[X] My Assistant

[Guest_AlexBlackwell_*]

Well, one answer is to DQ proposals during the 2006 AO that are really stretching the envelope. Pick a good, solid, modest mission. Maybe refly CONTOUR, for example. A Deep Impact visit to an asteroid. See where the gaps are in Venus Express (particularly with the lopss of the PFS instrument) and have an orbiter that fills those gaps.

Since one of the specific complaints Dawn had about the cancellation was that they were being held to retroactive higher standards, "penalizing" subsequent missions would be a supreme irony.

Or (and I'm sure I'll have Bruce chasing me around with a pitchfork for this), use the 2006 Discovery slot or a modest, focused Mars mission in the 2011 launch window (e.g., methane detection or Netlander Mk. II).

Given that Discovery and Mars Scouts are independent mission lines, I don't even think this is possible under current guidelines, which means, of course, that NASA will probably do precisely that at some point in the future.

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

Well, one answer is to DQ proposals during the 2006 AO that are really stretching the envelope. Pick a good, solid, modest mission. Maybe refly CONTOUR, for example. A Deep Impact visit to an asteroid. See where the gaps are in Venus Express (particularly with the loss of the PFS instrument) and have an orbiter that fills those gaps. Or (and I'm sure I'll have Bruce chasing me around with a pitchfork for this), use the 2006 Discovery slot for a modest, focused Mars mission in the 2011 launch window (e.g., methane detection or Netlander Mk. II).

Heavens, no, you wouldn't have me chasing you around for that -- except that the Mars Scout program has now officially subsumed all of the Mars-directed Discovery-type mission proposals. (It's also subsumed those directed at the moons of Mars, like Aladdin -- which Alex and I both think was a mistake.) Since the curent US Mars plan calls for only two more Mars Scout missions through 2024, I think it's possible that Mars (or Phobos-Deimos) missions may become permissible for Discovery again in the future. (A Netlander-type Mars network mission would almost certainly be too expensive to fit into Discovery -- after all, the US intends to fly that as its one and only Mars mission in 2020 -- but there is already great interest in collaborating with Europe on it. After all, the French have already done a great deal of development work on it.)

As for methane detection, though: it's now very likely that the larger atmosphere-directed 2013 Mars orbiter will handle that -- which may free up the 2011 Mars Scout for other types of missions. (I have a sneaking suspicion -- based on nothing more than intuition -- that this, combined with the continuing delays in a full-fledged Mars sample return, may improve the chances of SCIM being picked in 2011; but as yet I can't even find out whether it will be proposed again.)

As for Venus: it's too early to know whether PFS HAS been lost yet. But also keep in mind Tom Campbell's already-existing proposal for a Venus orbiter carrying a subsurface radar sounder, which he thinks may be the only way to really settle the question of the planet's overall geological history and whether it really did undergo catastrophic resurfacing. As for small-body missions, I pretty much take for granted that both a CONTOUR-type mission and the HERA near-Earth asteroid sample-return mission will be among the front-running proposals. And, given the continuing delays in SIM, I don't think we can even quite rule out the possibility of another extrasolar-planet detection mission of a different sort being flown (although, if so, I hope to God it doesn't emulate Kepler's cost overruns).

And as for Dawn: as far as I can tell, none of us really knows enough yet to tell whether or not this mission's reinstatement was properly justified. Who know what evil lurks in the hearts of NASA administrators? (Although one thing's for sure: a lot does.)

[nprev]

....glad NASA came to its senses, at least in this case...GO DAWN!!!

[Holder of the Tw...]

I'm cautiously optimistic today, but I'll be less in doubt when I see DAWN on the way to the launch pad. Something tells me if there is one more significant problem with anything... well, enough said.

... given the continuing delays in SIM, I don't think we can even quite rule out the possibility of another extrasolar-planet detection mission of a different sort being flown (although, if so, I hope to God it doesn't emulate Kepler's cost overruns).

There is a promising new technology in the works called an "optical vortex". Space dot com and Spacedaily have both had stories about it. If they can make it work, it might simplify exoplanet detection quite a bit. Perhaps to the point of being Discovery class.

[hendric]

How about selecting both Stardust and Deep Impact MoI's and deferring the Discovery selection another year? I'd think that would be a wise decision, since it's not likely you would get cost overruns with a continuation of two current missions.

[Rakhir]

I am glad to see that this thread I've created in November will die soon, being replaced by the new "Stand Back Up" thread.

-- Rakhir

[Bob Shaw]

Who know what evil lurks in the hearts of NASA administrators?

Bruce:

You forgot the laugh!

Bob Shaw

[Decepticon]

[RNeuhaus]

The Dawn proyect is in going. It has been undergoing a very rigurous testing, inclusive wht the steriling process in order not to contaminate to Ceres and Vestas asteroides. See the new very detailed testing updates.

Dawn continues to keep its human handlers very busy as preparations continue on schedule to meet the planned opening of the launch period on June 20, 2007. Much of June 2006 was devoted to conducting the comprehensive performance tests (CPTs) described in the previous log.

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Dawn_Con..._Tests_999.html

The ion engines were tested up to 10 times harder than the expected for the mission with success.

Each of the three ion thrusters will be mounted on a mechanism that allows its pointing direction to be fine tuned by other software on the spacecraft. As we will see in the next log, this accurate aiming is essential, so if one of these mechanisms fails, the attached thruster would be useless. To verify the robustness of the design for the mechanism, a test unit was subjected to 10 times the amount of work the ones to be flown on Dawn will have to provide. The performance was flawless.

Rodolfo