UBC Faculty Research and Publications

A Vision for Canadian Space Exploration Caiazzo, Ilaria; Gallagher, Sarah; Heyl, Jeremy Aug 9, 2017

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
52383-Caiazzo_I_et_al_Vision_canadian_space_exploration.pdf [ 941.73kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 52383-1.0352001.json
JSON-LD: 52383-1.0352001-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 52383-1.0352001-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 52383-1.0352001-rdf.json
Turtle: 52383-1.0352001-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 52383-1.0352001-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 52383-1.0352001-source.json
Full Text
52383-1.0352001-fulltext.txt
Citation
52383-1.0352001.ris

Full Text

A Vision for Canadian Space Exploration  We propose a sustained and balanced program in space exploration to fuel innovation             in the space sector, ​support Canada's world-leading space researchers, inspire the next            generation of scientists and innovators, and create thousands of highly skilled,           well-paying jobs for Canadians. During the next decade we recommend a total             investment of approximately $1B, increasing to $1.3B in each decade that follows,            including a regular flagship mission that Canada would lead and a constellation of             smaller missions, either led by Canada or in collaboration with international partners.   Contributors Primary Authors Ilaria Caiazzo​, Doctoral Student, University of British Columbia Sarah Gallagher​, Associate Professor, Western University Jeremy Heyl​, Professor, University of British Columbia CSEW 2016 Topical Team Leaders Roberto Abraham​, Professor, University of Toronto, President of CASCA, Origins TT Luigi Gallo​, Professor, Saint Mary’s University, High-Energy Astrophysics TT John Moores​, Assistant Professor, York University, Planetary Atmospheres TT Gordon Sarty, ​Professor, University of Saskatchewan, Health & Radiation TT Douglas Scott​, Professor, University of British Columbia, Cosmology TT Greg Slater, ​Professor, McMaster University, Astrobiology TT Andrew Yau​, Professor, University of Calgary, Space Environment TT Other Contributors Ed Cloutis​, Professor, University of Winnipeg Nicolas Cowan, ​Assistant Professor, McGill University Paul Fulford​, Program Manager, MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates John Hutchings, ​ Principal Research Officer, NRC Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics       Executive Summary Developing the technology required for space exploration missions (space astronomy,          planetary science, and space health and life sciences) represents one of the most challenging              engineering opportunities of our time and an economic driver for advanced technologies. This             leads to prosperity through innovation and the associated use of technologies developed for             space exploration (e.g., surgical robotics, telemedicine, remote mining, imaging), strengthening          Canada’s international reputation as an advanced nation in science and technology research,            and raising literacy by inspiring Canadian students to pursue higher education in the STEM              (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) areas critical to developing tomorrow’s          technically capable Canadian workforce. Indeed, space exploration, perhaps uniquely, ignites          interest and motivates young minds to pursue careers in the sciences, engineering and             high-tech sectors. Consequently, Canadian universities have made and continue to make           substantial investments in faculty, students, cutting-edge laboratories and infrastructure related          to space exploration.  Building upon early successes in space robotics and earth observation, Canada’s expertise            has expanded to enter a new era of investment in space exploration: the realm of planetary                and space science missions. Notable successes include instrument contributions on the           Phoenix Mars Lander, the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover and the Herschel Space             Observatory as well as the MOST space telescope. The Canadian Space Agency is             contributing to the ​James Webb Space Telescope ​in the form of a $170M investment in key                components for NASA’s flagship mission. A history of CSA support for such missions             culminating in ​JWST ​enabled Canadian industrial partners to develop world-leading expertise           in space technologies.  Having a continuous human presence in space is now an accepted fact of life. The               International Space Station has been continuously populated for over sixteen years and future             missions to Mars and the Moon are in advanced stages of planning. Yet, we know little about                 how long-duration exposure to microgravity and radiation, or the low levels of gravity found on               Mars and the Moon affect the human body. We are seeking measures to counteract the               deleterious effects we do know about, and Canada’s strong presence in the international space              research community means we are actively involved in key studies to look at the physiological               and perceptual issues associated with changes in gravity.  While Canada has had a track record of impressive contributions to international space             exploration missions, we have failed to join several key recent NASA mission opportunities,             including the Mars 2020 rover and the MoonRise lunar sample return mission. The window is               closing fast for a Canadian contribution to NASA’s dark-energy flagship mission WFIRST and             for the ESA X-ray flagship mission Athena. It is paramount that Canada is ready to take                advantage of such opportunities when they arise to ensure that the space science and              engineering community of today will remain in Canada, and that the community of tomorrow              1   will once again push the limits of exploration. Canada is now at a critical point where it needs to                   set a strategy for participation in future missions.  An environment that fosters scientific and engineering innovation requires maintenance and           growth in the form of substantial and reliable injections of resources. The Canadian space              exploration sector is currently underfunded. Canada spends the least on its space program             within the G8 countries in terms of actual dollars and the second lowest per capita. Per year,                 Canada spends only $16M on space exploration missions and technology, much less than             comparable nations as a fraction of GDP. For example, France spends about 0.01% of GDP on                space science, and the US about twice more. In the Canadian context, these would translate               to $250-500M/yr, ​more than ​ten times ​the current funding level​. ​In addition, the lack of a                coherent and reliable process for allocating funding via the CSA obstructs scientific and             engineering innovation: hardware investments in space missions are not followed up with            support of science teams to reap the rewards of substantial investment in instruments;             promising technologies are explored and never developed towards a launch opportunity           because of unreliable funding streams; opportunities to join international missions are missed            because of the lack of a process for responding quickly to new ventures; and finally, young                scientific and engineering talent is lost to other countries with more robust support for space               exploration.  Given the depth of talent already present within Canadian universities and industry, the space              exploration sector is ripe for growth. In the next decade, Canada should maintain its scientific               leadership in space exploration and develop its pool of young scientists. Canadian aerospace             companies should be recognized as essential partners in the most exciting international space             missions. Critically, ​Canada should lead a flagship space exploration mission to advance the             frontiers of our scientific understanding.  