Dear All,

This is for geophysicists at UK universities and concerns the Wakeham
Review of Physics.  The Royal Astronomical Society has been asked to
collect, urgently, a lot of information from its members for this
very important Research Councils UK committee.
See http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/review/physics

The RAS President states, in his recent email to all members:

"On April 15th Andy Fabian, David Elliott and I met Prof Bill Wakeham and he outlined
some of the information he wants from us. He seems to accept the case that astronomy
should be supported, but he kept saying how difficult it is to decide what the level
of that funding should be.  This will be our hardest task, to convince him that the
2007 level was about right and that the 2010 level is too low.  He may well query
whether departments of physics which have almost all their research funding from
PPARC/STFC are being wise and he may query whether some of the smaller departments
are viable.


"There are some very specific questions Prof Wakeham has asked us for data on, for
which we need input from you:


(1)   A list of spinoff companies generated from astronomy, space science or
geophysics groups.

(2)   Major resources acquired on non-STFC facilities.  This could be NASA or other
space missions like Spitzer in which ESA or the UK were not partners, or non-STFC
telescopes like Keck.

(3)   Examples of astronomy groups having significant resources from research councils
other than PPARC or STFC.

(4)   Examples of funding awarded to consortia which span Physics and non-Physics
Departments.

"Please send this information very urgently to David Elliott ([log in to unmask]).  We are
asked to supply as much information as possible by May 7th."

_____________________________________________________________________________________

I asked the RAS President whether and how geophysicists should respond
to this request.  He informed me that geophysicists should also answer Query (1)
above, and versions of Queries (2)-(4) rephrased for geophysics:

(2) Major resources acquired on NON-RESEARCH-COUNCIL facilities;

(3) Examples of GEOPHYSICS groups having significant resources from research
councils other than PPARC or STFC (the RAS President says "Should
have said geophysics groups, so do mention NERC");

(4) Examples of funding awarded to consortia IN GEOPHYSICS which span Physics
and non-Physics departments (i.e. he is only interested in consortia that
include PHYSICS DEPARTMENTS).

___________________________________________________________________________
Please send the information to David Elliott ([log in to unmask]) not to me or
the list!
___________________________________________________________________________

I presume that (2) includes fully industry- and EC-funded research but not
the IODP, for which NERC pays the subscription.   I appreciate that both
(2) and (3) open floodgates of information: all I can suggest is that people
reply briefly but mention the PROPORTION of their research resources that come
from these sources, so that the Wakeham Committee can see the importance of
such sources to geophysicists.

Regards,
Sheila Peacock
(On behalf of the British Geophysical Association)