AAVSO Program Committee
Full Individual Reports
These full reports are presented without editing.
I.
INDIVIDUAL OBSERVING SECTIONS (DAVID TURNER)
The various observing sections listed on the AAVSO website comprise the following:
Cataclysmic Variables–CVnet (Novae, dwarf novae, recurrent novae, and symbiotic
variables) Leaders: Mike Simonsen and Gary Poyner
Eclipsing Variables (Algol, beta Per, W UMa, and all your favorite eclipsing binaries)
Leaders: Gerard Samolyk and Gary Billings
Short Period Pulsating Variables (Cepheids and RR Lyrae stars) Leader: Gerard
Samolyk
Solar (Sunspots and Sudden Ionospheric Disturbances–SIDs) Leaders: Rodney Howe and
Kim Hay
Long Period Variables (Miras, semiregulars, RV Tau, and all your favorite red giants)
Leader: Matt Templeton
Young Stellar Objects (Observing program for Pre-Main-Sequence (YSO/PMS) stars)
Leader: Michael Poxson
High Energy Network (Gamma Ray Bursts–GRBs and other high energy astrophysical
phenomena) Leader: ?
Binocular Star Program (The AAVSO Binocular Program consists of 153 stars in the
northern and southern hemispheres. They are mostly semi-regulars and Miras, with a few
other types sprinkled in. Most of stars range between V = 3.0 to 9.5 and can be observed
best using simple hand held binoculars.) Leader: ?
Data Mining? (Is there an official group?)
Photoelectric Photometry (Is this a group?) Leader: James Fox
The recent Strategy and Operations Survey identified the observing sections and programs
as last on the list of the AAVSO’s greatest strengths, and several items (9 of 21) in the list
of the AAVSO’s greatest weaknesses pertain to the observing sections:
3. CCD emphasis / Visual observation importance
5. Poorly defined AAVSO direction, vision, mission and goals
6. Poorly coordinated observers in Observing Programs and Sections
8. No observer or individual observing program guidance
10. Poor observer and member networking/Isolation
12. Poor new observer help, mentoring and indoctrination
15. Poor data quality management, QC and no observer feedback
19. Poor international networking and collaboration (members and associations
21. Staff stretched thin - too little resources and underpaid
Perhaps several (13 of 22) of the items listed in the list of the AAVSO’s greatest
opportunities relate to the observing sections?:
1. Utilize and expand use of AAVSONet and remote telescopes
2. More professional collaboration
4. Better training in photometry and data analysis(all levels)
6. Outreach to more amateur astronomers and astrophotographers to do photometry
7. Cooperation and better networking with other International VS associations
1
8. Data mining (large surveys and AID) activity and training
11. Develop new and standardized software tools for data analysis
12. Do more research and contribute to variable star science
13. Add spectroscopy as a program and store the data
14. Adopt and encourage professional 'best practices' and workflows
18. Evolve to CCD away from visual observations
21. Continue visual program and support
22. Improve AID data quality, accuracy and screening
The responses of those who took the time to record comments regarding the observing
programs are also informative.
Survey Item 15.
“The AAVSO’s Observing Sections show initiative and effectiveness.”
From the executive summary: There were 295 responses to this survey item and 46
individuals (12.3%) skipped this question. The raw average score of 3.16 was rescaled to
an average score of 7.30, which ranked 10 out of 16 Survey Items of this variety. This
rescaled score is slightly below the average of 7.72. 36 individual comments were given
and are cited in the Appendix. Comments were mixed to negative. There were positive
comments for CV Section and the Solar Section. Both of these sections are active and
update their sites and/or publish monthly. Comments noted that finding section leaders was
difficult and section success is often dependent on leadership. There were negative
comments expressed about EB Section being out of date, the Data Mining Section being
“dead” and inactive and the Binocular Program having not been updated for several years.
There is a good correlation between the nature of the comments and the survey score.
AAVSO Observing Sections Select Comments (Survey Question 15).
1. “As usual, it is dependent on the individual(s) leading the sections.”
2. “I mostly just check the Cataclysmic section and the High Energy section. My
experience with both the above is fine. It seems like maybe the latest real time GRB
activity could be in a more visible part of the page. But really, it's easy enough to find.
The Supernova Search section has not been updated in quite a while.”
3. “I don’t hear much about them.”
4. “I know it's hard to find energized volunteers to run some of the sections. Good luck
with continued crowd sourcing!”
5. “It seems though that CVs are more active than the others (perhaps only my
impression).”
6. “It's a shame that the eclipsing binary group doesn't want to publish visual
observations.”
7. “I'm sure there's more that could be done, but I know it all comes down to having
enough volunteers to do the actual work. The sections should definitely be continued
and encouraged.”
8. “This area seems to be hit-and-miss. I thought the LPV section website was very
characteristic of LPVs themselves - slowly changing on approximately an annual basis.
EB section is way out-of-date. Short-period pulsators gave some background, a list of
stars for the program (reasons for the selection was not that clear) and then no changes
for more than a year. Binocular program hasn't changed or been updated for a couple
years.”
2
9. “It depends on which observing sections you are talking about; some sections only exist
because certain individual members keep them alive.”
10. I have not been that involved with the different sections so I cannot judge other than by
the activities documented in the Journal.”
11. “I know the solar bulletin is published regularly; a monthly report like this is good
advertising for the section, and is very educational to the members. I think other topics
are not nearly as well covered or advertised.”
12. “There could be improvements, especially in outlining specific methods to be applied
and equipment requirements for some of the Sections.”
13. “Only the CV section does anything.”
14. “Data mining?”
15. “This is a mixed bag. It depends on the initiative and amount of time the section leaders
have.”
16. “The CV section is very good. But what do the others do?”
17. “If they do, I don't see much evidence of it. CVNet is the best in this respect.”
18. “Some observing sections are active (CV) while others languish or are inactive (data
mining). We need to create more activity in all observing sections.”
19. “Most are stuck in the mud. (just my opinion)”
20. “Observing sections are improving in the job of explaining what do they do, but
doesn't offer ideas about observing programs for the season, for example in the short
period pulsating stars.”
21. “More on effectiveness than initiative.”
22. “Some sections lack of information. Some just give links which lead to links, etc. Some
sections are a little confusing and not structured well.”
23. “Some do, some don't. The EB and PEP sections seem moribund. Data Mining didn't
take off. CV section is active. I wonder though if the Z Campaign is supported by the
professional community. Do real astrophysicists agree with Simonsen's challenging of
their classification of Z Cams, or is he tilting at his own windmills? No question
though, that the observations he is causing to be made will add to our knowledge of
those stars.”
A variety of services complement the observing sections, such as the AAVSO Bulletins
and Long Period Variable Circulars that present recent observations and predictions for
maxima and minima of long period variables, the Eclipsing Binary Ephemerides, the
Cataclysmic Variable Circulars, the Variable Star of the Season page, the AAVSO
Newsletter (which is supposed to embrace the former PEP Newsletter, CCD Views, and
Eyepiece Views), and of course the SID and AAVSO Solar on-line discussion groups
(probably the source of most information). The lack of identifiable leaders for some groups
and a lack of regular communications from them is a weakness that might be eliminated by
regular contributions in the AAVSO Newsletter, for example. In some cases the function
and purpose of the group needs to be more focused.
The survey suggests that a few groups are fairly active, and that can be seen in the quantity
and quality of research papers generated from the observations (JAAVSO and other
publications devoted to variable stars). Short-period systems tend to have a distinct
advantage in that regard, and are certainly popular. Many objects of very long period are
therefore the most poorly studied and understood, although often well observed, curiously
enough. Many become targets for the Variable Star of the Season page. Some groups
concentrate on objects best observed with CCD detectors, others on objects best observed
visually, and some are a mix of CCD, visual, photoelectric, and DSLR observing.
3
A general weakness for most programs lies in the standardization of brightness estimates.
For slowly-varying red supergiant variables, for example, individual observations often
deviate by up to 0.5 magnitude or more on the same night, with the best value no
necessarily being a straight average among individual observers. It is a well recognized
problem that should be addressed.
David Turner
4
II.
ELECTRONIC/ REMOTE PROGRAMS (JOHN MARTIN)
Preamble to Electronic and Remote Programs
In the course of doing this survey I discovered that the membership is not of one mind on
any of these programs. Each program has very strong advocates and detractors. As in any
survey, the people who feel most passionate about a topic are the most motivated to give
their feedback. That tilts the analysis. It isn’t possible to determine what a majority of the
members feels about any of these programs. My own personal assessment is that the
number of detractors has NOT reached a critical level for any of these programs. It is
telling that AID, VSP, and AAVSO-net all made the list of “strengths” of the AAVSO in
the last membership survey. None of these programs were identified as “weaknesses” in
the same survey. All of them were referenced by ranking or comments under
“opportunities.”
My sources of data presented included the latest AAVSO strategic survey, the AAVSO
website, the AAVSO online forums, and my own knowledge and experience. There are
forums on the AAVSO website dedicated to VPHOT and AAVSO-net. I also combed
through the General Discussion, Software Development, and Photometry forums for
subjects relevant to these programs.
John C. Martin, PhD
Member, AAVSO Council
Director, University of Illinois Springfield Barber Research Observatory
AAVSO International Database
Strengths:

This is probably one of the most visible and externally useful aspects of what the AAVSO
does. It is a logical modern extension of the longtime mission of the AAVSO to collect and
disseminate reliable variable star data.

It is very easy to access the data. It is one-stop shopping for astronomical photometry.

It is very easy to contribute new data to the system. Considering that this all was once
done by hand by AAVSO paid staff, this is a great use of technology to act as a multiplying
force for our mission.

The AID was the ranked at the top of “strengths of the AAVSO” in the latest membership
survey. 20% of members rated this our strongest area. For comparison 13.5% responded
the same to the 2nd ranked program.
o
Comments:

“Database and on-line resources are very good and are an immense
contribution to the community”
5

“The website, the AID and online resources are a true strength of the
AAVSO.”
Weaknesses:

With AID online it is harder to police the quality of the data being entered into the
database (compared with when staff cataloged the data by hand). The “zapper” tool
helps address this by allowing users to bring obviously erroneous data to the attention of
the AAVSO staff. There are also some checks in the entry software to guard against
accidental mistakes in data entry. But this is still not as accurate as having every entry
scrutinized by a staff member.

Use of this data still requires some knowledge about the methods used by those
submitting data. For example DSLR or visual photometry has different accuracies, errors,
and pitfalls than CCD photometry. Ideally these would merge seamlessly but they do not.

From the AAVSO survey comments: “I think that the exclusive "photometry database"
orientation is too limiting. Variable stars photometry and the exclusion of data collection
for other small telescope techniques, particularly spectroscopy, is a bad decision that
simply creates other groups that attract amateurs away from the AAVSO.”
Improvements Made:

The page for introducing the AID was last updated in 2011. There are no recent
improvements listed there.

The staff continues to work on zapper and encouraging people to police and take
ownership for the quality of data they submit.

DSLR photometry tutorial (http://www.citizensky.org/content/dslr-documentation-andreduction )
Suggested Improvements:

It would be an improvement if we could find a way to making zapper sexier or fun. People
might comb our database for errors as a hobby then.
o
HTY suggested in the “Software” forum that it would be easier to “zap” bad data
points if there was a quick way to do it from the light-curve-generator tool. The
response was that this was a good idea, but would require a major rewrite of
code.

Continue efforts to tie together the CCD, DSLR, and visual observing frames.

Continue to develop and disseminate DSLR photometry techniques.

