*************************** ** THE GEM MESSENGER ** *************************** Volume 5, Number 32 November 6, 1995 ------------------------------------------ REPORT ON THE FALL MEETING OF THE ITM MOWG ------------------------------------------ From: John Craven (craven at GEEWIZ.GI.ALASKA.EDU) The Management Operations Working Group (MOWG) for NASA's Ionosphere, Thermosphere and Mesosphere Branch (ITM) held its second meeting of the year on August 31 and September 1, 1995, and its findings were then presented to the Space Physics Subcommittee of the Space Science Advisor Committee during its September meeting. The ITM findings are presently available to the community at http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/space/space_physics_home.html, but are not frequently accessed. Findings of the earlier 1995 meeting are also available from the same WWW site. The reports are written in the form of "findings" as a MOWG is not an official advisory body, and, as such, can not formally make recommendations to the government. In spite of this, the MOWG structure is intended to be one of the most direct, organizational links between individuals in the community and NASA. However, as Marge Kivelson indicated in her recent report on findings of the magnetospheric physics MOWG, we do not know if the MOWGs will be retained as part of the new NASA organization. Findings of the fall meeting are now provided here so that you can more easily discover what issues have been brought forward to NASA by members of the MOWG and by the ITM community. We encourage you to discuss these and other issues with members of this and the other three MOWGs within the Space Physics Division, which are identified at http://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/stp/spd.html#Mowg. Interested individuals are encouraged to attend meetings of the MOWGs for the purpose of bring to NASA's attention concerns and suggestions of the research community. As an example, the ITM MOWG received presentations at its last meeting from the University of Colorado (Stan Solomon) and Boston University (Supriya Chakrabarti) on their STEDI satellite missions, and from Brian Gilchrist at the University of Michigan on the results from a workshop on the technology and use of tethers in space research. All ITM meetings begin with Mary Mellott's overview of NASA events since the previous meeting, and George Withbrow routinely reserved several hours to meet with each MOWG. The ITM and magnetospheric physics MOWGs schedule joint meetings whenever possible. Present members of the ITM MOWG and their email addresses are: craven at giuaf.gi.alaska.edu John Craven (chair,'95) University of Alaska earle at mclapo.saic.com Gregory D. Earle SAIC dave at leonardo.colorado.edu David C. Fritts University of Colorado u5jmg at lepvax.gsfc.nasa.gov Joseph Grebowsky NASA/Goddard dave_gorney at qmail2.aero.org David J. Gorney Aerospace Corp. hagan at cedar.hao.ucar.edu Maura Hagan NCAR/HAO pollock at ssl.msfc.nasa.gov Craig J. Pollock NASA/Marshall rasmussen at sprlc.sprl.umich.edu Craig E. Rasmussen University of Michigan fasojka at sojka.cass.usu.edu Jan J. Sojka Utah State University hunter at swri.space.swri.edu Hunter J. Waite Southwest Research Inst. jlabelle at einstein.dartmouth.edu James W. LaBelle Dartmouth College jeng-hwa_yee at jhuapl.edu" Jeng-Hwa (Sam) Yee Applied Physics Lab/JHU mmellott at hq.nasa.gov Mary Mellott NASA Headquarters Findings of the Management Operations Working Group for the ITM Branch of NASA's Space Physics Division Meeting Date, 31 August - 1 September 1995 1. Proposal Reviews The ITM MOWG has reviewed the results of the survey entitled "NASA Science Grant Surveys: Results and Implications," which describes the responses of proposers and peer reviewers to questions regarding the procedures involved in proposal writing, submission, review and feedback. While the survey pointed out several areas in which improvements were desired, the ITM MOWG finds, in general, that the procedures currently employed by the ITM Branch already address many of the noted shortcomings. It is the opinion of the MOWG that the current procedures of the ITM Branch nearly optimize the peer review process under the present and anticipated personnel constraints. The following comments and considerations for improvements are suggested: * The panel review, supplemented by mail-in reviews, should be maintained as the primary mode of proposal peer review. Three specific improvements appear to be reasonable. First, panel reviewers should be encouraged to provide thorough reviews of all proposals assigned to them. To that end, the practice of assigning reviewers as "primary" or "secondary" should be eliminated. Second, proposals should be screened to eliminate the need for detailed reviews of proposals that are clearly inappropriate or non-competitive. Third, mail-in reviews should not be eliminated, but the number of mail-in reviews per proposal could be reduced (to perhaps two) in the interest of streamlining the process. * The ITM branch chief should continue to provide clear feedback on rejected proposals, especially on those that are clearly non-competitive and those that should be discouraged from future submissions. * The page limit for proposals should be shortened to about 10 pages for SR&T proposals and about 20 pages for the suborbital proposals. This action should lead to proposals that are clearer and more focused, and, therefore, easier to review efficiently. * The due date for proposals should be not less than 60 days from the release of the NRA. Letters of intent should be mandatory, since the letters are important for efficient planning at NASA Headquarters when selecting the membership of the review panels. Electronic submission of letters of intent and (perhaps) proposals should be considered. * Finally, the survey indicated some desire by proposers to receive clearer guidance in the NRAs on areas of research that are likely to be funded. The ITM MOWG believes that it would be inappropriate for NASA to write SR&T NRAs that strictly delineate the areas of research to be funded, because this could suppress creative ideas. 