Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “ADVISORY COMMITTEES”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 523 records · Page 29
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1935

Ice Prevention on Aircraft by Means of Impregnated Leather Covers, Special Report

The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics is testing the effectiveness of a method to prevent the formation of ice on airplanes. The system makes use of a leather cover that is attached to the leading edge of the wing. A small tube, attached to the inner surface of the leather, distributes to the leading edge a solution that permeates throughout the leather and inhibits the formation of ice on the surface. About 25 pounds of the liquid per hour would be sufficient to prevent ice from forming on a wing of 50-foot span. The additional gross weight of the system will not be excessive. The tests are not yet completed but the method is thought to be practicable for the wing and it may also be adaptable to the propeller.

Clay, William C.↗
NASA NTRS1934

Resume of Present Data on Load Distribution on Slots and Flaps, Special Report

This report covers a study of the generally available data on load distribution on slots and flaps. The study was made by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics at the request of the Material Division, Army Air Corps to furnish information applicable to design criteria for slots and flaps of various types. The data are presented in three main sections: slots (Handley page type), auxiliary airfoils (fixed), and flaps.

Wenzinger, Carl J.↗
NASA NTRS1954

Preliminary Investigation of the Static Longitudinal and Lateral Stability Characteristics of a 0.05-Scale Model of the Convair F2Y-1 Airplane at High Subsonic Speeds

At the request of the Bureau of Aeronautics, Department of the Navy, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics has conducted a preliminary investigation at high subsonic speeds of the static longitudinal and lateral stability characteristics of a 0.05-scale model of the Convair F2Y-1 water-based fighter airplane. The tests covered a Mach number range from 0.5 to 0.94 and corresponding Reynolds numbers, based on the wing mean aerodynamic chord, from 3.3 x 10(exp 6) to 4.3 x 10(exp 6). The maximum angle-of-attack range (obtained at the lower Mach numbers) was from -2 degrees to 25 degrees. Sideslip angles from -4 degrees to 12 degrees also were investigated. The investigation included effects of various arrangements of wing fences and of rocket packages.

Spreemann, Kenneth P.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Physical, Ecological, and Societal Indicators for the National Climate Assessment

The National Climate Assessment (NCA) is being conducted under the auspices of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), pursuant to the Global Change Research Act of 1990, Section 106, which requires a report to Congress every 4 years. The current NCA (http://globalchange.gov/what-we-do/assessment/) differs in multiple ways from previous U.S. climate assessment efforts, being: (1) more focused on supporting the Nation s activities in adaptation and mitigation and on evaluating the current state of scientific knowledge relative to climate impacts and trends; (2) a long-term, consistent process for evaluation of climate risks and opportunities and providing information to support decision-making processes within regions and sectors; and (3) establishing a permanent assessment capacity both inside and outside of the federal government. As a part of ongoing, long-term assessment activities, the NCA intends to develop an integrated strategic framework and deploy climate-relevant physical, ecological, and societal indicators. The NCA indicators framework is underdevelopment by the NCA Development and Advisory Committee Indicators Working Group and are envisioned as a relatively small number of policy-relevant integrated indicators designed to provide a consistent, objective, and transparent overview of major variations in climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation, and mitigation activities across sectors, regions, and timeframes. The potential questions that could be addressed by these indicators include: How do we know that there is a changing climate and how is it expected to change in the future? Are important climate impacts and opportunities occurring or predicted to occur in the future? Are we adapting successfully? What are the vulnerabilities and resiliencies given a changing climate? Are we preparing adequately for extreme events? It is not expected that the NCA societal indicators would be linked directly to a single decision or portfolio of decisions, but subsets of indicators, or the data supporting the indicator, might be used to inform decision-making processes such as the development and implementation of climate adaptation strategies in a particular sector or region.

