Minutes of Inter-Agency meeting for SOLAR-C
Date: 2010/03/12 13:30 - 17:00
Place: 7th floor meeting room in the A-building at ISAS
Participants:
Newmark, Cirtain (NASA), Fleck (ESA)
Tarbell (LM), DeLuca (SAO), Culhane, Harra (UCL), Doschek (NRL)Nakamura, Sakao, Shimizu, Matsuzaki (JAXA)
Tsuneta, Watanabe, Suematsu, Sekii, Hara, Katsukawa, Kano, Kubo (NAOJ)
Ichimoto (Kyoto University), Kusano (Nagoya University)

Summary
The formation of a JAXA–NASA Joint WG was proposed by NASA to evaluate science
goals of Solar-C, and it was accepted by JAXA SOLAR-C WG. As the approach for theinclusion of Solar-C in the Decadal Survey document, output documents form the Joint
WG will be delivered to the Decadal Survey. The Solar-C mission proposal document
will be prepared for both Plan A and Plan B by October 2010.

Programmatic Review
The meeting began with expressing brief impressions of the SCSDM2 from personnel
representing JAXA, NASA, and ESA. Tsuneta (JAXA SOLAR-C WG chair) summarized
the SCSDM2. Plan A has evolved into a good plan in terms of scientific and orbital
considerations, while the following issues should be seriously addressed: (a) Assessmenton the reliability of the bigger ion engines, (b) relationship to the Solar Orbiter andSolar Probe Plus; real story for synergy, beyond mere words, is necessary with the SO,and (c) domestic continuation of science (or lack of Japanese researchers involved in thePlan A science). Plan B, on the other hand, is a unique mission aiming high-resolution
observations coupled with spectroscopic (or even spectro-polarimetric) observations
from the photosphere to corona. He also pointed out that Plan B is a mission that only
Japan can take a leading role for building it with reasonable cost based on Hinode/OTA
heritage, and that the VL/UV telescope and the photon-counting X-ray telescope havetheir own scientific discovery spaces.

Newmark (NASA) agreed that both plans are excellent and was willing to movefurther forward. He pointed out that both Plan A and B mission objectives fit well to thequestions that U.S. heliophysics community has, and an approach for the inclusion ofSolar-C in the Decadal Survey document (that will come out in 2012) was discussed: Inorder to have Solar-C in the queue of NASA strategic missions (whose NASA
contribution exceeding ~$200M), not a mission with MOO (Mission Of Opportunity), hepointed out that it is essential to clarify how Solar-C’s scientific objectives align with
NASA’s highest priority goals. Approach for this aim was discussed, which is describedin the Mission Proposal section in the minutes.
He also stated that it is important to combine various missions for understanding thesystem from small scale to large scale in the heliosphere. Tsuneta asked Newmark
about the relation between JAXA and NASA in the SOLAR-C mission. The answer byNewmark was that NASA will help propelling the Solar-C mission with intensive
international collaborations experienced in Yohkoh and Hinode, but no fixed supports at
this moment. That means if Solar-C mission proposal were to be submitted in autumn
this year (2010), NASA would not be able to make any commitment to the mission bythat timing.
Fleck (ESA) made comments on ESA’s standpoint for the Solar-C mission. As Solar-C
is currently not in Cosmic Vision, Solar-C needs to enter M3 slot of CV for ESA tocontribute. In general, ESA provides only ‘major portions’ of a mission, such as
spacecraft and/or launcher vehicle, but not single instrument(s). (Note in the case ofSPICA, ESA took part in the telescope mirror as it is large enough to be considered as amajor portion of the satellite.) Thus, for European contribution of instrument(s), eachcollaborating country should be contacted instead of ESA; this is what NASA did forEuropean instruments aboard STEREO. In order to avoid contacting all related
countries, forming a consortium for that instrument would be a possibility.
JAXA Mission Review Process
Prof. Nakamura, chair of Space Sciences Steering Committee at ISAS/JAXA, gave
information about the review processes, schedule, and cost for the Solar-C project. JAXA
requests a MDR (Mission Definition Review) and SRR (System Requirements Review)as a first step of the JAXA review. MDR and SRR usually take place simultaneously, but
sequential reviews (MDR first, followed by SRR) are also acceptable in the case ofSolar-C, because of its intensive international collaboration. Newmark pointed out thatNASA is not prepared to commit on the proposal, if it is submitted in fall 2010.

Nakamura answered that NASA and/or ESA commitments are not compulsory inMDR/SRR processes; the important point he mentioned was as long as foreign agencies
are proceeding in accordance with Japanese side preparation and that fact is visible
from ISAS/JAXA management, no letter from foreign agencies expressing commitment
to Solar-C is necessary for the MDR and SRR. Regarding timing of issuing AO of thenext JAXA mission, it depends on ISAS budget situation which will become clear inApril 2010. If no AO comes out this fall, the next opportunity will be in fall 2011. One
notice about the schedule is that four projects (SCOPE, SPICA, WISH, and Solar-C)
hope for the launch of 2017-2018. Finally, the cost cap for ISAS/JAXA mission is about$250M in total, including the vehicle and the cost of H2A is about $100M (~$60M for thedual launch case).
Mission Proposal
Newmark proposed to form a JAXA–NASA Joint WG (JWG). The JWG will beorganized in NASA in a few months, with 6–12 months of activity, with carrying the twoplans. The primary role of the JWG is to generate and to document scientific goals andpriorities for the project in terms of how well the proposed Solar-C science fits withinand supports the NASA Heliophysics Roadmap and NASA Strategic Plan and within
the resources to be specified by the Agencies. The output documents will be available forevaluation and inclusion in the NASA Heliophysics Decadal Survey and form the basisfor a strategic science mission. The JWG will consist of 6–8 persons each from Japanand from U.S. This proposal of JWG (also the term SDT (Science Definition Team) wasused in the meeting) was favorably accepted by the JAXA SOLAR-C WG. Tarbell
commented that U.S. researchers who are outside Hinode team should also be includedin the JWG so that Solar-C would be well appreciated by the entire U.S. heliophysics
community. As for the relationship between ESA and the JWG, it was proposed by
Tsuneta that ESA representative to participate in the JWG as an observer, which is theapproach that has been working quite well for Hinode Science Working Group. Fleck
took the action to consider this possibility.
Watanabe proposed the way for moving forward with the Solar-C mission proposal
document as follows: (1) The final product by the current sub-WGs is the document
describing Solar-C science and strawman instruments, which correspond to Sections 3
and 4 of the JAXA proposal document, respectively. (2) One document is prepared forPlan A and the other for Plan B. Each document should include science part, strawman
instrument, and spacecraft resources. (3) Chief editors are Hara for Plan A and Shimizu

for Plan B. Cirtain will help the editorial work for both plans. (4) The deadline isOctober 2010. All of these four items have been accepted by Tsuneta and all of thesub-WG chairs. It was discussed that the current sub-WG activities would be taken overto more technical-oriented sub-WG(s) once the final product from each sub-WG issubmitted.
The mission proposal should include cost and weight estimate. JAXA can provide costestimate on the spacecraft bus and the 1.5-m telescope. Newmark took an action ofproviding scheme for estimating cost of the three major telescopes.