VERITAS and EnVision

[vjkane]

Well if it's just a few tens of millions, ESA can pay NASA to obtain the expertise and services.

Paying for stuff, radical concept I know, but it works. In fact private companies pay NASA to get their expertise and services all the time.

Agencies of different governments don't pay each other; they exchange services.

[Blackstar]

[thespacecow]

Well if it's just a few tens of millions, ESA can pay NASA to obtain the expertise and services.

Paying for stuff, radical concept I know, but it works. In fact private companies pay NASA to get their expertise and services all the time.

Agencies of different governments don't pay each other; they exchange services.

There's no rule or law that says they can't pay each other, time to think out of the box for once...

[Don2]

I am glad people have noticed the impact on Envision. NASA was going to spend $178 million to build the radar for it. NASA reneging on that commitment is quite likely to blow up the whole project. The US will be seen as a dysfunctional and unreliable ally who Europe will not want to collaborate with in future. That will have impacts far beyond space science.

If this was really about saving money then the Envision contribution would provide a way to get new Venus data for US scientists with a minimum investment.

I hope the Europeans will fund the completion of the US radar or will find a suitable European replacement. However, Europe faces the need for additional military spending due to US policy. Letting Envision die and blaming the US for it is the politically pragmatic thing to do. Europe has a lot of expertise in Earth science radars so I have no doubt they could build a European radar if the funding was available.

Meanwhile DAVINCI and VERITAS are excellent and affordable projects. When it come to delivering value for money the Discovery program is one of the top performing areas of NASA. Space science in general is far more efficient than most US government spending, and Discovery is one of the top performing areas of space science.

This budget cut will do enormous damage to the American space program, and will accelerate the collapse of America's global reputation.

[vjkane]

I hope the Europeans will fund the completion of the US radar or will find a suitable European replacement. However, Europe faces the need for additional military spending due to US policy.

If I remember correctly, EnVision couldn't fit within the medium class mission budget without a contributed radar system.

[flatpf]

If I remember correctly, EnVision couldn't fit within the medium class mission budget without a contributed radar system.

(Most of the time) Instruments are contributions by member states or international partners and do not count towards the cost cap.

When Envision was proposed for M4 (which was more cost constrained than M5) they had an UK built radar based on NovaSAR-S and they used it for the M5 proposal. The CDF-study in 2018 still included that radar. Then somewhere in between that study and the Yellow Book in 2021 the switch to a NASA/JPL provided radar happened.

[Blackstar]

Just a note that when it comes to discussing cooperation on space missions, there is more to it than barter agreements and money. These kinds of cooperation usually come with participating scientists and data sharing agreements. So not only do we contribute an instrument, we also get to participate in the science analysis. That's all being wrecked now.

[StraumliBlight]

Can ESA do without NASA? [Jun 12, translated]

Carole Mundell, Director of Science at ESA, explained that there are 19 joint missions currently under consideration, and that only 16 of them are considered “mitigable” , that is, they can be tackled (with possible delays) even without the American space agency. The remaining three are LISA, EnVISION and NewAthena, and they could require more structural interventions. These three missions are the most at risk in the event of a lack of US support, but it was also reiterated that ESA has the technical expertise to compensate for any shortcomings, if necessary.

In any case, the importance of developing in-house the technologies currently supplied by third-party partners has been repeatedly stressed . These include critical components for the Rosalind Franklin rover of the ExoMars mission, such as the radioisotope heater units (RHU) and braking motors. Daniel Neuenschwander, Director of Human and Robotic Exploration at ESA, explained that the Agency has already started discussions with Canada as an alternative supplier.

https://twitter.com/ESA_Envision/status/1933083562346963301

Meet the @ESA_Envision VenSpec science team 👋!
Scientists working on our three instruments, VenSpec-H, VenSpec-M & VenSpec-U, have joined forces at the LATMOS site in Guyancourt, France, to maximize their science output.

