Review of NASA Office of Space Science Enterprise Strategic Plan: Letter Report (2003)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

ASSESSMENT OF NASA’S DRAFT 2003 SPACE SCIENCE ENTERPRISE STRATEGY 4 highlighted in this short report what it believes to be the salient points relevant to these areas, which are discussed below.4 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS The Board believes that the draft “2003 Space Science Enterprise Strategy” document provides an informative survey of OSS scientific objectives, goals, and associated missions. It identifies NASA’s science objectives for each space science theme area and notes key missions and programs that the OSS has identified to address objectives. The document also discusses some resource requirements and external relationships to other federal agencies and international partners. The Board commends the OSS for incorporating into the 2003 draft document suggestions that the Board made for improving the 2000 plan:5 The document provides a clear presentation of how astrobiology fits into the overall plan and does a good job of connecting the technology and future missions in the OSS theme areas. However, the Board does not find the draft document to be a true strategy. As the Board noted in its prior review of the draft 2000 strategic plan, more explicit information about resources, criteria for decision making, priorities, mission plans, time lines, and contingencies could have transformed this document from a “handbook for what we intend to do and why” into a strategy.6 While some elements of a strategy are included, they are dispersed throughout the draft document and do not convey an integrated strategic approach to the OSS program. The Board is also concerned that the document, in some areas, overlooks critical strategic guidance prepared by the scientific community in NRC science strategy reports that were requested by NASA. RESPONSIVENESS TO THE NRC’S GUIDANCE ON KEY SCIENCE ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES In assessing the draft document, the Board paid particular attention to the extent to which the document reflects the guidance and priorities provided by the NRC to the OSS on space science issues. The Board is pleased that the OSS document captures some of the core elements of the solar system exploration (SSE) survey, New Frontiers in the Solar System: An Integrated Exploration Strategy, and the astronomy and astrophysics (AA) survey report, Astronomy and Astrophysics in the New Millennium. At the same time, the Board found that the document neglects the priorities recommended in the solar and space physics (SSP) survey, The Sun to the Earth —and Beyond: A Decadal Research Strategy in Solar and Space Physics. In addition, the Board believes that the OSS draft document could be clarified and strengthened by making explicit the process used to create the OSS program and the priorities for the program it presents. The Board is concerned that the draft OSS document does not integrate the results of some NRC surveys into certain theme programs, the most obvious being the Sun-Earth Connection (SEC) section of the document. The goals presented in the SEC section do not refer to the SSP survey, nor does the document provide a connection between the missions included in the SEC theme and those identified as high priorities in the SSP 

ASSESSMENT OF NASA’S DRAFT 2003 SPACE SCIENCE ENTERPRISE STRATEGY 5 survey. For example, the SEC theme section describes two future Solar Terrestrial Probe (STP) missions, one that will “focus on reconnection and micro-scale processes in the solar atmosphere using both high-resolution spectroscopy and imaging”7 (referred to in that section as the Reconnection and Microscale [RAM] probe) and one that will “measure the polar regions of the Sun and the heliosphere from high solar latitude”8 (referred to as Telemachus). Although the NASA SEC roadmap team recommended both, the SSP survey placed RAM on the deferred list and did not endorse Telemachus at any level of priority. If the OSS pursues these two missions, they would displace the STP missions—the Multispacecraft Heliospheric Mission (MSM), Solar Wind Sentinels (SWS), and the Stereo Magnetospheric Imager (SMI)9—that received high priorities in the SSP survey. As a result, the only remaining high-priority STPs from the SSP survey to be included in the OSS program would be the currently approved missions, Geospace Electrodynamic Connections (GEC) and Magnetospheric Constellation (Magcon). The OSS should address the mismatch between the missions included in the SEC section of the draft document and those identified as high priorities in the NRC’s SSP survey report. The Board also noted that the draft document made no mention of the important opportunity to transition the research and instrumentation devoted to the scientific study of solar and space physics into applications and operations for space weather.10 The nation’s investment in solar and space physics research can provide important dividends for society, and the OSS should include in the document its plans for transitioning SEC research and instruments into applications and operations.11 In another example, while the SSP survey independently identified a dedicated Jupiter Polar Mission (JPM) as its third priority,12 the Board did not find in the draft document any mention of JPM and noticed in the SEC section (at pages 36–37) only passing mention of the SSE survey’s Jupiter Polar Orbiter with Probes (JPOP) mission. It also found little mention of the relationship between these two missions (JPOP and JPM) and possible plans to combine them. The document should acknowledge that the SSP community has identified a JPM mission as a high priority and that opportunities exist to work with NASA’s SSE program. In the Structure and Evolution of the Universe (SEU) theme, the Board applauds the OSS for initiating the Einstein Probes, which relate to priorities identified in the NRC report Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos. However, the SEU section could be strengthened by presenting a more explicit connection to the Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos report, which provides a new scientific treatment of the foundation of the SEU theme. Regarding new initiatives, the Board commends the OSS for initiating the New Frontiers Mission Line, an effort that corresponds directly with some of the priorities recommended in the NRC report New Frontiers in the Solar System: An Integrated Exploration Strategy. However, the OSS draft document could be strengthened with the addition of clear statements on the scientific rationale and objectives for the mission lines. The Board also applauds the OSS on reinvigorating the radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) program under Project Prometheus and the prospects for new scientific capabilities afforded by the Prometheus advanced power and propulsion activities— activities identified in the SSE survey as key to enabling the future exploration of the outer planets, including the long-term operation of landers.13 However, the Board is concerned with the appearance of a major new mission—Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter