Vision and Voyages: 2013-22 Planetary Science Decadal Survey Options

[Drkskywxlt]

The report was unveiled to the community last night at LPSC by Steve Squyres. The full report is on the National Research Council's website.

The recommendations:

1. Increase R+A funding by 5% above the FY11 budget and then by 1.5% above inflation per year for each year thereafter
2. Maintain a technology development fund at 6-8% of the Planetary Science division budget (~$100M). This includes tech development for Mars Sample Return (particularly the Ascent Vehicle).
3. Continue Discovery program at current funding plus inflation adjustments and keep a schedule of no more than 24 months between AOs and selections
4. Mars Trace Gas Orbiter as long as the division of work with ESA is preserved
5. Increase New Frontiers cost cap to $1B without (!) the launch vehicle. Select NF-4 and NF-5 in 2013-22. NF-4 concepts: Comet Surface Sample Return, Lunar South Pole-Aitken Basin Sample Return, Saturn probe, Trojan Tour and Rendezvous, Venus In-situ Explorer. NF-5 concepts: any unselected NF-4 concepts, Io Observer, Lunar Geophysical Network.
6. Begin NASA/ESA Mars Sample Return by launching a DESCOPED MAX-C rover in 2018. This is the only flagship recommended for start in this decade. This mission MUST fit under a $2.5B cost cap (FY15 dollars). If not, the Survey recommends it be delayed or cancelled. There is no Plan-B for Mars exploration if MAX-C can't be flown. The cost assessment for this mission came in around $3.5B. Steve Squyres said the big reason this mission is so expensive is due to risk and costs associated with landing 2 landers (MAX-C and ExoMars) with one EDL system. He hinted at combining the rovers into 1 rover.
7. A dramatically DESCOPED Jupiter Europa Orbiter. Cost estimate for this mission came in at $4.7B. That was it's death sentence. It scored comparably with the Mars Sample Return for science return per dollar. This also needs to fit under about $2.5B. Recommend it switch to ASRGs for power production immediately.
8. Uranus Orbiter with probes. Uranus was chosen over Neptune primarily for trajectory reasons. Steve Squyres suggested that if this mission waits until next decade, Neptune would appear very attractive as well.
9. Either an Enceladus Orbiter or a Venus Climate Mission as the 4th priority flagship.

Other comments:
1. Technology development priorities: Titan Saturn System Mission, Neptune Orbiter (aerocapture), Mars Sample Return lander and orbiter.
2. If there is less funding provided than their estimates: in priority order, descope/delay flagships, slip NF/Discovery missions only if flagship cuts don't solve the problem, high priority to keep R+A/technology development money safe.

My sense from being there is that the Europa folks were understandably devastated. Sticker shock was pretty severe with these estimates as they were almost 50% higher than many of the numbers tossed around before. I think Titan folks were probably pretty blue as well (although I'm not sure there are many such people at LPSC) since there was no suggestion of a Titan mission anywhere. Based on the cost predictions shown, it seems nearly impossible that some of the Discovery-class Titan concepts would be cost feasible.