Given the existing landscape of expertise and creativity, these compelling goals are feasible             with a funding level now of approximately $130M/yr and the adoption of a process within CSA                to allocate resources regularly and with agility. We envision a structured, long-term space             exploration program for Canada, a total investment of $1B over the next ten years that ramps                up to $1.3B over the following decade. This framework fuels future innovation driven by the               Canadian space-science community and their industrial partners. Innovation from initial          investment in space science is measured not by percent but by factors of ten. The promise of                 scientific discoveries inspires current and future engineers and also drives industry to develop             new technologies that might not be justified by short-term financial rewards. That is, this              collaboration between scientists and industry shakes up the classic risk-reward balance and            encourages the aerospace industry to take calculated risks that bring new, transformative            technologies into being.  A succession of competitive calls for proposals, arranged in cycles that cover ten years, will               grow Canadian expertise in space science and technology, inspire our communities and reach             out to our partners around the world. Moreover, it guarantees that several missions at different               2   stages are under development simultaneously and that each mission is chosen competitively,            fueling innovation and cultivating a broad and deep space industry. The outlined funding             program would be divided nearly equally into small projects and missions (less than $40M,              yearly calls), medium missions (up to $200M, every five years) and large missions (up to               $500M, once per decade) to develop depth and continuity in the sector. A crucial aspect of a                 successful plan for space exploration is that funding is guaranteed at every stage of a mission,                especially during the early feasibility study phase (about 10% of the mission budget) and the               late science and operation phase (about 10%). For each call for proposals, two or three               competing projects will be selected through rigorous peer review to go through a design phase,               and this will assure both that the final selection will be robust and that a broader community of                  researchers and their industrial partners will develop new expertise and new technologies. The             final scientific investment will ensure that the goals of the mission are ultimately achieved.  Our proposed framework over a decade will stimulate vigorous interaction between scientists            and aerospace companies throughout Canada by generating a series of competitions for            missions; each proposal call has several levels of competitive assessment and development,            cultivating a broad range of collaborations and technologies and creating a robust industry             within Canada.   The comprehensive contributions of Canadian scientists and industry to several missions over past decades means that Canada now has the expertise to lead a large (about $400M) space science mission where we invite our international partners to join our Canadian project (rather than the other way around), stimulating our aerospace industry, while inspiring a new generation of young Canadians.      3   The Canadian Space Agency: Starved Ambition  In 2012, the Emerson report found an aerospace industry without direction or sufficient             1funding. It argued for a new long-term space plan to update the plan from 1994 as well as                  renewed, sustained funding for the Canadian Space Agency and a new governance structure             for the agency. The 2014 Space Policy Framework outlined broad principles for the Canadian              2Space Agency but did not provide a steady funding stream. Now, five years after the Emerson                report, we are still without a long-term plan for government investment in space and the A-base                funding for the CSA is at its lowest level since 1999. Fortunately, our previous investments in                space have a very long lead-time, and so we are still reaping the benefits of the planning and                  investments that began in the 1990s. However, if we do not choose to resume investment in                space exploration soon, we will continue to lose momentum. Capabilities, once lost, are very              difficult to rebuild. Canada has already missed opportunities for major missions and lost highly              qualified engineers and scientists to other countries. The current plan for the CSA forecasts              decreased funding in general and for space exploration in particular. After a decade of              3neglect, further decreases in funding will decimate the Canadian capacity for space            exploration. We argue that an increase in funding at least to the levels of the early 2000s, and                  ideally beyond, is crucial to maintain and grow Canada’s space capacity and to fuel innovation.   In 1999 the Canadian government funded the CSA with $300M of A-base funding. This was               4sufficient at the time to maintain the core programs, but did not allow the agency to grow or to                   commit to any large programs. Since that time, the A-base funding has actually decreased to               $250M, and the government has supplemented this with ad hoc funding to meet the CSA’s               existing commitments, without allowing for new endeavours or growth. Furthermore, the current            financial governance structure and ad hoc funding infusions for the CSA has made Canadian              participation in international projects difficult if not impossible. Even modest financial decisions            (at the level of a few million dollars) must be decided by the Treasury Board rather than within                  the CSA itself. This approval process has resulted in delays and missed opportunities for              partnerships. Our proposal is to either move these decisions to a funding agency or to operate                the program on a strict timeline so that the Treasury Board will know well in advance of                 upcoming programs in order  to encourage timely decision making.   After more than a decade of stagnant funding, Canada’s leadership and expertise in the space               sector are beginning to erode, and without a renewed commitment to innovation and a              reinvigorated vision for the CSA this loss may be irrecoverable. Our historical leadership and              expertise are crucial both to Canada’s internal security and to engage our international             partners, which amplifies Canadian investment. Despite this recent lack of investment in future             1 ​http://aerospacereview.ca/eic/site/060.nsf/eng/home 2 ​http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/publications/space-policy/default.asp 3 ​http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/publications/dp-2017-2018.asp 4 ​http://nationofinnovators.ca/index.php?option=com_publivateideamodule&controller=media&view=media&id=169 4   endeavours, our past efforts are poised to bear fruit with the launch of perhaps the most                ambitious science experiment ever, the James Webb Space Telescope, with the CSA as one              of three key partners. Do we continue to let the CSA dwindle into obsolescence or do we take                  this historic achievement as an opportunity to reinvigorate the Canadian space exploration            program to inspire our communities and build innovative technologies? Societal Benefits of Space Exploration: Inspiration and Innovation “We choose to go to the Moon. We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.”   US President. John F, Kennedy, 12 Sept 1962  The Naylor report (​Canada’s    Fundamental Science Review )   5recognized that “societies without    great science and scholarship [...] are      impoverished in multiple dimensions.”    