Portals to the Universe The NASA Astronomy Science Centers (2007) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Models for NASA Astronomy Science Centers
3 Models for NASA Astronomy Science Centers
Pages 17-24
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 17... ...
FIvE MODELS AND THE SERvICES THEY OFFER Traditional Mission Centers Traditional space-based astronomy mission centers are dedicated to a single mission. The simplest are exemplified by the centers for small principal investigator (PI) -class missions prior to about 1980. Such PI mission center functions included little more than PI activities that supported mission operations and data analysis, without any significant guest observer or archival research program. Although a NASA mission that does not provide some guest observer utilization is essentially a relic, there are still a few missions, such as the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe, for which it makes no sense to have a guest observer program during the mission's operational phases.
|
From page 18... ...
RXTE, much like other Explorer-class missions, is required to have an EPO plan and has a small budget and fractional staff time devoted to it. Guest Observer Facilities A variation on the small mission center described above is a guest observer facility (GOF)
|
From page 19... ...
Much like other science centers, the archival centers provide EPO services, help-desk access, and other science support services to the community in addition to the EPO activities of the individual missions associated with the archive center. Flagship Science Centers At the high end of complexity for NASA astronomy science centers are those associated with flagship missions like the Hubble Space Telescope, the Chandra X-ray Observatory, and the Spitzer Space Telescope. These centers perform the same basic support functions for guest investigators as do the centers for Explorer missions, including help-desk services, proposal software and proposal preparation support, data archiving, and analysis software, but the scale of each support function is generally much larger. NASA clearly expects that the flagship centers will take extensive responsibility for NASA EPO activities (and will therefore have specialized staff)
|
From page 20... ...
, with NASA having intentionally requested and funded large EPO efforts at the flagship centers. Centers with larger EPO staff can offer a wider range of services and educational tools than the smaller centers. However, individual PI or Explorer-class missions leverage EPO products from their umbrella institutions, such as HEASARC, and are able to reach larger audiences and provide more EPO services than they would on their own. Centralized versus Distributed Architectures Flagship centers such as STScI and the Chandra X-ray Center (CXC) conduct both mission operations and science operations at a central location; other centers follow a distributed approach. The SSC, for instance, handles science operations (e.g., scheduling of observatory sequences)
|
From page 21... ...
MODELS FOR NASA ASTRONOMY SCIENCE CENTERS Several center staff members reported on the need for strong linkages among operations engineers, instrument teams, software developers, and support scientists. Locating mission operations and science support activities nearby may strengthen those linkages. Governing Institution and Governance Science centers take a range of approaches to governance. Exercising a high level of independence, the STScI is governed by a separate association that holds the contract for the STScI, has responsibility for hiring the director and deputy director, and oversees the work of the STScI. SSC and MSC are governed by JPL program management; directorships of the centers are held by academics in the California Institute of Technology (Caltech)
|
From page 22... ...
High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (HEASARC) Archives: XMM–Newton, XMM–Newton GOF RXTE GOF RXTE, Chandra, others Associated Universities for Research in Astronomy (AURA)
|
From page 23... ...
MODELS FOR NASA ASTRONOMY SCIENCE CENTERS and other resources that users can apply to multiple databases held by the archive. Further benefits accrue in the knowledge base that staff acquire from one mission to the next, which allows for transferring best practices and lessons learned among missions. The committee viewed the presence of research scientists and visiting scientists as a positive enhancement of a science center's role and its ability to provide an exciting and intellectually rich environment. It was recognized that staff scientists can best serve the community if they are themselves involved in active research, so that some fraction of their salaried time should be allocated for their own research. The committee believes, however, that it is not necessary to have full-time researchers for a science center to serve the community effectively and that all the scientists at a center should be involved, at some level, in facilitating the mission.
|
From page 24... ...
Finding: Embedding guest observer facilities in existing science centers such as the High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center provides for efficient user support, especially when the scope of a space mission does not warrant a separate science center. Finding: The Chandra X-ray Center, the Space Telescope Science Institute, the High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center, and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center have sufficient scientific and programmatic expertise to manage NASA's current science center responsibilities after the active phases of space astronomy missions are completed.
|
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.