2. Missions and Future Directions * The ITM MOWG continues to advocate implementation of the critically important TIMED flight program. * The efforts of the SNOE and TERRIERS teams to develop and deploy workable and scientifically meaningful ITM flight missions within the framework of the STEDI program promise significant contributions to ITM science. They represent important programmatic pathfinders. * The evolution of spacecraft tether technology is approaching maturity. We encourage a clear articulation of tether-based ITM science applications via the competitive proposal process. * It is vital that access to space in the conduct of space science research (including small, intermediate and large missions) be gained using the full range of available launch vehicles and launch opportunities. Requiring a particular launch vehicle from the outset for a given mission class is sometimes unnecessary and counterproductive, and can preclude potentially more reasonable alternatives for selected missions. * While the ITM MOWG generally endorses efforts to develop and demonstrate the efficacy of low cost, short time scale scientific mission scenarios, these scenarios are as yet unproved. Therefore, funding for new programs of this class, such as the proposed UNEX program, should be derived either from appropriate path-finding elements within NASA or from existing programs which satisfy two criteria: (1) the contributing program should be large enough that it would not be seriously affected by the required funds diversion; and (2) the contributing program should not be one which already provides low cost, short time scale access to space. Specifically, the Space Physics Division's highly effective suborbital program provides the individual training and technological basis for small orbital missions and should not suffer a funds diversion in support of an unproven UNEX class flight program. * The ITM MOWG finds that NASA should identify a queue of flight missions which methodically addresses important and heretofore unexplored geophysical regions and processes within the ITM purview. We advocate that the Space Physics Division, in collaboration with interested members of the space physics community, develop a strategic plan that identifies and prioritizes required ITM scientific thrusts and thereby provides the context for the development of specific mission concepts which draw upon the entire range of available spacecraft. In such light, the application of promising new technologies, such as tethered payloads (and payload suites), could be considered and critically evaluated. 3. Future of the MOWGs The ITM MOWG strongly supports the continued existence of discipline- based MOWGs within the reorganized Office of Space Science (OSS). While acknowledging the obvious interdisciplinary needs within the OSS, there are equally numerous important issues that are more efficiently addressed at the more focused, discipline-based level. An insular NASA does not best serve the nation's science endeavor. The MOWGs provide a unique, direct and informal connection between NASA and the individual working scientists, and they have played a significant role in enhancing communications between NASA and the scientific community in both directions. 4. National Space Weather Program Present knowledge about the ITM region is inadequate to meet the requirements of the NSWP for specification and forecasts. In each distinct region of ITM physics, there are gaps in our fundamental physical understanding and associated ability to "predict (model)." This emphasizes the compelling nature of the research carried out by the ITM community. The full complement of ITM SR&T, suborbital and space physics theory programs, combined with existing (POLAR, SNOE, TERRIERS, UARS, WIND) and planned (TIMED, MI) NASA missions, provides fundamental contributions required for a successful NSWP. 5. Educational Outreach Educational outreach plays an important role in enhancing the general science knowledge of our nation's students, teachers, and general population. Hence, the ITM MOWG finds that educational outreach is an important responsibility of the space science community. Two examples of NASA's successes in this endeavor are the CAN and Space Grant University programs, which have established important links into secondary school systems. The ITM MOWG encourages NASA to continue the Space Physics Educational Outreach program. However, because of the small SPEO grant size, SPEO grant recipients are encouraged to collaborate with other outreach program participants that have already established networks into the K-12 grades and undergraduate college and university systems. It is also suggested that a special yearly award be created by NASA to acknowledge the contributions of individual scientists in outreach efforts. +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |To add name to the mailing list, send a message to: editor at igpp.ucla.edu | |For message to whole GEM mailing list, send to: gem at igpp.ucla.edu | | | |URL of GEM Home Page: http://igpp.ucla.edu/gem/Welcome.html | |Please update your e-mail address. | |CAUTION: Do not send messages to gem at igpp.ucla.edu unless you want | | your message to go to everyone in the GEM mailing list! | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+