NASA Dawn asteroid mission told to ‘stand down’ Options

[mchan]

Does Dawn have Hall effect ion thrusters, or is this a completely new design?

IIRC, Dawn uses the thruster design from DS1, but three thrusters.

[SFJCody]

I suspect this project is done.  Sound like there are significant technical problems and no reason to believe that the DAWN team can overcome them at a cost near the capped award.

That's a shame. I don't think a good understanding of the processes that created Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars will be possible until we look at the 'mini-terrestrials' Ceres and Vesta.

[Decepticon]

Sadly I would even take a scaled down project with a Ceres Only Target.

Does anyone agree?

[Bob Shaw]

Sadly I would even take a scaled down project with a Ceres Only Target.

Does anyone agree?

Yup. They can't let this one go - perhaps it's an ideal international mission in waiting...

Bob Shaw

[Marz]

Yup. They can't let this one go - perhaps it's an ideal international mission in waiting...

Bob Shaw

I agree. Ceres must rank pretty high in terms of science targets, especially since it was discovered to have a differentiated mantle, and lots of water, and possibly some ancient organic chemistry.

I'd imagine the launch windows are fairly flexible for this mission, since it only relied on a mars flyby... although it might require sacrificing visiting Vesta.

I sure hope this project is only slightly delayed instead of being mothballed.

[nprev]

Hmm. Anybody tight with anyone over at the Planetary Society? Now that NH made it safely off, perhaps it's time to mount a campaign to save Dawn!

[punkboi]

Hmm. Anybody tight with anyone over at the Planetary Society? Now that NH made it safely off, perhaps it's time to mount a campaign to save Dawn!

I'm a member of TPS

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

That possibility was discussed at the November COMPLEX meeting where I first heard that Dawn would be put in a stand-down mode -- and it was quickly dismissed by Andy Dantzler on the grounds that changing Dawn to a one-asteroid mission would only very slightly lower its cost. Its science payload has also been whittled down to an absolute minimum.

I do wonder, though, whether it might be possible to augment its previous budget with the $35 million that goes to the next Discovery Mission of Opportunity, allowing it to fly after all, albeit late. NASA might be amenable to this way out of the problem, given how close the craft is to completion. I intend to look into this.

[Rakhir]

Hmm. Anybody tight with anyone over at the Planetary Society? Now that NH made it safely off, perhaps it's time to mount a campaign to save Dawn!

Ask Emily

[gpurcell]

I do wonder, though, whether it might be possible to augment its previous budget with the $35 million that goes to the next Discovery Mission of Opportunity, allowing it to fly after all, albeit late.  NASA might be amenable to this way out of the problem, given how close the craft is to completion.  I intend to look into this.

Bruce, to me the question really is whether the NASA managers for DAWN feel any confidence that the contractor running the project can even tell them what the overrun is going to me to complete the project. I can't speak to the technical side of it, but it is pretty clear the budgeting assumptions used in the proposal were way ouf of whack with reality.

Right now we have an almost completed spacecraft...but that is a sunk cost.

How much is on the table:

1) There will be funds left in the project budget category for completion of the spacecraft and operations.
2) NASA has got to fund the launch for the bird...how much is that?

The launch cost could easily be moved into the next Discovery mission and that would help accelerate the following mission.

[JRehling]

Bruce, to me the question really is whether the NASA managers for DAWN feel any confidence that the contractor running the project can even tell them what the overrun is going to me to complete the project.  I can't speak to the technical side of it, but it is pretty clear the budgeting assumptions used in the proposal were way ouf of whack with reality.

This will be one to watch: Clearly, with a nearly-completed craft, Dawn represents a better bang for the (additional) buck than starting some new mission from scratch. But this sends out the bad message that haunts bureaucracies: What will stop the next Discovery proposals from targeting a science/dollar value that matches the Dawn standard (spend all you're allowed, then a little more).

A sadistically punitive answer is to give the spacecraft to some other PIs to fly. That gets the mission in the air for not much (additional) money, but doesn't give anyone an incentive to try to duplicate this scenario in future Discovery proposals. But taking the craft from the rightful owners, if legal (?), may introduce operational showstoppers, apart from being somewhat loathsome ethically. This isn't Stalin's space program...

At the same time, giving the original team extra money is problematic.

If the project is being, in any sense, re-funded, I would just as soon see some of the downscoped original goals being reinstated...

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

At the same time, giving the original team extra money is problematic.

Although I think this is one of the better Discovery missions (as originally proposed) from a science standpoint, even with the currently descoped science payload, and while I certainly hope the mission flies, I feel that funding the cost overrun (notwithstanding the fact that that MESSENGER came within a hair's breadth of being cancelled for similar reasons) would set a bad precedent. Indeed, I think that further descopes (either of payload or target) would degrade the mission dangerously close to the performance floor.

[RNeuhaus]

I agree. Ceres must rank pretty high in terms of science targets, especially since it was discovered to have a differentiated mantle, and lots of water, and possibly some ancient organic chemistry. 

I'd imagine the launch windows are fairly flexible for this mission, since it only relied on a mars flyby... although it might require sacrificing visiting Vesta. 

I sure hope this project is only slightly delayed instead of being mothballed.

Agree. The last chance is up to the end of the year 2007. The setback is sometime good since it starts to review, track down the critical problems and develop a plan in order to determine the next fund rise to solve the identified problems. That way will help to stop the vicious circle.

Rodolfo

[Redstone]

NASA management is being briefed on Friday by the independent review panels. Then they'll make a decision, to fund or cancel, which is expected "within weeks."

New Scientist article

My fingers are crossed.

[Bjorn Jonsson]

A sadistically punitive answer is to give the spacecraft to some other PIs to fly. That gets the mission in the air for not much (additional) money, but doesn't give anyone an incentive to try to duplicate this scenario in future Discovery proposals. But taking the craft from the rightful owners, if legal (?), may introduce operational showstoppers, apart from being somewhat loathsome ethically. This isn't Stalin's space program...

I wonder if something similar to Mars 2003/Phoenix might be possible, i.e. canceling the mission and then someone (possibly some other PI) might propose flying a modified version of this thing a few years from now.

One problem with not canceling Dawn is the fact that this really isn't the same mission as it was when it was selected. The magnetometer and laser altimeter have been dropped so it is possible that some of the mission against which Dawn originally was competitively selected really are better than Dawn in its present form. So flying Dawn without these instruments might be unfair to these missions.