6Two of these dimensions are the      inspiration that motivates young    people, and the innovation that fuels      economies. In perhaps no other     human endeavor are inspiration and     innovation more tightly linked than in      space exploration, and Canada has     been part of it since the beginning.       Just 17 days after John Kennedy set       the US on a course to the moon, with         Alouette 1​, Canada became the third      nation to construct a satellite and the       fourth to operate one in space. Inspiration Exploration is a fundamentally human endeavour motivated by our natural curiosity to            understand the functioning of the world. Space exploration in particular causes us to cast our               view beyond the bounds of our planet to our Solar System, our Milky Way, and beyond to the                  earliest light from a nascent Universe. We can frame our urge to explore space as seeking to                 answer the following three questions.  5 ​http://www.sciencereview.ca/eic/site/059.nsf/eng/home 6 p. 5, ​Investing in Canada’s Future, Strengthening the Foundations of Canadian Research 5   The advent of Kennedy’s Apollo program had a direct positive effect by inspiring students to pursue STEM fields.  From Siegfried, W.H., "Space Colonization—Benefits for the World", Space Technology and Applications International Forum, 2003.   What's out there? ​If we only ever look within the boundary set by our own atmosphere, we                 miss out on much of the complexity and diversity of the Universe. Within our Solar System, the                 highest mountains are on Mars, clouds of poisonous gas surround Jupiter, and solid chunks of               iron orbit the Sun in the asteroid belt. Icy visitors come from beyond Pluto as comets. Beyond                 the Solar neighbourhood, extreme gravity bends spacetime around black holes, dark matter            keeps galaxies in their perpetual merry-go-round, massive stars explode and provide newly            forming star systems with the elements that are the building blocks of future planets and even                life. The extreme - and more typical - environments in the Universe are not accessible without                exploration into space, and we can learn about the fundamental forces by probing these              environments in ways that are impossible on Earth.  Where did we come from? The appearance of complex life on Earth is a circumstance arising                within the present epoch in the evolution of our Galaxy, around a specific type of star, on a                  particular rocky planet. We do not yet know exactly how life arose on Earth or how unusual life                  is in the Universe. Are the peculiarities of our planet necessary, or is the appearance of life                 quite robust? Addressing this question requires historical exploration to understand the nature            6   of an early Earth and to identify other locations within our Solar System and around nearby                stars where life may arise.  How can humans explore space? ​As we cast our view beyond Earth, we recognize that our                green and blue planet is special and unusually hospitable in a Universe hostile to fragile human                bodies. To bring ourselves outside our protective atmosphere is an extensive undertaking that             requires substantial investments in the machinery to keep humans alive in space, and the              health sciences to keep our bodies robustly functional. Physically transporting humans to            space to explore our Solar System requires investment.  These big questions fuel the desire of many young people to pursue STEM fields, so that they learn about the boundaries of our present knowledge, and develop the tools to contribute to further knowledge.  Astronomy 101 classes in colleges and universities across the country are filled with students from all fields who are fascinated by the weird and wonderful Universe we live in, and motivated by the remarkable achievements of space exploration in planetary science and astronomy.  Third graders have countless questions about black holes, planets around other stars, how people survive in space, and the most recent spacecraft they have been following in the media.  Aerospace companies attract the best engineers to work on instruments for space exploration.  Innovation “Space is at the cutting edge of innovation.”   Hon. Naveep Baines, Minister of ISED In the funding landscape of research and development, support for space exploration plays a              unique and powerful role. It is essentially curiosity-driven, usually by members of the             higher-education community (so it falls under the category of university research and            development), but the bulk of funding is usually ultimately directed to the private sector. This               reverses one of the key Canadian funding models of the past decade, with support for basic                research only to serve the private sector (e.g., the NSERC SPG and CRD programs). Space               exploration is a powerful driver of innovation because the goals are necessarily long-term and              transformative. Scientific missions routinely achieve ten-fold jumps in capabilities beyond the           current state of the art. A brilliant example is the JWST mission, to be launched in 2018, for                  which the Canadian Space Agency partnered with NASA and ESA: over most of its range of                sensitivity, JWST is 30 to 100 times more sensitive than current technology. This leap in               capability is required in space exploration missions due to the challenging nature of the science               questions that drive the missions.  Furthermore, support of space exploration, driven by the curiosity of our nation’s scientists,             naturally creates powerful innovation clusters. The top scientists in our government           77 ​http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/062.nsf/eng/home 7   laboratories and universities seek out the expertise of our best engineers in the aerospace              industry with the key goal of creating transformative technologies. In Canada, aerospace is a              leader in innovation, with a rate of research and development investment higher than in Europe               and other industries within Canada. Furthermore, every $1B invested in space generates an             additional $1.2B of immediate economic activity,​8 meaning new markets and new jobs; more             than half of the new positions are HQP in STEM disciplines. The indirect activity generated by                investment in space is much larger. Canadian space researchers in astrophysics and planetary             science account for nearly seven percent of the world’s research publications in these areas.              Canada thus ranks between third and sixth worldwide for impact (depending on the discipline).              Space exploration specifically teams two of the strongest innovation engines in Canada —             space science researchers and Canadian aerospace companies — to build the next Moon (or              Mars) shot.  Back on Earth, spending on space exploration fuels a wide range of economic activity. The               2015 report, ​Comprehensive Socio-Economic Impact Assessment of the Canadian Space          Sector , estimated that the total revenue of the Canadian space sector was $5.4B annually,              8giving jobs to nearly 25,000 Canadians. About 53% of these positions were HQP, where the               mean contribution of these HQP to the Canadian GDP is $160,000, twice the national average.               Furthermore, job creation in this sector is six times the national average and the sector as a                 whole is growing at 3.6% annually, twice the rate of the economy in general. The space                industry is growing and creating high quality jobs for Canadians.  