Let's talk about mid-outer solar system targets, specifically the ice giants and the KBOs.
Quote from: redliox on 01/23/2016 10:40 pmAnother thought (although probably should put it in the Ice Giant thread) since you mention budget: partnership with ESA. They have a good interest in Uranus too but lack a budget as well. Given the success of Cassini/Huygens, perhaps collaborating with them would help constrain expenses while maximizing science. How do you think that situation would affect budget specifically?That is probably how it will happen. But it will still be a flagship-class mission.
Another thought (although probably should put it in the Ice Giant thread) since you mention budget: partnership with ESA. They have a good interest in Uranus too but lack a budget as well. Given the success of Cassini/Huygens, perhaps collaborating with them would help constrain expenses while maximizing science. How do you think that situation would affect budget specifically?
You cannot do a meaningful, scientifically worthwhile ice giants mission on a New Frontiers budget. It has to be flagship-class.
I don't know of any study of an orbiter that isn't flagship class.
Quote from: vjkane on 01/26/2016 11:02 amI don't know of any study of an orbiter that isn't flagship class.IMHO, the system is caught in a feedback loop where no one dares to suggest lower-cost missions because the cost models don't "validate" them. If a hard cost cap was imposed, and sensible cost-benefit trades were made in a capability-driven way instead of the usual Parkinson's Law/everything but the kitchen sink approach, who knows what might be possible?
Quote from: Blackstar on 01/23/2016 10:31 pmYou cannot do a meaningful, scientifically worthwhile ice giants mission on a New Frontiers budget. It has to be flagship-class.Citation needed. In your opinion? Per some Aerospace Corp cost model? Seems like a very definitive statement for something that has so many variables in reality.
At the AGU conference in December, I chatted with Jim Bell about the Trojan mission his team plans to propose (and he said that this information could be shared). They are looking at a mission that would orbit at least one asteroid and flyby several more to study the heterogeneity of these objects.
There is an Ocean Worlds hearing on Capitol Hill on Thursday.
Very informative synopsis Blackstar. It sounds like they're getting a solid plan on schedule, and the plan seems to be the flyby orbiter with a short-term lander launching separately. Culbertson is surprisingly intelligent for the average politician, and I only wish his polite exchange of conversation with the scientists could be the norm of Congress and the (U.S. at least) government in general. A very good read.
Comments on Draft AO Due: September 30, 2016Notices of Intent Due Date: TBDProposal Due Date: TBDANNOUNCEMENT OF OPPORTUNITYNEW FRONTIERS PROGRAMNNH16ZDA008JFOREWORDThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Science Mission Directorate (SMD) is releasing this Announcement of Opportunity (AO) to solicit Principal Investigator (PI)-led space science investigations for the New Frontiers Program.Proposed mission investigations must conform to the mission themes described in Section 2.4.The AO Cost Cap for a New Frontiers mission is $850M in NASA Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 dollars for Phases A through D, not including the cost of the Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) or any contributions. NASA expects to select up to one New Frontiers mission to proceed into Phase B and subsequent mission phases. The selected missions will launch no later than December 31, 2024.Proposers should be aware that this New Frontiers AO closely follows the updated Standard AO and the Discovery 2014 AO. This has resulted in major changes from the previous New Frontiers AO issued in 2009. Some of the major changes include:• The value of foreign instrument contributions are limited to one-third of the PI-Managed Instrument Cost.• A standard launch capability is offered as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). Higher performance or larger fairing will be charged to the PI-Managed Mission Cost.• Phase E and F costs, excluding the development of ground or flight system software and the development, fabrication, or refurbishment of test-beds, which will be considered deferred Phase D work, are no longer under the AO Cost Cap.• Proposers are now required to use one parametric cost model as a benchmarking exercise and to report the input file and results in their submission.• The use of lightweight Radioisotope Heater Units, small radioactive sources, and/or the use of Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (MMRTGs) is permitted.• A variety of NASA-developed technologies are available for infusion into missions.• Plans for Student Collaborations, Science Enhancement Options, and Technology Demonstration Options have been deferred to Step-2.In addition to the listed major changes, this AO incorporates a large number of additional changes relative to previous New Frontiers Program AOs, including both policy changes and changes to proposal submission requirements. All proposers must read this AO carefully, and all proposals must comply with the requirements, constraints, and guidelines contained within this AO.