Many members have suggested including spectroscopy in the database.

Incorporate data from bright star monitors directly in the database. From the comments
in the AAVSO survey: “A personal opinion, but as a former PEP observer (terminated for
6
reasons of health), I find myself asking, "Who's looking at bright stars?" I think not too
many. This appears an important but sadly neglected field.”

From the membership survey: “Encourage other groups (like CBA & VSNET) to adopt the
AAVSO file format for observations. I don't like compiling observations in multiple
formats, so someone usually misses out (not AAVSO). The AAVSO could be a leader in this
area and encourage the commonality of file formats.”

Emphasize parameter space not covered by surveys coming online. From the survey:
“Keep low budget visual observers involved, so some will graduate to fancier stuff.
Encourage monitoring of variables that change too fast and unpredictably for the new
automated survey telescopes. Protect the database of star observations.”

The latest membership survey listed improving AID quality and screening as opportunity
#22 out of 22. It also listed data mining with AID as #8 and “Be the choice of variable star
data and information (AID and VXS)” was #10 on the same list.
o
From the comments in that survey:

“[The AAVSO’s future direction is] Collection of data from observers, other
organizations, publications, and even its own surveys; support and
education for "amateur" observers and data miners.”

“[The AAVSO’s future direction is] To continue to gather, organize and
make available the largest variable star database in existence.”

“What about exoplanets?”

“Resources could be expanded. For example, the CCD manual should
include more in depth procedures such as methodology for transforms.”

“I would like to see more stats on observations on the web site, like who's
observing what, number observations for the night, week, month, the
number of inner-sanctum observations each night. Stuff like that, get
creative. It might spur on more observations. Perhaps something like an
interactive map that shows the location of observers and number of
observations each night. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I find it interesting
where my fellow AAVSOers are and what they are observing and how
much. Yes, I have MyNewsFlash, but it seems like more could be done
along these lines.”
VSP Charts
Strengths:

No more flipping through a box-o-charts. The charts are always organized and cataloged
so that they no longer get lost or out of order.
7

Anyone with an Internet connection can instantly generate a chart to suit almost any
situation.

The process by which sequences are put together for charts is quick, the volunteers who
do it are patient and helpful, and high quality results are the norm.

The interface with existing sequences easily allows for updates and corrections to
sequence data included on charts. Changes to sequences appear nearly instantaneously.

Errors are easy to correct because it would require a change in computer code rather than
changing every published chart with a problem.

Astronomers no longer go blind making charts on index cards from the BD charts with an
opaque projector

The membership ranked VSP only #10 out of 20 garnering more than 0.5% as a strength of
the AAVSO in the latest membership survey.
o
Comments:

“I like WebObs and the charting programs.”

“Yes, [the website] full of wonderful tools. VSP, VSX, LCG are all top rate
and easy to use.”

“Effective tools (VSX ; Charts; Quick look, etc.).”
Weaknesses:

The only significant weakness is what if you don’t have Internet? Or what if your Internet
connection is down when you need the chart?

VSP does not accumulate notes and wisdom scribbled on written charts at observatories.

The weakness of VSP is the same as the weakness of any electronic media relative to
printed books.
Improvements Made:

Binocular charts are now generated by VSP.

I am unaware of any other improvements made recently. Problems posted to the
“Software” forum appear to get addressed rather quickly and normally the human
element is eventually identified as the source of the error.
Suggested Improvements:

DKS suggested in the software forum that he would like to see a higher resolution option
for the output from VSP. It was pointed out that the purpose of VSP is not to produce
pretty pictures, but to produce a useable finding chart.
8

From the membership survey: “It would be nice to be able to print one or more circular
overlays with the VSP charts. To be able to query more than one star at a time would be
great too.”
VSX
NOTE: As I evaluated other programs under this category, I noticed that VSX plays and
important supporting role in VSP and VPHOT that does not come out in this analysis of it
as a stand-alone program.
Strengths

It is a dynamic database that is always growing and expanding.

Any AAVSO member can contribute. So it can grow as a result of the collective knowledge
of the membership.

Positive comments in the membership survey:
o
“VSX is the premiere variable star database in the world.”
o
“The website & tools (VSP, VSX, etc.), AAVSONet, APASS clearly put the AAVSO on
the leading edge! The chat room, Citizen Sky, and online meetings contribute to
this too.”
o
“VSX catalogue is especially valuable; the GCVS lost its position long time ago.”
o
“Yes, [the website is] full of wonderful tools. VSP, VSX, LCG are all top rate and
easy to use.”
o
“Effective tools (VSX ; Charts; Quick look, etc.).”
Weaknesses

It is not as comprehensive as Simbad, which could be seen as a direct competitor. The
only bits of information that VSX has which Simbad does not have are AAVSO specific
information like AAVSO identifiers.

It is unclear to people not involved with VSX how accuracy of the included information is
assured.

VSX did not make the list of 20 strengths of the AAVSO identified by members in the last
membership survey. Items needed to garner a response rate greater than 0.5% to be
included in this list. However, neither was it identified as a weakness of the AAVSO

Comments that highlight weaknesses from the membership survey:
o
“Yes, it has the largest database of observation but there are other similar
organizations covering different stars and more should be done to advice users of
the data where they can find such data not held by the AAVSO. Depending on
what information I want I will probably go to either the GCVS or Simbad."
9
o
“The professional community hardly knows of us, and the GCVS is still considered
the authority on variables by the scientific (professional) community even though
VSX is ten times better.”
Improvements Made:

We are told that VSX is being constantly updated but it happens almost invisibly.
Suggested Improvements:

Clearly communicate the rationale for how VSX contributes something to the AAVSO.
Every AAVSO member should be able to say why we maintain VSX when Simbad is out
there too.
o

“Be the choice of variable star data and information (AID and VXS)” was #10 on a
list of opportunities identified by members in the latest membership survey.
Make the improvements and updates to VSX more visible. CMJA suggested last year in
the “Software” forum that there be a page or a FAQ for VSX.
AAVSONet
Strengths:

Easy access to professional telescope rigs for AAVSO members.

Potentially allows 24/7 coverage of a target near the equator.

Bright star monitoring gathers high quality data on bright stars tying together the visual
and CCD frames better than we ever have done.

Helping build APASS and improving calibration photometry across the sky.

The membership ranked AAVSO-net #16 out of 20 garnering more than 0.5% on a list of
strengths of the AAVSO.

The membership ranked AAVSO-net the #1 opportunity the AAVSO has in the latest
membership survey.
o
Comments:

“Other important strengths are our Members / observers / volunteers,
Citizen Sky and AAVSONet.”

“AAVSONet and VStar are a great way to get people actually participating
by acquiring and analyzing images.”
10
Weaknesses:

Independent operators host the telescopes. The council is well aware that those
operators need to be chosen carefully and even then problems can arise. The
independent operator is one of the weak links.

The way that AAVSO-net has organically grown rather than being rolled out as a mature
rigorously considered system affects how it has been received by the membership. First
impressions are important. Members opinions of the project and its utility may be
influenced by an early experience that is not consistent with the current operation of the
network.

It is not clear how widely this resource is utilized by the general membership.

It takes time and resources from HQ and the director to maintain this network. It is a clear
expansion of how we go about our mission. In the past we primarily maintained an
archive, now we maintain hardware and facilities. Some members are nervous about the
added cost and liability.
o
From the AAVSO survey comments:

“Not clear how the robotic telescopes, and HQ-operated surveys, fit with
being an organization of observers. Right now there are AAVSO-run
telescopes out there observing things and we do not even know what
they are observing. This is demoralizing for observers using their own
equipment. How do I know an AAVSOnet telescope is not observing what I
am laboriously capturing data on? I am not clear whether the AAVSOnet
sites will survive when Arne leaves the stage, or how AAVSO budget and
staff will support AAVSOnet in to the future.”

“I wonder where the AAVSO council expects the poorer members of
AAVSO to find the money to build robotic large telescope for CCD
photometry.”
Improvements:

Formalizing a Telescope Allocation Committee who process requests using an established
rubric.

Additional equipment added to the network. See the dedicated forum for regular updates
from Arne that are too many to document here.

A memo of understanding is now signed by independent operators.

Member accessible BSM (bright star monitor) database.
Suggested Improvements:

Complete and post a User’s Guide for AAVSOnet.
11
o

Provide more easily accessible and detailed information about the brightness
limits and capabilities of each of the network telescopes.
More PR. Make the membership more aware of what AAVSOnet has done. Hype and
advertise successful observing campaigns that members have carried out. We should
document and share success stories.
o
From the membership survey: “As most (not all, but a large percentage) of the
scientifically value projects need some equipment (either a CCD or a telescope),
people with financial limitations may feel that they are prohibited to contribute.
Since there is access to online telescopes, I believe it is a good idea to "advertise"
more this capability and to increase (of course according to the organization's
abilities) the number of telescopes.”

Add capabilities to observe solar system objects (i.e. asteroids). Comment in survey: “It
would be possible to use the remote telescopes to observe asteroids to measure light
curves.”

Educational program tie-ins. From the membership survey: “It would be very welcome if
you'll be able to organize some opportunity for gifted children to observe remotely.
Astronomy becomes more and more popular, and it's important to give such children an
opportunity to observe (at least remotely), taking into account that not all of them may
afford a telescope and camera for proper astronomical observations. These children are
our future, and they may become our colleagues if we support their interest in
astronomy.”

The membership ranked AAVSO-net the #1 opportunity of the AAVSO in the latest
membership survey. Their comments called for the AAVSO to utilize and expand the use
of AAVSO-net telescopes.
o
From the Comments:

“Believe me, the only thing easier would be to have automated telescopes
that automatically provided observation data and responded to AAVSO
observation campaigns. It will happen at some point in the future. For
now, the AAVSO website is clear, simple, and easy to use.”
APASS
Frankly the APASS web page does a very good job of critically assessing itself. Most of
the information I gathered came from there:
http://www.aavso.org/apass
Strengths:

A high density all-sky catalog of photometric standards all on the same system.

High (and improving) internal consistency to the data.

Great tool to do high precision CCD photometry from 10th to 17th magnitude.
12

It ties together the Tycho and SDSS magnitudes.

Comment from the membership survey: “APASS is likely to be of great use to other
variable organizations, asteroid observers, and others. That the AAVSO is making this
carefully compiled resource available to the community at large may earn plenty of
goodwill and positive attention.”
Weaknesses:

Many of the people working on the project are volunteering their time so delays are
inevitable.

With each new release the magnitudes are updated. So users need to update with each
data release.

Self criticism from the APASS webpage:
o
There are some duplicate entries that have not been fixed yet due to astrometry
errors in the image overlaps. This also means there are some stars that have not
been “observed twice” and have no internal statistical errors.
o
There are saturated stars in the catalog that have not been identified and
removed.
o
The instrumental corrections and transformations could be improved.
o
Issues with a red leak in the first-generation Astrodon B-Filters pollute the early
parts of the survey.
Improvements:

There have been seven data releases over the past three years, each improving on the
other as far as coverage, internal consistency, and absolute calibration. The latest was
DR7 in March 2013.

There is a plan to reprocess the images over the next year to improve both astrometry
and photometry in crowded fields.
Suggested Improvements:

A second overlapping survey to improve the photometry further.

Include fainter stars in the catalog.

Further refine instrumental corrections.

Redo the B-filer fields initially done with the Astrodon B-filter that has a red leak with the
newer filter that has no red leak.

