Steps to Facilitate Principal-Investigator-Led Earth Science Missions (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Institutional Investments: Establishing the Foundations
4 Institutional Investments: Establishing the Foundations
Pages 24-29
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 24... ...
The committee heard from numerous presenters, including several small-mission PIs, that cost- and scheduleconstrained missions are not well suited for undertaking significant technology development. In most cases the 1The ESSP-3 AO summarizes the dilemma with regard to technology development: "NASA is committed to successfully infusing new technologies that will lower mission costs in its programs.
|
From page 25... ...
, as described in Table 4.1. Although the ESSP-3 AO does not appear to identify a specific TRL requirement, it was suggested to the committee that the TRL should be at least TRL 6.3 Existing Technology Development Resources ESSP expects proposed mission technologies to have sufficient maturity to achieve launch readiness within 36 months (nominally TRL 6 or higher)
|
From page 26... ...
As indicated below, the committee recommends that a quantitative assessment of the anticipated flow of technology through the TRL chain compared with the projected needs of future ESE missions be performed. Potential for Enhancing Technology Development NASA's SSE has recently begun to consider ways to enhance technology development by providing limited technology funding to highly rated Discovery missions that were not selected because of technology readiness
|
From page 27... ...
Finding: The rigorous and ambitious cost and schedule constraints imposed on PI-led missions preclude all but minimal technology development prior to launch. Recommendation: NASA's Earth Science Enterprise should explicitly nurture and coordinate technology feeder programs -- such as the Instrument Incubator Program and the Office of Aerospace Technology's Mission and Science Measurement Technology Program -- that develop technologies with potential application to PI-led missions.
|
From page 28... ...
In addition, ESE may wish to consider a more proactive stance in encouraging university participation in its technology development programs, perhaps along the lines of the recent NMP AOs, which indicated NASA would reject FFRDC, government, or national laboratory proposals that are substantially the same as those submitted by universities or industry. Successful PI-led programs tend to be mature mission designs under the leadership of highly experienced PIs.
|
From page 29... ...
INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENTS: ESTABLISHING THE FOUNDATIONS 29 Finding: The Earth science community, particularly the university-based community, has historically produced only a small number of scientists with the in-depth space engineering and technical management experience that is required to lead a project in a PI mode of operation. Recommendation: NASA's Earth Science Enterprise should formally identify and promote activities that develop PIs qualified to propose and lead small, focused science missions.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.