0 Assigned ID: 288 ----- Attempting Submission 1 (Thu Apr 09 22:13:02 GMT 2015) ----- HST Phase I Proposal 288 (EPIC201912552b_STIS+WFC3.apt) successfully submitted. Receipt: # 288-3 ----- Attempting Submission 4 (Fri Apr 10 21:25:40 GMT 2015) ----- Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. Sensitive exposures should have an ETC run number provided. 1 February 2018- EHRENREICH Changed the start phase range to accomodate scheduling (20 min earlier) 6 July 2017 - EHRENREICH I resubmit the Phase 2 in view of a repeat, following the decision on HOPR 88203 (visit 11 lost due to detector reset). I created a new visit (21), copy of the lost visit 11 but 1 orbit shorter to facilitate the scheduling. I tightened the phase constraints a bit, leaving a slack time of ~42 min. Everything else unchanged. --- I have made the following changes: - I updated the transit ephemeris following recent Spitzer observations. As a result, I'm expecting that the current observation window will change. - I modified the ACQ/PEAK procedure: I was using a grism but the 45-sec exposure required to reach the S/N ratio was taking too much out of the science time (~1,000 sec), so I switched the grism off and simply set the mirror, keeping the same slit. - I consequently adapted the length of the science exposure in the first orbit to fill up the 800 sec won through this setting change. - Since the science exposure begins a bit earlier, I slightly updated the phase constraint values on the first ACQ exposure. 3/31 Opening the PHASE window to try to get a window in cycle 23 6/7 Cut exposure time in the final exposure 6/7 added visits 02 and 03 with modified PHASE windows since exposure cut didn't work 6/7 removed visits 02 and 03 and modified visit 01 with a larger PHASE window to allow two potential start times 6/27 Added visit 11 as exact duplicate of visit 01 which was lost due to a STIS suspend on 06/19 6/28 Increased SCHEDULABILITY to 100 and decreased exposure time by 221s in each orbit 1/17 Opened PHASE window earlier to allow for potential scheduling on March 11 802558034 ----- Attempting Submission 1 (Thu Jul 23 14:15:17 GMT 2015) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 2 (Sat Jul 25 02:43:43 GMT 2015) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 3 (Mon Feb 08 17:32:55 GMT 2016) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 4 (Thu Mar 31 17:14:03 GMT 2016) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 5 (Tue Jun 07 14:11:05 GMT 2016) ----- HST Phase II Proposal 14221 (14221.apt) successfully submitted. Receipt: # 14221-5 ----- Attempting Submission 6 (Tue Jun 07 14:32:47 GMT 2016) ----- Your proposal could not be saved. Submission aborted. ----- Attempting Submission 7 (Tue Jun 07 16:24:58 GMT 2016) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 8 (Mon Jun 27 16:00:54 GMT 2016) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 9 (Tue Jun 28 11:47:17 GMT 2016) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 10 (Tue Jan 17 18:36:09 GMT 2017) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 11 (Thu Jul 06 12:37:26 GMT 2017) ----- ----- Attempting Submission 12 (Thu Feb 01 18:07:51 GMT 2018) ----- As described in the comment on the exposure time of the science exposure, the target Lyman-alpha flux is going to be fainter than GJ 436's, safely observed in several previous programs (e.g. GO12965) with the same settings. Running the ETC would just consist in inputing a scaled down spectrum of GJ 436, so this will not be more informative. Atmospheric characterization of exoplanets in habitable zones is one of the greatest challenge of astrophysics. In fact, all known potential targets either do not transit, or they transit stars too faint or distant, making them impossible to probe with transit spectroscopy. A recently announced K2 planet candidate found in the habitable zone of a nearby M dwarf, could be a game changer as the first habitable-zone super-Earth (2.2 R_Earth) amenable to characterization. We propose to use HST to (1) validate the planet candidate by observing a high-precision near-infrared transit with WFC3 and (2) characterize its atmosphere by detecting an extended hydrogen exosphere in the far ultraviolet with STIS. Hydrogen escape is indeed a telltale sign of terrestrial planets enduring a runaway greenhouse effect. Further considerations on the habitable potential of the planet thus need to be vet against a detection of hydrogen escape. Our recent STIS Lyman-alpha observations of a moderately irradiated neptune show that extended upper atmospheres can reach much larger sizes around such planets than around very hot exoplanets. We could thus obtain a significant detection with a modest amount of HST orbits. In parallel, we started a ground-based campaign to constrain the yet unknown mass of this planet with Doppler measurements. Combining the Lyman-alpha transit depth with the measurement of the planet bulk density (from the accurate near-infrared transit and the Doppler mass), will reveal for the first time whether an exoplanet can be telluric and actually habitable, or if it is losing its water because of a runaway greenhouse effect. We are going to observe one transit of exoplanet EPIC 201912552.01, which lies in the habitable zone of its M dwarf host. The planet was found by the K2 survey; and two transits are known, yielding some uncertainties on the planet transit ephemeride. We use the ephemeride to impose phase constraints on the first (ACQ) exposure of the first orbit in the visit. These constraints are set to allow observation of 2 orbits before the transit, 2 orbits after the transit, and one orbit (the third one) within the optical transit of the planet. The UV transit can be much longer than the optical transit, and orbits 2 and 4 could catch an extended transit. We are submitted a Spitzer DDT to observe a NIR transit, which could significantly firm up the transit ephemeride (this was the original purpose of another WFC3 visit in this programme, which has been removed by the TAC). The science observations are all done with STIS/FUV-MAM/G140M using time-tag mode. Because the ACQ/PEAK is quite long, we won't repeat it in the subsequent orbits to save science time. I will also make a request to be able to use GO wavecals during occultations. EXTRA-SOLAR PLANETS 6 false true false false false false AVAILABLE STAR EXTRA-SOLAR PLANETARY SYSTEM M V-IV NO This object was generated by the targetselector and retrieved from the 2MASS database. It's also part of the K2 Ecliptic Plan Input Catalog. None of those data bases list proper motions. However, we will be able to retrieve those from contemporaneous observations we are doing from the ground to follow-up the system. We will update the Phase 2 as soon as possible with these information. EPIC201912552 2MASS11301450+0735180 J2000 J2000 J=9.76, H=9.13, K=8.90 STIS/FUV-MAMA Spectroscopic No No G140M 1222 1465316432782 The scheduling data was generated by CASM 24.0. CASM was run in Phase II mode. This 5-orbit visit will capture the transit of the planet using STIS/FUV-MAMA. 1466481055000 109.0 (Tic-Visit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "01" :proposal-version -1 :trans-version "20160129" :date "07-Jun-2016 12:20:32.0" :trans-errors '(:WARNINGS 0 :ERRORS 0 :HEALTH-AND-SAFETY 0 :FATAL-ERRORS 0 :CONTINUABLE-FATALS 0) :number-of-orbits 5 :saa-model "24" :si-bright-earth-limb-angle 20.0 :data-volume 1409456 :tdrss-contact-duration 0 :coron NIL ) (Tic-Obset :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "01" :obset-id "01" :pcs-mode "FGS" ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "01" :orbit-number 1 :pcs-time 333 :si-vis-utilization 2880 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 3213 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "01" :orbit-number 2 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2991 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 3213 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "01" :orbit-number 3 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2991 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 3213 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "01" :orbit-number 4 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2991 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 3213 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "01" :orbit-number 5 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2991 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 639 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 3213 :pcs-gap 0 ) false 5 0 14s allows to obtain S/N > 50 for this acquisition exposure. The previous setting (commented below) resulted in a very long (~1,000 sec) ACQ/PEAK procedure. I have thus changed settings to simply use the mirror and drop the grism. In 1 sec, the S/N > 150 and the warning on CTE vs. low-background disappeared. #Previous setting: (ACQ/PEAK with a grism) #45s allows to reach over S/N=40 at with STIS/CCD/G750L at 7751 Angstroms. The Spectroscopic ETC yields a warning about the issue with charge transfer #efficiency for low background, but we are just using the CCD for the target acquisition, after which we switch to the MAMA. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. 1484677821781 The scheduling data was generated by CASM 24.2. CASM was run in Phase II mode. This 5-orbit visit will capture the transit of the planet using STIS/FUV-MAMA. Added as a repeat of visit 01 which did not execute due to a STIS safing on 6/19/2016 1497784468000 112.78804800335018 (Tic-Visit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "11" :proposal-version -1 :trans-version "20160601" :date "17-Jan-2017 13:30:20.0" :trans-errors '(:WARNINGS 0 :ERRORS 0 :HEALTH-AND-SAFETY 0 :FATAL-ERRORS 0 :CONTINUABLE-FATALS 0) :number-of-orbits 5 :saa-model "24" :si-bright-earth-limb-angle 20.0 :data-volume 1339872 :tdrss-contact-duration 0 :coron NIL ) (Tic-Obset :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "11" :obset-id "11" :pcs-mode "FGS" ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "11" :orbit-number 1 :pcs-time 333 :si-vis-utilization 2659 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2992 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "11" :orbit-number 2 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2770 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2992 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "11" :orbit-number 3 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2770 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2992 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "11" :orbit-number 4 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2770 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2992 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "11" :orbit-number 5 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2770 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 639 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2992 :pcs-gap 0 ) false 5 0 14s allows to obtain S/N > 50 for this acquisition exposure. The previous setting (commented below) resulted in a very long (~1,000 sec) ACQ/PEAK procedure. I have thus changed settings to simply use the mirror and drop the grism. In 1 sec, the S/N > 150 and the warning on CTE vs. low-background disappeared. #Previous setting: (ACQ/PEAK with a grism) #45s allows to reach over S/N=40 at with STIS/CCD/G750L at 7751 Angstroms. The Spectroscopic ETC yields a warning about the issue with charge transfer #efficiency for low background, but we are just using the CCD for the target acquisition, after which we switch to the MAMA. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. 1499344366189 The scheduling data was generated by CASM 25.2. CASM was run in Phase II mode. This 4-orbit visit will capture the transit of the planet using STIS/FUV-MAMA. Added as a repeat of visit 11 which was lost due to a MAMA1 reset event (HOPR 88203). The repeat is 4 orbits instead of the original 5 to optimize schedulability. (Tic-Visit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "21" :proposal-version -1 :trans-version "20170613" :date "06-Jul-2017 14:32:45.0" :trans-errors '(:WARNINGS 4 :ERRORS 0 :HEALTH-AND-SAFETY 0 :FATAL-ERRORS 0 :CONTINUABLE-FATALS 0) :number-of-orbits 4 :saa-model "24" :si-bright-earth-limb-angle 20.0 :data-volume 1044160 :tdrss-contact-duration 0 :coron NIL ) (Tic-Obset :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "21" :obset-id "21" :pcs-mode "FGS" ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "21" :orbit-number 1 :pcs-time 333 :si-vis-utilization 2659 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2982 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "21" :orbit-number 2 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2770 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2982 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "21" :orbit-number 3 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2770 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 377 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2982 :pcs-gap 0 ) (Tic-Orbit :proposal-id 14221 :visit-id "21" :orbit-number 4 :pcs-time 222 :si-vis-utilization 2770 :al-overhead-at-end 0 :internal-dur-at-end 639 :dark-offset NIL :dark-utilization 0 :max-dark-utilization 1920 :low-sky "N" :pcs-visibility 2982 :pcs-gap 0 ) false 4 4 14s allows to obtain S/N > 50 for this acquisition exposure. The previous setting (commented below) resulted in a very long (~1,000 sec) ACQ/PEAK procedure. I have thus changed settings to simply use the mirror and drop the grism. In 1 sec, the S/N > 150 and the warning on CTE vs. low-background disappeared. #Previous setting: (ACQ/PEAK with a grism) #45s allows to reach over S/N=40 at with STIS/CCD/G750L at 7751 Angstroms. The Spectroscopic ETC yields a warning about the issue with charge transfer #efficiency for low background, but we are just using the CCD for the target acquisition, after which we switch to the MAMA. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's. The star is of the same spectral type (M2V) as GJ 436, observed several time (e.g., GO#12965) in this configuration. The target is ~3 mag fainter and farther away (30 pc vs. 10 pc) than GJ 436, so the Lyman-alpha flux of the target will be weaker than GJ 436's.