Control for and correct for images polluted by cirrus clouds.
13
VPHOT
Strengths:

Much easier to use than IRAF. Very intuitive user interface. Easy to learn to use. This is
hands-down the best and easiest to use photometry reduction software out there.

You can do high quality photometry solutions anywhere with an Internet connection.

Seamlessly use data in VSX, VSP, and AAVSO-net in photometry solutions.

Users can make, edit, and share with each other customized photometry sequences and
images.

From the AAVSO survey comments:
o
“VPHOT is a fantastic tool and I couldn't perhaps (wouldn't) do photometry
without it.”
o
On value of the AAVSO: “Heck, VPHOT is worth the entire dues” and “The VPHOT
access is easily worth the cost of membership.”
Weaknesses:

You need an Internet connection with decent bandwidth to use VPHOT.

Development, maintenance, and answering questions on the forum dedicated to VPHOT
relies on heavily on a single volunteer (Geir Klingenberg).

Aaron Price is still listed as the editor and maintainer for the VPHOT entry/info web pages.

It is not possible to get multiple “seat licenses” if you want to use this interface as part of
a class you are teaching. Other software can be shared by research students and staff in a
single observatory.

The documentation for what the astrometry solution software and VS Search need in
terms of FITs header keywords to operate properly is difficult to find.

The upload queue sometimes freezes up and requires staff to fix it.
Improvements:

Geir is working on changes to VPHOT as requested by the community on the VPHOT forum
pages.
Suggested Improvements:

Seamlessly integrate APASS into VPHOT to identify comparison and check stars in the
field.

Improve the astrometry solution software in VPHOT. This is the subject of many
comments on the online forum dedicated to VPHOT.
14

Assign paid staff members to understand the inner workings of VPHOT so that Geir is not
the single source for trouble-shooting information and how to fix it when it breaks.

The online videos are a useful tutorial but it would be helpful to have this information
documented in a written User Manual.

