|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. C
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
Page 49 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 49
Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions
C
Characteristics of NASA’s Recent Interagency Collaborations
Table C.1 shows a side-by-side comparison of some of the key attributes of selected recent interagency collaborative efforts that were reviewed by the committee. In addition to the type of collaboration and governance structure, the committee noted whether the collaboration was directed by Congress or the administration or whether it emerged in a more spontaneous fashion from the agencies and scientists themselves.
OCR for page 50
Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions
TABLE C.1 Selected Recent Interagency Collaborative Efforts
NPOESSa
OSTM/Jason-2
Fermi/GLAST
JDEM/Omega
Nation(s) Involved
United States
United States, France
United States
United States
Type of Collaboration
Cooperation
Coordination (NASA-NOAA)
Cooperation
Cooperation
Cost-sharing (NOAA, DOD)
CNES: bus, 2 instruments, launch and early orbit phase (LEOP), and checkout
NASA: telescope, main science instrument, spacecraft bus
Technology infusion (NASA)
DOE: fabrication of major science instrument, development of science operations center
NASA: 3 instruments, launch services
NOAA/EUMETSAT: ground segment
Agencies Involved
NOAA, DOD, NASA
NASA, NOAA, EUMETSAT, CNES
NASA, DOE
NASA, DOE
Governance Structure
Integrated Program Office (IPO) for NPOESS
Developed by NASA, CNES and operated by NOAA, EUMETSAT
NASA: project office, instruments
NASA: lead agency responsible for overall success of the mission
DOE: instruments
DOE: science and operations contribution
Project/Program
Program—multiple spacecraft
Single project
Single project
Single project
Directed/Organicb
Directed (executive order)
Organic
Organic
Directed
OCR for page 51
Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions
GOES-R
Landsat 7
LDCM
C/NOFS
ACE
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
Procurement of services
Coordination
Coordination
Coordination
Use of resources
NASA: development and launch of the spacecraft; development of the ground system
NASA: development and launch of the spacecraft; development of the ground system
NASA: spacecraft and instruments
NOAA: provides direct oversight for the GOES-R program, flight and ground segment
NOAA: small ($680,000) contribution to modify the ACE spacecraft and enable 24-hour continuous transmission of real-time data on the solar wind
USGS: operates the satellite and captures, processes, and distributes the data and is responsible for maintaining the data archive
USGS: operation of the satellite and responsible for a ground system to receive, ingest, archive, calibrate, process, validate, and distribute LDCM science data
NASA: procurement, management, and execution of the flight project in accordance with overall NOAA guidance
DOD: Air Force ground stations
NASA, NOAA
Development: NASA, NOAA, USGS
NASA, USGS
Joint USAF Space Test Program (STP) and Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL); participation by NASA, NRL, universities, federally funded research and development centers
NASA, NOAA, DOD
Operations: NASA, USGS
Developed by NASA for NOAA on a cost-reimbursable basis
NASA: spacecraft, instrument, and ground system
NASA: development of spacecraft
STP: spacecraft, launch vehicle, launch and first year of on-orbit operations
Managed by NASA
USGS: development and operation of the ground system
NOAA: spacecraft and ground systems operations and functions
AFRL: payload, payload integration and test, model development, data center operations, and product generation and distribution
USGS: Landsat data distribution and archiving
NASA: CINDI instrument
Single project
Single project
Single project
Single project
Single project
Organic
Directed
Directed
Organic
Organic
OCR for page 52
Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions
NPOESSa
OSTM/Jason-2
Fermi/GLAST
JDEM/Omega
Year Started
2006 (spacecraft development)
2002
September 2000 (SRR)
2010 (Phase A)
Launch (or Launch Readiness Date)
2014 (C-1)
June 2008
2006 (ICRR, 2001) June 2008 (actual)
2017
Number of Spacecraft
Originally 6, now 4 (not including NPP)
1
1
1
Number of Instruments
7 (C-1), 8 (FOC)
5
2
1
Initial Budget
$76 million (no LV, NASA only, March 2006) $76 million (no LV, NASA only, at launch)
$454 million FY 2006 (ICRR, 2001)
~$900 million (FY 2009)
Budgetary Outcome
Significant overrun; program descoped: $6.8 billion through C1, $8 billion through C2
Met launch date on budget
$508 million FY 2006 (at launch)
Not yet selected
Motivation for Collaboration at the Outset
Cost: “eliminate the financial redundancy of acquiring and operating polar-orbiting environmental satellite systems, while continuing to satisfy U.S. operational requirement for data from these systems”
Third in partnership; continue measurement record