Kenney, Melissa A.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Laboratory Astrophysics Division of the AAS (LAD)

The purpose of the Laboratory Astrophysics Division (LAD) is to advance our understanding of the Universe through the promotion of fundamental theoretical and experimental research into the underlying processes that drive the Cosmos. LAD represents all areas of astrophysics and planetary sciences. The first new AAS Division in more than 30 years, the LAD traces its history back to the recommendation from the scientific community via the White Paper from the 2006 NASA-sponsored Laboratory Astrophysics Workshop. This recommendation was endorsed by the Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee (AAAC), which advises the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) on selected issues within the fields of astronomy and astrophysics that are of mutual interest and concern to the agencies. In January 2007, at the 209th AAS meeting, the AAS Council set up a Steering Committee to formulate Bylaws for a Working Group on Laboratory Astrophysics (WGLA). The AAS Council formally established the WGLA with a five-year mandate in May 2007, at the 210th AAS meeting. From 2008 through 2012, the WGLA annually sponsored Meetings in-a-Meeting at the AAS Summer Meetings. In May 2011, at the 218th AAS meeting, the AAS Council voted to convert the WGLA, at the end of its mandate, into a Division of the AAS and requested draft Bylaws from the Steering Committee. In January 2012, at the 219th AAS Meeting, the AAS Council formally approved the Bylaws and the creation of the LAD. The inaugural gathering and the first business meeting of the LAD were held at the 220th AAS meeting in Anchorage in June 2012. You can learn more about LAD by visiting its website at http://lad.aas.org/ and by subscribing to its mailing list.

Salama, Farid↗
NASA NTRS2009

Jet Noise Research at NASA

A presentation outlining current jet noise work at NASA was given to the Naval Research Advisory Committee. Jet noise tasks in the Supersonics project of the Fundamental Aeronautics program were highlighted. The presentation gave an overview of developing jet noise reduction technologies and noise prediction capabilities. Advanced flow and noise diagnostic tools were also presented.

Henderson, Brenda S.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Human System Risk Management for Space Flight

This brief abstract reviews the development of the current day approach to human system risk management for space flight and the development of the critical components of this process over the past few years. The human system risk management process now provides a comprehensive assessment of each human system risk by design reference mission (DRM) and is evaluated not only for mission success but also for long‐term health impacts for the astronauts. The discipline of bioastronautics is the study of the biological and medical effects of space flight on humans. In 1997, the Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) initiated the Bioastronautics Roadmap (Roadmap) as the "Critical Path Roadmap", and in 1998 participation in the roadmap was expanded to include the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI) and the external community. A total of 55 risks and 250 questions were identified and prioritized and in 2000, the Roadmap was base-lined and put under configuration control. The Roadmap took into account several major advisory committee reviews including the Institute of Medicine (IOM) "Safe Passage: Astronaut care for Exploration Missions", 2001. Subsequently, three collaborating organizations at NASA HQ (Chief Health and Medical Officer, Office of Space Flight and Office of Biological & Physical Research), published the Bioastronautics Strategy in 2003, that identified the human as a "critical subsystem of space flight" and noted that "tolerance limits and safe operating bands must be established" to enable human space flight. These offices also requested a review by the IOM of the Roadmap and that review was published in October 2005 as "A Risk Reduction Strategy for Human Exploration of Space: A Review of NASA's Bioastronautics Roadmap", that noted several strengths and weaknesses of the Roadmap and made several recommendations. In parallel with the development of the Roadmap, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) began a process in 2004 of evaluating the tolerance limits and safe operating bands called for in the Bioastronautics Strategy. Over the next several years, the concept of the "operating bands" were turned into Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS), developed by the technical resources of the SLSD at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC). These standards were developed and reviewed at the SLSD and then presented to the OCHMO for acceptance. The first set of standards was published in 2007 as the NASA‐STD‐3001, Volume 1, Crew Health that elaborated standards for several physiological areas such as cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, radiation exposure and nutrition. Volume 2, Human Factors, Habitability and Human Health was published in 2011, along with development guidance in the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH). Taken together, the SFHSS Volumes 1 and 2, and the HIDH replaced the NASA‐STD‐3000 with new standards and revisions of the older document. Three other changes were also taking place that facilitated the development of the human system risk management approach. In 2005, the life sciences research and development portfolio underwent a comprehensive review through the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) that resulted in the reformulation of the Bioastronautics Program into Human Research Program (HRP) that was focused on appropriate mitigation results for high priority human health risks. The baseline HRP budget was established in August 2005. In addition, the OCHMO formulated the Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) in 2006 that established the position of the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) at the NASA JSC along with other key technical disciplines, and the OCHMO became the responsible office for the SFHSS as noted above. The final change was the establishment in 2008 of the Human System Risk Board (HSRB), chaired by the CMO with representation from the HRP, SLSD management and technical experts. The HSRB then began to review all human system risks, established a comprehensive risk management and configuration management plan and data sharing policy. These major developments of standards, the HRP, the HMTA and a forum for review of human system risks (HSRB) facilitated the integration of human research, medical operations, systems engineering and many other disciplines in the comprehensive review of human system risks. The HSRB began a comprehensive review of all potential inflight medical conditions and events and over the course of several reviews consolidated the number of human system risks to 30 where the greatest emphasis is placed for investing program dollars for risk mitigation. The HSRB considers all available evidence from human research, medical operations and occupational surveillance in assessing the risks for appropriate mitigation and future work. All applicable DRMs (low earth orbit 6 and 12 months, deep space sortie for 30 days and 1 year, a one year lunar mission, and a planetary mission for 3 years) are considered as human system risks are modified by the hazards associated with space flight such as microgravity, exposure to radiation, distance from the earth, isolation and a closed environment. Each risk has a summary assessment representing the state of knowledge/evidence base for that risk, the available risk mitigations, traceability to the SFHSS and program requirements, and future work required. These data then can drive coordinated budgets across the HRP, the International Space Station, Crew Health and Safety and Advanced Exploration System budgets. These risk assessments were completed for 6 DRMs in December of 2014 and serve as the baseline for which subsequent research and technology development and crew health care portfolios can be assessed. The HSRB will review each risk at least annually and especially when new information is available that must be considered for effective risk mitigation. The current status of each risk can be reported to program management for operations, budget reviews and general oversight of the human system risk management program.

Davis, Jeffrey↗
NASA NTRS1961

Post University On-the-Job Training for Engineers

Our national need for qualified scientists and engineers is greater now than at any other time in our history. Fortunately, we can point with pride to this need as a measure of the impact of science and technology on our way of life. In effect, we have made such rapid strides In advancing established sciences and in opening new technological fields that we have proved the value of the scientist and engineer to society, and, as a-result, have created an expanding demand for their services which we must now attempt to satisfy. This demand we face is also due to the changing skills and high degree of specialization required to perform in these new technological fields. The colleges and universities are doing their part to provide current graduates with a modern technical foundation, but we cannot afford to ignore the thousands of experienced engineers and scientists already employed by private industry and government. As employers, we have an obligation to these men and women to see that they are provided with an understanding of the latest advances that modern technology has to offer; that we develop them in particular specialty areas characteristic of a given field of work; and, equally important, that we assist them in the transition from one field to another as the technological emphasis shifts. Practically all technological industries have experienced and continue to experience rapid changes in their activities. The aerospace business, in particular, has been characterized by extremely rapid, in fact revolutionary, changes during the relatively short period of its existence0 At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, successor to the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, for example, we have encountered the fun impact of a changing science and technology. Indeed, as a research organization, we have undoubtedly contributed, in some measure, to this change. Within the NASAs Lewis Research Center, we have approximately 800 research scientists and engineers who have matured professionally in an environment which is essentially one of continuous learning - an experience which comes close to being a form of post graduate training in itself. This environment, in addition to providing continuous evolutionary changes, has also provided two major revolutions which have made this development picture more complex. We will describe these environmental changes which have occurred at the Lewis Research Center and discuss the various techniques and programs we have employed to provide for the professional development of our staff. The Lewis Research Center has had an Interesting and exciting l8-year history of aerospace propulsion research and development. It began during the early years of World War II as an expansion of the Power Plant Division of the NCA Langley Center with the mission of conducting research required for the development of improved reciprocating engines and to study the associated problems of subsonic propulsion aerodynamics, It was only a few years later, however, that turbojet and ramjet propulsion and supersonic flight research became our main concern. This transition to jet type engines and higher speeds was our first major technological change. The aerodynamics of propellers became the aerodynamics of high speed turbine and compressor blades; the fuel ignition and carbon deposition problems were transferred from a cyclical or Intermittent high compression combustion chamber to a continuous combustion zone within a thin-walled metal shell; aerodynamics problems were thrust into the supersonic range; and high temperature materials began to play an increasingly critical role. Although this transition still required the same basic knowledge and principles as before, the new engine types did involve a different emphasis and variety of consideration not generally familiar to our scientists and engineers.

Manganiello, Eugene J.↗
NASA NTRS1928

Bibliography of Aeronautics: 1926

This Bibliography of Aeronautics for 1926 covers the aeronautical literature published from January 1 to December 31, 1926. The first Bibliography of Aeronautics was published by the Smithsonian Institution as volume 55 of the Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections and covered the material published prior to June 30, 1909. Supplementary volumes of the Bibliography of Aeronautics for the subsequent years have been published by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. The last preceding volume was for the calendar year 1925. As in the previous volumes, citations of the publications of all nations are included in the languages in which these publications originally appeared. The arrangement is dictionary form with author find subject entry, and one alphabetical arrangement. Detail in the matter of subject reference has been omitted on aCC01.mt of the cost of presentation, but an attempt has been made to give sufficient cross reference for research in special lines.

Brockett, Paul↗
NASA NTRS1928

Bibliography of Aeronautics: 1928

This Bibliography of Aeronautics for 1928 covers the aeronautical literature published from January 1 to December 31, 1928. The first Bibliography of Aeronautics was published by the Smithsonian Institution as volume 55 of the Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections and covered the material published prior to June 30, 1909. Supplementary volumes of the Bibliography of Aeronautics for the subsequent years have been published by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. The last preceding volume was for the calendar year 1927. As in the previous volumes, citations of the publications of all nations are included in the languages in which these publications originally appeared. The arrangement is in dictionary form with author and subject entry, and one alphabetical arrangement. Detail in the matter of subject reference has been omitted on account of the cost of presentation, but an attempt has been made to give sufficient cross reference for research in special lines.

Paul Brockett↗
NASA NTRS1930

Bibliography of Aeronautics, 1929

This Bibliography of Aeronautics for 1929 covers the aeronautical literature published from January 1 to December 31, 1929. The first Bibliography of Aeronautics was published by the Smithsonian Institution as Volume 55 of the Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections and covered the material published prior to June 30, 1909. Supplementary volumes of the Bibliography of Aeronautics for the subsequent years have been published by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. The last preceding volume was for the calendar year 1928. As in the previous volumes, citations of the pUblications of all nations are included in th.e languages in which. these publications originally appeared. The arrangement is in dictionary form with author and subject entry, and one alphabetical arrangement. Detail in the matter of subject reference has been omitted on account of the cost of presentation, but an attempt has been made to give sufficient cross reference for research in special lines.

Brockett, Paul↗
NASA NTRS1935

Bibliography of Aeronautics: 1932

This Bibliography of Aeronautics for 1932 covers the aeronautical literature published from January 1 to December 31, 1932. The first Bibliography of Aeronautics was published by the Smithsonian Institution as volume 55 of the Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections and covered the material published prior to June 30, 1909. Supplementary volumes of the Bibliography of Aeronautics for the subsequent years have been published by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. The last preceding volume was for the calendar year 1931. As in the previous volumes, citations of the publications of all nations are included in the languages in which these publications originally appeared. The arrangement is in dictionary form with author and subject entry and one alphabetical arrangement. Detail in the matter of subject reference has been omitted on account of the cost of presentation, but an attempt has been made to give sufficient cross-reference for research in special lines.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1939

A Glimpse of Scientific Research on Fundamental Problems of Military and Civil Aeronautics

Among the outstanding accomplishments of the last century is man's conquest of the air. That conquest began in 1903 when the Wright brothers made the first successful flight of an airplane at Kitty Hawk, N. C. Five years later the United States Government purchased its first airplane for the use of the Army, and began the training of officers for military flying. During the years immediately preceding the outbreak of the World War the Government and a meager aircraft industry had made important progress, but the Government, practically the only customer, had purchased less than 100 airplanes. In the meantime, leading European nations, sensing acutely the potentialities of aircraft in warfare, had made greater progress and had begun laying the foundations for the new science of aeronautics. The World War gave a remarkable impetus to the development of aeronautics and emphasized the need for organized research on the fundamental problems of flight. By act of Congress approved March 3, 1915, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics was created and charged with the duty of supervising, directing, and conducting fundamental scientific research and experiment in aeronautics. With the farsighted support of the Congress the Committee has led the world in the development of unique aeronautical research facilities in its laboratories at Langley Field, Va. The research programs include problems initiated by the Committee and its subcommittees and also investigations requested by the Army, the Navy, and the Civil Aeronautics Authority. The results of researches conducted under one control, serve without duplication of effort, the needs of all branches of aviation, civil and military, and exert a profound influence on the progress of aeronautics by improving the performance, efficiency, and safety of aircraft. A brief description of the results of some of the committee's researches and of the equipment employed will be found in the following pages.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2016