The three instruments form the so-called VenSpec Suite and will tell us how geological processes on the Venus surface shape its atmosphere and climate:
☁️ VenSpec-H will observe the Venus atmosphere below and above the massive cloud deck, at high spectral resolution in the near-Infrared, to detect volcanic gasses.
🌋VenSpec-M will image Venus’ surface in the near-infrared to reveal its rock composition and to detect volcanic hotspots. It will also observe the lower atmosphere and cloud variability.
💨VenSpec-U will image the Venus mesosphere down to the upper cloud in the ultraviolet at high and medium spectral resolution, to monitor the atmosphere sulphur cycle.

@ESA_Envision 🛰️will contribute to a holistic understanding of Venus, thus enhancing our knowledge of rocky planets and conditions for habitability in our solar system and beyond🌍

Preliminary Thermal Design of the Planned Venus Synthetic Aperture Radar Instrument [Jul 20]

Mission Overview
• EnVision would be an ESA medium-class mission to Venus.
• Primary science goals include
• Characterize the history of the Venus surface and mechanisms related to the release of heat
• Search for present-day geological processes
• Characterize interactions between the planet and atmosphere to assess if liquid water could have existed on the surface in the past
• EnVision would launch on an Ariane 64. Planned launch in 2031 and a backup launch in 2032.
• EnVision would depart directly from Earth, travel away from the sun and return for an Earth flyby, and then arrive at Venus. Cruise lasts about 1.5 years. The VenSAR reflectarray deployment is currently planned early in cruise.
• Aerobraking would be performed to achieve the science orbit at Venus. Aerobraking lasts about 1 year. The VenSAR reflectarray would be deployed by this point and have to survive the aerothermal loads.
• The science orbit at Venus would have an orbital period around 1.5 hours with an 88 degree inclination angle. Science phase would be about 4.25 years.

ESA Linkedin [Nov 19]

Envision is an ESA-led mission in partnership with NASA.

It's targeting launch in 2031 on an Ariane 64.

The spacecraft will reach Venus after a 15-month cruise. After arriving, it will spend 11 months aerobraking through Venus’s atmosphere to progressively reach its science orbit

Europe’s next mission to Venus – Envision this [Dec 1]

https://twitter.com/ESA_Envision/status/1995826343141916835

Envision [Dec 2]

Planned launch: November 2031

[AndrewM]

Both of these missions were mentioned in the annual NASA GAO report as "Non-Artemis Early Formulation Non-Category 1 Projects" with no significant updates provided.

[Blackstar]

Both of these missions were mentioned in the annual NASA GAO report as "Non-Artemis Early Formulation Non-Category 1 Projects" with no significant updates provided.

That's a weird way to categorize them.

The administration wants to cancel them. I suspect that because of that, NASA provided no information to GAO about them.

[flatpf]

I consider the US Venus missions dead.

Unlike for Exomars, there was no news around Envision (and LISA and Athena) at the ministerial, so it looks like ESA will have to iniate tenders/sign development contracts (allegedly provisional tenders have already been initiated) for Envision's radar next year.

Unless a US budget with commitments "appears" which I think is unlikely for Envision. Maybe a new administrator might decide to fund VENSAR while killing off VERITAS and DAVINCI, who knows. Guess we will have to wait and see.

[vjkane]

I consider the US Venus missions dead.

Unlike for Exomars, there was no news around Envision (and LISA and Athena) at the ministerial, so it looks like ESA will have to iniate tenders/sign development contracts (allegedly provisional tenders have already been initiated) for Envision's radar next year.

Unless a US budget with commitments "appears" which I think is unlikely for Envision. Maybe a new administrator might decide to fund VENSAR while killing off VERITAS and DAVINCI, who knows. Guess we will have to wait and see.

I think you are right about VERITAS and DAVINCI. Congress will likely restore the mission's funding, but we have no insight to whether the human expertise stilll remains to carry out these missions given the large number of people who left.

I still have hope for NASA's contribution to EnVision. This mission is funded, I believe, from the mandatory science budget, and therefore likely would not have been a topic of discussion at the ministerial meeting, which from news reports on this side of the Atlantic seems to have been focused on the voluntary programs.

I believe that ExoMars is funded out of one of those voluntary budgets. If so, providing that news could have been crucial to succor nations' voluntary funding commitments.

[flatpf]

ht about VERITAS and DAVINCI. Congress will likely restore the mission's funding, but we have no insight to whether the human expertise stilll remains to carry out these missions given the large number of people who left.

