small bodies in the planetary decadal survey past and future€¦ · • divided primitive bodies...

Small Bodies in the Planetary Decadal Survey

Past and Future

Mark V. Sykes 6/29/16

Second Decadal Survey, 2013-2022

Steering Group

Inner Planets Panel

Mars Panel

Giant Planets Panel

Satellites Panel

Primitive Bodies Panel

The Primitive Bodies: Building Blocks of the Solar System

The Inner Planets: The Key to Understanding Earth-Like Worlds

Mars: Evolution of an Earth-Like World

The Giant Planets: Local Laboratories and Ground Truth for Planets Beyond

Satellites: Active Worlds and Extreme Environments

Community White Papers

Vision and Voyages for Planetary Exploration in the Decade 2013-2022

PANEL PAPERS Science goals Important questions Supporting research & related activities Priority flagship missions Priority NF missions Discovery missions




CHALLENGE (NRC) Process is not transparent (black box). Community priorities require engagement and feedback (e.g., priority surveys, public comment on draft panel papers and decadal document).

Difficult to argue that a document represents “the consensus of the community” when the community is ignorant of its content until after it is released.




CHALLENGE (NRC) Process is not transparent (black box). Community priorities require engagement and feedback (e.g., priority surveys, public comment on draft panel papers and decadal document).

What is an AG to do?

Second Decadal Survey, 2013-2022 SBAG Activities to Support Survey

• Encouraged broadest input from white papers on any subject. • Coordinated plan and schedule with Primitive Bodies Panel Chair, Joe

Veverka, to ensure SBAG input would be useful and timely. • Divided Primitive Bodies into seven subareas (NEOs, Asteroids, Comets,

Dwarf Planets, Centaurs/Small Irregular TNOs, Small Satellites, and Interplanetary Dust).

• Called for community participation and volunteer leads for white papers covering these areas (PEN, DPS Mailings) - common template following decadal statement of task.

• Once SBAG white papers submitted to PB Panel, opened an online forum regarding prioritization across sub-areas (based on white paper inputs) and hosted workshop on priorities at DPS.

• Opened community poll on primitive body priorities. • Submitted report, forum record and poll data to PB Panel.


Near-Earth Objects - M. Nolan (Arecibo Obs.) + 57 Asteroids - D. Britt (UCF) + 68 Comets - H. Weaver (JHU/APL), K. Meech (U. Hawaii) + 59 Small Satellites - B. Buratti (JPL) + 31 Dwarf Planets - W. Grundy (Lowell), W. McKinnon (Wash. U) + 31 Centaurs/Small Irregular TNOs - Y. Fernandez (UCF) + 35 Interplanetary Dust - A. Espy (Flor. U), A. Graps (SWRI) + 35

SBAG Community White Papers


Subdiscipline overview Top-level scientific questions Required research and research facilities Technology needs Major mission priorities - Flagships - New Frontiers Discovery science goals Balancing priorities (e.g., mission balance, negative budget impacts)

SBAG Community White Papers - Outline


• What are the highest priority science issues addressed by the study of primitive bodies?

• What are the highest priority Flagship missions to primitive bodies? • What are the highest priority New Frontier missions to primitive

bodies? • What are the most importance science goals that can be addressed

by Discovery-class missions? • What are the highest priority areas of technology development that

need to be supported? • What are the highest priority research facilities that need to be

developed and/or supported? • Balancing priorities - In the event of negative budget pressure on

the planetary budget, what is the priority for preserving program funding?

SBAG Community Poll

Second Decadal Survey, 2013-2022 SBAG Community Poll


Primitive Bodies Panel NF Priorities: (1)Comet Surface Sample Return (2)Trojan Tour and Rendezvous.

Second Decadal Survey, 2013-2022 Recommendations

Planetary Exploration Technology Development: 6-8% of annual PSD budget Assuming an annual budget of $1.5B $90-120M

Research and Data Analysis: 2013, 5% above 2011 level ($224M), then 1.5% above inflation in subsequent years for remainder of decade NASA Infl Ind +1.5% Recommend (M) 2013 1.9% 3.4% $235.2 2014 2.1% 3.6% $243.2 2015 2.3% 3.8% $252.0 2016 2.6% 4.1% $261.5 2017 2.5% 4.0% $272.2 2018 2.5% 4.0% $283.1 2019 2.5% 4.0% $294.5 2020 2.5% 4.0% $306.2 2021 2.4% 3.9% $318.5 2022 2.4% 3.9% $330.9


Discovery missions: ≤ 24 month cadence for AO releases and mission selections ⇒ at least 5 AO releases and selections in the decade New Frontier missions: Two selections in the decade NS4: Comet Surface Sample Return Lunar South Pole-Aitken Basin Sample Return Saturn Probe Trojan Tour and Rendezvous Venus In Situ Explorer NF5: Add Io Observer Lunar Geophysical Network

