NASA Exploration Team Message

1
NASAs Earth Science Planning Updatepresented
at the Joint Meeting of Ocean Sciences and
Surface Water Hydrology in Support of Wide-Swath
Altimetry MeasurementsOctober 30, 2006
Lucia Tsaoussi, Deputy Associate Director for
Research, Earth Science Division NASA Headquarters
2
Presentation Outline

• NASAs Science Plan
• Development and review
• Focus On Earth Science Issues
• Earth Science planning timeline, recommendations
• Next Steps
• Near-term planning for plan amendment

3
Why a New Science Plan?

• NASA released a new 2006 NASA Strategic Plan in
  February 2006, in keeping with the triennial
  requirement in the Government Performance and
  Results Act
• The Science organizations follow with a strategic
  document describing their implementation of the
  NASA Strategic Plan
• The Space and Earth Science Enterprises produced
  strategy documents in 2003 it is timely now for
  the Science Mission Directorate to produce its
  first strategy document
• The Congress requires NASA to produce such a plan
  in the 2005 NASA Authorization Act signed last
  December

4
NASAs Strategic Goals

• Strategic Goal 1 Fly the Shuttle as safely as
  possible until its retirement, not later than
  2010.
• Strategic Goal 2 Complete the International
  Space Station in a manner consistent with NASAs
  international partner commitments and the needs
  of human exploration.
• Strategic Goal 3 Develop a balanced overall
  program of science exploration, and aeronautics
  consistent with the redirection of the human
  spaceflight program to focus on exploration.
• Strategic Goal 4 Bring a new Crew Exploration
  Vehicle into service as soon as possible after
  Shuttle retirement.
• Strategic Goal 5 Encourage the pursuit of
  appropriate partnerships with the emerging
  commercial space sector.
• Strategic Goal 6 Establish a lunar return
  program having the maximum possible utility for
  later missions to Mars and other destinations.
• 2006 NASA Strategic Plan

5
NASAs Strategic Goals

• Strategic Sub-goal 3A Study Earth from space to
  advance scientific understanding and meet
  societal needs.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3B Understand the Sun and
  its effects on Earth and the solar system.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3C Advance scientific
  knowledge of the origin and history of the solar
  system, the potential for life elsewhere, and the
  hazards and resources present as humans explore
  space.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3D Discover the origin,
  structure, evolution, and destiny of the
  universe, and search for Earth-like planets.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3E Advance knowledge in the
  fundamental disciplines of aeronautics, and
  develop technologies for safer aircraft and
  higher capacity airspace systems.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3F Understand the effects of
  the space environment on human performance, and
  test new technologies and countermeasures for
  long-duration human space exploration.
• 2006 NASA Strategic Plan

6
Purpose of NASA/SMD Science Plan

• Respond to Authorization Language
• NASA Authorization Act for 2005 (S.1281)
• Title I Section 101
• (d) SCIENCE. (1) IN GENERAL.The Administrator
  shall develop a plan to guide the science
  programs of NASA through 2016.
• (2) CONTENT.At a minimum, the plan developed
  under paragraph (1) shall be designed to ensure
  that NASA has a rich and vigorous set of science
  activities, and shall describe (A) the missions
  NASA will initiate, design, develop, launch, or
  operate in space science and earth science
  through fiscal year 2016, including launch dates
  (B) a priority ranking of all of the missions
  listed under subparagraph (A), and the rationale
  for the ranking and (C) the budget assumptions
  on which the policy is based, which for fiscal
  years 2007 and 2008 shall be consistent with the
  authorizations provided in title II of this Act.

7
Purpose of NASA/SMD Science Plan (2)

• Respond to Authorization Language
• NASA Authorization Act for 2005 (S.1281) cont
• (3) CONSIDERATIONS.In developing the science
  plan under this subsection, the Administrator
  shall consider the following issues, which shall
  be discussed in the transmittal under paragraph
  (6) (A) What the most important scientific
  questions in space science and earth science are.
  (B) How to best benefit from the relationship
  between NASAs space and earth science activities
  and those of other Federal agencies. (C) Whether
  the Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission, SIM-Planet
  Quest, and missions under the Future Explorers
  Programs can be expedited to meet previous
  schedules. (D) Whether any NASA Earth observing
  missions that have been delayed or cancelled can
  be restored. (E) How to ensure the long-term
  vitality of Earth observation programs at NASA,
  including their satellite, science, and data
  system components. (F) Whether current and
  currently planned Earth observation missions
  should be supplemented or replaced with new
  satellite architectures and instruments that
  enable global coverage, and all-weather, day and
  night imaging of the Earths surface features.
  (G) How to integrate NASA earth science missions
  with the Global Earth Observing System of
  Systems.