The bulk of the direct revenues in the space sector come from satellite operations and               services; that is, they come long after the initial investment in research and development and               the actual manufacture of satellite and launch systems. The development and launch of space              systems are low-profit-margin activities, and substantial value is added downstream; therefore,           a short-term strategy to reap rewards from research and development in space technology is              unlikely to succeed. On the other hand, this means that the government investment in this               area can have substantial beneficial effects. In particular, although Canada accounts for less             than one percent of total government spending on space world-wide, its share in the world               space market is nearly two percent. The dynamic downstream industry for services based on              space technology thrives on the infrastructure built in part through government investments in             space technology development and space missions. For example, CSA’s $4.7M investment in            the ESA ARTES program resulted in $99M in sales of products developed for the program by                COM DEV. Despite these successes, the ​Impact Assessment ​concluded that the baseline            funding of the CSA was not sufficient to maintain Canadian space capabilities in the long term                and furthermore that the budget instability and unpredictability had an especially detrimental            effect on small and medium-sized enterprises.  The Naylor report argues that decisions guiding government investment in research and            98 ​http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/publications/2015-assessment-canadian-space-sector.asp 9 ​http://www.sciencereview.ca/eic/site/059.nsf/eng/home 8   development should especially focus on the positive externalities of the support. Government            support of research is most crucial in cases where the benefits of the research are least likely                 to accrue for the research organization itself. Without government support, such potentially            transformational work would simply not get done. These positive externalities are strong in the              space industry, as we described earlier, and they are most powerful for space exploration              where the benefits are huge, but the timescales to impact are difficult to predict... In 1975,                during the ramp down in NASA spending after the end of the Apollo program, Michael Evans                (“The Economic Impact of NASA R&D Spending” known as “The Chase Report” ) studied the              10economic effect of diverting $1B annually from other government programs to research and             development at NASA. After ten years he concluded that $1B yearly investment would result in               an increase of $23B in annual GDP; the most dramatic increases were at the end of the                 decade and continuing to grow. Therefore, for a total investment of $10B, the total increase in                GDP over the decade would be $83B. By the end of the decade 800,000 more people would                 have jobs because of the yearly investment. In fact, toward the end of the decade, he argued                 that the economic benefits of the research and development would increase by 30% annually,              so continued investment would reap dramatically larger benefits.  For Canada the evidence is more anecdotal, but many technologies developed in Canada for              space exploration have built industries on the ground.        It all started with Canada’s first satellite, the science         mission Alouette One. The team of engineers had no         11experience in satellite building, and their design was        vastly more ambitious than other satellites of the time;         it had 50-metre antennas and solid-state electronics.       The twin objectives of the program were to study the          ionosphere and develop Canada’s space capacity. Of       course, it achieved both. The prime contractor, de        Havilland of Toronto, became Spar Aeropsace (now       part of MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates). Spar       and later MDA built the Canada arms for the space          shuttles and the ISS, cementing Canada’s leadership       in space robotics.  More recently we look to the development of the         attitude control system for Canada’s first space       telescope, MOST. To achieve its scientific goals,       MOST had to point stably for weeks on end with          one-arcsecond precision. This precision was far better than had ever been achieved before in              a microsatellite, the mass of MOST being 60kg. It also pioneered the use of commercially               available electronics on an effectively open-source bus from AMSAT for a scientific mission,             10 ​https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760017000.pdf 11 ​http://bit.ly/alouette_national_post 9   dramatically reducing the costs. The economic legacy of MOST lies in the dozens of satellites               for which members of the MOST team subsequently designed key elements. The            Canadian-led missions BRITE Constellation and NEOSat are among these, but so are many             micro- and nano-satellites from around the world. This precision attitude control system allows             Moore’s Law of computing to carry over into space with small, cheaper, more reliable and more                capable satellites. The technical heritage of MOST is the all-purpose micro- or nano-satellite             that is revolutionising the space industry today, and Canada is a world leader in this               technology. Canadian Investment in Space: Principles and Practices The recent Naylor report ​outlines several key principles for a successful program of              government-sponsored research which apply equally well to space. Curiosity-Driven At the most basic level, government-sponsored research should be driven by the interests of              the researcher themselves.  We quote from the review:  A key lesson emerging from the foregoing is that governments must give            researchers the support and freedom to pursue their very best ideas, any one of              which holds the potential to result in a discovery or insight that is the seed of a                 future innovation or industry. Indeed, the collective effort of the research           enterprise is most fruitful when scientists and scholars can let their curiosity and             passions guide them to those areas where they can make their very best             contributions. As observed by Bill Downe, Chief Executive Officer of BMO           Financial Group, “breakthroughs happen when brilliant minds are given the          freedom to probe the nooks and crannies of reality—when exceptional people           ask fundamental questions about the deepest problems and make extraordinary          discoveries that benefit us all.”  12World-leading and Globally-Collaborative  As a small and well-off country Canada must focus its government research support to achieve               excellence over a wide range of subjects and foster global leadership in areas vital to Canadian                interests, such as space. Furthermore, Canadian researchers can use this leadership role to             13foster global collaborations to maximise their impact. Balanced     A successful program should balance the portfolio over projects with a range of sizes, research               12 As quoted in: Universities Canada. Universities Canada’s Response to the Government of Canada’s Review of Federal Support for Fundamental Science, p. 4. Ottawa: Universities Canada; September 2016.  13 ​https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/SECD/Reports/DEFENCE_DPR_FINAL_e.pdf 10   areas and investigators. Small projects provide training grounds for more ambitious           endeavours. Such balance will foster the growth of the expertise of both early-career and              established researchers, investing both in today’s leaders and those of the future.  Meritocratic The process of selecting the projects to fund should be open, well-defined and based on the                merits of the proposals themselves as well as the research team leading the project. A panel                of experts in the area of research and the implementation of the project should be the final                 arbiters of the choice of projects to fund.  