Slashdot Mirror


ESA Selects Next Generation Space Missions

davecl writes "The European Space Agency has announced the results of its Cosmic Visions 2015-2025 call for proposals. Fifty space science missions for the next decade were proposed, with just seven selected. They range from X-ray and far-infrared observatories to planet finders and a near-earth asteroid sample return mission. These seven, together with the LISA gravitational wave observatory, will go ahead for further study in the next few years, and then two will be chosen for launch in 2015-2017."

46 comments

  1. Too Many Acronyms by pedramnavid · · Score: 1

    What? No space elevator?

  2. Sad... by JK_the_Slacker · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...they rejected my mission to determine if the Xbox 360 still overheats in a vacuum. Darnit.

    --
    I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
    1. Re:Sad... by tc1415 · · Score: 1

      I have to say - you don't _really_ need a space mission for that, a suitably large bell jar would suffice. Come to think of it, I'd like to try that now...

    2. Re:Sad... by jpflip · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Air is pretty darn useful for carrying away heat by conduction and convection flows. So the XBox 360 should have more overheating problems in vacuum.

      Physicists can't resist this kind of question...

  3. TEXT by Eightyford · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Astrophysics

    A dark energy mission
    Two proposals have been received (DUNE, the dark universe investigator and SPACE, the new near-infrared all-sky cosmic explorer) addressing the study of dark matter and dark energy - a hot topic in astronomy. While they propose to use different techniques (DUNE is proposed as a a wide-field imager, while SPACE is proposed as a near-infrared all-sky surveyor), they address the same basic science goal. In the follow-up study phase a trade-off will be performed leading to the definition in the spring of next year of a proposal for a European dark energy mission to go forward in competition.

    PLATO - PLAnetary Transits and Oscillations of stars
    The proposed next-generation planet finder is a photometry mission that will detect and characterise transiting exoplanets as well as measure the seismic oscillations of their parent stars. It will be capable of observing rocky exoplanets around brighter and better characterized stars than its predecessors. Observations of the mission will be complemented by ground- and space-based follow-up observations to derive the planet's masses and study their atmospheres.

    SPICA - SPace Infrared telescope for Cosmology and Astrophysics
    SPICA is a proposed medium- and far-infrared observatory with a large-aperture cryogenic telescope. The mission would address planetary formation, the way the solar system works and the origin of the universe. It would perform wide field, high sensitivity photometric mapping at high spatial resolution, spectral analysis as well as coronography of planets and planetary disks. SPICA is proposed in collaboration with the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA, with ESA providing the telescope and a contribution to the operations.

    XEUS - X-ray Evolving Universe Spectroscopy
    XEUS is a next-generation X-ray space observatory to study the fundamental laws of the Universe and the origins of the universe. With unprecedented sensitivity to the hot, million-degree universe, XEUS would explore key areas of contemporary astrophysics: growth of supermassive black holes, cosmic feedback and galaxy evolution, evolution of large-scale structures, extreme gravity and matter under extreme conditions, the dynamical evolution of cosmic plasmas and cosmic chemistry. XEUS would be stationed in a halo orbit at L2, the second Lagrange point, with two satellites (one mirror satellite and the other a detector satellite) that would fly in formation.

    Various international partners have expressed interest in cooperation in XEUS and discussions will start by the end of the year with the interested agencies to ensure the earliest involvement in study work.

    Solar System

    Cross-Scale - multi-scale coupling in space plasmas
    Cross-Scale, proposed to employ 12 spacecraft, would make simultaneous measurements of plasma on different scales at shocks, reconnection sites, and turbulent regions in near-Earth space. It will address fundamental questions such as how shocks accelerate and heat particles or how magnetic reconnection phenomena generate or convert energy. If approved, the mission would be implemented in collaboration with JAXA, the Japanese space and exploration agency.

    Laplace - a mission to Europa and the Jupiter System
    The Jovian System, with Jupiter and its moons, is a small planetary system in its own right. Unique among the moons, Europa is believed to shelter an ocean between its geodynamically active icy crust and its silicate mantle. The proposed mission would answer questions on habitability of Europa and of the Jovian system in relation to the formation of the Jovian satellites and to the workings of the Jovian system itself. The mission will deploy three orbiting platforms to perform coordinated observations of Europa, the Jovian satellites, Jupiter's magnetosphere and its atmosphere and interior. If approved, the mission would be implemented in collaboration with NASA.

    Marco Polo - a near-Earth object sample return mi

  4. Mars by g253 · · Score: 1

    Let me be the first to say : what about a manned mission to Mars? I don't care that it's more efficient and easy to send robots, I don't care that it would have little scientific justification, I want human beings to go there just because it would be mind-blowingly awesome!

    1. Re:Mars by sayfawa · · Score: 1

      That's what's wrong with space agencies of today; "mind-blowingly awesome" isn't accepted as a good reason to do something.

      --
      Free the Quark 3 from asymptotic confinement! Bring your charm! Don't get down! All colours and flavours welcome!
    2. Re:Mars by m0ns00n · · Score: 1

      It is very wierd indeed, that Europe, being a massive economy world wide, only can affort marginal space efforts. ESA should be at least as ambitious as NASA, but it is not. Could anyone give the reasons why Europe's space program is so low-fi compared to other organizations elsewhere? With Russia able to still have a competing program, one should have thought the EU would be more aggressive. One reason I was given previously is that Europe's dynamic, democratic nature disables some of the steering needed in colossal projects. The disputes inside the EU makes it more difficult to plan and execute space plans, while NASA and other space organizations have more central control. Is this true?

    3. Re:Mars by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Let me be the first to say : what about a manned mission to Mars? I don't care that it's more efficient and easy to send robots, I don't care that it would have little scientific justification, I want human beings to go there just because it would be mind-blowingly awesome!

      While cool, personally I get more satisfaction out of seeing new worlds. I was totally psyched when the Titan Huygens lander mission started posting photos on the internet. This was a new, cloudy world never before seen from under the clouds and the probe was even designed to float in case it landed in a hydrocarbon ocean. Thus, there was a small chance we'd see it bobbing up and down in liquid. (Unfortunately, it didn't land in the area of the probable active lakes, but only dried ones.)

      A mission that explores the underground oceans of icy moons of the gas giants would be cool also. Or finding and seeing the spectrum of earth-like planets in other systems thru special telescopes. That's the kind of thing I'd rather see the money spent on: brand new discoveries and worlds are like prying the lid off of a large stone box found under an ancient pyramid. It is just more Eureka moments per dollar.

      As far as public interest, finding an Earth-like planet around another star would result in Saturday morning cartoons, comic books, movies about settlers, etc. It would be like the mystique of Mars before Mariner 4 showed how dry Mars was.

    4. Re:Mars by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Europe is doing some big science projects though, the immense LHC is one such example. Thae US has no similar high-energy physics project that I'm aware of, in operation or in serious planning.

    5. Re:Mars by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "mind-blowingly awesome" also loses out to the problem of: Can we get them there and back alive? If everyone dies, suddenly it become mind-blowingly stupid. We will see long term inhabited space stations with centrifugal gravity and greenhouses before we will be sending live humans on multi-year missions outside of Earth orbit.

      --
      We are all just people.
    6. Re:Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I work in the European space programme (as a contractor), I can say this. There are a couple of problems, first is that the ESA has to make a geo-return, e.g. if say Sweden pays 2% of ESAs budget, then 2% of the money given in contracts going out should be to Swedish companies.

      The second problem is that the ESA is not an agency of the Union yet (but it seems to be moving in that direction), but an agency of the member states. Though, I might add that the two problems are tightly linked.

      There have been instances when for example:
      Company A from state 1: We offer this device that will weigh 300 kg and have performance 10
      Company B from state 2: We offer the same thing, but our device will weigh 20 kg and have performance 100
      ESA: Well, B's stuff is nicer, but state 2 have received to much money this year, so we have to go with A's stuff.

