The Q&A is from the chat. Additional Q&A as well as more detailed answers to some questions are available in the video.

Relationship between Ad ASTRA concepts and Flagship Studies

Q: The Ad ASTRA call doesn’t include X-ray and Far-IR flagships, correct?

A: Correct. The Ad ASTRA call is for 4 to 6 (>$1B) mission concepts for study, in addition to flagship-level X-ray and Far-IR studies already planned.

Q: How will these 4-6 studies be allocated?

A: In a similar fashion as for Astro2020 prep. APD will select STDT chairs and establish a study office within the Centers. STDT members will be nominated and selected. CML 3 is the final output—which defines the science and trade space — and the study / architectures will be guided by the STDTs

Q: We haven't yet defined whether the X-ray flagship will be, e.g., a high-angular resolution wide-field imager, a medium-angular resolution high-spectral resolution observatory, a very broadband imaging spectrometer, a rapid-reaction transient hunter etc. In the absence of this definition, how will ASTRA selections be kept distinct from the flagship?

A: This can be done in different ways. Within the X-Ray Study, there could be a range of mission sizes and capabilities (somewhat like the HWO EACs - where you have different aperture sizes). In the larger context of the ASTRA discussions (Ad ASTRA workshop) - X-ray concepts that fit into a distributed suite of missions (like the flaglet concept) could be considered in achieving a common set of science goals as a single member in a suite (for example).

Q: The XR SIG (Science Interest Group) already has several SAGs (Science Activity Groups) studying X-ray flagship concepts. Should these be submitting to Ad ASTRA?

A: All concepts are welcome. They should be focused on achieving a particular science goal— and not necessarily wavelength focused. X-ray and Far-IR are outliers —as these concepts were recommended by Astro2020. Manel is just showing examples of community coordinated efforts already underway.

Q: If the PAGs (Program Analysis Groups – Physics of the Cosmos, Cosmic Origins, Exoplanet Exploration) are going to be responsible for the selection of the additional 4 - 6 concepts, how do you plan to ensure that the selection process is made in an unbiased way and that there won't be conflicts of interest?

A: The PAGs will not be selecting detailed mission concepts, but will be relaying the community's identification of what the priority science questions are, and which concepts meet them, at the level defined when we did Astro 2020 input (X-ray Surveyor, Far-IR Surveyor, etc. ). Within CML3 - the trade space will allow for iteration of architectures with science that will define the range of configurations to study.

Q: How high-level should the mission concept be pitching the science goals in the template? Is connecting to specific questions or themes in the Astro 2020 Decadal a good baseline for high-level expectation?

A: Think CML 1 or 2 … very high level. Detailed concepts are welcome as part of the discussion as they can help to really lock down feasibility and science in some cases. However detailed concepts are not compulsory for discussion.

Q: Probe mission concepts already developed for the last Probe call don't really need any low-level concept development studies. Is there any point in those concepts submitting to ASTRA to ensure they are kept on lists and in mind going forward, as part of the Decadal input process, or is this really not recommended?

A: Probe-class missions studied as input into the last Decadal, and in the more recent Astrophysics Probes call, may be outdated, as science and other landscape changes are expected. Focus on the science priorities/questions and then decide which mission types make the most sense to study. If one of these older concepts fits in one of the science buckets, it may be appropriate to submit to ASTRA.

Q: Could you provide a bit more clarity regarding the White Papers due at the end of June? I am a little confused about their scope. Specifically, should a White Paper be strictly linked to a single mission concept proposed to ASTRA, or can it describe broader science goals that could be achieved across multiple, different mission concepts?

A: If you have a general science question, it’s probably best to contact relevant SAG to see how they might answer it.

Q: Should the X-ray SAG reports be converted into the recently circulated template form, or are we still putting all of that into the SAG report?

A: X-ray science is a bit different. Since we know we’ll be moving forward with an X-rays flagship, these WPs will have more purpose than just for the Ad ASTRA Workshop.

Q: If we have a concept idea that has science that crosses PAG boundaries (especially in situations where it might be less obvious), how do we make sure that it gets to the attention of the relevant PAGs?

A: In the submission form you will be asked to click on the relevant PAG, and one can select multiple PAGs if your concept crosses PAG boundaries. Also note that at the Ad ASTRA Workshop we will have participation from all the PAGs, so you’ll have the chance to present to the entire community.