Efficient The available funds to support research of any sort are limited, so it is crucial to limit waste. In                   the context of space exploration it is also crucial for efficiency to limit risk as well, both the risk                   in terms of the costs of a program ballooning and in terms of the mission failing. A multi-tiered                  approach of selecting several programs for initial design and cost studies, followed by down              selections mitigates both of these risks and increases efficiency. Meanwhile it also supports a              broader community of researchers. The teams that are initially unsuccessful in the full             competition develop both technologies and expertise in the first rounds and still have the              opportunity to be successful in subsequent competitions. Furthermore, efficiency requires that           the funding be consistent, so that both academic researchers and their industrial partners can              develop capacity and retain HQP. Best Practices These principles should guide the design of a sustainable, balanced space exploration program             for Canada. We briefly outline below a sample process (further detailed in Appendix A) based               on these principles, taking into account successful examples from other space agencies. In             this model, the program will be organized around a series of calls for projects and missions.                The questions that these missions will answer are only limited by the imagination of our               scientific community within the area of planetary exploration, space astronomy and space            health and life sciences. The calls will invite projects of a particular budget envelope with more                frequent calls for small projects and a single, decadal call for the largest projects. This tiered                approach will create a balanced and efficient program where a diverse group of researchers              and industrial partners can participate and innovate. Furthermore, the larger-scale          competitions will be coordinated with our global partners such as NASA and ESA to foster and                grow the international collaborations that CSA developed in the 1990s and 2000s through             missions such as JWST and the Curiosity Rover.  We examined the approaches of space exploration programs throughout the world to find the              best practices for a vibrant space exploration program. Furthermore, the Naylor report guided             our thinking. In particular the general process follows the outline of the review for the               assessment of an investment in a large scientific facility (we quote from the Naylor report): ● a peer-reviewed decision on beginning an investment;  11   ● a funded plan for the construction and operation of the facility, with continuing             oversight by a peer specialist/agency review group for the special facility;  ● a plan for decommissioning; and  ● a regular review scheduled to consider whether the facility still serves current needs. Drawing from the ESA Cosmic Vision program we augment this general process with two              additional levels of peer review. Space exploration is a high-risk, high-reward endeavour, and             as such specific actions must be taken to mitigate these risks. In particular the selection of a                 large or medium mission (budgets greater than $50M) will include two costing phases before              the final selection of a particular mission. In the first phase several (e.g. 4 or 5 per call)                  possible missions will be chosen and funded for analysis and definition (phase 0), with the               science team and an industrial partner completing the study in collaboration with the CSA. At               the second peer review, two missions will be chosen on the basis of scientific merit,               technological readiness and initial cost estimates. These two missions will each be funded for              two independent feasibility, preliminary design studies (phase A/B). Finally, the third peer            review will choose from among these designs the successful mission.  A tiered approach not only manages the risks of this program, but it also builds a robust space                  exploration community. Although at the end only one science team and industrial partner are              chosen for each mission, the process in fact creates and fosters up to five innovation clusters                of scientists and industrial partners at the first stage, and possibly four new collaborations at               the second stage. Looking at other space programs, some missions that are chosen in the first                stage but initially unsuccessful in one of the final two stages can build upon the funded                development in the unsuccessful call to propose a successful mission in a subsequent call.              Having a sustained and predictable investment in space exploration ensures that our persistent             investment bears continued innovation and results. These tiered studies foster the growth of             expertise and capacity, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, fostering a broader            and deeper space industry.  Given the principle of efficiency espoused above and in the Naylor report​, the question arises               of whether the Canadian Space Agency should become a large funding agency itself or should               it provide guidance in design and procurement in service of the proposers. In this latter case,                the proposed framework could be funded through new A-base funding at either NSERC or CFI,               but in this case space exploration would have to be added to the agency mandate. Such a                 program would mirror the success of the Planetary Science Directorate (PSD) within NASA.             PSD funds $​1.6 billion of research while spending only $7.1 million on management. ​In any               case Canada would have to commit to this new funding envelope over a decadal timescale               because space exploration is a long-term investment. ​For example, Canada’s participation in             JWST began around 1997 and may continue through 2028.   12   Launching a CSA for the 2020s: Canadian Space Exploration Program Overview The Canadian Space Agency needs continuous funding and a clear governance structure to             fuel innovation in Canada and inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers. The              current uncertain funding and sluggish decision making process at the CSA actually stifle             innovation in space science and prevent Canadian researchers and industry from partnering            with their peers around the world. Canadian space scientists and space industry are world              leaders and aspire to collaborate together, as demonstrated for example in the CASCA Long              Range Plan (LRP) and the funding of industrial research chairs by space industry leaders at               14Canadian universities, but it is impossible to develop this world-leading team with the current              level of funding and governance model at the CSA.  The 2012 Emerson report on “Canada’s Interest and Future in Space” identified a key              challenge to the Canadian space community:  The first lies within government: inadequate clarity of purpose with respect to            Canada's space program and its role in providing services and advancing           national priorities. This lack of focus appears to go back at least a decade and               has been manifested in weak planning, unstable budgets, and confusion about           the respective roles of the CSA and those government departments that are            major space users. In a sector whose undertakings are, by definition, long-term,            expensive, and complex, it is especially important to have concrete goals,           predictable funding, and orderly implementation.  