8
Science Plan Draft Outline

• Preamble The NASA Science Story
• Purpose Progress
• Summary of Science Questions and Prioritized
  Missions
• Principle requirement in the NASA Authorization
  Act
• Common Elements of Strategy
• Research Areas
• Bulk of the Plan a section for each of the four
  science areas
• Science Enabling and Enabled by Human Exploration
• Summary On the Brink of Understanding
• Appendices

9
SMD Science Plan Schedule 10/5/06
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
06
Helio
Mars NRC Report
Earth (Internal Draft)
Mars to NRC
?
?
?
?
Solar System
?
?
?
Roadmaps
Solar System (Exec Sum)
Astro
SMD
Agency
?
?
?
?
SMD Management Review
?
?
?
4/20
5/31
9/29
Draft of Common Elements Sections
?
Roadmap Presentations to Subcommittees
?
Status / Content Presentation to NAC / SC
?
5/31
Draft of Science Division Sections
?
10/3
?
Draft 3 for SC, Subcommittees, NRC, Industry
review
Italics change from prior version of the
schedule
6/23
?
Meeting of SSB ad hoc Review Committee
7/11-13
?
9/13
Draft 3.5 for Sept. Subcommittee Meetings
9/15
?
Comments from NRC, NSAG, etc.
?
10/6
Draft 4 for NAC/SC, Other Agency Review
Final Discussion with NAC / SC
Table top review with PAE
10/24
Table top review with OMB, OSTP
10/26
SSB report on impacts of FY07 request
Draft for Agency OMB clearance
11/27
12/8?
Deliver to Congress
AGU 12/11-15
NAC Science Committee
2/7-8 HQ?
2/8-9 HQ
5/17-18 JPL
7/19-20 JSC
10/10-12 GSFC
Science Subcommittees
Chairs telecon - 4/7
7/6-7
5 mtgs in mid, late Sept
5/3-4 Conference
10
SEPT OCT NOV
DEC JAN
4
11
18
25
2
9
16
23
30
6
13
20
27
4
11
18
25
1
8
?
Draft 3.5 for Sept. Subcommittee Meetings
9/13
Detailed Schedule for Completion of SMD Science
Plan 10/5/06
HS Mtg
9/25-26 PSS Mtg
9/13-15
9/27-28 ES Mtg
AS Mtg
9/14-15
Critical window for revising draft
?
Comments from NRC, NSAG, etc.
9/15
?
9/19
SMD Senior Mgmt Mtg to Confirm Mission Priorities
?
Draft 4 for NAC/SC Review
Provide Draft 4 for review by other Agencies
10/6
NAC
10/10-12
Comments from Other Agencies
Cut off for external comments from all sources
10/20
Italics change from prior version of the
schedule
Draft 4.X if needed for NAC, other Agency comments
10/24
Table top review with PAE
10/24
Table top review with OMB, OSTP
10/26
Draft 5.0 for editing by PD
10/30
Draft 6.0 for layout by TAJ
11/13
11/27
Layout doc for editing
SMD
Doc ready to start Mgmt concurrence
12/6
Approved Doc (pre-pub)
Agency
1/5
Deliver to Congress post pdf version send to
printer
12/8
Printed copies available
AGU
11
External Review Groups

• NAC Science Committee Subcommittees
• National Research Council / Space Studies Board /
  Committee on Review of NASA Science Mission
  Directorate Science Plan
• NASA Science Associates Group (major industrial
  contractors)
• Partner US Government Agencies

