Collaborations

Q: Does a NASA Center have to be involved in the proposal? 

A: Submissions are not formal proposals and a NASA Center does not need to be involved at this time. NASA Centers will provide support to the concept study teams once the Astrophysics Division Director has made selections. 

Q: In MIDEX and SMEX missions, collaboration with a NASA Center is often required and starts as early as the pre-concept phase. How does ASTRA compare in terms of the timing and expectations for NASA Center engagement?

A: Collaboration with a NASA Center is not required at this time as only high-level mission concepts are required. The request for mission concepts is preliminary pre-formulation (i.e. idea formulation).  

Q: At what stage are we expected to search & arrange for partnerships with industry and international collaborations? Is the expectation by the end of 2026, or at the time that the 4-6 missions are at the STDT phase?

A: Partnerships are not required at this stage of concept selection. Once the studies have been selected, and Science and Technology and Definition Teams developed, partnerships with industry and international participation will be established.

Scope

Q: Are these mission concepts for a flagship-class or probe-class?

A: Mission concepts are for large strategic missions that are >$1B. The ASTRA Initiative includes Probe- and Flagship-class missions.

Q: What is the anticipated timeline for the mission concepts and technology that will be selected as a part of this process: from today to launch? Is this planning for the 2030s, 2040s, or 2050s?

A: Mission prioritizations are recommended by the National Academies via Astrophysics Decadal Surveys. The Decadal Survey on Astronomy and Astrophysics 2020 (Astro2020): Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s, recommended the Great Observatories Mission and Technology Maturation Program, with the Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO) as the first entrant. While HWO continues to be the highest priority in this Program, the ASTRA Initiative will identify strategic technology developments that could start as early as FY27. The launch of missions selected for study by the NASA Astrophysics Division will depend on multiple factors, including the next Astrophysics Decadal and other programmatic considerations.

Q: How does this relate to current Probe selection status? E.g., would PRIMA advancing through the Probe-class mission pathway mean Far-IR mission concepts will not be prioritized in ASTRA? Conversely, since AXIS has been disqualified from the Probe competition, does this mean an AXIS-like X-ray mission should be excluded from ASTRA a priori or not?

A: Both X-ray and Far-IR concepts are prioritized as second entrants into the Astro2020 Great Observatories Mission and Technology Maturation Program, and so are included in the ASTRA Initiative. The level of study and prioritization will take into account programmatic considerations and Astrophysics portfolio balance. 

Q: Can you explain the line “up to six community-prioritized concepts, in addition to X-ray and Far-IR, selected by APD to enter the ASTRA Initiative [...]”. Does that mean that if 6 are selected, 8 total will be studied including X-ray and Far-IR? Should the community be submitting X-ray and Far-IR concepts to the study as part of the “up to 6”?

A: Both X-ray and Far-IR concepts are prioritized as second entrants into the Astro2020 Great Observatories Mission and Technology Maturation Program in Astro2020, and so will be included in the ASTRA Initiative. The community has been asked to identify up to six more mission concepts, for a max total of 8 mission concepts. 

Q: What are the long-term consequences of an idea being selected or not selected for ASTRA? Will other concepts still be selectable for missions when they’ve reached sufficient maturity without ASTRA? Will there be dedicated slots for missions drawing exclusively from concepts successful in the ASTRA process?

A: The ASTRA Initiative will develop selected mission concept studies to Concept Maturity Level 3 and Manufacturing Readiness Level of ~3 to 4, will identify tall-pole and long-lead technologies that the Astrophysics Division should prioritize and invest in, and will highlight science priorities, including those that have changed since Astro2020. A non-select of a mission concept for study in ASTRA does not preclude its submission by the community as a white paper to the next Decadal process. 

Selection Criteria and Timing

Q: How do we get from ~10 concepts to the 3-4 requested?

A: The Astrophysics Division is asking the community, with support from the Program Analysis Groups (PAGs), to provide feedback on a small set (4 to 6) of strategic mission concepts for study as entrants into this incubator program. The process used by the PAGs to collect and consolidate information is the responsibility of the PAGs. Points of contact are listed below:

COPAG: Shouleh Nikzad, COPAG Chair (shouleh.nikzad@jpl.nasa.gov)

PhysPAG: Manel Errando, PhysPAG Chair (errando@wustl.edu)

ExoPAG: Ian Crossfield, ExoPAG Chair (ianc@ku.edu)

Q: Why wouldn't all 5 probe concepts from the last round be submitted plus the four SAG flagships?

A: There were 10 Probe mission concepts studied for input into Astro2020, in addition to the four flagship-scale concepts. These studies are listed here. A top recommendation of Astro2020 was for the Great Observatories Mission and Technology Maturation Program, with the Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO) as the first entrant. An X-ray and Far-IR mission were recommended to enter this program following HWO. Following this recommendation, X-Ray and Far-IR flagship studies will be part of the ASTRA Initiative in addition to the 4-6 studies that are community selected. The Astrophysics Division encourages the community to select a Gamma-Ray (Time Domain and Multi-Messenger) and CMB mission as part of the 4-6 recommended missions to study, as these were also high priorities in Astro2020. However, given changes, and predicted changes, in the national and international mission landscape since Astro2020, emerging industry capabilities, and emphasis on the Artemis Program, the Astrophysics Division is asking the community to consider key new science gaps that can be addressed in this new environment.

Q: Who is going to decide the downselect?

A: The ASTRA mission concept study selections, informed by community input, will be determined by the NASA Astrophysics Division Director and Deputy.

Q: Do we know what NASA will do with the mission concepts that they select?

A: Following a similar procedure to that used to provide input into Astro2020, it is expected that Science and Technology Definition Teams (STDTs) will be established for each study. The STDTs will consist of nominated community members, and ex-officio international partners. A parallel effort (TBD) to encourage industry involvement will commence. The teams will be asked to study to Concept Maturity Level of 3, and Manufacturing Readiness Level ~3 to 4. A detailed process flow will be shared with the community later this calendar year. 

Q: For ideas that are intrinsically cross-PAG –  should they be run in parallel through the same gauntlet in all the PAGs?

A: The process used by the PAGs to collect and consolidate information is the responsibility of the PAGs. Points of contact are listed below:

COPAG: Shouleh Nikzad, COPAG Chair (shouleh.nikzad@jpl.nasa.gov)

PhysPAG: Manel Errando, PhysPAG Chair (errando@wustl.edu)

ExoPAG: Ian Crossfield, ExoPAG Chair (ianc@ku.edu)

Q: The timeline to select mission concepts (January 2027) seems relatively short. Why the urgency?

A: There are multiple reasons for starting these studies at this time. The ASTRA Initiative will 1) identify strategic (flagship/probe) mission concepts that expand our frontier to dramatically advance astrophysics; 2) study those concepts at a low fidelity level to inform strategic decisions within the Astrophysics Division; and 3) advance the concepts ahead of formal pre-Phase A activities for potential projects. This initiative is structured to reduce the total cost of future strategic missions, their time from conception-to-science, and their cost and schedule, in advance of formal project formulation. These studies will also provide the National Academies community-generated feasible mission architectures prior to the Astro2030 Decadal that will inform their prioritizations for the next decade. 

These studies are anticipated to take ~3.5 years to meet Concept Maturity Level of 3. As a point of reference, the process to select and develop mission concept studies to CML 4 (which resulted in a fully costed design reference mission) took 4.5 years.

Other

Q: To what extent will “technology evolution” be considered in the ASTRA prioritization? By this I mean planning for use of intermediate versions of technologies that are needed in more evolved states for later missions. The experience of using intermediate versions of technologies in flight can be invaluable for reducing risk in this commensurate cost for later flagships.

A: This option will be explored within the context of existing Programs and Opportunities with the Astrophysics Division portfolio.

Q: What is the interplay between ASTRA and Astro 2030 preps? Specifically, is the idea that Astro 2030 will be expected to rank lower-CML missions compared to Astro 2020?

A: These studies will provide the National Academies community-generated feasible mission architectures prior to the next Decadal that will inform their prioritizations. The concepts will be studied to Concept Maturity Level (CML) of 3 and Manufacturing Readiness Level of ~3 to 4. CML 3 explores the trade space of science objectives with specific investigations, while assessing the optimal mission architecture needed to meet those goals. Potential partnerships are identified, and cost drivers are identified. Emphasis is on the scientific priority of the proposed investigation. Manufacturing readiness will provide confidence in the ability to produce the required technology at the required scale for a large strategic mission, ensuring early industry involvement and manufacturing feasibility. A detailed process flow will be shared with the community later this calendar year.