====== Telecon Notes February 28, 2018  ======

Attendance: Shaul, Charles, Nick, Al, Lloyd, Clem, Hannes, Dan


Notes by: Karl

=== Agenda:===

  * May Workshop
    * {{https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kIxWWhZd0Kv-Nt9KnJ-9YyNdxTt8SMUxaMoF6-QWgZU/edit#gid=529735521| Program google}}
  * {{:private:budgetscience_kogut_20180221.xlsx|Science Team Costs}}
  * Decadal Products
    * Engineering documents
      * TeamX slides vs something else ("logistically complicated I&T not explored in this study")
    * Possible White papers
      * individual vs Collated


=== Notes ===

May Workshop
  * Fundamental Physics
    * de Gouvea confirmed
    * Vera Gluscevic -- **Lloyd** will check in.
    * Tracy Slatyer invited, **Lloyd** will follow up.
    * Panel: 3 confirmed, **Lloyd/Dan** to consider 1 more invite.
    * Axion DM: invited Dan Grin, he's considering.  **Lloyd** follow up.
  * Extra-galactic Science
    * replace Simone.  Marcel -- **Nick** inviting.
    * Panel: all invited.
  * Galatic Science
    * all confirmed.
    * waiting to add a foregrounds person
    * Panel: Giles still considering.
  * Tech
    * Panel: Adrian pinged, waiting to invite others.
  * Final session
    * Moderated by Lloyd.
    * Al can't commit. 1:3 chance could come, shipping Piper.  But willing to join if possible.
    * Bill in similar case, trying to make schedule work.
    * Suzanne pinged again.
    * Lloyd/Shaul to work offline to find more people. ideally S4 person, outside person,
      * Charles: Planck people relevant. volunteering if needed.
      * Looking for outside people with other input.

Science Team Costs (Al, Charles)
  * for TeamX and mission costs
  * basic number of people and cost per person
  * manpower spread evenly over all years, ignores ramp up.
  * 4 yrs flight, 4yrs I&T, 2 yrs post flight analysis
    * adjusted to 7.5 to account for ramp up.
  * $52 M total, no reserves (close to 12% of WB lines 5-6, which is common rule of thumb advice.)
  * Charles: US planck involvement. including early release source catalog cost. real year dollars. total cost for data analysis ends up $80-85 M.  $52 is none too high, but probe is competed line so be careful.
    * CL: for example. include inflation. Planck #s include multiple (3) extended missions by senior review. those don't go in initial proposal.  First Planck ask was $32 M in 2000. 
    * CL: in report, data analysis is big part of the program.  Planck got ratio of analysis money to hardware right. was 1:1.  clearly not same case here, but weight analysis heavily.
    * CL: having second thoughts about my numbers.
  * Lloyd: rich data set. need to weight analysis heavily.
  * Shaul: makes sense. need to remember this goes against other costs.  Currently close to the $1B.
    * Shaul: large unknowns are mission, I&T, spacecraft.
      * SH: JPL contracted with Lockheed to cost spacecraft bus for TeamX.  past estimate $200M. 
      * SH: thermal design passed to Goddard  (Pete, Tom) for ADR cost estimates.  **Al** will stay engaged to maintain timetable. 
  * CL: data analysis carried about 5% reserves for Planck.  more sensible for data analysis
    * Al: reasonable.  We do same things.
  * CL: can also split science costs around. for example can split 3 month in flight CVP out. can be own category.

Engineering documents,  TeamX slides vs something else (“logistically complicated I&T not explored in this study”)
      * SH: JPL TeamX slides exist. not ITAR approved for broad release.  Originally these would go to NASA and coster.  Concerning. Coster could do anything.
        * AT+SH: talked with headquarters to do something different.  TeamX often makes 'friendly suggestions' not always suitable for coster. They were favorable. Discussions ongoing on what input goes from TeamX to coster.
          * Al: raw teamX seems crazy.
          * SH: rule was 'engineering documents' NASA said this = TeamX slides.  That rule now looks to be changing.  Have argued for a narrative report along with the slides to give full explanation. No final decision yet.
          * Al: My experience with Goddard MDL was those reports going only to PI.
          * SH: agree TeamX (or MDL) are geared to give suggestions to PI.
          * CL: Goddard doing 5 studies, JPL doing 5. should be some agreement on what to send. Jeff Booth  person at JPL in charge of 5.  Agreement of what to send should be global.
            * SH: That was my argument!  Didn't get a lot of traction with Jeff or Keith Warfield. TeamX discussion specifics was only with Keith.
            * CL: I will talk to Jeff also. 
            * SH: often get 'you have 50 pages' as a response. but we want those to be mostly science. 50 pages is for decadel panel so needs to be science.
      * Al: tying budget numbers to recent flights as much as possible would be good idea. tying 'detector assembly' to a recent flight prevents them from pulling numbers from thin air.