The history of Hudnall Planetarium is
intricately linked with the history of
|
Interoffice Memorandum |
|
|
|
Date: |
|
|
|
To: Dr. Raymond
Van Cleef |
|
Albert
Baade |
|
|
|
From: Frances
Friedman |
|
|
|
Subject: Comprehensive Report on Hudnall Planetarium |
|
|
|
|
|
HISTORICAL |
|
|
|
Technical requirements: |
|
|
|
When the Board of Trustees of Tyler Junior College
elected to install a planetarium on the college campus in 1963, it became
necessary for the Board to have a thorough understanding of the technical
requirements, staffing, operational objectives, ad financing to assure the
successful operation of the proposed program. The project involved a complex and difficult technological
field, but the members of the Board were able to abstract the technical terms
into comprehensive language necessary for developing policies governing each
specific requirement. |
|
|
|
The essential elements of the planetarium system to be
installed in the split-level building were integrated to function within a 30
ft. dome configuration. Concentric
seating for one hundred adults around the astronomical projector in the
center of the demonstration chamber was the dominate element of the
system. The projection screen
consisted of compoundly curved and perforated aluminum panels suspended
within the dome. The perforations
provided superior acoustical properties and facilitated the introduction of
air conditioning. Sound is supplied
through multi-speaker units mounted behind the perforated screen. The console is housed in the northeast
section of the demonstration chamber and controls all of the instrument
(astronomical projector), instrument-related auxiliaries, and special
effects. Auxiliary elements for
special effects, which are very great in cost, were constructed by |
|
|
|
All of these essential elements consisting of concentric
seating, cove lighting, sound system, control console, projection screen, and
planetarium projector were purchased as a single package deal from the Spitz Space
Systems, Inc. at a cost of approximately $35,000 including installation
charges. The Model A3P Spitz
astronomical projector is capable of producing a realistic reproduction of
the night sky as seen from any point on earth and for any desired date in the
past or future. This reliable
instrument cost only $18,375 as a part of the $35,000 package, and it has
operated since |
|
|
|
It was realized at the time or purchase, and should be
noted at this date, that each of the essential elements could be replaced
without replacing the entire system; however, any replacement would have to
be compatible with a 30 ft. dome and with the other elements of the system. A new astronomical projector must be
capable of covering a 30 ft. screen without reducing the one hundred person
seating capacity of the present system. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The initial purchase of the astronomical projector,
projection screen, cove lighting, sound system, seating, and other essential
elements was made with the funds contributed by Mr. Jimmy Hudnall. In later years, Mr. Hudnall made
additional contributions resulting in the exterior copper-clad dome replacing
a plastic covering with had deteriorated from weathering. |
|
|
|
A generous contribution by Dr. Jim Vaughn provided the
funds to develop a downstairs exhibition area housing ten display cases in
which astronomical concepts are exhibited to supplement the regular programs
presented in the demonstration chamber.
At a later date, Dr. Vaughn purchased a Celestron C-8 telescope with its
associated equipment for research in developing current planetarium programs. |
|
|
|
The planetarium has operated on a minimal cost
basis. The director has conducted
programs, scheduled reservations, operated the lobby sales counter, and
performed other duties usually done by additional staff members in other
planetariums. Scripts, art work, and
auxiliary effects were produced by the director at additional cost
savings. Maintenance of the
sophisticated equipment has been performed by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Role and Function: |
|
|
|
The most important role for Hudnall Planetarium, in
accordance with the Board’s policy and as directed by the administration, has
been to serve as a public relations vehicle to bring prospective students to
the campus. The most important
function in carrying out this role was educational. It was planned as a center for space education to serve the
entire |
|
|
|
The administration realized at an early date that in
order to carry out this role and function, it would be illogical for several
reasons to impose a large admission fee.
With a seating capacity of only one hundred adults, the planetarium
could not generate a substantial income, and it was observed that several
other planetarium have not continued to function on this basis. The greatest benefit to the college could
be derived in utilizing the planetarium as a recruitment vehicle, and
subsequent years proved the wisdom of the Board’s policy. The planetarium has had an important role
in bringing prospective students to the Junior College campus. |
|
|
|
A public school program was to be provided with
appropriate planetarium presentations on each grade level from the first
grade through the twelfth grade.
Other colleges from freshmen through graduate school would be offered
presentations on an appropriate level.
Teachers were invited to make special reservations for their classes
and attendance to these planetarium programs would be free of charge. In addition to these free programs
designed specifically for students, special programs were offered on
designated Sundays to the general public and to special club organizations at
other times. |
|
|
|
The original objectives of the planetarium are being met
in serving the educational needs of different segments of the community. Two different college accredited astronomy
courses are presented each year. |
|
|
|
The planetarium is not restricted to astronomy
students. Several other TJC classes
attend planetarium presentations. We
have one program on mythology of the night skies that was shown to English
classes as they study mythology.