SB

SB


Flagships: 1st: MAX-C (descoped to $2.5B) 2nd: Jupiter Europa Orbiter (descoped) 3rd: Uranus Orbiter and Probe (new start at least)


Fiscal Scenario 1 (assuming a budget increase sufficient to allow a new start for JEO (no order assumed):

MAX-C (descoped to $2.5 billion) Jupiter Europa Orbiter (descoped) Uranus Orbiter and Probe (new start) Mars Trace Gas Orbiter conducted jointly with ESA New Frontiers Missions 4 and 5 Discovery program funded at the current level adjusted for inflation

Fiscal Scenario 2 (assuming currently – 2011 - projected NASA budget): MAX-C (descoped to $2.5 billion) Jupiter Europa Orbiter (descoped) Uranus Orbiter and Probe (new start) Mars Trace Gas Orbiter conducted jointly with ESA New Frontiers Missions 4 and 5 Discovery program funded at the current level adjusted for inflation


Fiscal Scenario 3 (less favorable than assumed, necessitating budget cuts):

1st: Descope/delay Flagship missions 2nd: Changes to NF and Discovery programs only if adjustments to

Flagships cannot solve the problem High priority to preserve funding for R&A and technology

development

Second Decadal Survey, 2013-2022 Recommendations - Performance

Planetary Exploration Technology Development: 6-8% of annual PSD budget Assuming an annual budget of $1.5B $90-120M FY16 $197M Planetary Science Tech Research and Data Analysis:

2013, 5% above 2011 level ($224M), then 1.5% above inflation in subsequent years for remainder of decade NASA Infl Ind +1.5% Recommend (M) Actual Diff 2013 1.9% 3.4% $235.2 $229.6 -$5.6 2014 2.1% 3.6% $243.2 2015 2.3% 3.8% $252.0 2016 2.6% 4.1% $261.5 $214.1 -$47.4 2017 2.5% 4.0% $272.2 2018 2.5% 4.0% $283.1 2019 2.5% 4.0% $294.5 2020 2.5% 4.0% $306.2 2021 2.4% 3.9% $318.5 2022 2.4% 3.9% $330.9

Budget #s from J. Rall, LPSC 2016 presentation


Discovery missions: ≤ 24 month cadence for AO releases and mission selections ⇒ at least 5 AO releases and selections in the decade

Recommendations - Performance

AO Date Missions & Year selected NEAR, Pathfinder (1993) 1994 Lunar Prospector, Stardust (1995) 1996 Genesis, CONTOUR (1997) 1998 Deep Impact, MESSENGER (1999) 2000 Kepler, Dawn (2001) 2002 No AO Released 2004 No mission selected 2006 GRAIL (2007) 2008 No AO Released 2010 Mars Insight (2012) [launch rescheduled from 2016 to 2018] 2012 No AO Released 2014 Not yet selected (DAVINCI, VERITAS, Psyche, Lucy, NEOCam) 2017 (Target)


New Frontier missions: Two selections in the decade

AO Date Missions & Year selected 2000 New Horizons (2001) 2003 Juno (2005) 2009 OSIRIS-REx (2011) 2017 (Target)


NF4: Comet Surface Sample Return Lunar South Pole-Aitken Basin Sample Return Saturn Probe Trojan Tour and Rendezvous Venus In Situ Explorer Ocean Worlds (Titan and Enceladus) [Derived from FY16 House report language, not in final conference report]


Flagships: 1st: MAX-C (descoped to $2.5B) Mars 2020 (launch 2020) 2nd: Jupiter Europa Orbiter (descoped) Jupiter Europa mission, orbiter+lander (launch 2022) (or orbit 2022, lander 2024 - House 2017) 3rd: Uranus Orbiter and Probe (new start at least)


Green, PSS 6/7/16, p6.

Not yet listed on SSB site

Timeline of National Academy Studies (upcoming)

R&A Restructuring Review: • Tasked August 30, 2015 • Report due to NASA, December 2016

Large Strategic NASA Science Missions: • Tasked March 2016 (not yet listed on SSB site) • Report due to NASA, August 2017

Midterm evaluation: • To be tasked September 2016 • Input: Cubesat, Extended Missions, R&A Restructuring, Large Missions

3rd Planetary Decadal Survey • To be tasked before October 2019 • Expect report to NASA due 1st quarter 2022

Important for all AGs to study panel tasks and make specific findings addressing those tasks.

Suggest a reprise of SBAG support for the 2nd decadal survey

small bodies in the planetary decadal survey past and future€¦ · • divided primitive bodies...

Documents