Is Europa really the "highest priority" of the community?, Cleave said it was at LPSC? Options

[mcaplinger]

From Emily's LPSC blog: "Bob Pappalardo would not sit down until he got Cleave to acknowledge that Europa is the consensus highest priority of the planetary science community."

Cleave was obviously poorly prepared for this session, but I don't see that this acknowledgement is either meaningful or particularly accurate. If Europa were the "highest priority" of the PS community as a whole, then one might wonder why we were spending all this money on Mars. I could easily imagine that Europa is the highest priority of the outer planets community, but frankly I was surprised when Europa Orbiter appeared in the '07 budget (presumably the result of some serious lobbying on someone's part.) It was pretty obvious to me then that there would be no money for it, especially in the aftermath of JPL running the old EO project into the ground with cost overruns and engineering upscopes. (And JIMO is best forgotten.)

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be involved with a Europa mission (we did what I think was a good proposal design for EO) but I don't see either the money or the political support being there in the near term. I know it's frustrating, but one has to be realistic, and it might help to avoid the aura of entitlement that I perceive is building in some parts of the community (not referring to you, Bob). Of course, I am just a lowly engineer.

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

This is turning into an awfully interesting debate, and I need to put in some more thought on it. So for now I'll just mention that consideration is apparently being given to adding one more instrument to Juno's payload: a combination near-IR spectrometer and camera.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2006/pdf/1564.pdf

Looking at it again: during Juno's (brief) extended mission, this gadget might -- repeat, MIGHT -- provide justification for having the craft make one close flyby of Io, to get the detailed mineralogical data that Galileo couldn't get because of the last-second partial failure of its own NIMS, and to map hotspots on Io better. This is a longshot, though -- their primary concern is making sure that the craft is destroyed before it has any chance to hit Europa.

[Stephen]

This is turning into an awfully interesting debate, and I need to put in some more thought on it. So for now I'll just mention that consideration is apparently being given to adding one more instrument to Juno's payload: a combination near-IR spectrometer and camera.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2006/pdf/1564.pdf

Looking at it again: during Juno's (brief) extended mission, this gadget might -- repeat, MIGHT -- provide justification for having the craft make one close flyby of Io, to get the detailed mineralogical data that Galileo couldn't get because of the last-second partial failure of its own NIMS, and to map hotspots on Io better. This is a longshot, though -- their primary concern is making sure that the craft is destroyed before it has any chance to hit Europa.

What are the chances of it achieving the latter by doing a Ranger-style kamikazi swan dive straight into Io, snapping pics etc all the way down to the surface?

======
Stephen