      I've met people working at the agency who did evaluations suggesting the better product, just to be overruled by management due to political reasons.

      Other issues are for example that the member states, usually have difficulties explaining why they are putting that much money into the space sector, this means that the agency has been forced in most cases to focus on earth observation instead of on more forward looking "cool" projects, though lately, more "cool" projects have happened e.g. cassini-hogyens (joint nasa/esa), venus express, mars express and so on. Earth observation is not that exciting in the news, so ESA is hardly known for the average European that is more likely to know about NASA than ESA (I have actually been asked several times if I am working for the NASA).

    7. Re:Mars by Herve5 · · Score: 1

      There are plans for Mars, collaborating with the US, but for reasons I won't detail they are not coordinated by the Science directorate in Esa, so they are out of this "Cosmic Vision".

      For Esa the Mars program is called Aurora, and the first coming mission is Exomars, planning to land in 10 years a relatively big rover (hundreds of kg) whose data relaying relies on US satellites. Later on, sample return is planned, in a clear collaboration still to be refined with Nasa which *possibly* would allocate precision landing /EU, sample packaging and placing in Mars orbit /US, sample capture in orbit /EU, sample back to Earth incl. safe Earth reentry (no biocontamination) /US.
      This, at least, is the European view here -maybe Nasa seees it completely upside-down ;-)

      --
      Herve S.
    8. Re:Mars by j-b0y · · Score: 1

      All the big players have their own space agencies to fund too. If the NASA had to compete with the California Space Agency you bet they'd be flying less missions too.

      --
      Please remain calm, there is no reason to pani... wait, where are you all going?
    9. Re:Mars by j-b0y · · Score: 1

      In fact a concept for a manned mission has been kicking around within the Aurora program. Target arrival date: 2037.

      No shortage of forward planning there, then.

      --
      Please remain calm, there is no reason to pani... wait, where are you all going?
  5. Jovian System by WebmasterNeal · · Score: 1

    I think one of the more interesting missions here is the visits to the Jovian System. Europa in particular may yeild the best results within our solar system for some sort of life beyond Earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_(moon)

    --
    "During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
    1. Re:Jovian System by volcanopele · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, but neither Laplace nor NASA's proposed Europa Orbiter will answer the question of whether there is life on Europa. The upper few meters of Europa's surface have been effectively sterilized by particle radiation from Jupiter's magnetosphere, removing all trace of life that may have made its way to the surface. Most plausible life on Europa would likely be much deeper, within the internal ocean. To answer THE question WRT Europa would require a lander and probably a sub.

      --
      The Gish Bar Times - Blog covering Jupiter's moon Io
    2. Re:Jovian System by teebob21 · · Score: 2, Funny
      We may wish to rethink this mission:

      All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landing there. Use them together. Use them in peace.
      --
      khasim (12/9/06): In a blind taste test, more people preferred Coke over the Pepsi that I had previously pissed in.
    3. Re:Jovian System by PieSquared · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm afraid it might take a bit more then that. Feasibility speaking landing a probe on europa isn't *that* difficult. Nothing to scoff at, but certainly within our limits. Automated drilling through the ice, though? And this is more then a few meters to find liquid water. How exactly do we *do* that? Then the sub. How do you power it? Not solar. Nuclear would make a big stink with environmentalists (bringing nuclear waste on your search for life!?) if you could even *get* a nuclear powered up that far (reactors aren't small...). No air, so that pretty much leaves batteries. How long can we have a sub explore with batteries? A day or two at most?

      No, there are problems that need to be solved before we can explore europa for life. And one of those problems is solved by landing on it and just looking at the surface a bit. Is it stable? Could something sit on its surface for a few months without trouble? How hard is it?

      But the search for life on europa isn't something to plan for "this decade."

