Visions into Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022 A Midterm Review (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Summary
Summary
Pages 1-10
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 1... ...
In spring 2017, after the passage of the NASA Authorization Act, the agency asked the National Academies to expand the scope of its midterm review to also include an assessment of the Mars Exploration Program (MEP) , which is managed within the Planetary Science Division (PSD)
|
From page 2... ...
NASA did place high priority on preserving R&A and technology funding. The decadal survey also recommended the following priorities if more funding than expected was made available for the planetary science program during the next decade (and assuming that the Uranus orbiter and probe mission was funded in addition to MAX-C and Europa orbiter)
|
From page 3... ...
These missions have been implemented by NASA as the Mars 2020 rover and Europa Clipper. The Europa Clipper concept currently in Phase B is reduced in cost and scope from the Jupiter Europa Orbiter mission that was proposed to Vision and Voyages and its cost appears to be within the guidelines established by the decadal survey.
|
From page 4... ...
The notional ice giants mission described in Vision and Voyages would address a broad range of ice giant science objectives using mature instrumentation. The objectives of the mission concept described in a NASA-sponsored 2017 ice giants study have been changed significantly from the original Vision and Voyages science objectives.
|
From page 5... ...
R ecommendation: If scientific discoveries or external factors compel NASA to reassess decadal survey priorities, such as the list of New Frontiers missions, NASA should vet these changes via the Commit tee on Astrobiology and Planetary Science and allow for input from the community via assessment and analysis groups as time permits. (Chapter 3)
|
From page 6... ...
There are strong arguments for continuing Mars exploration through a program rather than as a series of independent, unconnected missions. Although the current MEP has a broad focus across most areas of Mars as a system, the program going forward beyond Mars 2020 is focused entirely on sample return.
|
From page 7... ...
The high number of proposals submitted, relative to the funding available, shows a strong community demand for these programs. The PSD has embraced the decadal survey's technology recommendations, and they have constructed a rational and comprehensive technology portfolio that can enable new and more challenging planetary science missions in the future.
|
From page 8... ...
INFRASTRUCTURE AND LABORATORY SUPPORT TO PLANETARY SCIENCE The 2014 Discovery AO and 2017 New Frontiers AO require early planning and coordination for sample return missions. The actual costs for all aspects of curation, from planning through distribution and storage, including all required laboratory construction or modification, are required to be borne by the mission from inception to 2 years following sample return.
|
From page 9... ...
R ecommendation: A formal assessment by NASA of how well the program structure and funding of the virtual institutes are aligned with the Planetary Science Division's science goals should be conducted on a regular basis, appropriately phased to the cycle of decadal surveys and midterm reviews. (Chapter 6)
|
From page 10... ...
Chapter 5 assesses the Mars Exploration Program. Last, Chapter 6 addresses preparations for the next planetary science decadal survey.
|
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.