APPENDIX A
ADVANCED INSTRUMENT CONCEPTS
FOR A
NEAR-SUN FLYBY MISSION
1.0 Introduction
This NRA is jointly sponsored by the Office of Space Access
and Technology and the Office of Space Science. The Office
of Space Access and Technology supports the development of
innovative approaches to miniaturization and reducing the
cost of spacecraft systems and scientific instrumentation.
The Space Physics Division of the Office of Space Science
supports scientific programs that seek to understand the
origin, evolution, and interactions of space plasmas and
electromagnetic fields in the heliosphere and the cosmos. A
key space physics mission that has been advocated since the
1970's is one that would send a spacecraft to within a few
solar radii of the Sun's surface in order to measure the
fundamental physical conditions of the solar corona in a
region critical to the heating of the corona and formation
of the solar wind which cannot be measured remotely. This
key region of the corona, from 3 to about 20 solar radii
above the Sun's surface, is where the solar wind is
accelerated to supersonic velocities and the properties of
the solar wind are established. These phenomena are
fundamental not only to the physics of the Sun, but to the
whole heliosphere, and to stellar winds that are known to
originate from other stars.
2.0 Program Objectives and Goals
This NRA solicits proposals that utilize new innovative
concepts and advanced technologies for the conceptual
definition and research investigation of science
instruments, groups of instruments, and complete integrated
instrumentation packages for a near-Sun flyby mission. The
goal is to demonstrate that an instrument payload that
addresses some or all of the mission objectives (see Section
3 below) is achievable within (and possibly for
significantly less than) the current reference mission
constraints of mass, power, environmental extremes, and
cost. For the purposes of this NRA, the Fire mission will
be used as the reference mission. Other mission
architectures are possible and, although these other mission
concepts accommodate and allocate resources for instruments
differently, the basic limitations and constraints of a near-
Sun flyby mission are the same as those described for the
Fire mission. The intent of this program is to fund
investigations that promise highly innovative, breakthrough
approaches for the science payload rather than only
incremental enhancements of existing techniques. The
selected efforts will assist in formulating a mission
concept that provides a low cost, focused science mission
involving one or two spacecraft that will fly to only a few
solar radii above the Sun's surface. Concepts can be
proposed for an individual instrument, groups of
instruments, or a complete integrated instrumentation
package. These instrument concepts shall be compatible
with the reference science objectives noted in Section 3.2,
and consistent with the general limitations and constraints
described for the reference mission architecture given in
A-1
Section 3.3 and Section 3.4, and the mechanical and thermal
specifications given in Section 3.5, all of this Appendix.
It must be emphasized that, in an era of constrained
budgets, any near-Sun flyby mission will be a first
exploratory mission. Regardless of the current baseline,
instruments with the lowest cost to develop and the least
demands on spacecraft design and resources, consistent with
breakthrough science, are most likely to be those that make
a mission realizable and, therefore, those most worth
support through this NRA.
This NRA program only seeks to define experiment concepts
through appropriate design and laboratory testing, not to
build flight hardware itself. There is no implication that
an Announcement of Opportunity for a Solar Probe and/or Fire
mission will be issued in the future, nor if such a
solicitation is issued that any instrument concept selected
for study through this NRA will either be included in the
strawman payload or be selected even if it is so included.
3.0 Background
3.1 Reference Near-Sun Flyby Mission - The Fire
Mission
The concept of a near-Sun flyby mission has been studied
independently by both the U.S. and Russia for a number of
years and, since April 1994, jointly under the name of the
Fire mission. In broad terms, the original U.S.-only Solar
Probe mission was a single spacecraft mission with the
spacecraft launched into an orbit that incorporates a
Jupiter gravity assist (JGA) in order to achieve flyby of
the Sun at a perihelion of 4 solar radii Rs, that is, about
3 Rs above the Sun's surface. The joint Fire mission ( Ref.
1) would consist of a U.S. spacecraft to 4 launched aboard a
Russian launch vehicle simultaneously with a Russian
spacecraft whose perihelion would be at about 10 Rs. The
flyby of this second spacecraft at 10 Rs is expected to
considerably increase the science yield of the mission,
since it will be possible to measure nearly simultaneously
the physical state of the corona at two different points
along a given radius from the Sun as well as afford a better
perspective for imaging the solar phenomena sampled in situ
by both spacecraft.