Create a stream-lined procedure for reporting when the upload queue processing freezes.
15
III.
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH (ROGER KOLMAN)
MENTOR PROGRAM
Strengths
 Availability of members to assist new members.
 AAVSO Forums
Weaknesses
 Often there is a lack of follow through.
 Need for better communication.
 Better advertising to new members.
Improvements made
 Hard to determine.
Suggested improvements
 Assign a new observer to a mentor.
 More mentors needed.
 Better communication.
CHOICE COURSES
Strengths
 Courses as well planned and conducted.
 Appropriate to the various programs of the AAVSO.
 Low cost. Available to all members.
Weaknesses
 Relatively new program needing expansion.
 Time required for development of new courses.
Improvements made
 Quality of courses.
 Number of courses.
Suggested improvements
 Keep up the good work.
 Add more courses.
OUTREACH
Strengths
 Speakers Bureau
 PPT presentations available on line
Weaknesses
 Not well advertised.
 No connection to groups such as the Astronomical League.
Improvements made
 Materials are added to presentations.
 Members giving talks.
16
Suggested improvements
 Better advertisement of what we offer.
 More involvement by members.
 Connect with organizations such as A.L.
 Add presentations to our inventory.
CITIZEN SKY
Strengths
 Epsilon Aurigae project best Pro/Am collaboration in history.
 Attracted diverse group of observers,
 Where we should go in the 21st Century.
 Involves all types of observers
 Great education tool.
Weaknesses
 None that I can see.
Improvements made
 Project continues as part of the AAVSO
Suggested improvements
 Better exposure to the public
 Look for new projects.
CHANDRA EDUCATION
Strengths
 Donna Young is a powerful advocate for the program.
 Hands on Astrophysics and its successor, Variable Star Astronomy are
excellent teaching tools.
 Science Olympiad is an excellent source for attracting young individuals.
 Connections to educators.
 Ability of students to use our data for small research projects.
Weaknesses
 Not well advertised. This should be a crowning jewel for the AAVSO to attract
new members.
Improvements made
 Continuous improvement of programs.
Suggested improvements
 Better advertising for program for AAVSO members and the public in general.
 Need to involve universities and colleges in the program.
17
IV.
PUBLICATIONS (ARLO LANDOLT)
/home/landolt/AAVSO/eJAAVSO/AAVSO-publications-review-030113.em
March 1, 2013
last updated:
March 1, 2013
PUBLICATIONS
JAAVSO
Published in Timely Fashion _______ The JAAVSO has had a mixed
publication
history over the years; it's better, more recently. Efforts sshould
be
continued to adhere to a strict "appearance" schedule.
Quality of Publication
appearance, etcc.
_______
The quality is quite good in physical
Comments ___________________ I'd sent you, roger, a summary of past
comments
to Council back in late November, 2012. The following comments are
similar.
My paper, "The Citation of Manuscripts Which Have Appeared in the
JAAVSO"
JAAVSO, 40, 1032, 2012, among other items, indicated that the
journal's
papers are cited in a two to one ratio, professionals compared to
AAVSO
authors. This means that the JAAVSO is attracting the attention of,
and is
useful to the professional community.
I reported that the Citation Index people (Reuters) communicated that
the
JAAVSO is not included in their list of journals' citation
compilations
because "the JAAVSO papers attract too few citation." Citation
recognition
plays a role in exposure and funding to and from the broaded user
community.
I believe that JAAVSO ought to at least encourage, if not require,
that the
light curve data which are discussed in a paper, and which are
presented in
plots in published JAAVSO papers, ought to be published in the same
paper.
Now-a-days, in the big journals, with which we'd like to be compared,
even
if at a modest level, a shortened version of the data table is
published,
18
which indicates the format, while the complete data set (table) is
available
online. Future studies of a variable star many times can benefit from
looking
at the actual data actually used in a published paper. So, we, the
AAVSO,
should ensure that data used, like heliocentric Julian days,
magnitudes,
colors, etc., get published. The associated cost of doing this
should be
minimal.
More than two issues of JAAVSO per year might prove useful, since
some
authors need or appreciate speed in the appearnce of an article. On
the
other hand, perhaps there is no problem since, I believe, the
electronic
version of a paper appears online upon acceptance of the manuscript,
and
hence is available to everyone well before the appearance of the
paper
version.
While the current physical size of the paper version of the JAAVSO is
'cozy',
comfortable, and traditional, there would be advantages to having a
journal
page size more like the Journal of the Royal society of Canada
(JRASC),
Publicatilons of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific (PASP), or
The
Astronomical Journal (AJ), if only to permit larger formats for
tables,
figures and in some instances, finding charts. In an electronic
publishing
environment that ought not be a problem. There probably would not be
an
associated increase in cost, since JAAVSO now is an electronic
journal, and
those individuals and institutions who want a paper copy buy "a
specially
run-off" copy. But, something needs to be done!
With regard to types and lengths of manuscripts, I believe length of
a
manuscript should not any longer be a consideration for acceptance of
a
manuscript, particularly in an electronic age. So, the JAAVSO should
handle,
accept, publish manuscripts such as appear in other professional
journals.
The JAAVSO also might accept manuscripts on spectroscopy, in 'our'
case, of
both intrinsic and extrinsic (variable and eclipsing) stars. These
papers
19
might be along the line of the descriptive discovery notes which once
appeared in the Astrophysical Journal (ApJ) decades ago, or in the
PASP?
Such notes, or 'papers' would generate citations. After all,
although
eJAAVSO does not appear via the Science Citation summaries, it does
appear
via the Astrophysics Data System (ADS), and astronomers do search the
ADS
on a daily basis!
Since the JAAVSO now is an electronic journal, it would seem that one
could
handle an order of magnitude more manuscripts. Since the journal is
electronic, and since the distribution costs of the paper copies are
covered
by the price charged for them, the additional cost to exxpand the
JAAVSO
would be the staff time necessary to process the manuscripts.
Many astronomers, both amateur and professional, have much data for
many
stars observed over the years, data that should be published,
including
details of acquisition, reduction and analysis, before "it's too
late." The
JAAVSO publication procedures ought to be able to take advantage of,
and to
encourage authors to get these data into the literature. Data not so
described have lesser value during later analysis. The JAAVSO ought
to
"take the bull by the horns" and go after these tidbits.
I have been asked "how could one identify manuscripts which would
attract
citations to papers appearing in the JAAVSO, and hence, more
importantly to
the JAAVSO itself, as well as to the AAVSO." Following through on
the
above ideas might help.
AAVSO NEWSLETTER
Published in Timely Fashion
Quality of Publication
_______
_______
seems to be
excellent, I would say
