1

MISSION PLANNING WORKING GROUP-ROADMAP-

Roadmap Update forthe ILWS Workshop Prague

June 11, 2008

Presented byAndy Christensen

Jim SpannChris St. CyrArik Posner

2

Roadmap 2009

• General update to previous roadmap– Advances in knowledge– Current fiscal and launch realities

• Focus on targeted science priorities– Not on mission timelines

• Articulate approach to provide mission flexibility– Identify high priority science targets without

constraining mission implementation

3

Roadmap Development Schedule• 3/7 Draft announcement for Townhall Meeting• 3/15 Team selection• 3/19 HPS presentation – NASA HQ• 4/15-16 Panel meeting #1- NASA HQ

Panel expectations, Townhall organization, #3 meeting date selection• 5/19-20 Community Townhall Meeting – College Park, MD.• 5/20-21 Panel meeting #2 – College Park, MD.

Writing assignments, science prioritization, start mission architecture analysis

• 6/10-27 Community outreach (ILWS, HPS, CEDAR/GEM/SHINE) – Park City, UT• 7/3 First draft• 08/19-21 - Panel meeting #3 – Boulder, CO

Finish science prioritization, implementation rationale and classification, final writing assignments, identify gaps and figures

• September - Second draft ready for HPS meeting• September - HPS status• 11/20 Final draft

4

Roadmap Team Membership List

Chair, two Co-Chairs, 12 Members,

HQ Support

Andrew B. Christensen (Dixie State) Chair

James F. Spann (MSFC) Co-Chair

O. Chris StCyr (GSFC) Co-Chair

Roderick Heelis (UT Dallas) Member

Stan Solomon (UCAR) Member

Thomas Immel (UC Berkeley) Member

Lynn Kistler (UNH) Member

Robert Strangeway (UCLA) Member

Geoffrey Reeves (LANL) Member

Nathan A. Schwadron (BU) Member

Alan C. Cummings (CalTech) Member

Justin Kasper (Harvard SAO) Member

Frank Hill (NSO) Member

Theodor Tarbell (Lockheed) Member

Jeffrey R. Kuhn (U Hawaii) Member

Arik Posner,Barbara Giles,

William Stabnowand Discipline

Scientists(NASA/HQ)

5

RFAsF. Open the Frontier to Space Environment Prediction

F1. Understand magnetic reconnection as revealed in solar flares, coronal mass ejections, the solar wind, and in magnetospheres.

F2. Understand the plasma processes that accelerate and transport particles.

F3. Understand the ion-neutral interactions that couple planetary ionospheres to their upper atmospheres and solar and stellar winds to the ambient neutrals.

F4. Understand the creation and variability of magnetic dynamos and how they drive the dynamics of solar, planetary and stellar environments.

H - Understand the Nature of Our Home In Space

H1. Understand the causes and subsequent evolution of solar activity that affects Earth’s space climate and environment.

H2. Understand changes in the Earth’s magnetosphere, ionosphere, and upper atmosphere to enable specification, prediction, and mitigation of their effects.

H3. Understand the role of the Sun and its variability in driving change in the Earth’s atmosphere.

H4. Apply our knowledge of space plasma physics to understand other regions of the solar system, stars, and the galaxy.

J. Safeguard the Journey of Exploration

J1. Characterize the variability, extremes, and boundary conditions of the space environments that will be encountered by human and robotic explorers.

J2. Develop the capability to predict the origin, onset and level of solar activity in order to identify potentially hazardous space weather events and safe intervals.

J3. Develop the capability to predict the propagation and evolution of solar disturbances to enable safe travel for human and robotic explorers.

J4. Understand and characterize the space weather effects on and within planetary environments to minimize risk in exploration activities.

