Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- private:teleconsnotes20170719 [2017/07/26 13:47] – hanany
+++ private:teleconsnotes20170719 [2017/07/26 14:21] (current) – hanany
@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
     * Conclusion: Laura, Dave will solicit input from diffuse foregrounds folks as well. As long as they are focusing on science not on 'foreground removal' there is no conflict with 'data challenge' or 'foreground removal' folks.
+  * Need a NAME for the Probe
+    * Shaul has been using CMBP
+    * Amy: there is advantage in using a name that is short, descriptive of science, catchy
+    * Lloyd: shall we think about it a little?
+    * Shaul: yes. Also, shall we reach out to the community?
+  * Cost (Amy)
+    * Tech development is risky.  Can't afford to do a lot.  However, we will need to include SOME in there...probably detector/readout (best science return vs risk).  NASA says we ARE allowed to include technologies not at TRL 5.  However, it would need to get up to TRL 5 by phase A (2023).   The cost is outside the $1B cap.  BUT it will be reviewed and managed.
+    * Cap include $150M for launch, operations, management.  The amount available for all of this, but budget left for the instrument itself could be less than $200M.
+    * We are a risk classification B.  Single fault tolerant.
+    * Power - need a 75% contingency + margin on power.  We have lots of high power stuff.    Putting all these together means we may need deployable solar array.  Not much risk, but it is a cost.  To get this down, we would need to know our power needs *very* well.
+    * Start date of the project is October 2023.  Tech development would need to be done prior to this.

User Tools

Differences

Page Tools