Bringing the Future Within Reach: Celebrating 75 Years of the NASA John H. Glenn Research Center

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio, has been making the future for 75 years. The center's work with aircraft engines, high-energy fuels, communications technology, electric propulsion, energy conversion and storage, and materials and structures has been, and continues to be, crucial to both the Agency and the region. Glenn has partnered with industry, universities, and other agencies to continually advance technologies that are propelling the nation's aerospace community into the future. Nonetheless these continued accomplishments would not be possible without the legacy of our first three decades of research, which led to over one hundred R&D 100 Awards, three Robert J. Collier Trophies, and an Emmy. Glenn, which is located in Cleveland, Ohio, is 1 of 10 NASA field centers, and 1 of only 3 that stem from an earlier research organization-the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA). Glenn began operation in 1942 as the NACA Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory (AERL). In 1947 the NACA renamed the lab the Flight Propulsion Laboratory to reflect the expansion of the research. In September 1948, following the death of the NACA's Director of Aeronautics, George Lewis, the NACA rededicated the lab as the Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory. On 1 October 1958, the lab was incorporated into the new NASA space agency and was renamed the NASA Lewis Research Center. Following John Glenn's return to space on the space shuttle, on 1 March 1999 the center name was changed once again, becoming the NASA John H. Glenn Research Center.

Arrighi, Robert S.↗
NASA NTRS1939

A Flight Determination of the Moments of the YG-1B Tapered Blade Rotor about the Hub Trunnions

At the request of the Materiel Division, Wright Field, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics is conducting a program of flight tests on a Kellett YG-1B autogiro equipped with a new type of rotor blade. The new blades are tapered in both plan form. and thickness and are designed to avoid periodic blade twist. One phase of the investigation, involving determination of the moments of the resultant rotor force about the trunnions on which the hub is pivoted for control, has been completed. The results obtained are reported herein.

Bailey, F. J., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2018

From Apollo to the Future, the NASA Curation Model for Engaging the Sample Science Community Maximizes Science on Extraterrestrial Samples

The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at Johnson Space Center (JSC) has enjoyed a long-term partnership (50 years!) with a broad community of planetary sample scientists. This partnership has enabled the curators of planetary samples to plan for and enact evolving requirements for preservation of sample scientific integrity and for handling and long-term storage. The basis for this relationship is a standing peer review advisory committee composed of leading scientists who are recognized for achievements in sample analysis. The committee and its descendants have brought familiarity with the most relevant scientific investigations and the associated analytical and contamination challenges. Beginning with Apollo, the review committee was charged with oversight of curatorial operations and with ensuring fair access to samples. As additional samples from other planetary bodies were acquired, the committee evolved, taking on new responsibilities, reflected in committee name changes. However, oversight of curatorial operations and fair allocation of samples remain basic responsibilities. Committee recommendations are sent to the NASA Headquarters Discipline Scientist for approval. To minimize conflict of interest and maximize fair access, the rules governing the make-up of the committee is structured. Systematic rotation of leadership and staggered terms of membership allow the committee to retain expertise while bringing in fresh ideas. The first peer review committee was called the Lunar Sample Analysis and Planning Team (LSAPT) and was formalized in early 1968 with about 15 members. Their function was to review a) the equipment and procedures used in the new Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL); b) the proficiency and capability of the LRL staff; c) the sequence of sample analysis and allocation after quarantine release; and d) the findings of the Preliminary Examination Team (PET). According to LSAPT member Gerald Wasserburg, one of the first issues they faced was deciding whether to have most of the sample analyses performed in house at the LRL or to distribute samples to members of the scientific community. LSAPT concluded that the major scientific investigations should be carried out externally to the LRL by scientists chosen for their expertise in specific disciplines. Further they recommended that the PET's basic characterization of samples be circulated to the broad scientific community. LSAPT set its own agenda, paid attention to facility details, closely monitored the move of samples from the LRL to the interim curatorial facility in 1973, and was active in inspecting curation facilities. Between 1975 and 1979, a Facility Subcommittee of LSAPT oversaw the design and construction of a permanent facility for preservation of lunar samples. The result was an outstanding facility still in use today. In 1977, a separate peer review committee, the Meteorite Working Group (MWG), was formed to evaluate requests for new meteorites then being collected in Antarctica under what would in 1980 become a 3-agency agreement (National Science Foundation, NASA, Smithsonian Institution). By 1979, after lunar samples were moved into the new permanent facility, the vacated gloveboxes and laboratory were prepared for meteorite curation. Recognizing that LSAPT had been helpful in setting up the JSC curatorial facility for Antarctic meteorites, JSC recommended the review committee be given expanded duties, including advice on curation and analysis of materials from other planetary bodies and the name be changed to Lunar and Planetary Sample Team (LAPST). In 1993, LAPST was renamed the Curation and Analysis Planning Team for Extraterrestrial Materials (CAPTEM) to reflect additional functions. CAPTEM is chartered to be (1) a community-based, interdisciplinary forum for discussion and analysis of matters concerning the collection and curation of extraterrestrial samples, including planning future sample return missions and (2) a standing review panel, charged with evaluating proposals requesting allocation of all extraterrestrial samples contained in NASA collections. Efficiency and flexibility are gained through use of subcommittees, both ad hoc and standing. Transition of the MWG to a subcommittee of CAPTEM was completed in 2017. Today subcommittees review allocation requests for lunar samples, Antarctic meteorites, cosmic dust, Stardust cometary samples, Genesis solar wind samples, and samples returned from asteroids. Other subcommittees address facilities, informatics, and micro-cratered substrates. Planetary samples have been sent to research teams in over 30 countries world-wide. The expertise in the care and fair distribution of astromaterials by NASA using this model spans generations of planetary sample scientists and is a valuable resource to be tapped for future sample returns - OSIRIS-REx, Hayabusa 2, and Mars 2020.

