Skip to main content

Space Studies Board Annual Report 2014 (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

5 Summaries of Major Reports
Pages 41-50

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 41...
... Reports are often written in conjunction with other National Research Council boards and divisions, as noted, including the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (ASEB) and the Board on Physics and Astronomy (BPA)
Read the entire page →
From page 42...
... This report of the National Research Council's Committee on an Assessment of the Astrophysics Focused Telescope Assets (AFTA) Mission Concepts responds to a request from NASA to compare the WFIRST mission described in NWNH to the WFIRST/AFTA design reference mission, with and without a coronagraph, on the basis of scientific objectives, technical complexity, and programmatic rationale, including projected cost.
Read the entire page →
From page 43...
... , the committee offers the following finding: Finding 2-4: The risk of cost growth is significantly higher for WFIRST/AFTA without the coronagraph than for WFIRST/IDRM.2 Because of the immature design and because there has been very limited study of the coronagraph's accommodation on the mission, the committee could not quantitatively assess the cost and risk impact to the WFIRST/ AFTA program.3 However, the committee found the following: Finding 2-6: Introducing a technology development program onto a flagship mission creates significant mission risks resulting from the schedule uncertainties inherent in advancing low technical readiness level (TRL) hardware to flight readiness.
Read the entire page →
From page 44...
... The objective of the review should be to ensure that the proposed mission cost and technical risk are consistent with available resources and do not significantly compromise the astrophysics balance defined in the 2010 National Research Council report New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics. This review should occur early enough to influence the exercising of a rescoping of the mission if required.
Read the entire page →
From page 45...
... Authorization Act of 2010, which required that the National Academies perform a humanspaceflight study that would review "the goals, core capabilities, and direction of human space flight." The explicit examination of rationales, along with the identification of enduring questions set the task apart from numerous similar studies performed over the preceding several decades, as did the requirement that the committee bring broad public and stakeholder input into its considerations. The complex mix of historical achievement and uncertain future made the task faced by the committee extraordinarily challenging and multidimensional.
Read the entire page →
From page 46...
... Among that small set of plausible goals for human space exploration,1 the most distant and difficult is a landing by human beings 1 Although there is no strictly defined distinction between human spaceflight and human space exploration, the committee takes the latter to mean spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit, in which the goal is to have humans venture into the cosmos to discover new things.
Read the entire page →
From page 47...
... Having considered past and current space policy, explored the international setting, articulated the enduring questions and rationales, and identified public and stakeholder opinions, the committee drew on all this information to ask a fundamental question: What type of human spaceflight program would be responsive to these factors? The committee argues that it is a program in which humans operate beyond LEO on a regular basis -- a sustainable human exploration program beyond LEO.
Read the entire page →
From page 48...
... In addition, the committee has concluded that the best way to ensure a stable, sustainable human-spaceflight program that pursues the rationales and enduring questions that the committee has identified is to develop a program through the rigorous application of a set of pathway principles. The committee's highest-priority recommendation is as follows: NASA should adopt the following pathway principles: I. Commit to designing, maintaining, and pursuing the execution of an exploration pathway beyond low Earth orbit toward a clear horizon goal that addresses the "enduring questions" for human spaceflight.
Read the entire page →
From page 49...
... RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING A SUSTAINABLE PROGRAM The committee was not charged to recommend and has not recommended any particular pathway or set of destination targets. The recommended pathways approach combines a strategic framework with practical guidance that is designed to stabilize human space exploration and to encourage political and programmatic coherence over time.
Read the entire page →
From page 50...
... 2. Maintain long-term focus on Mars as the horizon goal for human space exploration, addressing the enduring questions for human spaceflight: How far from Earth can humans go?
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • space exploration
  • human space
  • enduring questions
  • spaceflight program
  • pathways approach

  • beyond leo
  • decision rules
  • horizon goal
  • human exploration
  • pathway principles

  • low earth
  • earth orbit
  • international space
  • space policy
  • exploration beyond

  • beyond low
  • international partners
  • low technical
  • overall scientific
  • pragmatic rationales

  • focused telescope
  • sustainable human
  • human destiny
  • shared human
  • spaceflight beyond

  • potential international
  • hoc committee
  • international collaboration
  • international partnerships
  • committee offers


    • 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.