Differences

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

--- private:teleconsnotes20170719 [2017/07/26 13:50] – hanany
+++ private:teleconsnotes20170719 [2017/07/26 14:21] (current) – hanany
@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
     * 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?
+    * 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.