      --
      Does a line appended to your comment give your post meaning in and of itself, or only in relation to those without?
    4. Re:Jovian System by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative

      How do you power it? Not solar. Nuclear would make a big stink with environmentalists (bringing nuclear waste on your search for life!?) if you could even *get* a nuclear powered up that far (reactors aren't small...).

      This is an INCREDIBLY ignorant statement.

      Any and all probes designed to go out past Mars or so are powered by nuclear sources. Sunlight gets extremely weak the further you go, and Jupiter is a LONG way out there and solar panels simply won't work. They WILL BE NUCLEAR, no matter who wants to protest. The recent Cassini and New Horizons probes were both nuclear powered.

      With one single exception, such probes are NOT nuclear reactors as we have on earth, but generally RTGs. Simply plutonium-238 generating a few hundred watts of heat, and a Peltier/Seebeck device to convert the heat to electricity. Quite small, and NASA's developments with Sterling engines will make it much, much more efficient (needing even less Plutonium).

      As for waste, RTGs do NOT generate long-lived waste, like the common nuclear power plants. In fact it would be terrible at generating electricity if it did. The plutonium just keeps generating heat until it is depleted.
      RTGs are also NOT powered by gamma emitters like nuclear reactors. That would be far too difficult to contain with the weight limits of spacecraft, and would quickly destroy the internal systems. So even if there is a catastrophic accident, it'll just be a chunk of heavy metal that happens to stay warm for a couple centuries, emitting some short-lived particles that won't even be detectable a few feet away.
      In fact Apollo 13's RTG is still chugging away at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, and nobody seems to care (never mind the 1,000+ lost somewhere in Russia)... They are designed to withstand extreme forces, so even the above scenario is unlikely.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    5. Re:Jovian System by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight: You want to power a drill/submarine with RTGs? Can you explain how big these will need to be to produce the power to drill, excavate, dive, and transmit to an orbiter?

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    6. Re:Jovian System by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Can you explain how big these will need to be to produce the power to drill, excavate, dive, and transmit to an orbiter?

      There is no limit. It's just a trade-off of power vs. time. Use a 1W RTG and it'll simply take FOREVER to drill to any depth.

      At 620W+, Cassini's 3 (man-sized) RTGs should have more than enough power to do the job in a reasonable time-frame. What's more, if NASA's Sterling tech works, you're able to make them SRGs instead, and get 2,500W+ from the same-size/weight package. That's easily FAR more power than you need.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  6. They are very ambitious missions by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 5, Informative
    A short summary of the missions, all extremely interesting:
    • Laplace. To study the Jovian system (three orbiters, one entirely dedicated to Europa!) in collaboration with NASA.
    • Tandem. To study the Saturnian-Titanian-Enceladusian environment (orbiter+carrier with a balloon and 3 probes to Titan) in colaboration with NASA.
    • Marco Polo. Sample return mission from an asteroid (à la Hayabusa) with orbiter+lander, sampler and return capsule; in collaboration with JAXA.
    • Dune/SPACE. Two proposed missions to study dark matter and dark energy.
    • Plato. Extrasolar planets detector, capable of detecting rocky planets.
    • Spica. Infrared telescope with wide field of analysis, spectroscopy and coronograph; in collaboration with JAXA.
    • XEUS. X-ray telescope to study extreme environments from L2 halo orbit, consisting on a mirror satellite and a detector satellite flying in formation.
    • Cross-Scale. Proposed to employ 12 spacecraft, would make simultaneous measurements of plasma - the gas of charged particles surrounding Earth - on different scales at shocks, reconnection sites, and turbulent regions in near-Earth space.
    [thanks to eeergo from NSF for the short list]

    At least one of the first two (Laplace or Tandem) will almost certainly be selected, the second one approved will probably be an astronomy mission (i.e. observation of objects outside of the solar system).

