FIGURE B.8 Artist’s conception of the Super-EUSO spacecraft from the revised version of the concept. SOURCE: Courtesy of NASA.

FIGURE B.8 Artist’s conception of the Super-EUSO spacecraft from the revised version of the concept. SOURCE: Courtesy of NASA.

as there seems to be no technical solution for their manufacturing or launch or a technical path to such development. Other, more feasible mission concepts, such as multiple smaller telescopes or different wide-angle telescope designs that can be manufactured, as well as ground-based expansions of systems such as the Pierre Auger Observatory, should be considered as a more cost-effective means of reaching the scientific goals. The committee determined that the Super-EUSO mission concept, as presented to the committee, does not deserve further study as a Constellation-enabled science mission.

Additional note: The proposers submitted a revised and updated version of the Super-EUSO concept to the committee several months after making their initial proposal and presentation. The revised proposal appears to answer some of the concerns about fitting the optics into the Ares V shroud without the need of folding and deployment. (See Figure B.8.) It also appears to address concerns raised by the original proposal about the large corrective optics required. However, the data provided were very limited, and insufficient for the committee to assess the relative TRL for the technology solutions. Furthermore, the revised proposal still does not provide a clear rationale explaining why an Ares V-sized mission is necessary compared with smaller and more affordable solutions, including ground-based solutions.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement