PPARC Rolling Grant Bridging Year
Notes: Richard Harrison – July 2005
The basic points:

We need to apply for a bridging year to make the change from a 2 to 3 year rolling
grant with the IHR and S&T rollers.

We need to submit by September 30 2005, for support for the year from April 2006.
(note that the date has changes slightly). Given the fact that August is non-existent,
we should have a near complete draft by the end of July.

Please note that we also need to submit the proposal for the 3 year grant from April
2007 in May 2006. That is almost a year prior to the start of the requested funding!
The method:
PPARC has defined the method for the bridging year support in their Web site. The proposal
requires the following:






Current grant reference number;
Project Title;
Current level of support, e.g. names PDRA(s) in post, current spine point and other
related resources;
Details of bridging support requested;
A two page (A4) maximum explanation for bridging support;
A two page (A4) maximum explanation for new project support.
That is all they say! They do not seem to want a formal Je-S form submission (to be
confirmed by them). Mike Lockwood and I can pull together the required information for the
first three bullets, so those can be ignored.
We need to establish what the 4th bullet means – just the financial details? PPARC have
been asked and we await a response.
We also need to establish with PPARC that there is no need for an interim report as with the
full proposal. They do not ask for a publication list either. Having no measure of performance
seems a bit strange. However, they do see a full proposal within less than a year. They have
been approached about this as well and we anticipate a response soon.
That leaves precious few pages for the justification, given the mixed bag of activities at RAL.
We have talked to Maggie Collick at PPARC and the plan is to keep in touch with her as we
draft the proposals to ensure that we are doing what is required.
The basic idea is that groups applying for a bridging year ask for level funding and all will be
OK. Our position will, or course, be that we need more – for very good reasons (which I list
below.
The final question is ‘who judges the bridging year proposal’? PPARC have been asked this
one – any response will be fed back to you.
Next Steps:
The actions on you come in here. Make sure you have your copy of the proposals which we
presented in November 2003 in front of you. The proposals we submitted covered the
following – those who coordinated the response for the last proposal are listed:
IHR Proposal
Solar Physics
STP
Planetary
Astronomy
Coordinator – Richard Harrison
Coordinator – Mike Lockwood/Ian McCrea
Coordinator – Manuel Grande
Coordinator – Roger Emery
Studies and Technology
Solar Orbiter Studies
Solar Orbiter – APS Detector Development
Planetary – Future Missions
Planetary – Bepi Colombo
Astronomy – mm-Technology
Astronomy – Future Mission Studies
Fundamental Physics – Future Missions
Coordinator – Richard Harrison
Coordinator – Nick Waltham
Coordinator – Manuel Grande
Coordinator – Manuel Grande
Coordinator – Peter Huggard
Coordinator – Roger Emery/Bruce Swinyard
Coordinator – Barry Kent
The basic structure must stay the same but we must include specific issues which, in some
cases have been requested by PPARC. Also, some of the areas must now be coordinated by
someone else. Thus, the suggested approach for each area is spelt out in the table below:
Area
IHR Solar Physics
Coordinator
Richard Harrison
IHR STP
IHR Astronomy
Mike Lockwood
Glenn White
IHR Planetary
Manuel Grande
S&T Solar Orbiter
Richard Harrison
S&T S.O. Detectors
Nick Waltham
S&T Planetary
Future Studies
– Manuel Grande
S&T Planetary
Bepi Colombo
– Sarah Dunkin
S&T Astronomy
Future Studies
S&T Astronomy
mm-Technology
S&T
STP
Earthshine
– Bruce Swinyard
Comments
Continuation of agreed research programme but with Post
Doc award (Bewsher) starting 1 October 2005.
RAH to supply 300 words on solar research plus
statement about Post Doc delay.
ML to supply 300 words on STP research.
GW to supply 300 words on astronomy programme
(see comment about Glenn on SLA below)
MG to supply 300 words on planetary research. Also
provide text for additional support for Post Doc.
Stress that post doc was awarded and taken out on the
grounds that we had a RS Fellow. That has now gone so
level award means that we should have post doc…
RAH to supply 300 words on continuation of Solar
Orbiter studies. Include EGSO request?
NRW to supply 300 words on continuation of Solar
Orbiter APS detector activity.
MG to supply 300 words on continuation of planetary
future mission studies.
MD to supply 100 words on support for new mission
studies for SWISE/KuaFu for ‘new projects’ section.
Assume this line is not required this time – should be in
the SLA by April 2006.
SD to supply 300 words on continuation of Bepi
studies – if this is required.
BMS to supply 300 words on Future Mission studies –
and 100 words on ‘new project’ SPICA.
– Peter Huggard
PH to supply 300 words on continuation of mmtechnology studies.
- Mike Lockwood
ML to supply 100 words on support for Earthshine in
new S&T line (suggested by Sue Horne).
Given the inputs requested in the above table, and summarising it in another way, we should
have the following:
IHR two-page explanation for bridging support
- Solar 300 words from Richard
- STP 300 words from Mike
- Planetary 300 words from Manuel
- Astronomy 300 words from Glenn
IHR two-page new project explanation
- Explanation of delayed ‘post doc’ award for Solar*
- Explanation for ‘post doc’ proposal for planetary work**
- Explanation that the astronomy proposal is a ‘new’ start coinciding with Glenn’s
arrival and Bruce’s new role as Group Leader. This must include a formal request
for increased Group Leader support in the SLA. Note that the SLA is not part of
this bid but we do have to cover it here.
[* The solar award was not taken up on time because the successful candidate was asked to
complete some work at UCLAN. A start date of October 2005 was agreed by
PPARC/RAL/UCLAN. ]
[** With regard to the planetary post doc, the original award included such a person but it
was taken out on the grounds that we had a RS Fellow on the planetary side. With the
completion of that Fellowship, we can argue that the post doc should be awarded to remain
level.]
S&T two-page explanation for bridging support
- Solar Orbiter studies 300 words from Richard
- Solar Orbiter detectors 300 words from Nick
- Planetary – Future Studies 300 words from inputs from Manuel and Malcolm
- Planetary – Bepi Colombo – 300 words from Sarah only if required
- Astronomy Future Studies – 300 words from Bruce
- Astronomy mm-technology – 300 words from Peter
- STP – Some text from Mike on Earthshine (see below)
S&T two-page new project explanation
- Explanation of new support for SWISE/KuaFu
- Explanation of new support for SPICA
- Explanation of solar request to maintain EGSO
- Explanation of request for support of IHY activities
- Explanation of Earthshine request
To ensure that people are aware of what they are aiming at, the figures for the last award are
summarised below. This is our minimum target.
IHR Solar –
IHR Astro –
IHR Planetary –
IHR STP –
1.6 SY (incl post doc)
0.2 SY
0.0 SY
1.9 SY
In parallel with this we have the SLA Group Leader award, at 2.75 SY, which is not formally
part of the roller but is assessed with it in effect. Currently, this is divided roughly as:
Solar -
0.35 Harrison, 0.3 Fludra, 0.1 Lang
Astro –
Planetary STP -
0.2 Bingham
0.4 Grande, 0.2 Dunlop, 0.4 Bingham
0.6 Lockwood, 0.2 Bingham
It is not clear how you divide Bob up but he was in more than one Group! We MUST aim to
increase the Astronomy award with a target of 0.6 at least.
S&T Solar Orbiter studies - 1.05 SY
S&T Solar Orbiter detectors - 1.50 SY
S&T Future Mission Studies - 0.3 SY
S&T Bepi Colombo 0.4 SY
S&T Astro Future Mission - 0.1 SY
S&T Astro mm-technology - 0.25 SY
S&T Fundamental Physics - 0.2 SY
We did get formula support for computing, secretarial work etc.. and modest travel and
equipment costs.