The current baseline Fire mission assumes the inner
spacecraft to be sponsored by the U.S. and the outer one by
Russia but that the payloads of both would be jointly
sponsored. This NRA solicits advanced instrument concepts
that could be utilized on either or both of the spacecraft.
Under the current plan, in September 2001 the U.S.
spacecraft and the Russian spacecraft are launched
simultaneously aboard a single Russian Proton launch vehicle
augmented with a Star-48 upper stage, which is necessary in
order to achieve the required injection energy of
about 121 km² /s² to achieve a 4 Rs perihelion. Shortly after
separation, the Russian spacecraft must maneuver itself into
a 10 Rs perihelion trajectory that will arrive at perihelion
simultaneously with the U. S. spacecraft. The
interplanetary trajectory takes the two spacecraft first to
Jupiter for a gravity swingby in 2003. The spacecraft then
essentially free-fall back to the Sun for their respective
perihelion passages. The dual flybys of the Sun occur
approximately 3.7 years after launch (May 2005).
A-2
The ecliptic inclinations of the two orbits are chosen to be
exactly 90° , thereby providing for a passage over both
solar poles as well as the necessary geometry for the
parabolic High Gain Antenna (HGA)/heat shield. Perihelion
is planned to occur when the orbit plane is orthogonal to
the Earth-Spacecraft line. This allows continuous
communication with the Earth since there are no solar
occultations and continuous pointing of the parabolic
shield/antenna toward the Earth. This orbit also allows a
simultaneous view of the Sun and its corona by ground-
and/or space-based "context" observations.
3.2 Fire Mission Science Objectives
The Fire mission will study the last unexplored region of
our inner solar system to understand the origin of the solar
corona, its structure, and its dynamics. The major
scientific objectives of the mission (Ref. 2 ) may be
summarized through three key questions:
a. What is the origin of the solar wind?
b. Why does a million degree corona exist around the
Sun?
c. Where in the vicinity of the Sun does the solar wind
become accelerated?
d. What mechanisms accelerate, store, and transport
energetic particles near the Sun?
It is now widely recognized that the answer to all four
questions lies in measurements that are impractical or
impossible to make from the ground or Earth orbit. Their
answers all require appropriate measurements with a payload
of two generic classes of carefully coordinated experiments,
namely, a complement of particle and field experiments to
measure the intrinsic plasma parameters of the solar corona,
and imaging experiments that can provide the visual context
of the features being sampled in situ by the plasma
instruments, as well as possibly relating the Sun's
"surface" phenomena to those in the overlying corona.
The specific set of strawman measurement objectives are:
a. Particles and fields measurement objectives -
- To determine the characteristics of the
magnetized plasma of the solar wind in the corona.
- To characterize plasma dynamics in the context
of large-scale magnetic structures in the coronal
source regions of the solar wind.
- To determine the nature of the waves and plasma
turbulence in the corona and inner heliosphere, as
well as their role in solar wind dynamics.
- To characterize the magnetic fields,
temperatures, and morphology of the underlying
coronal structures.
- To measure the spectrum and determine the origin
of energetic particles in the corona and inner
heliosphere.
b. Imaging measurement objectives -
- To provide optical "context" observations of the
corona sampled by the in situ experiments.
- To obtain the three dimensional structure of the
large-scale corona by utilizing the polar view
afforded by the spacecraft as they approach
perihelion.
- To infer coronal properties below the regions
sampled by the in situ experiments (i.e., in the
region 1-3 Rs).
- To obtain high-resolution images (<70 km on the
Sun) of coronal structures that are impossible to
resolve from the Earth.
- To measure and characterize the polar magnetic
fields.
A-3
3.3 Fire Mission - U.S. Spacecraft
3.3.1 Spacecraft Concept
The design approach for the U.S. spacecraft is to reduce the
total mass and power by extensive reliance on advanced
technology, integration of functions, and miniaturization of
both spacecraft systems and the science payload. The NASA
guidelines used to develop the mission architecture for the
U.S. portion of the program use a non-nuclear spacecraft
power system, restrict the total phase C/D development cost
to under $250M (this restricts the cost for the scientific
payload(s) to under $30M), retain compatibility with a Delta
II launch vehicle, and minimize operations costs.
Table 3-1 summarizes the launch opportunity characteristics
and the major events for the Fire mission.