    --
    There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
    1. Re:They are very ambitious missions by Tom+Womack · · Score: 1

      It's interesting to see ESA proposing Galileo- or Cassini-type missions, given that NASA has rather missed the boat on those - they focussed on JIMO, which would have been a spectacular truly next-generation mission, but didn't have the political backing. Either mission would be a twenty-year commitment and cost several billion Euros, but the ESA is confident at the moment and the various 'Europe, centre of innovation' pushes by the EU will likely be able to find several billion Euros.

      I wouldn't be surprised if JAXA flew Marco Polo whether ESA is interested or not - Hayabusa was a beautiful mission plagued by bugs, and Marco Polo would be a re-run with the bugs fixed.

      DUNE/SPACE are close to duplicating a NASA effort called the Joint Dark Energy Mission; PLATO is very specialised and comes close to duplicating NASA's Kepler. I would bet on Xeus since XMM/Newton has been a great success, and ESA's reputation in X-ray astronomy is particularly good. Spica, again, I could see the Japanese flying without ESA input, though I suppose I should push for that since a friend of mine's working on the transition-edge detectors planned for it.

      JDEM is a wide-field optical telescope in space; Hubble's not going to last forever, and the JWST's inability to see wavelengths shorter than yellow means it will have some trouble producing Hubble-class spectacular images, so it may well be that the classic NASA images from the 2010s will have to come from JDEM.

    2. Re:They are very ambitious missions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, these mission seem very exciting! Since many of these will defualt towards automated probes to do scans, samples, and flyby pics; I wonder how the information will be redistributed to the public as it comes in. Perhaps by then; the net can serve as base station itself for the data as it comes in to prevent loss? I do have an idea for a mission that would definitely benefit humanity. My idea would be to launch communication probes to every planet forming a network in the Solar System providing better coverage and signal amplification. It would serve as foundation for specialized probes that could look for resources or keep track of threatening "heavenly" bodies. It's something humanity can do today and is more affordable than any manned mission.

    3. Re:They are very ambitious missions by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      I wish there was a tag for these kinds of stories, so we can easily tell when it's interesting news as opposed to interesting (or not so interesting) debate fuel.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    4. Re:They are very ambitious missions by davecl · · Score: 1

      I suspect that the gas giant missions will need significant international collaboration, like Cassini, anbd the climate in the US may be bad for that.

      My own horse in the race, SPICA, has the advantage of building on existing European technology, since the ESA contribution woulkd be a mirror similar to Herschel's. The instrument, that I'm associated with and that your friend is working on, would be finded separately by national funding agencies, as is always the way with ESA missions. It's already been defined as a 'core SPICA instrument' by JAXA which puts us in a good position.

      The other key feature of SPICA against the rest is that, from the ESA point of view, it's very cheap.

    5. Re:They are very ambitious missions by Tom+Womack · · Score: 1

      I hadn't realized ESA was thinking of supplying the mirror for SPICA; I did an arxiv search for SPICA, and aside from the occasional confounding reference to Alpha Virginis, there was a paper on surface quality of carbon fibre / silicon carbide mirrors which made me assume that JAXA was planning to build one such.

      [also a very nifty paper on coronographs using binary masks very close to the focal plane, which in principle masked out the star enough that you could almost detect Jupiters in reasonably distant orbits around reasonably close stars]

      The mirror paper surprised me slightly, since they were testing the mirrors at 95 kelvin and assuming that the results could be extrapolated to liquid helium temperatures, which I'd have thought wasn't guaranteed.

      You are, I suspect, the friend I was thinking of - Dave of Cardiff with whom I talked about infra-red astronomy at Recombination.

  7. The Europeans are really going to...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    capture the Lagrange Points 1,2 and 3, leaving us with only the less attractive points 4 and 5. Stop them now, I say!

    Millions for defence, but not a cent for anything co-operative or sensible...

    By the way, do astronauts have to have security anal searches, no shoes and a Sky Marshal riding with them? Seems to me that a Shuttle flight would be a prime target for Al-Quaida infiltration. You know the little bastards get everywhere, and they're obviously hard to spot, because we haven't found one yet......

