F
Mission Teams’ Tech nology Funding Inputs to the Committee

The funding requirements and assumptions for continuing the mission development activities for the 11 mission candidates shown in Table F.1 were essentially developed from inputs provided to the committee by the individual mission teams. As shown, the teams were asked to identify continuation activities at two budgetary levels: (1) the level of mission risk reduction to prepare input for the next astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey of the National Research Council and (2) the bare minimum budget level to sustain the mission team in a meaningful way.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 152
F Mission Teams’ Technology Funding Inputs to the Committee The funding requirements and assumptions for continuing the mission development activities for the 11 mission candidates shown in Table F.1 were essentially developed from inputs provided to the committee by the individual mission teams. As shown, the teams were asked to identify continuation activities at two budgetary levels: (1) the level of mission risk reduction to prepare input for the next astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey of the National Research Council and (2) the bare minimum budget level to sustain the mission team in a meaningful way. 52

OCR for page 152
153 APPENDIX F TABLE F.1 NASA Investment Options for 11 Beyond Einstein Candidate Missions Assessment of Mission Team Requirements: Assessment of Bare Minimum: Fully Prepare for the Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Surveya Team Sustainment Levela Mission Areaa Mission FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 Inflation CMBPol b,c,d Probes EPIC-Fb,c,e $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 EPIC-Ib,c,f  $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 <$250,000 <$250,000 <$250,000 Without APRA funding $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 <$750,000 <$750,000 <$750,000 CIPg $870,000 $840,000 $682,000 <<$875,000 <<$875,000 <<$875,000 Cross-mission $2 million $2 million $2 million $2 million $2 million $2 million CMB detector flight—packagingb,c BHFP CASTER $740,000 $740,000 $740,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 Balloon Flight in $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 Phase Ah EXISTi $200,000 $1.8 $1.8 million $100,000 $600,000 $600,000 million Con-X Con-Xj $10 million $10 million $10 million $6.2 million $6.2 million $6.2 million JDEM ADEPT $2.3 $2.3 $2.3 million $0.9 million $0.9 million $0.9 million million million SNAPk $3.0 $3.0 $3.0 million $3.0 million $3.0 million $3.0 million million million DESTINY $1 million $1 million $1 million $1 million $1 million $1 million LISA LISAl $6 million $6 million $6 million $6 million $6 million $6 million NOTE: Acronyms are defined in Appendix G. Does not include civil service or Jet Propulsion Laboratory costs.  a Investment in detectors and focused detector integration into large-scale flight-ready arrays.  b Assumes additional ongoing NASA, DOE, NIST funding of an additional $2 million per year for development of bolometric array  c technology continues. No data provided to the committee from the mission team.  d Assumes team is successful in proposed funding for a balloon experiment “SPIDER” to demonstrate instrument, six detectors, wave  e plate, and telescope concept. Assumes team is successful in proposed NASA Astronomy and Physics Research Analysis (APRA) Program funding for a balloon flight  f demonstration of a scalable millimeter-wave bolometric interferometer at $1,549,513 over the period from the second quarter of FY 2008 through the second quarter of FY 2011. Assumes successful JWST detector demonstration.  g Assumes team is successful in proposed funding for a balloon experiment under NASA’s APRA Program or it is deferred to Phase A.  h Assumes $600,000 APRA Program proposal for LET development is successful and current HET APRA funding is maintained through  i March 2009. Constellation-X input scaled back from the team’s input that was proposed as needed for a new start to a level assessed by the committee  j that would allow the team to prepare for the 2010 astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey. Currently there is $3 million per year in DOE funding for SNAP.  k Excludes ESA funding and NASA ROSES research grant funding.  l