We propose a structured, long-term space exploration program for Canada, including space            astronomy, planetary science and space health and life sciences, a total investment of $1B              over the first ten years and $1.3B over subsequent decades. A succession of calls for               proposals, arranged in cycles that cover ten years, will grow Canadian expertise in space              science and technology, inspire our communities and reach out to our partners around the              world to explore the Universe. Moreover, it guarantees that several missions at different stages              are under development at every moment and that each mission is chosen competitively, fueling              innovation and cultivating a broad and deep space industry. Canadian space scientists are             world leaders in fields from planetary surfaces and atmospheres to cosmology and high-energy             astrophysics, and Canadian researchers have played and continue to play key roles in             scientific missions from Phoenix and MOST to Curiosity and JWST. This leadership will not              continue unless the CSA's funding and selection processes are revitalised.  A framework such as we describe fuels future innovation driven by the Canadian space              science community and their industrial partners. Because of the technical challenges,           14 http://casca.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MTR2016nocover.pdf 13   innovation in space science is outsized compared to the initial investment. The promise of              scientific discoveries inspires current and future engineers and also drives industry to develop             new technologies that might not be justified by the immediate financial rewards. That is, the               close collaboration between scientists and industry enables the aerospace industry to take            calculated risks to develop novel and transformative technology.  Such a framework over a decade will create integrated communities of scientists and             aerospace companies throughout Canada by generating a series of competitions for missions;            each call has several levels of competitive assessment and development, cultivating a broad             range of collaborations and technologies and creating a robust industry for Canada.            Furthermore, the calls focus on missions of various sizes to engage our international partners              and to encourage growth for the broad aerospace and space science community — not only               the established players. Within the broad area of space exploration, the calls will not be               restricted by topic, and so the community itself will determine where best to invest and grow. Canada’s Global Role Although Canada’s space sector is small by international standards, it is a world leader in               specific technologies such as communications, space-based radar, robotics, optics, data          analysis and scientific instrumentation. It is one of the few countries (and one of the smallest)                with an end-to-end space industry, where an idea can go from a university classroom to its                realisation in space. This powerful combination of a broad and deep space industry makes              Canada unique and a sought-out partner for international collaboration. Within Canada this            combination means that an entrepreneurial individual can have a huge impact and be a great               catalyst for innovation. “In 1983, NASA invited Canada to fly three payload specialists, in part because we had contributed the robotic arm that is used on the shuttle.” Hon. Marc Garneau, Minister of Transport Canada has an enviable position. Although it is an ESA associate member, Canada chooses              which parts of the ESA science program to participate in (e.g., Planck, Herschel) by              collaborating with the payload teams. This leaves the        Canada space exploration community the freedom to       collaborate alternatively with the US (e.g., JWST,       Curiosity), Japan (e.g., Hitomi), India (e.g.      ASTROSAT) and other nations, and Canada also has        the expertise to go it alone. Canada sits at the          crossroads of space exploration worldwide, creating      great growth and innovation opportunities for      Canadian industry and researchers that are unique in        the world.  Why now? Canadian investment in space exploration in the past        decades is now reaping rewards. The long-term       14   commitment to JWST that began in the 1990s will culminate with the launch of perhaps the                most ambitious science experiment ever. JWST will explore the Universe from a vantage point              nearly 1,500,000 km from Earth. Canada’s contributions to this mission made us a key partner               in this nine-billion-dollar effort with a relatively modest investment of about $200M.  The Canadian Space Agency, Canadian scientists and industry built a world-leading           collaboration to study the solar system as well. Researchers at York University in collaboration              with MDA built the premier instrument of the Phoenix Mars Mission, the LIDAR weather station               to measure cloud structure above the surface of Mars. This was the first LIDAR system to be                 deployed beyond Earth. Our success with      Phoenix led NASA to invite Canada to build        the Osiris-Rex Laser Altimeter (OLA)     instrument contribution, our largest    planetary contribution to date. This shows a       pattern of contributions in areas of particular       expertise. For the NASA flagship mission to       Mars, Curiosity, NASA called on a      consortium of Canadian universities, the     CSA and MDA to build the Alpha particle        X-ray spectrometer (AXPS). AXPS can     measure the composition of materials on the       surface of Mars.   Because of Canada’s demonstrated space capabilities, international partners in the US,           Europe and elsewhere are continuing to look to Canada for expertise and leadership in optical               design, communications, robotics and metrology for many proposed missions, but for the past             ten years, Canadian investment in space has been much more modest than earlier when the               foundations for today’s great missions were built. Since the first decade of the 2000s, the               baseline spending for the CSA has declined from $300M to just over $250M. Meanwhile,              government investment in space has increased worldwide. In the last ten years, this low level               of Canadian baseline funding has been augmented with several ad hoc injections of funding.              Even including this additional spending, Canada’s investment in 2013 on space relative to GDP              lagged behind the world average and all of the large world economies except for the UK.                Though the space program has kept hobbling along, this funding pattern discourages sustained             investment by scientists and industry.  Most troubling, it discourages innovation.   Unless we resume investment in Canadian space exploration, our expertise and leadership will             be lost. Just as Canadian scientists will be starting to make amazing discoveries with these               ground-breaking missions, Canada will have the choice to reinvigorate its investment in space             or abandon it. Ultimately, expertise and leadership are really about people, people who will              either move on to other areas or other countries. Once these people are lost, Canada’s current                role in space will be nearly impossible to regain. Instead, we can build upon our successes to                 develop a balanced program of missions and even lead a flagship mission in space              15   exploration. The comprehensive contributions of Canadian scientists and industry to several           missions over the past decades means that Canada now has the demonstrable expertise to              lead a large (say about $400M) space astronomy or planetary mission and to invite our               international partners to join our Canadian mission (rather than the other way around).  16   Appendix A: The Framework We present a representative framework for the selection, scheduling and budget for a             comprehensive program of space exploration over the next decade and beyond. Although we             understand that in practice the details may end up being different than this example, it is                nevertheless important to give some specifics to make our proposal more concrete.  