Other - Target/Program/Project Focus

1.	Multidisciplinary programs that combine astrophysics, geology and biology are fundamental to our understanding of our world and that of other planets and should be strongly supported.
2.	Emerging field of astrobiology are building a strong student component that is vital to the future interests of NASA space science. The timeline for all mission scales should be shortened. A streamlining of NASA bureaucracy should be done combined with a cap on overheads that institutions can charge to NASA grants/funds. This will liberate more direct funds to researchers. Solar system road maps should include a strong parallel component of solar and heliospheric physics experiments.
3.	More long-term funding should be allocated and preserved for increased aeronautics research and development, including wind tunnel & flight test research.
4.	Educational outreach programs that help to inspire our next generation are also extremely important. The future of US Solar System exploration will lie in the hands of our students of today. It seems especially important to inspire our students at a young age (K-12)to generate a continual and powerful workforce for the future.
5.	!IMPORTANT!: Solar System Exploration -> Astrobiology.
6.	NASA should not compromise its strong Earth Science program to have a Mars mission. While the space program does provide tangible benefits to the nation, the Earth Science programs provide direct, immediate and real benefits to the nation. NASA stands alone in providing a global prospective for earth system studies of weather, climate and the biogeo sciences assisted by revolutionary satellite measurements. Such work is critical to the nation and should not be compromised. Current funding for such programs has been in decline and further cuts should not be tolerated.
7.	The Moon, being our closest and most accessable planetary body needs more attention paid to it. If we are to successfully reach out to other planets and understand them better, it makes practical sense to test our instruments/investigative approaches on this satellite. As well, there needs to be more focus on the science and engineering of sustaining life off of this planet; be it in orbiting space stations or lunar/planetary base stations.
8.	The educational opportunities that arise because of NASA funded programs have the ability inspire students in a way that no other program can. By including students, teachers and public audiences in NASA programs, we ensure that today's children are tomorrow's explorers.
9.	We need a mission to Enceledus in the next decade. We should already have an R&A program for the Moon--what are we waiting for? Flagship mission costs should be better controlled. LRO has gone from $400M to $700M to $1.2B, yet there is no R&A dedicated to the Moon?
10.	The drivign force for any mission has to be fundamantally astrobiology relevence, rather than other way around. The only rational we can afford, at times of monetary cutbacks, is defining a fundamental scietific basis that is stronger than 'because it is out there'. I believe that such a case can be made for astrobiology, since this provides a unique framework that is poised to provide not just the basic scienc that uniquely NASA. Additionally the scientific platform of astrobiology also (not unintentionally) provides basic informaitonm that is relevent to everything needed for human sustanence on earth: from energy to climate.
11.	Life Detection
12.	1. Space weather is an interesting area of focus--basic research with perhaps practical application. 2. A balanced approach to new missions (small, medium, and large) is critical to the well-being of an organization. 3. Manned mission to Mars is NOT a reasonable Flagship mission at this time or in the reasonable future.
13.	Priorities: Heliosphere and Interstellar medium, Sun, Planets
14.	The inclusion of Exobiology within Astrobiology should be re-thought. E.g.,there is no rationale for leaving Cosmochemistry and Origins PI oriented programs separate from Astrobiology when their objectives fall within her broad spectrum of objectives. Exobiology should follow those programs in the organization. As is, Exobiology has become a broad-aimed mini-Astrobiology, expensive, and an easy target of cuts.
15.	The greatest public benefits from NASA science lie in the study of the Earth and its near-space environment. Funding priorities and the selection of core programs should reflect this reality.
16.	I believe that Discovery opportunities should only be stretched out by one or two in question 3. Although not within Solar System Exploration, SOFIA will significantly advance the knowledge base at least at a level of a Discovery mission at a cost of ~60 Million per year of operations.
17.	experiment (missions) should be first priority, resonably balanced between small. medium and large scale missions
18.	We need to maintain space weather monitors (like ACE, or SOHO, or global auroral imagers, or NPOESS) either within NASA or NOAA. The two agencies should coordinate this and work with Congress and the President to ensure proper funding for these monitoring activities.
19.	This survey effectively ignores contributions from ground-based astronomy, which is a serious omission. NASA is cutting funding to the IRTF and eliminated funding for the radar at Arecibo a few years ago. Is it a coincidence that the Arecibo radar is now less reliable?
20.	Europa!
21.	We should not minimize support for and mission which focus on atmospheric studies. Atmospheric studies as well as studies of geology and geoscieces and astrobiolgy are all important for Solar System exploration goals.
22.	Our focus should be on advancing the fundamental understanding we have of the formation of the solar system and its dynamical evolution.
23.	Missions to asteroids, especially near-Earth asteroids, and to the outer satellites (Titan, Enceladus, Europa) should take precedence over missions to the Moon and Mars.
24.	near earth asteroids formation and evolution of the solar system
25.	Communicating NASA science content to students and the general public should be a high priority within all programs. This generates understanding, support and future scientists for NASA.
26.	Missions should include those to terrestrial planets and those to outer solar system to retain capability in designing disparate types of missions
27.	Higher priority: establish a program for doing missions in the $10M-$100M pricerange.
28.	Advanced propulsion studies should not be forgotten. At any funding level, propulsion is the decisive factor that ultimately sets the scale of space activities.
29.	Astrobiology on extrasolar planets
30.	searching for traces of life on Mars should not overshadow the goal to understand the origin of the solar system. In my view, the next important steps should be the exploration of the Jovian satellite system, foremost Europa.
31.	Solar-Terrestrial plasma research should be strengthened.
32.	I'm not certain where an extended mission for Cassini falls in this, but I would put that at top priority. As long as the probe is working well it is worth significant money to continue utilizing the investment that has already gone into getting the probe there.
33.	Stable support for programs that excite and attract young students and researchers.
34.	NASA's AB Program needs to define a practical protocol to detect life (extinct or extant ). This is must be based on a practical definition of life as to elaborate a standard set of measurements that will be required to say with certain probability that life was detected. For example, if certain gases and organics are found in combination with liquid water in a hypothetical hydrotermal system on Mars, then life was detected with 99% probability.
35.	Investigation of Uranus during equinox passage. Earth-orbiting and ground-based campaign - this is a unique body. Cost is not terribly high.
36.	I support restoring cuts to the following specific missions/programs to at least 80% of the level they were at in FY2005 Astrobiology SOFIA