Optical Imager (NAC)Wide Angle Camera (WAC)Infrared Imager/Spectrometer (IR)UV Spectrograph (UVS)(Sub-)Surface RadarMagnetometer (MAG)Plasma Spectrometer PackageElectric field and Cold PlasmaRadio Science Experiment
That's 8 compared to Psyche's 3! Crazy! If that wasn't enough their page goes on to mention including a cubesat with their mission. Ambitious to say the least, although I'd assume ESA would view such ambition as skeptically as their American counterparts would in mission evaluation.
As I understand it the PLATO situation was a special case. When PLATO failed to be selected for M1/M2 it was specifically decided it would be retained to compete in a future selection;http://sci.esa.int/cosmic-vision/49385-dark-and-bright-esa-chooses-next-two-science-missions/I suspect this was done to ensure the exoplanet community didn't give up proposing so ESA wouldn't be left without the choice. As far as I know there was no similar statement after the M4 selection.
Will not the cost of the forthcoming orbital gravitational wave observatory impact all these kind selections?
Quote from: Star One on 01/21/2017 08:47 pmWill not the cost of the forthcoming orbital gravitational wave observatory impact all these kind selections?Why would L3 mission that is almost two decades from launch have any effect here? I'm also not sure why you think a gravitational wave mission would be especially costly (more so than any other large-class mission). ExoMars stuff, on the other hand, could have an effect if they go ahead with plans to divert money from science budget.
I don't know where you're getting that time scale from being as they've been indicating that they want to bring forward as soon as possible the mission I thought to the late 2020s.