Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Executive Summary
Pages 1-9

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...
... The scientific fruits of this heritage are plainly evident in achievements such as a signature for supermassive black holes provided by the Hubble Space Telescope (FIST) ; the first views of the solar atmosphere and corona illuminated by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO)
From page 2...
... , ISEE EOS-Polar platforms IML-1, 2 ROSAT AMPTE WARS, TOPEX-POSEIDON IML-1, 2 NOTE: AMPTE = Active Magnetospheric Particle Tracer Explorer; EOS = Earth Observing System; GMM = Generic Mars Mission; HST = Hubble Space Telescope; IML = International Microgravity Laboratory; INTEGRAL = International Gamma-Ray Astrophysics Laboratory; ISEE = International Sun-Earth Explorer; ISPM = International Solar Polar Mission [renamed Ulysses] ; ROSAT = Roentgen Satellite; TOPEX = (Ocean)
From page 3...
... Shared goals and objectives for international cooperation must go beyond scientists to include the engineers and others involved in a joint mission. One of the most important lessons learned from the years of space research is that "intellectual distance" between the engineering and scientific communities and the accompanying lack of common goals and objectives can have a detrimental effect on missions.
From page 4...
... This test is particularly important in the area of anticipated and upcoming large missions. Specifically, the joint committee recommends that international cooperative missions involve the following: · Scientirc support through peer review that Affirms the scientific integrity, value, requirements, and benefits of a cooperative mission; · An historical foundation built on an existing international community, partnership, and shared scientific experiences; · Shared objectives that incorporate the interests of scientists, engineers, and managers in common and communicated goals; · Clearly derned responsibilities and roles for cooperative partners, including scientists, engineers, and · ~ mission managers; · An agreed-upon process for data calibration, validation, access, and distribution; · A sense of partnership recognizing the unique contributions of each participant; · Benercial characteristics of cooperation; and · Recognition of the importance of reviews for cooperative activities in the conceptual, developmental, active, or extended mission phases- particularly for foreseen and upcoming large missions.
From page 5...
... Recommendation 3 Regarding cooperation between NASA and European countries, the joint committee recommends that scientific communities in the United States and Europe use international bodies such as the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSUJ, the Committee on Space Research (COSPARJ, and other international scientific unions to keep informed about planned national activities in the space sciences, to identify areas of potential program coordination, to discuss issues and problems (e.g., technology, data sharing and exchange, cultural barriersJ related to international cooperation, and to share this information with national agencies. Finding: Clear, open communications are particularly important for international missions in space science to ensure that the cooperative space efforts have clearly articulated common goals and responsibilities and that mission results will be freely available.
From page 6...
... Finding: The lessons learned show the importance of defining a protocol for reviewing the ongoing cooperative activities by independent bodies, to ensure that these endeavors are both timely and efficient and that the criterion for high-priority scientific research is still met. Recommendation 7 The joint committee recommends that each international mission in the space-oriented sciences be assessed periodically for its scientific vitality, timeliness, and mission operations, if a significant delay in mission development or if mission descope is necessary because of funding difficulties or other factors.
From page 7...
... Recommendation 9 The joint committee recommends that program andproject scientists andprogram andproject managers be selected who have (IJ a strong commitment not only toward the recognized mission objectives, but also toward international cooperation, and (2J excellent interpersonal skills, since it is important that key leaders and managers seek practical means for minimizing friction in joint U.S.-European missions. Guidelines and Procedures Finding: The joint committee found that international cooperation has been hampered by nonessential administrative requirements, lack of timely information on both sides of the Atlantic, and changes in budget policies.
From page 8...
... budget process, and the importance of trustworthy international agreements supporting cooperative efforts in space, the joint committee recommends that international budget lines be added to the three science offices within NASA to support important peer-reviewed, moderate-scale international activities.2 2 Although multiyear appropriations for international missions might be preferred, Congress has been reluctant to authorize such multiyear commitments because of the inflexibility it creates in the appropriations process.
From page 9...
... significant scientific international cooperation is difficult, if not almost impossible. Recommendation 14 The joint committee recommends the following: · NASA and European space agencies should make a commitment to free and open exchange of data for scientific research as a condition for international scientific cooperation after any proprietary period established for principal investigators; · The scientific community, through their international organizations (e.g., ICSU, COSPAR)


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.