6

Roadmap Table of Contents

• Letter from Dick Fisher• Executive Summary• The Science

– Overview of Heliophysics science– 3 Objectives and 12 RFAs

• Situational Assessment– Recent Progress– Evolution of Goals– Where Heliophysics Fits and how it Relates in NASA– Heliophysics Landscape

7

• The Program– Logical Framework for Science Prioritization– Science Implementation Scenarios– Science Implementation Program

• Technology Investment– Capability Requirements– Affordable and Available Access to Space– Next Generation of Instrumentation– Returning Large Data Sets– Analysis, Data Assimilation, Modeling and Visualization– Enabling Space Weather Prediction

Roadmap Table of Contents

8

• Education and Public Outreach• Appendices

– Bibliography of key NASA and NRC documents– Strategic Planning Process– Impact on Decadal Survey– Design Reference Missions– Roadmap Team– Acronyms

Roadmap Table of Contents

9

The 2008 Heliophysics Town Hall Meetingwas held on May 19/20 in College Park, MD. Purpose of this meeting was to incorporate Heliophysics community input in terms of science priorities, recent major science achievements, technology advances, and mission implementation suggestions. The Town Hall web site http://heliophysics.gsfc.nasa.gov/Townhall08.htm contains standardized mission charts and other information on the outcome of the meeting. A feedback page is still open for roadmap-team solicited community input. Registered attendees: 108.

10

Workshop Objectives• Communicate the budget, launch

environment, and other constraining factors• Provide a forum for community input and

discussion of the state of Heliophysics – Suggested updates to the science objectives,

Research Focus Areas (RFAs), and Science Targets in the near, mid-, and far term

– New mission concepts across the range of small to large, especially consistent with potential launch vehicles

11

Breakout Sessions

• Breakout Sessions 1 and 2 (1st day)– Science Discussions (question 1 and 2)– Mixed Discipline– Important that all disciplines be

represented in all parallel sessions.

• Breakout Session 3 (2nd day)– Discipline Focused discussion of

technology

• Two dedicated Poster Sessions

12

Questions to the Community• In your view, what is the most compelling and enabling science that

will advance Heliophysics in the next 5-10 years? In the next 10 -20 years?

• Does the science that you envision fit into the current roadmap Research Focus Areas? If so, which one (s)? If not, could you suggest a new Research Focus Area that would include your new science? are there any revisions to the RFAs that you would suggest?

• Acknowledging that new discoveries in Heliophysics are often driven by the utilization of emerging and enabling technologies, what is needed in the areas of mission implementations (e.g. launch vehicles, space craft, locations, etc.), data acquisition/instrumentation (e.g. remote sensing detectors, in-situ measurements, etc.), transmission (e.g. telemetry, recording, etc.) and analysis (e.g. data environments, virtual observatories, modeling, etc.)?

13

Community Input (RFA)• Community input was captured during breakout

sessions, open mic sessions, e-mail, poster sessions, and quad-chart submissions.

• In general the RFA statements from the 2005 Roadmap were endorsed with many suggested re-wordings. The associated text in the RM was critical to understanding the scope of the RFA statement. No substantive omissions were identified, however the text should reflect recent discoveries.

• Future science directions in Heliophysics are well covered by the existing RFAs, however, the spirit of discovery needs to be more explicit.

14

Community Input – Recent Advances• Justin Kasper solicited inputs from the operating missions and

prepared a spread sheet on recent accomplishments. Additions still being added. This information will form the basis for a new chapter on recent accomplishments in the RM. Some examples include:– Measurements of reconnection, including in situ in the solar

wind and in the magnetosphere, together with improved simulations. 3-D structure of reconnection.

– Better far-side observations of the Sun– Observations of lower atmosphere drives of upper

atmosphere variability as source of ITM variability– Termination shock observations– STEREO observations - CME propagation from the Sun to

the earth.– Hinode testing loop models

15

Community Input – Open Mic

• People generally expressed support for their areas of research, as expected. Some random issues raised:– Importance of theory and modeling– Interstellar precursor– Maintenance of the Great Observatory– Failure of NASA to follow previous RM launch queues– How to prioritize science targets?– Value of partnerships

16

Community Input – Mission Quad Charts

• 34 charts were submitted prior to the meeting and several have been received since.

• These missions and those in the 2005 RM are intended for use as a basis for the engineering studies of reference missions.