Presentation on theme: "NASA Agency Report May 12, 2006 Kathy Fontaine WGISS-21 Budapest, Hungary."— Presentation transcript:
NASA Agency Report May 12, 2006 Kathy Fontaine WGISS-21 Budapest, Hungary
Exploration Systems Space Operations Science Aeronautics Research Mission Directorates Ames Research Center Dryden Flight Research Center Glenn Research Center Goddard Space Flight Center Jet Propulsion Laboratory Johnson Space Flight Center Kennedy Space Center Langley Research Center Marshall Space Flight Center Chief of Staff Inspector General White House Liaison Office of the Administrator Administrator Deputy Administrator Associate Administrator Centers Mission Support Offices Chief Financial Officer General Counsel Chief Information Officer Innovative Partnership Program Office of the Chief Engineer Prog Analysis & Evaluation NASA Advisory Council Aerospace Safety Advisory Council Office of the Chief of S&MA V3 NASA Shared Services Institutional Planning and Investments Office of infrastructure & Administration Office of Human Capital Management Office of Diversity & Equal Opportunity Office of Security and Program Protection Office of Procurement Office of Small & Disadvantaged Business Utilization Ofc of Institutions & Management Education Public Affairs Legislative Affairs External Affairs Strategic Communications Integrated Enterprise Mgt Prog Chief Medical Officer NASA Organization
2006 NASA Strategic Plan NASAs Strategic Goals Strategic Goal 1: Fly the Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than Strategic Goal 2: Complete the International Space Station in a manner consistent with NASAs International Partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. Strategic Goal 3: Develop a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics consistent with the redirection of the human spaceflight program to focus on exploration. Strategic Goal 4: Bring a new Crew Exploration Vehicle into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. Strategic Goal 5: Encourage the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. Strategic Goal 6: Establish a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations.
Proposed Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Organization Management & Policy Division (R. Maizel) Heliophysics Division (R. Fisher) Astrophysics Division (R. Howard-Act.) Planetary Science Division (A. Dantzler) Associate Administrator (AA) (M. Cleave) Deputy AA (C. Hartman) Chief Scientist (P. Hertz) Deputy AA for Programs (M. Luther) Chief Engineer (K. Ledbetter) Deputy AA for Technology (G. Komar-Act.) Earth Science Division (B. Cramer - Act.) Budget (C. Tupper) Policy (M. Allen) Administration (D. Woods)
SMD Programs * Science Mission Directorate Planetary Science Division Astrophysics Division Heliophysics Division Earth Science Division New Frontiers Mars Exploration Discovery Solar System Research Living with a Star Solar Terrestrial Probes Explorers Earth System Science Pathfinder Earth Systematic Missions New Millennium Deep Space Mission Systems Ground Network Hubble Space Telescope Navigator James Webb Space Telescope SOFIA GLAST ISSC: Herschel/Planck Division Program Earth Science Research Universe Research Beyond Einstein Applied Sciences Heliophysics Research Other Agency Support Programs ESS Multimission Ops Cassini
NASA Advisory Council (25 members) Science Committee (5 members) Science Subcommittees Executive Panel (chairs of SMD subcommittees) Astrophysics Subcommittee Heliophysics Subcommittee Planetary Science Subcommittee Earth Science Subcommittee Each Subcommittee has about 15 members NASA Advisory Committee Apparatus Planetary Protection Subcommittee ExplorationAeronautics Audit & Finance Human Capital
Earth Science Missions
LRD MCI&T CDR LRD I&T LRD MCI&TCDR LRD Spacecraft GPM OSTM OCO LDCM Aquarius Glory NPP Earth Science Flight Missions in Formulation/Development EOPM LRD = Launch Readiness Date EOPM = End of Prime Mission PDR = Preliminary Design Review CDR = Critical Design Review MC – Manufacturing Completed I&T = Integration & Test Completed PDR CDR PDR CDR
Some Current Data System Initiatives REASoN – wrapping up the first round in the next year ACCESS – just awarded this past February Earth Science Data System Working Groups – began in January EOSDIS Evolution
EOSDIS Evolution From the charter document, June 2004, signed by Ghassem Asrar The overarching goal for this study is to assess, by considering the future objectives, the current state of EOSDIS in order to identify the components that can/must evolve, those components that need to be replaced because of the rapid evolution of information technologies, and those components that require a phase-out strategy because they are no longer needed. This study should provide findings and options for evolution of elements of EOSDIS in order to: Increase end-to-end data system efficiency and operability Increase data usability by the science research, application, and modeling communities Provide services and tools needed to enable ready use of NASAs Earth Science data in the next-decadal models, research results, and decision support system benchmarking Improve support for end users
Evolution Process Steering Committee Appointed several teams to help assess different aspects of EOSDIS Evolution Evaluated team inputs throughout 2005 Recommended a course of action to NASA HQ in late 2005 Draft implementation plan accepted; ESDIS Project now working on details Key to the process is absolute minimal impact on existing operations.
Vision of Data System in 2015 Timeframe NASAs research communities have access to all EOS data through services at least as rich as any contemporary science information system, for example: Data access latency is no longer an impediment The physical location of data storage is irrelevant Finding data is based on common search engines (e.g., Google2015) Services are primarily invoked by machine-to-machine interfaces Multiple data and metadata streams can be seamlessly combined Custom processing (e.g., subsetting, averaging, reprojection) provides only the data needed, the way they are needed Open interfaces and best practice standard protocols are universally employed The research and value-added provider communities use EOS data interoperably with any other relevant data sources (e.g., NPOESS, METOP, GPM, numerical models, in situ systems) and systems (e.g., Global Earth Observation System of Systems). The EOS archive holdings are regularly peer reviewed for scientific merit: Procedures for such reviews have been developed and tested over a decade Derived products that are not deemed scientifically useful are phased out.
Vision, contd Mechanisms to collect and preserve the pedigree of derived data products are readily available. Processing and data are mobile: processing can be moved to data and/or data can be moved to processing. NASA data systems have evolved into components that allow fine- grained control over cost drivers. Expert knowledge is readily accessible to enable researchers to understand and use the data. Community feedback directly to those responsible for a given system element is readily available.
Key Aspects of the Implementation Plan Changes designed to Improve efficiency and introduce more autonomy, agility and scalability through infusion of newer commodity based hardware Move control over processing, archive and distribution for specific science data to science teams Reduce complexity of existing system through development of several DAAC-unique systems Reduce annual operational costs by 15-25% within 3 years Changes will happen gradually over next 2-3 years and are planned to Reduce risk associated with operational changes Have proof of value periods before taking next steps Continue full operations while evolving
Cool NASA Results New Blue Marble generated using Terra MODIS data
California Floods Flooding on the San Joaquin River (top) in mid April captured by MODIS Aqua. Bottom photo is one month earlier prior to above average rainfall.
Summary Science organization and planning at NASA has undergone considerable change over the past year, and there is more to come. But the essentials remain the same: Science questions drive mission and technology investments. Science and technology research will be selected based on open, competitive processes. The pace of scientific progress will demand continuous technological advancement. A vast web of partnerships in science, technology, and applications are required to successfully conduct Earth system science.