For the U. S. spacecraft, the solar encounter prime mission
phase begins at 10 days prior to perihelion (P-10 days),
when the spacecraft are at 0.5 AU and ends after depletion
of the primary battery, which is expected at approximately
P+3 days. During the closest approach phase (P-1 day to P+1
day), science data are both stored and transmitted in real-
time via two simultaneous data paths. From P+1 day to P+3
days the stored data are then retransmitted to allow provide
redundancy of transmission of the closest approach data .
3.3.2 Spacecraft Baseline
The baseline U.S. spacecraft design is shown in Figures 3-1
and 3-2. It incorporates a unique combined primary heat
shield and high gain antenna (HGA). As the U.S. spacecraft
approaches the Sun, the large silicon solar array (Low
Illumination Low Temperature Array, LILTA) is tilted to
reduce heat on the array. Once the spacecraft reaches
approximately 0.7 AU, the LILTA temperature becomes too high
( approximately 125 ° C) for further operation, necessitating
its jettison from the spacecraft. At that time, a smaller
High Temperature (GaAs) Solar Array (HTSA) is deployed that
can survive temperatures to 225 ° C at 0.2 AU, whereupon the
HTSA is jettisoned. The remainder of the mission then
relies on a lightweight primary battery as a power source.
This primary heat shield/antenna unit is constructed of
carbon-carbon (C-C) and is expected to have a mass loss of <=
2.5 mg/s at the solar flux of approximately 400 W/cm² at the
4 Rs perihelion. This shield plus three additional
secondary thermal shields constitute the key elements of the
Thermal Protection System (TPS) for the spacecraft. At
perihelion, the TPS casts a conical umbral shadow over the
spacecraft where the sensitive electronics and instruments
must reside and operate at temperatures of less than 30° C.
The umbra is a limited volume which must contain all of the
sensitive components including the instruments.
As described above, two different deployable solar arrays
and two different batteries, supply nonnuclear power for
cruise and perihelion passage. Because of the minimal solar
dependent power at Jupiter, no power is available there for
science. The spacecraft communicates to Earth via the fixed
heat shield/HGA using an X-band transponder (a low gain X-
band antenna is also available during early cruise). The
downlink data rate at perihelion is estimated to be greater
A-4
than 4 kbps. The anticipated telemetry rate during the
entire close-Sun encounter phase (perihelion ± 1 day) is
shown in Figure 3-3.
Fire Reference Mission Trajectory Event Summary
| Event
| Description | Event Marker
|
|---|
| Launch | Launch and interplanetary injection | September 2001
|
| Separation | Configure spacecraft for cruise (orientation, deploy LILTA) | L+1 hrs.
|
| Jupiter flyby | Jupiter closest approach at 9 RJ | January 2003
|
| Transition to HTSA | Deploy HTSA at 0.7 AU and jettison LILT | P-18 d at 150Rs
|
| Initiate prime mission | Spacecraft at 0.5 AU,Continuous Tracking Begins | P-10 d at 100Rs
|
| Transition to battery | Jettison HTSA at 0.2 AU | P-3 d at 45 Rs
|
| Begin solar flyby | Data stored in addition to real time transmission | P-1 d at 20 Rs
|
| Perihelion | Solar encounters at 4 and 10 Rs | May 2005
|
| End prime mission | End data storage and real time transmission | P+1 d
|
| Playback | Transmission of stored data (twice) | P+1 to P+3 d
|
| End of mission | Primary battery depleted | P+3 d at 45 Rs
|
Table 3- 1. Fire Reference Mission Trajectory Event
Summary. (P = Perihelion; Rs = Solar radii;
d = days).
A low mass/high performance data system (the Spacecraft Data
Subsystem - SDS) combines the digital processing functions
of central control, attitude control, data storage and
control, spacecraft command detection and sequencing, and
telemetry processing. This subsystem is designed around a
RISC-based CPU (>2.5 MIPS). A separate Science Data
Processing (SDP) unit, with hardware identical to the SDS is
proposed. The SDP interfaces to the SDS through serial
lines, allowing parallel efforts for test and integration of
science and spacecraft software and hardware. Onboard solid
state data storage of 2.0 Gb is provided.