Comments ___________________ the appearance and content certainly is
evidence
of a lot of hard work in its production.
AAVSO ANNUAL REPORT
Published in Timely Fashion
Quality of Publication
_______
_______
seems to be
adequate as needed
20
Comments ___________________ again, a huge amount of work goes into
the annual
report document; it is an important document for "history," a source
for
whomever writes the next history of the AAVSO.
AAVSO BULLETIN
Published in Timely Fashion _______ last issue appeared about a
month, or so,
'late,'
Quality of Publication _______ adequate for the need
Comments ___________________ useful to some people in planning their
observing
programs; is there any evidence indicating just how many observers
need and
or use the service?
SOLAR BULLETIN
Published in Timely Fashion
so....
Quality of Publication
_______
_______
I've not used this service,
appears to be well produced
Comments ___________________ I understand that the solar observers
feel quite
strongly about the solar Bulletin's existence. Is there evidence
indicating
just how many observers need and or use the service?
VISUAL OBSERVING MANUAL Revised as needed
Quality of Publication _______ Has a long history of use;
be a
quality production.
appeara to
Comments ___________________ I've never done serious visual observing,
but the
manual appears to cover need techniques, etc.
CCD OBSERVING MANUAL Revised as needed
Quality of Publication _______ Appears to be useful. There is an
online
statement that "calibration and transformation information has been
deleted..
... said to be beyond the scope of an introductory document. I
suggest
re-instating that material, those sections, perhaps as a supplement
or
appendix. It is important that CCD users are aware of the
observational
demands made by calibration and transformation needs.
Comments ___________________
see above
21
NOVA SEARCH MANUAL
Quality of Publication
_______
Comments ___________________
and
CCD observing manuals.
seems ok;
might have references to both the vvisual
ECLIPSING BINARY EPHEMERIDES
Published in Timely Fashion _______ appears to have been a month
'late' tbis
year. Ephemerides ought to appear two or three months in advance of
when
they're needed, to enable proper planning of an observational program.
Quality of Publication
appropriate.
_______
appears computer generated, which is
Comments ___________________ I've not used the eclipsing binary
ephemerides
table. Is there any evidence indicating just how many observers need
and
or use the service?
/home/landolt/AAVSO/eJAAVSO/content.em
February 28, 2013
last updated:
March 1, 2013
1. Types of manuscript to be considered are like the Notes
published in the Astrophysical Journal (ApJ) or in the
Publications of
the Astronomical Society of the Pacific (PASP) of the last
century,
such as:
ApJ. 101, 131, 1945, "A Proposal for the Classification of WhiteDwarf
Spectra", by W. J. Luyten
ApJ. 101, 377, 1945, "Note on the Eclipsing Binary SX Hydrae", by
Armin J. Deutsch.
ApJ. 102, 137, 1945, "Note on the Suspected Gravitational Red
Shift
of the Orion Stars," by O. Struve.
ApJ. 112, 212, 1950, "Apparent Magnitudes and Color Indices for
Seventy-four White Dwarfs and Degenerate Stars," by W. J. Luyten.
ApJ. 112, 216, 1950, "The Spectrum of YY Geminorium (Castor C),"
by
O. Struve, G. Herbig, and H. Horak.
22
ApJ. 112, 219, 1950, "The Spectrum of GP Orionis." by William P.
Bidelman.
ApJ. 112, 221, 1950, "Twenty-nine New Variable Stars in the
Globular
Cluster M 15," by L. Rosino.
ApJ. 112, 362, 1950, "Revised Standards for Supergiants on the
System
of the Yerkes Spectral Atlas," by W. W. Morgan, and Nancy G.
Roman.
ApJ. 112, 559, 1950, "Note on the Infrared Spectrum of 17
Leporis," by
Arne Slettebak.
ApJ. 112, 559, 1950, "Radial Velocities of Six Stars Having
Composite
Spectra," by William C. White, Jr.
ApJ. 113, 223, 1951, "A List of Newly Discovered Peculiar
Objects," by
Miriam E. Walther Jaffe.
ApJ. 113, 435, 1951, "The Color of BD+28 4211," by Daniel L.
Harris III
ApJ. 113, 439, 1951, "Zeta Aurigae: Photoelectric Observations of
the
Partial Phase at Egress on September 20, 1950," by Arthur Beer
and
Michael W. Ovenden.
ApJ. 113, 703, 1951, "The Spectrum of HD 217050," by E. Margaret
Burbidge and G. R. Burbidge.
ApJ. 117, 467, 1953, "The Spectrum of BD +67 922," by Nancy G.
Roman
ApJ. 117, 468, 1953, "The Spectroscopic Orbit of YY Geminorum
(Castor
C)," by Otto Struve and E. G. Ebbighausen.
AJ 60, 454, 1955, "Nova Sagittarii 1936," by S. Gaposchkin.
AJ 60, 455, 1955, "Note on HV 2447 - the Cepheid with Longest
Period in
the Large Magellanic Cloud," by S. Gaposchkin.
AJ 62, 43, 1957, "A New Galactic W. Virginis Star," by s.
Gaposchkin.
AJ 62, 168, 1957, "Note on the Behavior of the RV Tauri-type star
no.
11 in Messier 2, by George Wallerstein.
23
AJ 62, 341, 1957, "Note on a possible close binary," by V.
Osvalds and
Z. Osvalds.
AJ 63, 78, 1958, "Confirmation of neglected variables in
Sagittarius,"
by Dorrit Hoffleit.
AJ 63, 511, 1958, "Nova Sagittarii 1932," by Jean Hales Andersen.
PASP 75, 64, 1963, "A Concept for an Offset Type of Photoelectric
Photometer," by Gerald E. Kron.
PASP 75, 72, 1963, "A New Manganese Star, HR 8349," by George
Wallerstein and Dorothy Hannibal.
PASP 75, 74, 1963, "Magnetic and Light Variations of 53
Camelopardalis,
" by Horace W. Babcock.
PASP 75, 193, 1963, "Photographic Maxima of CF Cassiopeiae," by
Cecilia
Payne-Gaposchkin and Sergei Gaposchkin.
PASP 75, 194, 1963, "A Southern Photoelectric Magnitude
sequence," by
A. R. Hogg.
PASP 75, 458, 1963, "Observations of Wachmann's Variable Near
Nova CK
Vulpeculae (1670)," by Merle F. Walker.
PASP 75, 520, 1963, "Photoelectric Observatiolns of 27 Canis
Majoris,"
by Adela E. Ringuelet-Kaswalder.
PASP 75, 524, 1963, "HR 4511: A Probable Supergiant Spectroscopic
Binary," by William P. Bidelman, J. Sahade, and H. FrieboesConde.
24
V.
PROGRAM SUPPORT (KEVIN PAXSON)
Kevin commented on all sections. His report is given in its totality.
I.
OBSERVING SECTIONS
CATACLYSMIC VARIABLES (CVNET)
Strengths
Good leaders (Simonsen and Poyner), great website
Weaknesses
None
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
None
LONG PERIOD VARIABLES (LPV)
Strengths
Many observers
Weaknesses
Inactive forum, little direction for observers
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
Observer incentives (1,000 observations per year award or Early Bird award for morning
observers)
ECLIPSING VARIABLES
Strengths
Good ephemerides
Weaknesses
No manual, few observers, little communication
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
Hold a workshop and generate an observing manual, publish ephemerides in quarterly
Newsletter
SOLAR & SID SECTION
Strengths
Good newsletter, active members, several good volunteers to lead
Weaknesses
None
25
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
None
YOUNG STELLAR OBJECTS
Strengths
New section, slowly growing, good website
Weaknesses
Need more observers
Improvements made
New website
Suggested improvements
More publicity for the section
SHORT PERIOD PULSATING VARS.
Strengths
Few
Weaknesses
Inactive section, old website, poor observer to observer communications
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
New observing manual, better publication of ephemerides, better observer to observer
communication
HIGH ENERGY NETWORK
Strengths
Unknown
Weaknesses
Unknown
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
Unknown
NOVA SEARCH
Strengths
None
Weaknesses
Out of date manual, few observers, inactive section
