Visions and Voyages: The Planetary Decadal Survey 16 April 2019

History Before 2003, NASA received individual reports from scientists to guide their mission selection These covered broad areas, but did not prioritize between them Now NASA receives a report every 10 years that sets the proposed comprehensive scientific strategy The National Academies rely on the community of scientists to write these reports Their recommendations are the most likely missions to be undertaken, if the Congress and administration provide the funds

Latest Decadal Survey (2013)

2013 recommendations: Small, Medium and Large Missions 2 Flagship missions: MAX-C and Jupiter-Europa Orbiter New Frontiers 4 and 5 Continued Discovery missions Research and Analysis New Technology

NASA Makes Progress Toward Science Priorities Outlined in 2013-2022 Planetary Decadal Survey  WASHINGTON - Despite significant cuts to NASA's Planetary Science Division budget early in this decade, the space agency has made impressive progress in meeting goals outlined in the 2013-2022 planetary decadal survey by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, says a new midterm assessment from the National Academies. The report notes that the agency met or exceeded the decadal survey’s recommendations for funding research and analysis, and for technology programs. However, NASA has not achieved the recommended timeline for New Frontiers and Discovery missions for the decade. At least one more New Frontiers mission and three Discovery missions should be selected before the end of the decade in order to achieve the schedule recommended in Vision and Voyages.

“Since the publication of Vision and Voyages, planetary science has made many advances, including acquiring results from several highly successful missions,” said Louise Prockter, director of the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas, and co-chair of the committee that conducted the study and wrote the report. “This decadal survey has served the planetary science community well, justifying a plan for planetary science that has been successful in supporting research and obtaining steady funding for missions.”

“NASA has made a strong investment in technology that has exceeded the Vision and Voyages recommended levels,” said committee co-chair Joe Rothenberg, former NASA associate administrator for space flight, Goddard Center director, and co-chair of the committee that conducted the new study and wrote the report. “This investment has not only enabled science missions in this decade, but is providing for the long-term technology development needed for missions in the next decade, including the Mars sample return program and the exploration of planetary bodies with extreme environments.”

The committee developed recommendations for the remainder of the decade based on categories including large strategic missions, NASA’s Mars exploration program, telescopes and planetary science, and education and public outreach. Among the recommendations: Continue to closely monitor the cost and schedule associated with the Europa Clipper to ensure that it remains executable within the approved life-cycle cost range. Continue planning and begin implementation of NASA’s proposed “focused and rapid” architecture for returning samples from the Mars 2020 mission so as to achieve the highest priority decadal flagship-level science. Reevaluate the Mars Exploration Program, which currently has only the Mars 2020 rover in its future missions queue. Continue investment in development of mission-enabling technologies at 6 percent to 8 percent of the Planetary Science Division’s budget. Link education and outreach activities directly to the missions that are providing the science content for those programs, working directly with mission scientists and engineers to ensure a strong connection to NASA’s mission results.

Summary Every 10 years, the National Academies gives NASA advice on the progress and priorities in planetary science, astrophysics, earth sciences and heliophysics After 5 years, the academies give a ‘mid-term review’, now in progress NASA generally follows the plan, but adjusts for budget, new discoveries, congressional input: this involves starting ‘flagship’ missions; plus evaluating and selecting ‘competed’ missions for ‘Discovery’ and ‘New Frontiers’ Problems: Plan is too costly; Focus on Mars puts other activities at a lower priority