12
NASA Advisory Council Structure
13
FYI - NRCs Review Team

• A. Thomas Young Chair
• Spiro K. Antiochus NRL
• Ana P. Barros Duke U
• James L. Burch SRI
• Antonio J. Busalacchi U Md
• Jack D. Farmer Arizona State
• Margaret G. Finarelli GMU
• John P. Huchra Harvard- SCA
• Ralph Lorenz Univ of Arizona
• Daniel McCammon UW-Madison
• Anneila I. Sargent CIT
• Jessica Sunshine U Md
• Carl Wunsch MIT

14
Earth Science Approach and Key Issues
20-30 page section

• ESD Roadmap and Decadal Survey in progress
• Legacy Science Focus Area roadmaps available and
  draft Research Plan (Jan 2005) reviewed by ESSAAC
• Plan to implement missions that are currently in
  development and formulation
• Utilize SFA Legacy roadmaps to initiate mission
  concept studies in a preparatory process to
  respond to decadal survey report
• Continue to work interagency planning and
  collaborative programs

15
Earth Science
2006 Science Plan Earth Science section
(Interim Report)
6 Science Focus Area roadmaps yet to be
integrated into a single Earth Science roadmap
2005
16
Chapter 4 Earth Science

• 4.1 Intellectual Foundation
• 4.2 Science Objectives and Outcomes The Six
  Science Focus Areas
• 4.2.1 Atmospheric Composition
• 4.2.2 Weather
• 4.2.3 Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems
• 4.2.4 Water and Energy Cycle
• 4.2.5 Climate Variability and Change
• 4.2.6 Earth Surface and Interior
• 4.2.7 Interdisciplinary Science
• 4.3 Mission Summaries
• 4.3.1 Mission Classes
• 4.3.2 Missions in Formulation and Development
• 4.3.3 Planning for Future Missions
• 4.3.4 Representative Future Mission Elements

17
Chapter 4 Earth Science (cont)

• 4.4 Program Elements
• 4.4.1 Research and Analysis Program
• 4.4.2 Applied Sciences Program
• 4.4.3 Technology Program
• 4.4.4 Modeling and High-End Computing
• 4.4.5 Data and Information Systems
• 4.4.6 Suborbital Science Program
• 4.4.7 Earth Observation and Science Partnerships
• 4.4.8 Earth Science Education and Public Outreach
• 4.5 Earth Science Beyond 2016

18
Section 4.1 Intellectual Foundation

• The compelling nature of Earth Science leading to
  NASAs strategic goal study planet Earth from
  space to advance scientific understanding and
  meet societal needs
• The unique role of NASA among other US government
  agencies and contributions made by NASA programs
• Program essential to the implementation of 3
  major Presidential initiatives (CCSP, GEO, AOP).

19
NASA Strategic sub-goals

• 3A.1 Understanding and improving predictive
  capability for changes in the ozone layer,
  climate forcing, and air quality associated with
  changes in atmospheric composition.
• 3A.2 Enable improved predictive capability for
  weather and extreme weather events.
• 3A.3 Quantify global land cover change and
  terrestrial and marine productivity, and improve
  carbon cycle and ecosystem models.
• 3A.4 Quantify the key reservoirs and fluxes in
  the global water cycle and improve models of
  water cycle change and fresh water availability.
• 3A.5 Understand the role of oceans, atmosphere,
  and ice in the climate system and in improving
  predictive capability for its future evolution.
• 3A.6 Characterize and understand Earth surface
  changes and variability of the Earths
  gravitational and magnetic fields