Technical writing classes, journalism classes, surveying classes, and
orientation classes also attend. |
|
|
|
Surveying students learn to “use the stars”. The planetarium can put up a sky for any
season, any hour, and any location: therefore, it certainly gives them a more
accurate view of constellation and star positions than charts in their
textbooks. |
|
|
|
Programs have been designed specifically for the grade
level in attendance. There have been
programs for all ages from first grade through college. The programs are locally produced and
tailored to meet the educational needs of each class. The planetarium has worked very closely
with many school districts in developing programs compatible and integrated
into their earth science programs.
Packets of instructional materials have been presented to visiting
teachers to supplement their individual programs. These programs have been presented each year to approximately
18,000 – 20,000 students. More than
433,000 have attended at least one program since November, 1963. |
|
|
|
During school hours,, Mondays through Friday |
|
There has been enthusiastic support from the news
media. Hudnall Planetarium has had
coverage from dozens of television presentations on KLTV, scores of
interviews on several East Texas Radio stations, and hundreds of news
releases through ore than 100 Texas newspapers both dailies and
weeklies. We are especially indebted
to the Tyler Courier Times-Telegraph which has enabled u to achieve our
mutual objectives of serving the entire |
|
|
|
Audience attendance is an important factor in determining
the impact that the planetarium has had in serving the community. Hudnall Planetarium has enjoyed the unique
distinction of over-capacity crowds at almost every public program. The traditionally limited seating capacity
of most planetariums could be considered as the reason for the standing
lines. However, the chief reason for
our audience acceptance has resulted from the locally produced programs which
have been designed to appeal to each individual audience. My years of experience in offering these
programs have provided me with a better understanding not only of our
clientele, but has allowed me to better examine the priorities, goals, and my
own ability to prepare programs.
Planetariums which operate with automated equipment, “canned”
programs, and sensational presentations have only a brief period of good
audience attendance. Several of these
facilities have been forced to close after a few years of operation without
sufficient audience attendance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Operations: |
|
|
|
To insure the continuity of successful operation, it is
necessary to reevaluate our priorities in establishing new goals for the
future. While our operations have
served the educational needs of many segments of the community, there are
several areas which could be better served.
Long-range objectives in meeting new goals should include: |
|
|
|
1. development
of programs designed for the students of |
|
|
|
2.
production of special programs for scientific, professional, and
cultural societies of the |
|
|
|
3.
offering public school teacher workshops for the |
|
|
|
4. development
of programs designed specifically for public school students from the 7th
– 12th grade levels covering current celestial events and
emphasizing the scientific, social, and cultural values affected world space
endeavors; |
|
|
|
5.
meeting the needs of the handicapped public school students including
those who are hard of hearing; |
|
|
|
6.
inviting club groups, civic organizations, retired citizens groups,
etc. to make reservations for private presentations designed for their
organization. |
|
|
|
7.
innovation of a method to alleviate standing clientel ticket lines on
specified Sunday public programs. |
|
|
|
As a short-ranged goal to meet these long-range
objectives, several projects are currently in production for presentation during
the 1985-1986 college year. |
|
|
|
1.
To support the proposed calendar of events for the college, a public
program is being produced, “Gala” |
|
|
|
2.
We are working with the student enrichment committee, chaired by Mary
Waldrop, to develop a special program on Halley’s Comet for the science
students of |
|
|
|
3.
By request, a program on Halley’s Comet will be presented to the |
|
|
|
4.
Teacher workshops will be developed to update astronomical concepts
and assist them with classroom materials. |
|
|
|
5.
Invitations will be mailed to all area school districts offering the
program on Halley’s Comet for grades 7-12. |
|
|
|
6.
Invitations will be mailed to all area school districts offering the
cultural program, Skywatchers of Ancient Mexico, for grades 7-12. |
|
|
|
7. An
electronic device will be installed which will be compatible with public
school equipment to improve the audio reception for the hard of hearing
students. |
|
|
|
8.
A reservation system is being developed for all public programs on
specified Sundays in order to alleviate standing lines; however, we do not
anticipate that this system will completely solve the problem. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROPOSAL FOR NEW EQUIPMENT |
|
|
|
A report covering the future operation of Hudnall
Planetarium must include data relative to the present condition of the
equipment if it is justified. Should
the replacement of any of the basic components including the astronomical
projector be justified, there would be many factors for consideration
including the 30 ft. dome building configuration, requirement for
modification to existing bench arrangements, compatibility with existing
lighting, sound, and auxiliary equipment.
Furthermore, the new equipment should be able to at least meet the capability
of the current projector and operate with a comparative measure of
reliability. |
|
|
|
The current astronomical projector, model A3P Spitz, was
installed in September, 1963 and is 22 years old. The original price was $18,375 as a part of the total $35,000
packaged deal. At the present time,
it is operating satisfactorily with regular maintenance and can be expected
to continue to function during the next year without a major expense. It is my opinion that it can continue to
function for several years with proper maintenance, and I have not asked that
it be replaced at this time.