The spacecraft is 3-axis stabilized (cold gas and hydrazine)
with a pointing control of ± 0.2 degree during solar
encounter (perihelion ± 10 days). The spacecraft will
supply a delta V of 200 m/s for Jupiter gravity assist targeting
A-5
and trajectory correction maneuvers during the cruise. The
propulsion system uses a combination of a cold-gas nitrogen
(GN2) reaction control system for 3-axis attitude control,
and a hydrazine (N2H4) propulsion system for propulsive
maneuvers and attitude control functions at perihelion.
Figure 3-1. Perihelion configuration of the U.S
spacecraft. The umbra cone provided by the
primary shield is shaded gray. At 4 Rs the Sun
subtends 14.5° therefore, the minimum umbra half
angle (measured from the bottom of cone) has been
designed to 15.75°, giving 1.25° half angle of
margin.
A-6
Figure 3-2. Three views of the stowed
configuration of U.S. Fire spacecraft (all
dimensions are in meters).
A-7
Figure 3-3. Telemetry rate vs. Time (and distance) from
perihelion.
A-8
3.3.3 Scientific Instrument Accommodation
The mass, power and data rate allocations for the baseline
spacecraft are summarized in Table 3-2. It should be
emphasized that the total payload allocations represent the
maximum allowable. Reductions in instrument resource
requirements could allow for reductions in spacecraft
systems that would lead to a lower cost for the mission.
Utilizing new innovative concepts or advanced technologies
to reduce the payload mass, power, and data rate
requirements while still providing a suite of instruments
capable of obtaining mission science objectives is the
primary purpose of this NRA.
Table 3-2 Science Payload Allocations
| Science Payload | Mass (kg) | Power(W) | Data Rate (bits/s)
|
|---|
| U.S. Payload | 17 | 14 | 2800
|
| Russian Payload* | 35 | 40 | > 32000
|
| * See Ref. 1
|
The primary constraints on total data return near
perihelion is the combination of a maximum telemetry rate
capability at perihelion of about 3 kb/s, a total data
storage capacity of 2 Gb, and a maximum time available for
playback past perihelion of 3 days. Though individual
instruments may sample and internally (or through SDP
resources) handle data at extremely high rates, the total
amount of payload data that can be played back is limited by
the three system constraints. It should be noted that a
total real-time rate of about 3 kbps is planned at
perihelion. Data redundant to the real-time transmission or
data sampled at a higher rate and stored in this time period
must be played back as part of the post-perihelion maximum
data rate from P+1 day to end of mission at P+3 days.
Science payload data collection, processing, and sampling
strategies should be consistent with this operational
scenario. Telemetry rates will vary near perihelion because
of solar noise effects at the tracking stations as well as
the effects of coronal scintillations on the telecom link.
It is expected that the variation will be over an order of
magnitude during the encounter based on preliminary analyses
for the U.S. spacecraft (Ref. 2, Section 4.4.3).
Instruments located within the umbra can view the corona
above the limb of the sun. Since the tangential spacecraft
velocity at perihelion is greater than 300 km/s and the
nearly radial solar wind velocity there is expected to be
less than 300 km/s, then the solar wind will appear to
approach the spacecraft from its side. For low energy
particles (plasma), this velocity aberration of the plasma
will allow the particles to appear to approach the
spacecraft from the ram side of the spacecraft . Figure 3-4
exemplifies the velocity aberration at 4Rs for two radial
plasma velocities as a function of distance in solar radii.
A more detailed analysis of the available viewing directions
near perihelion can be found in Ref. 3 , pp. 5-8. Thus, the
plasma instruments need not directly view the Sun to take
measurements of the solar wind. Instrument concepts that
require direct viewing of the solar disc through a small
aperture in the heat shield system (primary and/or secondary
shields) may be feasible, but additional thermal analysis
will be necessary to assess the impact to the shield and
spacecraft thermal design.
A-9
The spacecraft will provide a deployable boom extending
approximately 1 meter from the spacecraft bus to position
any instrument mounted in the tip of the umbral cone at
perihelion. The spacecraft bus is estimated to have a
background magnetic field of less than 20nt at a 1 meter
distance from the bus. If any proposed instrument must
position an appendage outside of the umbra, it must not
radiate energy back to the spacecraft bus (see 3.4.2) and
provide their own thermal protection which cannot affect the
spacecraft thermal design.
Figure 3-4. Velocity Aberration at 4Rs
A-10
3.4 Fire Mission - Russian Spacecraft
The Tsiolkovsky spacecraft is currently in a preliminary
design phase with few details about its capabilities. The
information that exists appears in Ref. 1 and is summarized
below.
