ATNF Future Operations Discussion Forum

Thread subject: taking over responsibility

09 Mar 08, 07:40pm Juergen Ott, NRAO/Caltech


I would like to address the question of student training. First of all, I agree
with Naomi's comments. Personally, I was certainly drawn into a PhD in
astronomy by the observational aspect of it. There's something addictive in
controlling and seeing a telescope move to your 'own' source where one has
spent many hours in developing the experiment, writing the proposal and where
one will spend even more hours for data reduction, analysis and publication.
And I feel that a trip to an observatory does get many students hooked on
astronomy. During the time at university I guess that everyone ponders where
their future lies. Should one take on a well paid job in industry or pursue the
high risk, less paid path of science? Being in control of 6 telescopes in
Australia certainly sealed the deal for many of us. 

But here, I would like to stress some different aspect: the steep learning curve
by taking over responsibility. 

Being a duty astronomer is something that, to start with, is really a scary
thing for a young student. It means that other people rely with their observing
projects on your expertise and overview. As a duty astronomer one is committed
to go to a level of understanding the system that is hardly reached as a
'simple' observer. Duty astronomers also learn to define the point at which
they need to ask other staff. Then, with time, this point is being pushed
further to deeper levels of the system and more and more problems can be solved
independently. 


I am now a member of the CARMA group at Caltech. The system there is that PhD
students and postdocs run the array as pool observers and to take over many
other aspects such as calibrator monitoring and the development of observing
routines. Again, it turns out, that most students go to levels of technical
understanding that I am very impressed with. They have to run, fix and
characterize the array be it on the spot or be it back at their institutions. 


Being responsible for a telescope implies to be able to solve many problems. If
a problem lies too deep for a simple solution, then the solution is worked out
with experienced staff. These interactions are great lessons to learn on how to
find the fault, how to find an interim or final solution, and to do this as
fast as possible with the efficiency of the observations and the safety of the
array in mind. It also implies to make decisions, for example, when to go from
mm to cm observing or when to switch on generators. 


Taking on responsibility (be it as a duty astronomer or a CARMA pool observer)
and the inevitable interaction with other experienced staff and other observers
breeds a very distinct kind of astronomer. 
They have qualities that are hard to find but much needed for all of the current
and future telescopes at all wavelengths. I had the impression that many of the
available positions at ATNF, now and within the foreseeable future, are
sometimes hard to fill because of the difficulty finding exactly those persons
that combine astronomical knowledge with the art of running a telescope and
pushing forward its capabilities.


I would therefore argue that not only should one be able to regularly visit the
observatories but that the duty astronomer scheme should include again students
from universities that are not necessarily affiliated with ATNF. But that
scheme can only work if observers, duty astronomers, and observatory staff are
all together at the observatory site. There has been a long tradition of
Australian radio astronomers who went through the  ATNF 'school' of being
responsible for a telescope. Many of them are now in charge of other Australian
or international world class observatories like CARMA or ALMA, to name but a
few. And indeed Australian radio astronomers do have the reputation of being
hands on and to know how to run a facility. 

Let this tradition continue.