  8. 2015-2025 Resources? by lobiusmoop · · Score: 0, Troll

    Given that it's looking more and more likely that we'll be well past the peak of global oil production by then, is it really a good idea to be planning seriously resource-intensive missions like these in this timeframe? I dont want to come over as a downer, but it's a good idea to be realistic. I suspect there will be more pressing issues than space exploration in this window.

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    1. Re:2015-2025 Resources? by Tom+Womack · · Score: 4, Informative

      Space missions aren't particularly resource-intensive; after all, the probes rarely weigh more than a few tonnes. They're expensive because they use a lot of staff time and rocket scientists aren't cheap, but about the only resource that they use which is in any sense rare is xenon for ion drives. Bits of space probe are quite often machined from solid ingots of relatively costly materials like inconel, but generally you can recycle the chips.

      An Ariane 5 burns 25 tons of liquid hydrogen in 130 tons of liquid oxygen, and is assisted by about 480 tons of ammonium perchlorate and aluminium powder in the solid rocket boosters; the materials costs are trivial in comparison to the cost of the engineers who designed and assembled the machine. Liquid oxygen is significantly cheaper than milk (say 10 cents per kilogram), and 130 tons is much less than the daily consumption by even a modest steelworks; liquid hydrogen is cheaper than beer at about $4 per kilo.

    2. Re:2015-2025 Resources? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa. I don't know where you buy your beer, but here in my neck of good ol' Europe I definitely pay less than $4/l. The cheapest is around 0.35/0.5l and really good beer can be had for 1/0.5l.

      (Damn this website for not taking my EUR-Symbols! Still no UTF-8 in 2007!)

    3. Re:2015-2025 Resources? by nilbud · · Score: 0

      $4 is only worth about 2.50 these days

      --
      never let a man put his dirty how-do-you-do into your bajingo
  9. Europe is slow? - Re:Mars by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is very wierd indeed, that Europe, being a massive economy world wide, only can affort marginal space efforts. ESA should be at least as ambitious as NASA, but it is not.

    For one, they are relatively new at it. NASA's been doing lots of missions for a long time. Europe has only been lightly dabbling so far.

    Second, is that they have more beurocracy because they want to make sure member countries get an equal share. It is sort of like the Osprey military project in the US where states all wanted a shake and also helped lobby to keep it alive despite unsolved safety problems. NASA has a little of that, but has learned to work around it and reduce it over the decades.

  10. It's a shame.. by Xordan · · Score: 1

    It's a shame that only two of the seven will be chosen for launch in 2015-2017 and not all seven (at least that's what I gathered).

    I'm not sure what's lacking the most, the number of people available to work on these or the funding required. Probably mostly the latter.

  11. this is speculation but by stranger_to_himself · · Score: 1

    I think that in Europe, space exploration is seen as science expenditure, and not military expenditure (since 'Europe' as an entity has no military). There's a lot more competition and public scrutiny regarding where the money goes.

  12. Except for one thing.. by eniac42 · · Score: 1

    The two principle solar system missions here - Tandem (Saturn - Titan and Enceledas) and Laplace (Jupiter) require going beyond Mars, and a first for the ESA: they would probably be using RTGs (Radioisotope Thermal power Generators) - this will be a big cost, and also a big political step - the first Nuclear ESA mission.

    Incidentally the proposed NASA-JUNO Jupiter polar orbiter is also a first - a *solar* powered orbiter for Jupiter - something that was not supposed to be possible! This is thanks to reduced power requirements and better solar cell/battery/computer tech. I would like to see the ESA try 2 missions - the nuclear powered mission to Saturn, and another cheaper mission using Solar, based on Mars/Venus Express architecture (with improved solar/battery etc) to Jupiter - maybe a Europa orbiter? The point is that Venus express cost around 200 million - by reusing the Mars Express system - why not try for a cheap Jupiter solar mission, which would be a first for the ESA..