Figure 3-5 illustrates our latest estimate of the
Tsiolkovsky spacecraft configuration as it appeared in Ref.
1. The primary shield has a conical shape and that the path
for the optical instruments is through a hole in center of
the cone. This configuration is possible because of the
10Rs perihelion which has a much lower thermal flux
(approximately 60 W / cm²). In addition the umbra is about
2.5 times longer than the 4Rs spacecraft allowing a larger
volume for instrument accommodation.
It is expected that the spacecraft will have an X band
telemetry capability of greater than 30 kb/sec at the 10Rs
perihelion through the DSN 34 meter network. (The 70 meter
network will be dedicated at that time to the 4Rs
spacecraft, if it is also using an X-band telecommunication
system.)
The spacecraft power will be supplied by an RTG and is
planned to have a life after perihelion. Because of the
power from the RTG available at Jupiter, science data
acquisition at Jupiter is being planned.
The current allocations for science instruments on the
Tsiolkovsky spacecraft are summarized in Table 3-2.
Figure 3-5 Russian "Tsiolkovsky" Spacecraft (Very
Preliminary ) Drawing
A-11
3.5 Mechanical and Thermal Instrument
Specifications for the U.S. Spacecraft
3.5.1 MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Instruments and instrument components mounted within
the umbra may be mounted to the spacecraft structure or
mounted to a magnetometer boom structure. Instrument
mechanical operation should not pass vibration and
unbalanced torques or forces to the spacecraft. Any
deployable appendages should be identified and estimates
provided of their pre- and postdeployment mass and dynamic
properties. Identify any specialized mechanical interfaces
or mechanical accommodations that the instrument expects of
the spacecraft. Clearly identify field-of-view and mounting
constraints needed to accommodate the instrument
3.5.2 THERMAL SPECIFICATIONS
The temperature level that instruments within the umbra will
be exposed to is between +5 to +40 deg. C for all flight
phases. This temperature range is for all locations within
the umbra that do not view flight system structure beyond
the multilayer insulation.
The thermal environment that an instrument will be exposed
to if it were outside the umbra varies between the solar
intensity at Jupiter (5.2 AU) and at 4 Rs from the center of
the Sun. Further thermal energy reflected to the spacecraft
by the exposed instrument must be evaluated, and this energy
must be such that it does not cause a failure of the
spacecraft. The total heat rejection capability available
for payload instruments is less than 10 watts. Heat loads
developed by instrument components in the umbra and/or parts
of instruments exposed to the direct solar environment must
not pass more than this amount of heat to the portion of the
spacecraft that is behind the TPS shields by radiation or
conduction.
4.0 Guidance for Proposal Preparation and Submission
4.1 General Provisions
This NRA solicits proposals that utilize new innovative
concepts and advanced technologies for conceptual definition
and research investigations of science instruments for a
near-Sun flyby mission as described in Section 3 in this
Appendix. Investigators may propose to study a single
instrument, a group of instruments, or a complete integrated
instrumentation package. In all cases, however, the
proposed effort must be in the context of a complete
experiment, not just a portion thereof (e.g., a detector),
no matter how important that portion may be to a generic
type of experiment. It is incumbent upon the proposer to
demonstrate that their proposed effort is clearly related to
an entire experiment. Again it is emphasized that this NRA
seeks proposals for highly innovative and creative
instrument designs, not incremental advances in known
instrument designs, that are focused on the science
objectives listed in Section 3.2.
All proposals received in response to this NRA will be
reviewed on an equal basis regardless of whether other tasks
A-12
by the same investigators are being funded through other
NASA programs. Selections from among the submitted
proposals will be based solely on their scientific and
technical merit and with respect to the programmatic factors
specified in Section 5 below in this Appendix.
Proposers may propose investigations requiring periods of
performance for up to 12 months. NASA reserves the right
to request a revised proposal with restricted objectives
appropriate for a reduced period of performance and/or
reduced budget.