Obviously an instrument of that age must be carefully operated and
serviced. Even with careful attention
it will eventually require replacement. |
|
|
|
Preliminary figures based on quotations from vendors,
which will be further explained in this report, indicate a basic cost factor
for the replacement of the Spitz A3P which cost $18,375 originally to be
$203,700 - $313,000 installed. These
figures do not include a new sound system nor any of the auxiliary projectors
which we now own. It should be
understood that these figures do not cover the possible replacement costs of
other elements including seating, projection screens, sound system, lighting,
and special effects projectors.
Replacement lamps for the cover lighting have been purchased recently
and will not be required. It is
anticipated that the concentric seating benches will require reupholstering
as they have been recovered only once in 22 years. |
|
|
|
Another option to be considered is the dismantling,
rebuilding, and reinstallation of the present A3P instrument which can be
done by Spitz Space Systems at a quote of $45,000 - $50,000 including
shipping, installation, and a one year warranty. If this operation is properly carried out, it is reasonable to
assume that the instrument could operate for another twenty years. |
|
|
|
I have invited three of the world’s leading manufacturers
of planetarium systems to offer quotations of costs and specifications to
replace our A3P Spitz projector should a decision be made to do so. The companies responding were Spitz Space
Systems, U.S.A. , Minolta Corporation of |
|
|
|
Following are important factors to be considered in the
purchase of a new instrument: |
|
|
|
1. reputation
of the companies with regard to the reliability of equipment, availability of
replacement part, and record of service response should it be required; |
|
|
|
2.
impact of new equipment on existing facility including building
configuration, seating, and other elements; |
|
|
|
3.
flexibility of new equipment if new equipment needs to be modified,
moved, or repaired at a future date. |
|
|
|
These factors will be considered in my
report relative to comparing each vendor’s offering as listed. |
|
|
|
1. Spitz
Space Systems, Inc., |
|
History: Spitz has been
in the planetarium business for 45 years and has 850 installations
worldwide. It has 34 planetarium
installations in |
|
|
|
Instruments: Model 512 and
console ---$203,700 |
|
(including installation and warranty) |
|
The figure quoted includes several standard
auxiliary projectors; however certain optional projectors and sound systems
can be obtained if desired. |
|
Solar Orrery
-----------------------------$7,000 |
|
Azimuth Projector
-------------------------2,700 |
|
Additional (2) Constellation Projectors ----1,900 |
|
Sound System
---------------------------11,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
2. Minolta
Camera Co., Ltd. |
|
History: Minolta enjoys
a reputation as a producer of high quality, reliable, and accurate planetarium
projectors on a world-wide basis. It
has built some of the largest installations including the |
|
|
|
Instrument: Model MS10 and console
---$313,000 |
|
(including installation and warranty) |
|
The figure quoted included several standard
auxiliary projectors; however, certain optional projectors can be obtained if
desired. A sound system would be
purchased from another source. |
|
Azimuth Turntable
-----------------------$38,740 |
|
Comet Projector
-----------------------------540 |
|
Twinkling Device
---------------------------1,850 |
|
Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto Projectors
-------930 |
|
Seasonal Sun Projectors
--------------------1,540 |
|
Note:
The prices listed are exclusive of duty and wiring. |
|
|
|
3. Carl
Zeiss, West German |
|
History: Zeiss is the
oldest producer of very high quality planetarium projectors and has built
projectors for some of the largest planetariums in the world. At this point in time, however, this company
has not quoted a price for an installation within our 30 ft. dome. According to the information I have
obtained, Zeiss introduced the Model 1015 about four years ago to fit into 30
ft. domes. Zeiss has not sold a
single installation in the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUMMARY |
|
In accordance with your instructions, I have presented
the historical background of Hudnall Planetarium including its role and
function and some new goals to improve service to the community. Estimates from leading planetarium
producers for the replacement of the planetarium projector, should this
action be decided, have been given.
Costs of other options, including the refurbishing of the present
instrument, have been presented. I
hope this information will be of some value in future planning of the
planetarium program. A drive to fund
the costs of replacing the planetarium instrument would have to furnish
$240,000 minimum. If other elements
are to be replaced at the same time, it is reasonable to assume that
approximately $300,000 would be required to restore the planetarium to its
operational condition and capability when it opened |
|
|
|
One should not expect a computerized automated system,
highly sophisticated T.V. projections, or awesome Omniplex presentations from
either of these astronomical projectors.
These are completely different systems designed to serve a different
purpose. The layman tends to confuse
Omniplex installations (movies) such as the one in |
|
|
|
If you have any questions relative to this report, I will
be very happy to answer them. My
files are available for further study of any technical specifications you may
wish to obtain. |
|
|
|
Thank you |
|
|
|
|
|
|