Space Studies Board

On June 8, 1983, Space Science Board Chair Thomas Donahue sent the following letter to NASA Administrator James Beggs.

The Space Science Board has asked me to forward to you some recommendations it has to make regarding science related issues that it sees as critical in the way the Space Telescope (ST) problems are handled. We are very gratified with the strong leadership that you are displaying where ST is concerned and your emphatic reiteration of the value NASA places on this project. We are also pleased with the indications that in many key places there is a disposition to cope with ST problems in a way that will allow the United States to maintain the momentum in Space Science that now is being regenerated.

However, in examining the structure of the ST project, both as it was in the past and as it is now revised, we find that there are resources available to NASA on the science side of the house that can and should be exploited more effectively than they are now. These resources provide the means to insure that technical issues are identified and resolved in a timely and effective fashion and in a way that will insure the realization of optimal scientific objectives by this important scientific facility. in particular, looking at the ST project from the perspective of many scientists with intimate experience in large space missions, the Board judges that NASA should improve the mechanisms by which the Science Working Group interacts with Project Management through a strong, well staffed Project Science office. It also has a strong conviction that NASA should exploit the availability of the highly qualified staff at the Space Telescope Science institute to work problems during the development phase of the project while it prepares for the operational phase.

With regard to the impact of the Space Telescope delay and overrun on other science projects, we understand the various considerations that govern the future of the Solar Optical Telescope. Where AXAP is concerned, we note the high priority afforded to this facility by the Board's Committee on Space Astronomy and Astrophysics and by the Astronomy Survey Committee. It also calls attention to the damage that could be done to the preeminence of the United States in this important area of astronomy which its own scientists discovered and developed by a delay in moving toward the launching of AXAF. if a delay is inevitable, it would seem to be wise to make an asset of adversity by finding means not only to preserve the nation's capability to execute this kind of science between now and the time the project starts but also to enhance the technology that will be needed for the mission.

In making these recommendations, our purpose in the tradition of the Space Science Board-NASA interactions is to be helpful to you in your efforts to attain a goal very important to each of us.

The Space Science Board (SSB) wishes to address three matters that it considers to be critical science issues arising from the present scheduling difficulties being encountered by the Space Telescope (ST):

1. The Board and the Committee on Space Astronomy and Astrophysics have received several presentations from NASA personnel concerning the technical and managerial problems being experienced by the ST project. The SSB is encouraged by the evidence of high level management attention and commitment, on the part of NASA, to the solution of the managerial problems being experienced. However, the Board has serious concerns about the adequacy of the present mechanisms by which NASA obtains scientific advice in developing the ST. In order to insure the achievement of the scientific performance required of the ST, there must be substantial and continual scientific involvement in the evaluation of system performance, technical approaches, and cost-performance trades. To this end, the Board recommends that NASA make full and effective use of the institutional resources available to it: project scientist, Science Working Group, and the Space Telescope Science Institute. In particular, the Board recommends:

a. That NASA consider appointing a chief project scientist and insuring that he has strong staff support available to him;

b. That a procedure be developed to insure that timely and effective advice on science related issues from the Science Working Group is available to the ST project and NASA management; and

c. That the Space Telescope Science Institute be given a greater role in the development phase of the Space Telescope.

The Board notes that the third recommendation is in accordance with that of the NAS report, Institutional Arrangements for the Space Telescope (NAS, 1976):

"The Institute, through the activities of scientists and engineers on its staff, should be informed about all developments in the ST project which may significantly change the scientific capabilities of the ST relative to the baseline specifications, and should participate to the greatest possible extent in tradeoff decisions and design modifications during the development of the ST and its subsequent refurbishment."

2. The Board is concerned that a realistic program for adequate testing, calibration, and integration of the telescope instruments be in place. To this end, it urges NASA to work closely with the Science Working Group and the Space Telescope Science Institute in setting up such a program.

3. The Board is encouraged by evidence that the Administration and Congress are disposed to solve the ST problems in ways that minimize the threat to attainment of other space science objectives. We, therefore, encourage NASA to proceed in an orderly fashion to put in place its high priority science projects of the future, such as UARS, TOPEX, OPEN, SOT, AXAF, and the Planetary Observer initiatives.