20
Science Questions and Focus Areas
Variability
Forcing
Response
Consequence
Prediction
Precipitation, evaporation cycling of water
changing?
Atmospheric constituents solar radiation on
climate?
Clouds surface hydrological processes on
climate?
Weather variation related to climate variation?
Weather forecasting improvement?
Global ocean circulation varying?
Changes in land cover land use?
Consequences of land cover land use change?
Improve prediction of climate variability
change?
Ecosystems, land cover biogeochemical cycles?
Motions of the Earth Earths interior?
Changes in global ocean circulation?
Coastal region impacts?
Ozone, climate air quality impacts of
atmospheric composition?
Global ecosystems changing?
Atmospheric composition changing?
Atmospheric trace constituents responses?
Carbon cycle ecosystem change?
Regional air quality impacts?
Ice cover mass changing?
Sea level affected by Earth system change?
Change in water cycle dynamics?
Earth surface transformation?
Predict mitigate natural hazards from Earth
surface change?
Climate Variability and Change Atmospheric
Composition Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems
Weather Water and Energy Cycle Earth
Surface and Interior
21
(No Transcript)
22
Earth-Sun Systems Earth Science FY07 Budget
23
Earth Science Mission Priorities and Rationale
Highest priority is given to missions that
fulfill Legislative or Executive Branch mandates
and inter-agency commitments. Systematic
mission priorities are based on the importance of
the measurement to global change research and the
maturity of the operational transition
plan. These are followed by missions that will
make first-time global measurements two
pathfinder missions having been selected within
the same competitive process have a relative
priority inferred by the launch order. The
representative future measurements are not listed
in priority order. The forth-coming first NRC
decadal survey for Earth science will identify
science community priorities for future
measurements, as well as begin to address issues
arising from recent changes in the NPOESS
program. Also influencing the eventual priorities
is the US Integrated Earth Observation Strategy,
which plans the US contribution to the Global
Earth Observation System of Systems.
24
Table 2.2.a Earth Science Mission Priorities and
Rationale
25
Section 4.3.3 Planning for Future Missions

• Mission Profile w/ESSP every two years
• Medium Class Systematic missions every other year
  starting 2017 (5 missions thru 2025)
• ESSP mission every other year starting 2014 (6
  thru 2025)
• Mission Profile w/ESSP every four years
• Medium Class Systematic missions start 2016 (6
  thru 2025)
• ESSP missions every four years starting 2014 (3
  thru 2025)
• Mission Profile w/ESSP every four years includes
  Large Mission
• Large mission in 2021 (1 thru 2025)
• Medium Class mission starting 2016 (4 thru 2025)
• ESSP mission starting 2014 (3 thru 2025)

26
Table 4.3 Potential Mission Elements/Measurements
for Each Focus Area
27
Table 4.3 Potential Mission Elements/Measurements
for Each Focus Area
28
Table 4.3 Potential Mission Elements/Measurements
for Each Focus Area
29
NAC Subcommittee Plan Review

• The NAC Science Committee discussed the draft
  Science Plan outline and approach in May and the
  draft (3.0) in July
• (see next slide on the NACs recommendation and
  NASAs response)
• The Science Subcommittees reviewed the draft
  (3.0) in their July meeting(s) and provided
  comments
• These comments were incorporated in Draft 3.75
• Most Science Subcommittees reviewed how we
  addressed their comments in their September
  meetings
• Findings addressed in letters to the NAC SC
• The NAC Chairman identified two issues with draft
  3.0
• In his view, the draft was not well written.
• NASA plans two rounds of professional editing
  before completion
• The draft did not adequately address lunar
  science
• Draft 4.0 articulates next steps in lunar science
  planning in each Science chapter. Chapter 8 is
  substantially revised in this direction

30
ESS COMMENTS ON DRAFT SCIENCE PLAN

• Adopt scenario of medium mission/2yrs, ESSP/4yrs
• First open mission in current plan is an ESSP
  in 2014 examine trade-off of scheduling medium
  mission instead
• Atmospheric composition continuous( gair
  quality) global ( gclimate) measurement should be
  top priority, implies sentinel orbit (L1 or GEO).
  
• Better discuss cross-cutting opportunities in
  instruments platforms across focus areas,
  importance of complementary technology (example
  InSAR)
• Flesh out Earth Science objectives beyond 2016
  
• Observation/prediction of rapid environmental
  change
• new technologies for Earth observation
  (microsatellites)
• Earth system modeling
• Better articulate science purpose of suborbital
  program, esp. UAVs
• Legacy road maps move to Appendix. New road
  maps in 2007 (after decadal survey input)
• Overall document needs executive summary
• Acronym list at beginning of each chapter

