ESO OPC Feedback:
-----------------

There is one issue that I would like to see discussed by the 8m users
committee. This regards ESO in particular. The issue is that because
of the set up of their OPC, applicants for time often get ridiculous
feedback that is also often completely contrary to the proposal
contents. This is - in my opinion - mainly due to the fact that ESO
doesn't send their proposals out for external review, like we do in
the UK/PPARC - and hte OPC often simply doesn't have enough expertise
to assess proposals properly. They claim that there are not enough
potential referees to do this job, but that is clearly bollocks. At
this point, I am really completely pissed off with this approach and
feel very strongly that we - as UK scientists - should make a strong
case to ESO to change this practice.

Gemini proposals are sent to external referees (I, for one, have
refereed a number of them), so this gives an independent assessment.



Gemini Instrument Manuals:
--------------------------

In my brief experience with observing using Gemini versus VLT, and
other large telescopes for example, I have noticed that the Gemini
instrument web pages are relatively difficult to use correctly when
proposing, mostly for first time users (the situation naturally
improves as you deal with it repeatedly, or get used to it).  This
seems to me because each web page describing a certain instrument
component often has multiple links that take the user off to other
peripheral pages, making it difficult to follow a single topic through
to the end.  As a result, the important information is sometimes lost
by having to follow all the links.  Also, while many of the links seem
to be leading to the same place, sometimes the information is not the
same, and sometimes a needed piece of information is only on one of
the sub-pages (so that you must reach it from the correct referring
page).

As an example, a challenge you might try is to find the NIRI arc lamp
spectra for reference during data reduction.  You must navigate to the
grism components web page (which has no title or referring link
suggesting the presence of arc lamp spectra on this page), then
understand that the check marks in the table are actually links to
spectra plots, and then you will discover that the spectra are
provided in blocky figures where the wavelength numbers are barely
readable due to the bitmapping.

By comparison, the VLT instrument manuals (in pdf format) are quite
helpful as preparation and reference material, with a definite
predictable structure, presented in a logical book form, and there is
relatively little difficulty when trying to locate a relevant piece of
information.  In addition, the document is static for the whole
semester, so that the information must be correct at the time of
release.

Generating completely new instrument manuals of this type would be a
lot of extra work for the Gemini staff to be asked to do, and I'm not
suggesting this.  However, perhaps they could address the issue of the
instrument web pages being difficult to use in the meantime.  For
example, organizing the web pages in the order of typical instrument
manuals, and not being afraid to have long, but comprehensive web
pages (with linked section divisions) that have all the relevant
tables and figures without having to click off to somewhere else each
time.


Composition of UK Gemini TAC
----------------------------

Several people (myself included) have noticed that the composition of
the Gemini TAC is such that the range of interests of its members is
quite limited. Three or four current/overlapping members (the majority
of the panel?)  have recently written papers on z>5 LBGs for
example. Such a concentration is just wrong.


-- 
Malcolm Bremer
Reader in Astrophysics

H H Wills Physics Laboratory,
University of Bristol,
Tyndall Avenue,
BRISTOL, BS8 1TL,
U.K.

Phone: +44-117-928-8764
Fax:   +44-117-925-5624

Email:  m.bremer@bristol.ac.uk