    --
    "A nation that forgets its past is doomed to repeat it." - Churchill
    1. Re:Except for one thing.. by khallow · · Score: 1

      they would probably be using RTGs (Radioisotope Thermal power Generators) - this will be a big cost, and also a big political step

      I don't recall RTGs being that expensive even given technology requirements like being able to survive both a launch explosion and reentry. It's pretty well known technology now. They probably could get someone in the US to make one for a few tens of millions or less if they buy in bulk.
    2. Re:Except for one thing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ESA has used RTGs earlier on. Ulysses was launched with a US built RTG and operated together with ESA.

  13. A little additional background by Trapezium+Artist · · Score: 4, Informative

    As someone closely associated with the selection process, let me add a little background that might be helpful to interested /.ers.

    1. In principle just two of these missions will proceed to flight in 2017-2018, following studies of all seven over the next couple of years. However, the important number is the 950Meuro budget envelope allocated for this round of Cosmic Vision: depending on how costs shape up during the study phase, we go for a different mix of missions. That number is the cost to ESA itself: you also need to factor in anticipated additional contributions (e.g. for payload) from ESA member states and third party countries (e.g. US, Japan, Russia, China).

    2. One poster suggested that either Laplace or Tandem was most likely to fly in one slot, with an astronomy mission in the other: this is in no way decided, at this point. We sent Laplace and Tandem through at this stage as NASA is looking closely at the same basic missions; indeed, for either to fly would require strong (majority) NASA partnership, as ambitious outer solar systems missions cost more like $2G, rather than the ~600-650Meuro ESA might put in. Following discussions and a selection process in the US, one or other of Laplace or Tandem will go through to the full European study stage. Then, in order to proceed to flight, we will need to decide whether we prefer that mission over XEUS or LISA for the 2017-2018 slot: they are the other L(arge)-missions selected for study.

    3. Dune and Space were similarly selected in the full knowledge that the US is planning a Dark Energy mission as well. Further talks with NASA on competition, collaboration, and complementarity in ths arena are very likely.

    4. Keep in mind that this is just the first round of Cosmic Vision: we anticipate a second selection round in 3 years or so, at which point other missions may be selected, perhaps from those of the seven here not finally picked for flight in the first round, perhaps from the 43 others which did not make it this far (some were felt to be extremely interesting, but not ready technologically for 2017-2018), or perhaps something new altogether.

    5. Finally, yes, we'd all like to have more money available to ESA to fund these and other exciting missions: we have plenty of interesting ideas. Europeans should think about writing to their parliamentary / governmental representatives about exactly this point. That said, it's not quite true to say, as someone did, that we're newbies in this game: ESA has been involved in a whole bunch of excellent astronomy and solar system missions already (Giotto, Rosetta, ISO, SOHO, XMM, Mars Express, HST, to name but a few), some alone, some in collaboration. There are more to come over the next few years as well (e.g. Herschel, Planck, Gaia, JWST), so watch this space (sorry).

    1. Re:A little additional background by j-b0y · · Score: 1

      As someone watching the selection process with curiousity, one thing struck me; where's Darwin?

      It's interesting that Plato was selected (instead?). Clearly from a ESA perspective it's more in line with current thinking; reuse either the Herschel or Gaia bus and build on Corot. I imagine that the French delegation were pushing hard too. But ESA has invested quite a lot of time on the Darwin concept and I would have though that it would have made it at to at least the study phase.

      Was Darwin too far out on the cutting edge compared to Plato? Was it too closely mingled with TPF? Too expensive?

      Also 3M+3L = 8 or 9 missions? Too much choice, it seems. Hope there are enough study scientists to go round.

      --
      Please remain calm, there is no reason to pani... wait, where are you all going?
  14. I propose a 5-year mission... by master_p · · Score: 1

    ...here is the proposal:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_trek

  15. Drill? by Gorimek · · Score: 1

    If you have a good heat source, there is no need to drill through an ice layer.

    1. Re:Drill? by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      That's awesome. Just tip over one of the RTGs, wait until it melts through the surface, dive in, Profit!
      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!