WASHINGTON — NASA defended the choice of two ideas for find out about because the company’s first astrophysics probe-class challenge amid neighborhood lawsuits that the 2 missions don’t seem to be on an equivalent footing.
NASA introduced Oct. 3 that it picked two proposals for additional find out about for its new Astrophysics Probe Explorer, or APEX, line of missions. The 2 proposals each and every gained $5 million for one-year research to refine their designs. NASA plans to select some of the proposals in 2026 as the primary probe-class challenge for release in 2032.
The APEX program, in keeping with a advice from the Astro2020 decadal survey, is designed to fill an opening between smaller Explorer-class astrophysics missions and bigger flagship missions just like the James Webb House Telescope. NASA set a value cap of $1 billion, except for release and any global contributions, and required proposals for this primary festival to hold out far-infrared or X-ray astronomy.
One of the crucial decided on proposals, the Complex X-ray Imaging Satellite tv for pc, or AXIS, will perform quite a lot of astrophysics research at X-ray wavelengths with a big box of view and prime spatial answer. The opposite, Probe far-Infrared Project for Astrophysics, or PRIMA, would carry out far-infrared imaging and spectroscopy the usage of a 1.8-meter telescope.
Within the weeks following NASA’s choice of AXIS and PRIMA, there have been hypothesis within the astrophysics neighborhood that the 2 weren’t essentially the very best rated proposals that had been submitted and evaluated by means of NASA. At a web based the city corridor consultation Oct. 23, Mark Clampin, NASA astrophysics department director, declined to touch upon questions submitted in regards to the variety procedure for the reason that company used to be nonetheless debriefing groups whose proposals weren’t selected.
He addressed the problem, regardless that, at a Nov. 7 assembly of the company’s Astrophysics Advisory Committee (APAC), protecting the choice of the 2 proposals. “In settling on the 2 missions that we picked, PRIMA and AXIS, we in reality aimed to stability the astrophysics portfolio and align with the decadal priorities set out by means of the science neighborhood,” he mentioned, arguing they may perform science now not imaginable with smaller Explorer missions.
“Each probes had been selected as a result of they promised to yield insights that supplement and lengthen our present features and amplify neighborhood involvement in the usage of those missions,” he persevered. “The base line: they had been the most productive science investigations, in order that’s why they had been picked.”
Committee individuals later raised questions on that variety procedure. That incorporated the influence that the 2 proposals “don’t seem to be at the identical footing” relating to era readiness.
Clampin rejected that declare. “Our point of view is that the ones missions are on a identical footing and we decided on them in keeping with the standard of the science systems,” he mentioned. “We don’t seem to be beginning with an asymmetric or unequal enjoying box.”
Neither the committee individuals nor Clampin mentioned specifics in regards to the two proposals and perceptions that they aren’t on an equivalent enjoying box. Alternatively, all over a later public remark length on the APAC assembly, committee individuals went via questions submitted on-line and upvoted, with lots of the best questions addressing the APEX variety.
The ones questions incorporated claims that some of the missions ranked less than some that weren’t decided on. NASA used a one-to-four scale to categorize proposals once they had been evaluated on clinical advantage; clinical implementation advantage and feasibility; and technical, control and value.
One of the crucial decided on proposals, the questions claimed, used to be rated as Class 1, the very best stage. Alternatively, they claimed the opposite used to be positioned in Class 3, which NASA defines as “meritorious investigations that require additional building” and which might be typically now not thought to be for variety. The lower-ranked challenge used to be reportedly picked over different proposals rated in each Classes 1 and a pair of.
Different questions indicated that the lower-rated proposal that used to be decided on used to be AXIS, one thing that Clampin or others on the assembly didn’t ascertain. Clampin said that he would now not speak about explicit rankings at the proposals.
In line with one public remark, regardless that, he mentioned NASA used to be now not sure to select handiest Class 1 missions. “We opted to choose two proposals that we felt had been those we needed to head ahead with,” he mentioned. “We don’t seem to be required to choose a Class 1 proposal and NASA has now not at all times decided on Class 1 proposals.”
“I might strongly urge the neighborhood to get at the back of those research and prevent attempting to select them aside,” he mentioned previous within the assembly, “as it’s now not truthful to the PIs [principal investigators] of those systems both.”
Comparable