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
26
New manual (stressing CCD and DSLR wide field imaging), new leader and
communication
III.
ELECTRONIC/ REMOTE PROGRAMS
AAVSO INTERNATIONAL DATABASE (AID)
Strengths
Large size, good web interface, many contributors
Weaknesses
Poor data QC, no monitoring of data besides Zapper
Improvements made
Slow improvements over time, improved WebObs
Suggested improvements
None
VSP CHARTS
Strengths
Convenient, web accessible, rapidly improving sequences
Weaknesses
Problems with wide field charts north of 70 degrees Declination
Improvements made
Continual sequence updates
Suggested improvements
None
VSX
Strengths
Better than GCVS, rapidly updated, world class
Weaknesses
None
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
AAVSONet
Strengths
Great in concept
Weaknesses
Slow startup for new scopes, spotty AAVSO accounting, delays in bringing new scopes
online, more AAVSO Staff involvement on startup
Improvements made
New allocation committee
27
Suggested improvements
New leadership to do project management
APASS
Strengths
Great in concept, nearly finished
Weaknesses
AAVSO time and processing, delayed finish to project, not leveragable to AAVSO benefit
Improvements made
Work in progress
Suggested improvements
None
PHOTOMETRY
Strengths
No comment
Weaknesses
Is this section redundant now?
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
None
VPHOT
Strengths
Great tool, web accessible, improves photometric accuracy
Weaknesses
Few
Improvements made
Continual updating
Suggested improvements
None
III.
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
MENTOR PROGRAM
Strengths
Good in concept
Weaknesses
Too few mentors, mentor request process ill-defined, isolation and distance challenge to
process
Improvements made
None
28
Suggested improvements
None
CHOICE COURSES
Strengths
Great training vehicle, easily accessible, good courses and content
Weaknesses
None
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
More course offerings
OUTREACH
Strengths
Unknown
Weaknesses
No Citizen Sky follow up or no communication of such
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
Does Council need to discuss Outreach and our mission?
CITIZEN SKY
Strengths
Good outreach initiative
Weaknesses
No conversion to new members, no value beyond grant money, is DSLR the next follow
up (?)
Improvements made
Absorbed by AAVSO web site
Suggested improvements
DSLR is the future for newbies
CHANDRA EDUCATION
Strengths
No comment
Weaknesses
No comment
Improvements made
No comment
Suggested improvements
No comment
29
IV.
PUBLICATIONS
JAAVSO
Strengths
Our exposure to the outside world, flagship publication
Weaknesses
Poor format (needs to be non-blue book size) and layout, poor when compared to major
astronomical journals, needs to have figures within text, needs more technical and less
historical content, poor citation history
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
See weaknesses
AAVSO NEWSLETTER
Strengths
Decent quarterly communication to members
Weaknesses
VS content is deficient, few contributors, and a “rag”
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
More VS content, more contributors, offer minor payment for articles, less gossip
AAVSO ANNUAL REPORT
Strengths
Good visual appeal and content
Weaknesses
Often late in publication, secondary to the JAAVSO
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
Publication on time
AAVSO BULLETIN
Strengths
Good predictions for LPVS
Weaknesses
Redundant to Light Curve Generator and Tom Bretl’s spreadsheet program
Improvements made
Recent conversion to Excel format
Suggested improvements
30
Publish quarterly max and mins in the Newsletter
SOLAR BULLETIN
Strengths
Excellent format, on time publication, done 100% by volunteers
Weaknesses
None
Improvements made
None needed
Suggested improvements
None
VISUAL OBSERVING MANUAL
Strengths
The bible to what we do
Weaknesses
Out of date, few modern examples, needs expert commentary
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
Needs a new rewrite
CCD OBSERVING MANUAL
Strengths
Decent theory and implementation
Weaknesses
Old examples, no VPHOT guide
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
Needs to be modernized
NOVA SEARCH MANUAL
Strengths
None
Weaknesses
Inactive, no up to date handbook, few observers (all visual with no CCD or DSLR),
barely a Section
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
New and up to date handbook (including CCD and DSLR search methods), new
champion, get more members
31
ECLIPSING BINARY EPHEMERIDES
Strengths
Few
Weaknesses
No handbook, no champion, no Forum
Improvements made
None
Suggested improvements
Create a handbook, find a champion and mentor, create a Forum when critical mass is
achieved.
V.
PROGRAM SUPPORT (KEVIN PAXSON)
MEMBERSHIP COMMUNICATIONS
Strengths
Good communication on web site, Facebook, Annual Report, Newsletter and in the
Forums
Weaknesses
Unknown
Improvements made
Recent Facebook communications
Suggested improvements
Increased use of social media
OBSERVER/MEMBER SUPPORT
Strengths
Good notification system for new objects and transient phenomena, announcements for
Pro-Amateur collaborations and notifications of articles in recent literature
Weaknesses
Many poor observing sections, no observer feedback on observation quality, poor or
outdated or lacking observing manuals for specialty observing, reactive versus proactive
observer support, limited number of forums, variable response time from less than one
to over one week, little or no observer guidance (especially new observers) or training
besides mentors
Improvements made
Recent addition of YSO section, more active Zap inquiries
Suggested improvements
New manuals for SSP’s, EB’s, Solar/SID, DSLR and Nova search, a web page detailing
problem categories and specific Staff covering those problem areas
STAFF TECHNICAL SUPPORT
32
Strengths
As above in Observer/Member Support
Weaknesses
As above in Observer/Member Support
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
As above in Observer/Member Support
FUND RAISING/DEVELOPMENT
Strengths
Good AAVSO presence at national star parties and meetings, good donor base, rapid
thank you letters and gift receipts
Weaknesses
Limited sources of available new funding
Improvements made
More frequent star party and meeting appearances
Suggested improvements
None
WEBPAGE
Strengths
Good content, great visual appeal, great database, tools and software offerings
Weaknesses
Poor navigation, lack of frequent new feature items (news, blogs), a few broken links
Improvements made
Moved to Amazon Cloud in 2012, continual upgrades to LGC and WebObs
Suggested improvements
Change away from Drupal programming language, more educational content like
VSOTM, CCD Views or Eyepiece Views
MEETINGS
Strengths
Reasonable costs, good accommodations, respectable format and good presented
topics
Weaknesses
No training offered in conjunction with meetings, spring meeting locations lack
geographical diversity over time, joint meetings with SAS and others dilutes VS content,
site hosting costs may burden AAVSO budget
Improvements made
Unknown
Suggested improvements
Survey spring meeting locations of the past to help attain future geographical meeting
diversity, hold meetings near vacation spots, get new joint meeting partners, have one
33
special feature guest speaker per meeting (fly in if necessary), scrutinize spring meeting
scheduling not to conflict with college semester or quarter finals period
34