Investigators who are selected as a result of this NRA are
expected to provide deliverables as follows:
- informal one-page quarterly reports sent by e-mail
that would describe progress
and status of key activities and resources,
- a final report that provides detailed results of the
work done, including a conceptual design for a
complete hardware experiment suitable for the
reference Fire mission described in Section 3 above;
- hardware performance evaluation reports (if hardware
is developed as part of the selected effort);
- a plan for additional development (if necessary)
that would lead to a complete experiment (hardware
phase only) including estimates of its requirements
for spacecraft resources and spacecraft integration,
(e.g., viewing); and
- a cost estimate for the complete experiment (hardware
phase only).
Investigators are encouraged (but not required) to make
summaries of their efforts and results available on the
World Wide Web for public information and educational
purposes.
Owing to the restricted level of funding available for this
program, only proposals for instruments that would study one
or more of the reference mission objectives listed in
Section 3.2 above will be evaluated. Proposals for
instruments with objectives other than those will be
returned without evaluation. Should a Solar Probe and/or
Fire mission be eventually approved, the actual payload will
be selected through an open NASA Announcement of Opportunity
for which any investigations of perceived relevance may be
proposed.
4.2 Notice of Intent to Propose
Advance knowledge of the proposals likely to be submitted is
useful for planning the review process. Therefore, a
descriptive Notice of Intent to propose should be submitted
to the address given in the NRA, according to the schedule
given in Section 6. This Notice of Intent should include:
- reference to this NRA by its alpha-numeric
identifier;
- the name, institutional address, and phone number of
the Principal Investigator, and of any Co-
Investigators (to the extent known by the date of the
Notice);
- the title (brief and descriptive) of the
investigation; and,
- a brief (not to exceed 100 words) description of the
instrument concept expected to be proposed.
4.3 Specific Proposal Preparation Information
A-13
Proposals submitted in response to this NRA should follow
provisions of Appendix B, "Instructions for Responding to
NASA Research Announcements for Solicited Proposals," with
the following exceptions:
- Replace paragraph (¶ ) b. of Section 7., entitled
"Transmittal Letter or Prefatory Material," in its entirety
as follows:
"b. Transmittal Letter or Prefatory Material
"In addition to any transmittal letter that
the sponsoring institution may wish to send,
the first four pages of a proposal shall
constitute summary sheets using the Proposal
Prefatory Material in Appendix C of this NRA
as follows:
- Cover Sheet (p. C-2)
- Proposal Summary (p. C-3)
- Budget and Personnel Summary (p. C-4)
- Current and Pending Research Support
(p. C-5).
"Careful attention should be given to an
accurate and complete preparation of the
Proposal Summary in accord with the model
format given on p. C-3. The Proposal Summary
may also serve as the Abstract for the
investigation.
All proposals from educational and private
institutions must be accompanied by properly
signed certifications as follows (sample
forms are enclosed as pages C-6, C-7, and C-
8, respectively, of Appendix C of this NRA):
- Pursuant to Executive Order 12549, a
Certification for Debarment and
Suspension;
- Pursuant to Drug-Free Workplace Act of
1988, a Certification for Drug Free
Workplace; and
- Pursuant to Title 31 of the U.S. Code,
a Certification Regarding Lobbying."
- Replace Appendix B, Section 9, entitled "LENGTH," in its
entirety as follows:
"Proposals should contain only substantive
material essential for a complete
understanding of the proposed project and
shall not exceed 15 pages of 8-1/2x11 inch
paper exclusive of the required prefatory
pages (Appendix C) and bibliographic
references. Each side of a sheet containing
text or a figure is considered a page. Text
is limited to 55 lines per side using a font
having <= 14 characters per inch. A one page
curriculum vitae and a bibliography relevant
to the proposed research may be appended for
the PI and each Co-I. The full institutional
budget format may be appended to U.S.
proposals.
"Subsidiary material may be included as
appendices not to exceed a total of 10 pages;
however, proposers are advised that peer
reviewers will not be required to read more
than the specified page limit noted above for
the Investigation Description. Proposals
missing the requested prefatory materials
will be returned. Do not send reprints or
preprints of articles, nor audio or visual
recordings. Proposals must use metric units.
In order to facilitate recycling and minimize
the use of paper, proposals should be on
white paper with a minimum of color or
photographic inserts, printed double-sided if
possible, and bound in a manner that
facilitates easy disassembly."