I still have hope for NASA's contribution to EnVision. This mission is funded, I believe, from the mandatory science budget, and therefore likely would not have been a topic of discussion at the ministerial meeting, which from news reports on this side of the Atlantic seems to have been focused on the voluntary programs.

I believe that ExoMars is funded out of one of those voluntary budgets. If so, providing that news could have been crucial to succor nations' voluntary funding commitments.

After the PBR with all the cancellations was published, ESA's Science Director said in a press conference that 3 of the 19  missions with NASA participation in the Science Directorate would be in need of corrective measures that the member states would have to decide on at the ministerial, the three were LISA, Envision and NewAthena.

Exomars falls under the Human and Robotic Exploration Directorate, a voluntary programme, as does MSR. I don't know if any Earth Observation mission is seriously affected. Exomars was oversubscribed at the ministerial if I recall the press conference correctly (although H&R Exploration is an envelope programme that got €800M less than requested), if that happened because of NASA's letter or would have happened regardless, I don't know.

Regardless of being a mandatory or voluntary programme, the corrective measures require either ESA or member states to pay for any contribution that NASA would have provided (or descope the mission). And if it's ESA that has to pay, the member states need to sign off, because in the case of Envision, if ESA buys the radar from a commercial vendor they would certainly blow the M-class budget as the radar is estimated to cost NASA about $200M.

And the rumours are that ESA already approached vendors to bid for tenders for development contracts that would be signed in January/February next year, lasting to mid 2026 in the hopes that by then NASA will have a budget and an administrator to make the decisions either for or against the contributions and therefore the contracts would either end mid 2026 if NASA was still in or they would be continued if NASA was out.
How ESA would pay for them is unknown, either the member states pay extra or calls for new missions get delayed, and if member states agreed to these contingency plans at the ministerial is also unknown. Maybe these decisions got deferred like some others at the ministerial.

[Don2]

The cheapest way for the US to do Venus science would be to deliver on the commitment to Envision. It would also avoid the US looking like a flaky and unreliable partner. The Europeans have flown multiple earth science radars so I don't doubt that they could replace the American contribution, but finding the funding would be inconvenient.

I suspect the VERITAS team has broken up, so that one is probably finished.

[Blackstar]

The cheapest way for the US to do Venus science would be to deliver on the commitment to Envision.

Yes. But let's keep in mind that "science" isn't some object that exists or doesn't exist. What American scientists want is to do the science themselves, which improves their understanding of the solar system and brings benefits to American institutions and educational system. So funding a European Venus science program has limited benefits to the United States.

(Don't mean to be pedantic about this, but still need to make that point.)

It would also avoid the US looking like a flaky and unreliable partner.

Too late. We're already a flaky, unreliable, even hostile partner. Take a look at the new national defense strategy paper, which treats Europe quite badly.

[TheKutKu]

Are Veritas and the US participation in Envision granted funding in the appropation bill?
https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20260105/Division%20A%20Commerce%20Justice%20Science.pdf doesn't mention them.

[vjkane]

Are Veritas and the US participation in Envision granted funding in the appropation bill?
https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20260105/Division%20A%20Commerce%20Justice%20Science.pdf doesn't mention them.

They are not specifically named, but that doesn't mean they are excluded.

Congress typically names a few specific missions/programs with specific funding. The vast majority aren't named. Agencies prepare spending plans to account for the difference between named spending and total top spending and then review those plans with Congress.

Also see my post at https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51500.msg2748565#msg2748565

[flatpf]

At ESA's annual press briefing ESA's Director of Science, Carole Mundell, was asked about Envision and the cooperation with NASA. They still expect NASA to honour the memorandum of understanding but they have been looking for European alternatives. Now with a new administrator and the minibus NASA should be in a position to determine if they can/want to continue with VENSAR (which apparently just recently passed its PDR), but ESA can only tell the way forward after they had discussions with NASA.

The launch of Envision is still scheduled for 2031, there are launch windows in 2032 and 2033 as well but afterwards the launch window will close for several years.

[TheKutKu]

https://www.planetary.org/articles/advocacy-success-fy2026-nasa-budget

VERITAS   $36.1
EnVision (ESA)   $68.9

For comparison from the FY2025 budget request