Allton, Judith↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA Guidelines for Promoting Scientific and Research Integrity

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) seeks to explore and expand human knowledge of the Earth, solar system, and universe and to enable the development of aeronautical and space exploration systems. NASA's ability to achieve these purposes depends on the integrity of the research and technology activities the agency conducts and supports. The NASA workforce - as well as all external entities who review proposals for or receive NASA funding - must maintain the highest standards of scientific integrity. These responsibilities include selecting the most meritorious research activities through open and fair competition, peer review and other appropriate merit review processes, and avoidance of actual and perceived conflicts of interest; avoiding fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results; openly sharing results and methods not subject to classification or privacy standards; disclosing assumptions and biases in sharing and applying scientific information and data; and acting honestly and transparently in using and serving on advisory committees and in engaging in professional development activities.

Guidelines↗
NASA NTRS2019

TESS Discoveries

TESS discoveries have already become fruitful targets for HST follow up, and this will undoubtedly continue through the JWST era. In addition to providing targets for atmospheric characterization, TESS' Level One Science Requirement is to measure masses for 50 transiting planets smaller than 4 Earth radii. A full suite of ground based facilities will be working together to optimize the TESS science yield. Somewhat surprisingly though, no study has quantified the accuracy of mass constraints required to yield robust atmospheric properties of small planets. Previous work showed that the mass of a transiting exoplanet could be inferred from its transmission spectrum alone. The method leverages the effect of the planet's surface gravity on the atmospheric scale height, which in turn influences the transmission spectrum. However, significant degeneracies exist between transmission spectra of planets with different masses and compositions, making difficult to unambiguously determine the planet's mass and composition in many cases. I will present the first quantitative answer to this pressing question. Our analysis places definitive limits on how accurate mass constraints need to be in order to unambiguously determine atmospheric composition for a diverse array of planets ranging from terrestrial-size (TRAPPIST-1-like) to mini-Neptunes and hot Jupiters. These results broadly impact the community of scientists working on exoplanets -- from the full breadth of ground based observers conducting TESS follow-up, to those studying planet populations, and finally to those planning atmospheric investigations. This is particularly timely as the STScI Director charged the HST-TESS Advisory committee to report to the Space Telescope Users Committee on how HST can best support follow-up observations of TESS exoplanet discoveries. The community needs to determine optimal strategies for maximizing the rapid scientific return from TESS targets.

Batalha, Natasha E.↗