A-14
4.4 Specific Guidance for Proposals from U.S.
Institutions
All proposals submitted by a U.S. institution or from non-
U.S. institutions that include U.S.-based Co-Investigators
must comply with the guidance in Appendix B, Section 7, ¶ i,
entitled "PROPOSED COSTS." In addition, this section is
supplemented by the following two subsections concerning
details of proposal costs:
"(4) The proposal should contain
sufficient cost details and supporting
information to facilitate a speedy evaluation
and award. The proposed costing information
should be in sufficient detail to allow the
Government to identify budgeted elements for
evaluation purposes. Dollar amounts proposed
with no explanation (e.g., Equipment: $5,000,
or Labor: $23,000) may cause delays in
funding should the proposal be selected.
Generally, the Government will evaluate costs
in terms of their reasonableness and
allowability. Each category should be
explained. Offerers should exercise prudent
judgment, since the amount of detail
necessarily varies with the complexity of the
proposal.
"Direct labor costs should be separated by
titles or disciplines (e.g., Principal
Investigator, Co-Investigator, clerical
support, etc.) with estimated hours, hourly
rates, and total amounts for each. Estimates
should include a basis of estimate such as
currently paid rates or outstanding offers to
prospective employees. This format allows
the Government to assess for reasonableness
by various means, including comparison to
similar skills at other organizations.
Indirect costs should be explained in order
for the Government to understand the basis of
the estimates.
"With regard to other costs, each significant
category should be detailed, explained, and
substantiated. For example, proposals for
equipment purchases should specify the type
of equipment, number of units, and unit cost.
Requested travel allowances should include
the number of trips, duration of each trip,
air fare, per diem, rental car expenses, etc.
"All subcontracts for commercial services or
products associated with an individual
proposal must receive approval before an
award is made. Therefore, it is necessary to
describe in some detail all intended
subcontracts by documentation such as a
Statement of Work, proposed personnel, cost,
fee, etc., so that a NASA awards specialist
can conduct a thorough review. Subcontracts
should be competitive whenever possible in
order to achieve the lowest possible cost to
the Government.
4.5 Specific Guidance for Proposals from Non-U.S.
Institutions
A-15
A scientist from a non-U.S. institution may propose for this
program either as a Co-I for a proposal submitted by a U.S.
PI or as a PI with a U.S. Co-I. In either case, NASA only
funds PI's or Co-I's, regardless of citizenship, who are
staff members of a U.S. institution. The following
A-22
guidelines must be followed by such non-U.S. proposers and
their own national sponsoring agencies in order for NASA to
consider their possible selection and execution of
appropriate arrangements.
1. A Notice of Intent to propose should be submitted as
indicated in Section 4.3. An additional copy of this Notice
of Intent to propose must also be sent to:
Ms. Shiron Gaines
International Relations Division
Code IRD (Attn. NRA 95-OSS-15)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Washington, DC 20546-0001
U.S.A.
2. Proposals should be submitted in accordance with the
provisions in Appendix B, as amended by Section 4. If the
proposal involves a Co-I from a U.S. institution, the
material in Section 4.4 above is applicable to that Co-I.
Proposals must be typewritten and in English. All non-U.S.
proposals will undergo the same evaluation and selection
processes as U.S. proposals.
3. Non-U.S. PI's or Co-I's planning to submit a proposal
should arrange with their appropriate governmental agency
for endorsement of the proposed activity. Such endorsement
by their national funding organization should indicate that
the proposal merits careful consideration by NASA, and that
if the proposal is selected, sufficient funds at the
sponsoring agency will be available to undertake the
activity envisioned.
4. The required copies (10 plus the signed original ) of
the proposal should be sent directly to the address given in
the NRA letter covering this Appendix. In addition, one
copy of the proposal and the letter of endorsement must be
sent to the address in item 1. above.
5. All proposals must be received before the established
closing date (see Section 6). Those received after the
closing date will be treated in accordance with NASA's
provisions for late proposals (Appendix B, Section 11). If
review and endorsement are not possible before the announced
closing date, non-U.S. sponsoring agencies may forward a
proposal without endorsement along with the date when a
decision on endorsement can be expected.
6. Shortly after the deadline for this Announcement, the
NASA Program Office coordinating this Announcement will send
an acknowledgment of the receipt of proposals to each
proposer.
7. Successful and unsuccessful proposers will be contacted
directly by the NASA Program Office coordinating this NRA
according to the schedule in Section 6. Copies of these
letters will also be sent to the sponsoring governmental
agency.
