the future, and ACS could be, taken out of dormancy basically. But we see three IR will not shut that down either. We need to keep the channel in a. 235 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:05:44.010 --> 01:06:00.360 A state that ensures, thermal stability for the entire with C three instrument. There are also some very basic calibration with with C three IR that support calibration for with C3u visits and so those would have to continue to be done. 236 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:06:07.080 --> 01:06:27.080 Okay, one more question, if support has to be dropped for ACS and with C three IR, will they be offered as available but unsupported? So that is the kind of feedback that we would like to have from the community. There's, there's two risks to keeping modes available but unsupported. One, it is. 237 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:06:27.080 --> 01:06:32.730 Quickly against our fundamental principle of equitable access to well calibrated for all our users. 238 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:06:32.730 --> 01:06:52.290 Available and but unsupported means we would stop taking calibration data, we would stop ETC updates, we would stop pipeline maintenance, and so in the end, there's a high risk that the data that would end up in the archive is raw uncalibrated and only usable by a handful of experts in the world. 239 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:06:52.290 --> 01:07:09.600 So that's not equitable, but more fundamentally I think it threatens the legacy of hubble, because again, we come back to the productivity and impact, and if only a handful of experts in the world can use the data and you have a fraction of your hubble archive populated by such data. 240 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:07:09.600 --> 01:07:25.650 Then the number of publications will start to go down and we get into that feedback loop where less publications may means less funding. So this is a pretty high risk, and, we would like to to have some community input on this. 241 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:07:25.650 --> 01:07:43.170 One more question that I can answer. When will request for cycle 32 budgets go out? That should be really soon. The the that's, the asset recently signed off from the total funding, it's gone through the the processes and the budget letters should go out within the next week or so. 242 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:07:48.870 --> 01:08:06.900 I'm not seeing any more questions. Roger raises his his white paper on astra ph with some very interesting high resolution images, but I think that's. 243 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:08:06.900 --> 01:08:26.900 Everything. So we're about ten past the hour, let me say thank you to Julia and thank you for everyone for joining today. We will be posting both the slides and the video online and we encourage people both to submit to the bridge program proposal process. 244 "STScI Boardroom" (4247974656) 01:08:26.900 --> 01:08:44.412 And to provide us input on these specific questions through the email listed here on the slide. Thank you all. Thanks everyone.