Mission categories, costs and time frames  Missions are divided into the following categories (total cost of development, launch, operation             and science): ● S — small-sized missions and technology development programs, divided into microsats           (MS) missions, with a budget below $50M, nanosats (NS), below $25M, and studies below              $10M at 2017 economic conditions; ● M — medium-sized missions that should not exceed the finance envelope of $160M, at              2017 economic conditions; ● L — flagship missions with a budget of about $430M, at 2017 economic conditions; ● MoO — missions of opportunity. MoO will be included into the M (or L) calls for proposals if                  their cost is comparable with the M (or L) budget, otherwise, they will be considered               separately each year and their cost will come from the S-mission budget.  The plan envisages a $130M investment per year, with a lighter expense in the first years and                 steadily increasing until it reaches a stable value. In the first year of the decadal time frame of                  the plan, a call for proposals for a L mission will be issued for a mission to be launched in the                     eighth year of the plan.   In the third and eighth year of the plan calls for a M class mission will be issued These calls for                     the medium-sized missions could be scheduled to coincide with NASA and ESA            announcements of opportunity (AOs) to fund development of Canadian contributions to           international missions. The first medium mission would be launched in the tenth year of the               plan, and the latter mission will still be under development at the end of the decadal cycle.  Calls for S missions are issued every year, or the budget can be allocated for MoO. All the                  space exploration (astronomy, planetary science and space health) missions will compete in            the same selection process. Medium and Large Mission Selection Procedure Calls for proposals A call for proposals for an L mission will be issued every ten years; every five years for an M                    mission. Along with Canadian-led missions, participation to other agencies’ missions (MoO)           with a contribution in the same range as the budget of the call can be proposed. In principle,                  the calls for M class missions could be scheduled to coincide with NASA and ESA AOs.  A letter of intent will be due two months after the call. The deadline for the proposals will be                   three months later. Submissions will be assessed by peer reviewers. The science committee             17   (JSECC) and the sub-themes committees (JCSA and PECC) will select three or four missions.              The decision will be based on a list of priorities, and the selection process will take                approximately four months. Mission Selection Rubric  ● Scientific priority ● Projected cost ● Technological readiness ● Projected launch date ● International collaboration ● Program balance  Mission of opportunity proposals must describe the role and responsibilities of all the partners              included. The share of CSA responsibilities must be stated in order to assess the cost.               Proposals must be accompanied by letters from the agencies involved, clearly stating their             interest in the proposed collaboration and their commitment to support the eventual            Assessment Phase activities.   Assessment phase The missions selected will enter the assessment phase funded by CSA. A science team will be                appointed responsible for each mission and each science will be assigned a CSA liaison. The               assessment phase will last approximately eighteen months and it will be divided into two parts.               In the first six months, the science team will produce a draft for the mission architecture and the                  payload definition. This will be the guideline for the following one-year long in-depth industrial              assessment phase. This second part of the assessment phase will be carried out by two               industrial contractors for each selected proposal. It is crucial that funding will be provided in this                phase to ensure the technical feasibility of the missions and to reduce the programmatic risk               (see table 1).  Furthermore in the case of international missions with proposed Canadian participation, the            scope of Canadian participation will be negotiated between the CSA and the international             agencies.   At the end of the assessment phase, the result of the studies will be presented to the                 committees and to the scientific community. First down-selection and definition phase In the first down-selection, the science committees (JSECC, JCSA and PECC) recommend two             missions for the definition phase, based on scientific excellence and feasibility. The Deputy             Ministers' Governance Committee on Space (DMGC) approves the two missions. For each of             the two missions, two competing industrial contractors carry out the spacecraft design study.             The payload can be funded by CSA directly, in which case an announcement of opportunity is                issued. Alternatively, other partners, like NSERC and CFI, can take the responsibility for the              payload and the instrument selection process.  18   At the end of the definition phase of a duration of approximately one year and a half, a detailed                   study on the design and a detailed cost estimation will be presented. In table 1, the funding                 allocated for this phase includes the spacecraft design and the payload. Final selection and implementation phase The two missions will undergo a thorough evaluation by the scientific committees, which will              select one mission. The DMGCS approves the mission for the implementation phase and             selects the final industrial contractor. Again, funding for implementation can be provided by             CSA and other partners and an estimate is shown in table 1.  The implementation phase will take approximately 5 years. Launch and operation Launch will be scheduled at the end of the implementation phase. To maximize the scientific               achievement of the mission, it is crucial that funds will be allocated after the launch for ground-                 based activities, scientific and operational support.  For example for the area of space astronomy, the CASCA long range plan, that is expected to                 be ready by 2020, could provide input for the first down-selection, giving indications on which               missions are to be considered a priority for Canadian astronomy.   19      Funding, Table 1 (millions of Canadian dollars)  M mission budget L mission budget Assessment Phase 2-3 7-8 Definition Phase 8-10 25-30 Implementation Phase 50-60 160-170 Launch 30 50 Ground segment 25 70 Administration 13 40 Science and operation 7 20 Contingency 12 40 Total 147-160 412-428  Large-Mission Timing, Table 2  Date Call for Proposals May 2018 Letter of intent due July 2018 Mission proposal due November 2018 Peer-review assessment December 2018 - February 2019 JSECC with JCSA and PECC select 3 or 4 large missions  March 2019 Assessment Phase April 2019 - end August 2020 Presentation of the results and JCSA-PECC recommendation for 2 L missions September 2020 JSECC down-selection to 2 L missions October 2020 The DMGCS approves the 2 missions November 2020 2 groups in competitive definition phase December 2020 - March 2022 JSECC/JCSA/PECC select L mission  April - May 2022 The DMGCS approves the L mission June 2022 Implementation phase July 2022 - mid 2027 Launch end of 2027 Commissioning and science to the end of 2029      20   First Medium-Mission Timing, Table 3   Date Call for Proposals May 2020 Letter of intent due July 2020 Mission proposal due November 2020 Peer review assessment December 2020 - February 2021 JSECC with JCSA and PECC select 3 or 4 medium missions March 2021 