8. NASA's International Relations Division will make
arrangements to provide for the selectee's participation in
the program. Depending on the nature and extent of the
proposed cooperation, these arrangements may entail a letter
of notification by NASA, an exchange of letters between NASA
and the sponsoring foreign governmental agency, or an
agreement between NASA and the sponsoring foreign
governmental agency.
A-16
5.0 Proposal Evaluation and Selection
5.1 Evaluation Criteria
The criteria to be used for evaluation of proposals, as
given in Appendix B, Section 13, entitled "EVALUATION
FACTORS," are amended as follows:
The principal elements in evaluating a proposal are, in
priority order: 1) relevance to the science objectives of
the reference Fire mission; 2) intrinsic merit; 3) cost; and
4) experience. Relevance is a primary discriminator: a
proposal with little or no relevance to the mission
objectives and the payload constraints (mass, power, cost)
will be a candidate for rejection regardless of its
intrinsic merit or cost. A proposal that is relevant will
be evaluated on the basis of the extent of its relevance,
intrinsic merit, cost, and experience of the offerors.
5.1.1 Relevance
Determination of a proposal's relevance is based on the
extent to which the proposed investigation addresses the
mission science and measurement objectives discussed in
Section 3.2, within the payload constraints of mass, power,
and cost of the reference Fire mission.
5.1.2 Intrinsic Merit
Evaluation of a proposal's intrinsic merit includes
consideration of the following factors:
1. Overall technical merit. Since this NRA is aimed
at innovative and creative concepts for instruments, the
scientific review will be limited to an assessment of how
well the proposed instrument(s) addresses the mission
science and measurement objectives.
2. Uniqueness of the proposed investigation in the
sense that it:
- Provides a major improvement of an existing
approach in terms of the instrument(s) size,
mass, power, and/or cost as compared to
currently available instruments that address similar goals.
and/or
- Provides an entirely new approach that
advances the state of the art, thereby
enabling critical enhancements, new capabilities,
or dramatic cost reductions to the mission.
5.1.3 Cost
Evaluation of the cost of a proposed effort includes the
relationship of the proposed cost to available funds for
this NRA, as well as the realism and reasonableness of the
proposed cost.
A-17
5.1.4 Experience
Evaluation of experience includes consideration of the
following factors:
1. Qualifications, capabilities, and experience of
the proposal principal investigator and, if
applicable, key members of the investigator's technical
team.
2. Offeror's capabilities, related experience,
facilities, techniques, or unique combinations of
those which are integral factors for achieving the proposed
objectives.
5.2 Evaluation and Selection Procedures
Proposal evaluations will be achieved as described in
Appendix B, Section 14. It is anticipated that a non-
Government contractor will aid NASA in organizing and
documenting the peer reviews of the proposals, which will be
done by mail-in and/or panel reviews. External reviewer
comments are considered primarily only for the science and
technical merit of the proposals, whereas cost and relevance
factors will be reviewed by NASA. All non-Government
reviewers, whether participating on a panel or by mail, will
be required to sign nondisclosure statements prior to their
participation in the evaluation process. All final
selections will be made by the Director, Space Physics
Division. It is anticipated that selected proposals will be
managed and funded through the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on
behalf of the Space Physics Division.
6.0 Schedule for NRA
The schedule for this NRA is:
Release of NRA October 3, 1995
Notice of Intent due December 4, 1995
Deadline for submission of Proposal January 3, 1996 (4:30 pm EDT)
Expected announcement of selections February 16, 1996
Expected initiation of funding March 4, 1996.
A-18
7.0 References
The following references may be requested by contacting:
Mr. James E. Randolph
Solar Probe Study Manager
M/S 301-170U
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, CA 91109-8099
Phone: (818) 354-2732
Facsimile: (818) 393-9815
1. Report of the Joint U.S./Russian Technical
Working Groups: Mars Together and FIRE & ICE, JPL
Publication 94-29 (October 1994).
2. Solar Probe Mission and System Design
Concepts 1994, J. E. Randolph (ed.), JPL Internal
Document D-12396 (January 1995).
3. Solar Probe Scientific Rationale and Mission
Concept, JPL Publication D-6797 (November 1989).
4. Close Encounter With the Sun, Report of the
Minimum Solar Mission Science Definition Team, JPL
Internal Document D-12850 (August 1995).
A-19
This has been the access to this page since October 4, 1995.