Similar science goals: GLAST draws on the interest of both the high-energy particle physics and high-energy astrophysics communities and is the highest ranked initiative in its category in the NRC 2000 decadal survey reportd
Science goals are high priority to both organizations; leverage each agency’s expertise
OCR for page 53
Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions
GOES-R
Landsat 7
LDCM
C/NOFS
ACE
September 2004 (instrument development) October 2005 (preliminary spacecraft design)
1993 (SRR)
2007
At least 2000
1991
April 2015 (GAO, 2009)c
1998 (1993) instrument power supply failures during thermal/vacuum testing; 1999 (actual)
2011 (ICR, 2008)
2012 (PDR, 2009)
2003 (2001)
1997
February 2006 (October 2005) solar panel (18-month delay) and EMI probes; rebuilt harness April 2008 (actual)
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
Originally 1, now 2
6
9
$6.6 billion
$652 million (ICR, 2008)
Total cost for Phase C/D through launch plus 30 days of checkout not to exceed $141.1 million (in real-year dollars)
$7.67 billion (GAO, 2009)c significant overrun; program descoped from 4 satellites/5 sensors to 2 satellites/4 sensors
$718 million (at launch, includes $212 million DOD, $6.5 million USGS)
Still in development, has overrun; USGS funding shortfalls have impacted ground system
Combined cost of satellite development and construction, the Pegasus rocket, and the 13 months of in-space operations total about $135 million (at launch); solar panel design issues slowed the program; instrument RF sensitivities created technical challenges
Final project cost $106.8 million, a $34.3 million under-run
NOAA: procurement of next-generation GOES spacecraft
Latest partnership to continue decades-long record of moderate-resolution measurements of the land surface (see text for details)
NSTC directed collaboration to maintain continuity of Landsat-type data for civil, commercial, and national security interests
NASA: science payload access to space as mission of opportunity
Merging of NASA research interests with NOAA and Air Force operational needs for real-time data on the upstream solar wind and forecast and warning of severe space weather events
NASA: Possible transition of GIFTS instrument to advanced sounder for GOES-R
DOD: means to expand scope of mission through hosting NASA-funded payload; support operational users of space weather information
OCR for page 54
Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions
NPOESSa
OSTM/Jason-2
Fermi/GLAST
JDEM/Omega
Primary Sources for the Committee’s Analysise
See in the main text references cited in the section “NASA-NOAA Interagency Collaboration.”
See in the main text references cited in the section “Coordination Example: Ocean Surface Topography Mission/Jason-2.”
See in the main text references cited in the section “The Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope Mission.”
See in the main text references cited in the section “The Joint Dark Energy Mission.”
a As noted in the text, on February 1, 2010, it was announced that the NPOESS program would be restructured into two separate lines of polar-orbiting satellites to serve military and civilian users. Information in this table refers to the NPOESS program prior to the restructuring.
b “Organic” and “directed” are used here to distinguish between agency collaborations that arise mostly from the normal self-interests of the agencies and in which efforts are made to align the structure with normal agency practices and culture (partnerships arise from the bottom up) versus collaborations that arise from external demands, for example, to meet a political objective beyond the agency’s own self-interests or to meet a mission requirement that is externally imposed (partnerships arise from the top down).
c Government Accountability Office (GAO), “Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites, GAO Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science and Technology, House of Representatives, Statement of David A. Powner, Director, Information Technology Management Issues,” GAO-09-596T, April 23, 2009.
d National Research Council, Astronomy and Astrophysics in the New Millennium, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2010.
e For all missions and especially for NPOESS, Fermi/GLAST, and JDEM/Omega, the committee also drew on the substantive knowledge and first-hand experiences of its members.
f National Research Council, Ensuring the Climate Record from the NPOESS and GOES-R Spacecraft: Elements of a Strategy to Recover Measurement Capabilities Lost in Program Restructuring, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2008, available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12254.
OCR for page 55
Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions
GOES-R
Landsat 7
LDCM
C/NOFS
ACE
NRC (2008)f
See in the main text references cited in the section “The Landsat Program.”
See in the main text references cited in the section “The Landsat Program.”
Interview with Roderick Heelis, principal investigator for CINDI
See in the main text references cited in the section “Use of Resources Example: Space Weather Data from the Advanced Composition Explorer.”