31
National Research Council Overview

• Supportive of NASAs approach to mission
  prioritization
• the committee does not believe that NASA should
  or could produce a prioritized list across
  disciplines at this time.
• Concerned with NASAs ability to carry out the
  plan given the budget
• Extensive reference to the NRC report An
  Assessment of Balance in NASAs Science Program
  SSB view of FY07 budget request
• Recommendations are cast in terms of
  recommendations on the implementation and
  viability of the draft Science Plan
• Several are not comments on the Plan per se, but
  on actions SMD should take e.g., on RA and
  controlling mission cost growth
• Several good comments that will improve the
  document. These are now in work by the Science
  Plan team for incorporation in draft 4.0

32
NRC Findings

• The draft NASA Science Plan successfully
  demonstrates that a major NASA objective is
  conducting scientific researchPortions of the
  plan do an excellent job of outlining the reasons
  that NASA carries out science missions
• The committee supports the plans treatment of
  priorities on a discipline-by-discipline basis
  and concludes that NASA should not or could not
  produce a prioritized list across disciplines
• the current draft overemphasizes
  mission-specific work at the expense of
  strategies and steps for achieving goals in
  mission-enabling areas
• The draft Science Plan often declares an
  intention to implement a program or identifies a
  goal or mission as a top priority, but it does
  not indicate what steps it would take to achieve
  the goals (issue of mission cost growth, risk,
  schedule)
• lacks a strategy for an integrated synthesis of
  the variety and volume of Earth observations
  generated by NASAEarth system modelslinking and
  cross-cutting the six ES interdisciplinary
  science focus areas

33
NRC Recommendations

• compare the key aspects of its 2003 Earth and
  space science plans with the 2006 plan in a list
  or table
• provide some indication of the strategy it will
  use to determine how critically needed
  technologies will be developed for future
  missions
• explicitly address realistic strategies for
  achieving the objectives of the mission-enabling
  elements
• Undertake appropriate studies through its
  advisory structure in order to develop a
  strategic approach to all of its RA programs
• Develop a strategic plan to address computing
  and modeling needs, including data and
  information stewardship
• NASA should improve mechanisms for managing and
  controlling cost growthundertake independent,
  systematic, and comprehensive evaluations of the
  cost-to-complete of each of its space and Earth
  science missions
• NASA/SMD should move immediately to correct the
  problems caused by reductions in the base of RA
  programs, small missions, and initial technology

34
NRC Recommendations for Earth Science Plan

• NASA/SMD should incorporate into its Science Plan
  the recommendations of the NRC Earth science
  decadal survey interim report, and should
  incorporate the recommendations of the Earth
  science decadal survey final report when it is
  completed.
• NASA/SMD should develop a science strategy for
  obtaining long-term, continuous, stable
  observations of the Earth system that are
  distinct from observations to meet requirements
  by NOAA in support of numerical weather
  prediction.
• NASA/SMD should present an explicit strategy,
  based on objective science criteria for Earth
  science observations, for balancing the
  complementary objectives of (i) new sensors for
  technological innovation, (ii) new observations
  for emerging science needs, and (iii) long-term
  sustainable science-grade environmental
  observations.

35
Impacts of the NPOESS Nunn-McCurdy Certification

• Presidential Decision Directive/NSTC-2 of May 5,
  1994 created the National Polar-orbiting
  Operational Environmental Satellite System
  (NPOESS)
• In 1999 NASA and the NPOESS Integrated Program
  Office (IPO) agreed on the NPOESS Preparatory
  Project (NPP) as an alternative to the second
  round of Earth Observing System (EOS) mission
• Due to a variety of technical problems, the
  completion cost for NPOESS grew by more then 25
  initiating the Nunn-McCurdy process in December
  2005
• The restructured program was certified on June 5,
  2006
• Restructured NPOESS deletes much of the climate
  research observing capability
• Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)
  asked for a white paper on the subject on June
  25, 2006

36
NPOESS Nunn-McCurdy Certification Content
Reductions
37
Summary of N-M Reductions and Actions

• De-manifested Sensors OMPS Limb Subsystem, TSIS,
  ERBS, Ocean Altimeter (ALT) and APS.
• Reduced Coverage Sensors VIIRS and CrIS
• Reduced Capability Sensor Conical Scanning
  Microwave Imager (CMIS)
• Navy tasked with providing mitigation plan for
  ALT
• NASA developed white paper now in review with
  NOAA for joint paper submission
• OSTP request for costs and schedules to restore
  the original capabilities preliminary costing
  completed
• NASA/Navy/NOAA continuing discussions for joint
  future altimetry mission

38
Next Steps

• Accommodate Science Plan reviews (including other
  agencies and White House Offices) to generate
  Version for NASA final approval and submit to
  Congress Dec. 2006
• Release of the Decadal Survey (DS) by the NRC to
  NASA (and other sponsoring agencies) late 2006
• Assessment evaluation of NPOESS N-M impact by
  WH and NRC panel report
• Develop Earth Science roadmap following DS
  priorities and mission studies results
• Develop amendment for the Earth Science plan and
  submit to Congress mid-2007

39
Back up
40
Certified NPOESS Program Schedule
41
Science Mission Directorate Organization
Associate Administrator (AA) (M. Cleave) Deputy
AA (C. Hartman)

Deputy AA for Programs(M. Luther)
Deputy AA for Technology (G. Komar-Act)
Chief Scientist (P. Hertz)
Chief Engineer (K. Ledbetter)
Management Policy DivisionDir. (R.
Maizel)Deputy (Vacant)
HeliophysicsDivision Dir. (R. Fisher)Deputy (C.
Gay)
AstrophysicsDivision Dir. (R. Howard-Act)Deputy
(Vacant)
Planetary Science Division Dir. (J.
Green-Act)Dep. (S. Wojnar-Act)
Earth Science Division Dir. (B.
Cramer-Act)Deputy (J. Kaye-Act)
Flight (T. Hammer-Act)
Mars Program(D. McCuistion)
Budget (C. Tupper)
Policy (Vacant)
Applied Science (M. Frederick- Act)
Administration (Vacant)
Research (J. Kaye)
As of October 1, 2006
42
Coordinating External Advice

• The standing advisory committees chartered to
  give advice to the Agency are
• NASA Advisory Council (NAC)
• Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP)
• ISS Independent Safety Task Force
• The NAC is the primary external group advising
  NASA on its implementation of national space
  policy
• All other (formerly) independent groups and
  committees have been brought under the purview of
  the NAC
• In this way, advice to NASA is coordinated and
  provided to the Administrator
• The NRC performs studies at the request of the
  Congress or NASA, but is not part of the standing
  advisory process
• Responsibility and accountability for planning
  and executing NASAs programs resides with NASA
  managers

43
NAC Science Committee Members

• Dr. Edward David Chair - NAS/NAE, EDD Inc.
• Dr. Owen Garriott - Skylab Spacelab astronaut
• Dr. Alan Stern - SWRI NH-Pluto PI
• Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson - AMNH- NY
• Dr. Bradley Jolliff - Washington U/St. Louis
• Dr. Mark Robinson - Arizona St. Univ.
• Dr. Lennard Fisk - NRC Space Studies Board
  chair (ex officio)

44
NAC Science Committee Subcommittees
S-06-5
SMD agrees and has prepared a first external
review draft of the Science Plan based on the
President's FY 2007 budget for NASA. Initial
review of the NAC Science Subcommittees was
generally positive. The entire NAC will receive a
revised draft for review at its October meeting.
Note NASA cannot use OMB budget guidelines
in a document to be publicly released before the
budget is approved. The FY 2008 budget will be
presented in February 2007.

• Develop the Science Plan draft using the
• following guidelines
• Define key scientific questions for each area
• Define reasonable progress in each area by 2016
  
• Describe the roles of major project elements
  (RA, technology, large and small missions, etc)
  in each area. It is understood that the means
  will differ from question to question
• Use OMB budget guidelines as the financial
  envelop to
• - Define missions and specific programs
• - Define ST investments that need to be
  made now to enable a robust set of
  program/mission options in 2011
• - Use this planning exercise to inform FY08
  budget formulation

45
SMD Participation in the Vision for Space
Exploration

• SMD has the lead for the robotic Mars, solar
  system, and planet finding components of the
  Vision
• SMD is working with ESMD on planning for science
  that enables and is enabled by the human
  exploration portion Vision
• SMD is sponsoring an NRC study of Lunar science
  priorities interim report delivered, final to be
  delivered in May 2007
• SMD and ESMD are jointly supporting the NASA
  Advisory Councils Lunar Science Workshop planned
  for Feb 26-March 2, 2007
• SMD is funding the Moon Mineralogy Mapper mission
  on Indias Chandrayaan-1 mission
• EMSD is funding a radiation environment
  instrument on SMDs Mars Science Laboratory
• SMD is funding an open solicitation for Lunar
  sortie science concepts for the early human lunar
  missions proposals due Oct. 27
• The Discovery and New Frontiers Programs both
  currently provide opportunities for the science
  community to propose missions to accomplish lunar
  science investigations
• SMD plays a program scientist role in LPRP
• Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) data sets will
  be archived in the PDS and available to the
  community starting 6 months after the end of
  prime mission.
• As funds can be identified, SMD plans to initiate
  a Lunar Data Analysis Program

46
NSAG Consensus Views

• General Reactions
• a very good document
• answers the mail in responding to Congress
  with considerable justification for the approach
  the Agency is taking
• can be improvedincreasing use of graphics,
  adding greater description of societal benefits,
  and a more comprehensive discussions of the
  interactions between SMD and ESMD plans, esp.
  lunar science
• Clearly a difficult task to develop an Earth
  science plan absent an NRC decadal survey some
  detailed comments in Consolidated Comments
• Responsiveness to Congressional Direction
• addresses the Congressional direction in spirit
  while not necessarily to the letter
• the NSAG supports SMDs approach of presenting
  its prioritization by disciplines
• creation of a single chart, showing all
  divisions missions togetherthrough 2016
• NASAs Prioritization Rationale
• generally appear to be internally
  self-consistent and consonant with Congressional
  direction

47
NSAG Consensus Views (contd)

• Technology Development and Insertion
• does not focus much attention on the technology
  development needed
• The Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO) and
  the New Millennium Program could be described in
  greater detail
• Industry possesses a wealth of applicable
  technology, and NASA should address this resource
  and how it can be tapped in this plan
• Mission Size Mix
• better define what is meant by large or
  small missions
• The plan shows a decrease in launch rate of AO
  missionsthere is a consensus that this class of
  mission is very valuableit is not our intent to
  make a specific recommendation in this regard
• Industry-NASA Relations
• provide a clear statement of the value of the
  industry-government partnership
• Greater collaboration with industry is
  recommended in order to get industry inputs and
  analyses early on in the process of
  conceptualizing architectures, missions, and
  relevant technologies

48
Ocean Altimeter (ALT)

• Oceans exert great influence on climate huge
  sink for solar energy
• Transport heat in ocean currents, release it back
  into the atmosphere as water vapor, transport it
  in the atmosphere, condenses, and returns as rain
  or snow the hydrologic cycle
• Satellites offer a synoptic view of oceans
  starting with Seasat (1978), Geosat (1985),
  TOPEX/Poseidon (1992), JASON-1 (2001), and OSTM
  (2008)
• NOAA and Navy are planning future operational
  missions
• NASA is working with the Navy and NOAA on an
  advanced altimetry mission that is backward
  compatible with OSTM and includes a Ka-Band
  interferometer ocean altimeter to provide wide
  swath coverage and greater spatial resolution
• This approach enables the examination of land
  surface water (rivers and lakes) as well as
  costal waters that are not presently available
  with OSTM

49
Interim Report Recommendations

• Proceed with the GPM and the Atmospheric
  Soundings from Geostationary Orbit (GIFTS)
  missions
• Evaluate plans for transferring needed
  capabilities to NPOESS (Ocean Vector Winds, LDCM,
  GLORY)
• Develop a technology base for future Earth
  observation
• Reinvigorate the NASA Earth Explorer Missions
  Program
• Strengthen research and analysis programs and
• Strengthen baseline climate observations and
  climate data records.

50
Assessment

• Recommendation 2 addressed
• Recommendation 1 has not been addressed
• Recommendations 3,4, and 6 are mentioned but
  without providing objective, as well as strategic
  and tactical vision
• Recommendation 5 is not addressed at all.