Assessment Phase April 2021 - end August 2022 Presentation of the results and JCSA-PECC recommendation for 2 M missions September 2022 JSECC down-selection to 2 M missions October 2022 The DMGCS approves the 2 missions November 2022 2 groups in competitive definition phase December 2022 - March 2024 JSECC/JCSA/PECC select 1 M mission  April - May 2024 The DMGCS approves the M mission June 2024 Implementation phase July 2024 - mid 2029 Launch end of 2029 Commissioning and science to the end of 2031   Second Medium-Mission Timing, Table 4   Date Call for Proposals May 2025 Letter of intent due July 2025 Mission proposal due November 2025 Peer review assessment December 2025 - February 2026 JSECC with JCSA and PECC select 3 or 4 medium missions March 2026 Assessment Phase April 2026 - end August 2027 Presentation of the results and JCSA-PECC recommendation for 2 M missions  September 2027 JSECC down-selection to 2 M missions October 2027 The DMGCS approves the 2 missions November 2027 2 groups in competitive definition phase December 2027 - March 2029 JSECC/JCSA/PECC select 1 M mission  April - May 2029 The DMGCS approves the M mission June 2029 Implementation phase July 2029 - mid 2034 Launch end of 2034 Commissioning and science to the end of 2036    21   Small Mission Selection Procedure Calls for proposals  Calls for proposals for small-sized missions and studies will be issued once every year. The               total budget for every announcement will be $50M. Depending on the nature of the              submissions, more than one mission can be selected and brought to completion, within the limit               of the $50M budget.  A variable number of missions, between 3 and 12, depending on their size, will be selected for                 the assessment phase. Funding will be provided for this phase, for a total of $1.5-2M to be                 shared between the projects. At the end of the assessment phase, which will last one year, the                 scientific committees have to decide, depending on the quality of the proposals, if only one               mission will be adopted at the end, with a budget between $30M and $50M (an MS mission), or                  more than one mission, each within a budget of $25M (NS missions). This yields a yearly                budget of about $50M, and a total investment of $500M over ten years.  Furthermore, additional studies (with a maximum funding of $10M per program) that do not              necessarily result in a mission would be funded through this call.  Depending on this decision, the process that follows will differ. Microsat missions  One or two projects will be selected to proceed to the definition phase, with two competing                industrial contractors per each mission. The definition phase will take 1.5 years. Funding for              this phase will be provided for $4-7M total.  At the end of this phase, one mission will be selected to continue to the implementation phase.                 The DMGCS selects the final industrial contractor. The implementation phase will last            approximately 3 years and will cost approximately $25M.  The rest of the budget will be allocated for:  Launch services, $3-4M Ground segment, $5M Administration, $4M Science and operations support, $2M Nanosat Missions  The final decision for the missions that will proceed to the implementation phase is taken at the                 end of the assessment phase. The implementation phase will take 2-3 years and the total cost                will be $20-30M to be divided between the groups depending on the size of the missions. The                 rest of the budget will be allocated for launch services, ground segment and administration,              depending on the size of the missions. For example, for a $20M mission: 22    Launch services, $1M Ground segment, $1.5M Administration, $1M Science and operations support, $1M Space Science Studies  Through the yearly call for small missions, the CSA will also fund studies in space health and                 life sciences, as well as technological development for space astronomy and planetary science             with a cap of $10M per project, although it is anticipated that many small projects will be funded                  through this initiative. Summary of Yearly Funding (rounded to nearest million of Canadian dollars)​, Table 5 Year Event  Large Medium Small Total 2018 AO L1 0 0 50 50 2019 Start L1 16 0 50 66 2020 AO M1 24 0 50 80 2021 Start M1 68 6 50 124 2022 Choose L1 25 8.5 50 84 2023  42 22.5 50 115 2024  Choose M1 42 8.5 50 101 2025 AO M2 42 14.5 50 107 2026 Start M2 42 20.5 50 113 2027 Launch L1 75 23 50 148 Total 2018-2027  376 104 500 980 2028 AO L2 53 37 50 140 2029 Start L2, End L1, Launch M1, Choose M2 73 47 50 170 2030 AO M3 28 33 50 111 2031  Start M3,End M1 68 39 50 157 2032  Choose L2 25 23 50 98 2033  42 37 50 129 2034  Choose M3, Launch M2 42 47 50 139 2035  AO M4 42 33 50 125 2036  Start M4, End M2 42 39 50 131 2037  Launch L2 75 23 50 148 Total 2028-2037   543 358 500 1348   23   Appendix B: Missions The AIAC Space Innovation white paper, “The Future of Canada’s Space Sector”, outlines             several representative missions and programs. We list those within the proposed space            exploration framework here.   Mission  Description  Partners Earliest Launch Advanced Crew Medical System (ACMS) Space Medicine Decision Support System (SMDSS) Demonstration mission of clinical decision support system capable of detecting pre-selected medical conditions and inferring possible and likely outcomes for given health state and symptoms   2020 Advanced Telescope for High- ENergy Astrophysics (ATHENA) ATHENA - a large X-ray telescope (formerly known as IXO) and selected as 2nd large mission in ESA Cosmic Vision. ESA  2028 Canadian micro-sat/rover mission (secondary payload) Small exploration science mission as secondary payload   TDB Cosmological Advanced Survey Telescope for Optical and UV Research (CASTOR) Cdn space telescope astronomy mission that would provide unique panoramic, high-resolution imaging of the Universe in the UV/optical spectral region   2024 eXTP  Cdn contribution to flagship X-ray mission: spectroscopy, timing and polarimetry CAS, CNSA 2024 JUICE JUICE - JUpiter ICy moons Explorer - the first large-class mission in ESA's Cosmic Vision 2015- 2025 programme ESA, JAXA, NASA 2022 KARI Lunar Pathfinder Lunar Rover Lunar lander and rover mission with NASA support KARI, NASA 2020 KARI Pathfinder Lunar Orbiter (KPLO)  Lunar orbiter mission with NASA support and hosted payloads KARI, NASA 2018 LiteBird Cdn instrument contribution to cosmic microwave radiation mission NASA  2025 LSRS Bio-Analytics Diagnostic system on ISS for quantifying soluble biomarkers in a liquid sample and analyzing the presence of biomarkers on cellular surfaces   2019 Lunar science rover (human precursor) Human Lunar Exploration Precursor mission with focus on Lunar Sample Return and future Human Surface operations   2030 MSR-Mars 2024 rover  Robotic sample return from Mars  NASA   NeMO (Mars 2022)  Mars communication orbiter with potential international contributions (system, science) NASA  2022 SPICA Cdn contribution to future IR space telescope  ESA, JAXA 2030 WFIRST Cdn instrument contribution to Wide Field IR space telescope NASA  2025 XIPE Cdn contribution to future X-ray space telescope  ESA  2026 24   Appendix C: Glossary  AO announcement of opportunity CAS Chinese Academy of Sciences CRD Collaborative Research and Development CNSA China National Space Administration CSEW Canadian Space Exploration Workshop DMGCS Deputy Minister Governance Committee on Space  ESA European Space Agency HQP highly qualified personnel JAXA Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency JCSA Joint Committee on Space Astronomy JSECC Joint Space Exploration Consultation Committee JWST James Webb Space Telescope KARI Korea Aerospace Research Institute  LIDAR light detection and ranging  MoO mission of opportunity MoU memorandum of understanding PECC  Planetary Exploration Consultation Committee SME Small and Medium Enterprise SPG Strategic Project Grant STEM science, technology, engineering and mathematics TT CSEW Topical Team    25 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.52383.1-0352001/manifest

Comment

Related Items