Q&A EChO
These pages list answers to questions received in response to the Announcement of Opportunity (AO), released on 24 September 2012, for the provision of scientific payload including SGS elements for the four M3 candidate missions: EChO, LOFT, MarcoPolo-R and STE-QUEST.
Below are the questions that apply specifically to EChO. The questions of general relevance that apply to all four M3 candidate missions and the additional questions specific to the other three candidate missions can be accessed through the following links, or from the right hand menu.
|
|
|
18 Oct 2012 - |
Possibility to revisit telescope prescription |
|
|
Q: |
Is it possible to revisit the telescope optical prescription? |
|
A: |
Baseline is that the telescope prescription is given and is to be respected. Advantages of alternative solutions can be described in the proposal, indicating deviations from the requirements listed in the EID-A. In case of significant benefits the proposal will be considered. |
|
|
|
18 Oct 2012 - |
Launch date and mission schedule |
|
|
Q: |
What is the reason for the delay between mission adoption (2014) and start of implementation (2016)? This delay could jeopardize the compliance with a launch in 2022. |
|
A: |
The schedule will be revisited depending on the actual decision on the M3 launch date. Proposals should take into account the available development time with a credible development schedule and a commensurate instrument design complexity. |
|
|
|
18 Oct 2012 - |
Cooler option in proposal |
|
|
Q: |
Does ESA expect to have the cooler option as part of the proposal? Can different cooler options be proposed? |
|
A: |
Yes, the cooler option is part of the proposal. Alternative options can be selected as long as meeting the interface requirements listed in the EID-A and in line with the expected technology readiness level. |
|
|
|
18 Oct 2012 - |
Delivery of the level 2 pipeline |
|
|
Q: |
There seems to be discrepancy between the AO / EID-A for delivery of the level 2 pipeline? |
|
A: |
No date is given in any document as to when the level 2 pipeline needs to be delivered, this is still TBC. In terms of who is responsible for it, both documents are consistent: the Payload Consortium (through the IOSDC) is responsible for providing the software to the SOC, while the SOC is responsible for running it and producing the level 0, 1 and 2 level data and the associated infrastructure needed to achieve this (AO document page 28 and EID-A page 80). |
|
|
Last Update: 1 September 2019
