Memorandum 16
Submission from the University of Leicester
SUMMARY
— The University of Leicester has had
an active space science programme for more than 40 years, carried
out largely through the UK membership of ESA, but also in bi-lateral
projects with NASA and other agencies. Consequently, we are well-place
to contribute to this inquiry.
— The health of UK space science is
currently fragile, as expertise is shrinking.
— There are problems with the comparatively
low levels of investment within the UK to all University groups
to participate in ESA programmes, which are already partially
supported through the ESA subscription, and bi-lateral opportunities.
— The British National Space Centre
is not effective in promoting UK space interests as it has no
executive or funding powers. It should be replaced with a national
space agency similar to the DLR, CNES and ASI in Germany, France
and Italy, our major European competitors.
— Knowledge transfer between academia
and industry should be promoted actively and new programmes developed
that encourage the participations of SMEs by fully-funding their
participation in these.
— UK participation in Human Space Flight
programmes will have important educational and motivational benefits
for young people, encouraging their participation in Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, subjects which are key
to future economic prosperity.
1. The University of Leicester
The University has been active in Space Science
since 1960. Originally noted for its pioneering X-ray Astrophysics,
the University has, in recent years, broadened its space activities
to include Earth Observation Science (since 1991) and Planetary
Science from Orbiters and Landers (since 1996). The University's
space activity is centered in the Department of Physics and Astronomy,
in whose purpose-built Space Research Centre the design and construction
of satellite-borne sensors and optics and carried out. Space research
at Leicester is, however, an interdisciplinary activity, also
involving the Departments of Chemistry and Geography in the Earth
Observation Science area. The Space Research Centre itself has
a complement of 60 staff including PhD students, technicians,
engineers, research associates and academic staff. The total research
budget of the Centre is approximately £3 million a year.
Leicester is involved in a number of missions currently operating
(Chandra, XMM Newton, Swift, Envisat, Meteosat 2nd Generation-GERB).
The University also has significant roles in a number of missions
now in preparation—in either Phase A or B studies. These
missions include Bepi-Colombo—an ESA project to orbit Mercury,
GAIA—to map the galaxy, James Webb Space Telescope—the
successor to the Hubble Space Telescope, Astrosat—the first
Indian National Astronomy Satellite and XEUS, a future European
X-ray astrophysical observatory. The University undertakes a large-scale
programme of knowledge transfer and is active through the Leicester-based
National Space Centre in particular in all forms of outreach to
the public and to industry. Within the wider Department of Physics
& Astronomy, colleagues are involved in the analysis of data
from missions now in orbit and also in the interpretation of the
Earth's magnetosphere and the magnetospheres of other planets
through space-based measurements and measurements by ground-based
radars at high latitudes.
2. UK Space Science
Overall, the health of UK space science appears
to be fragile. While individual groups and centres—including
the University of Leicester—are capable of competing at
the highest levels within the European Space Agency community
and throughout the World, the pool of expertise in space in the
UK is shrinking. Past Government policy which favoured the exploitation
of space in terms of satellite communication and the return from
Earth Observation, has left pure Space Science somewhat underfunded
in comparison with the major space faring nations of Western Europe,
ie France, Germany and Italy. The number of UK research groups
which are competent to build major space experiments within, for
example, the ESA context, is decreasing. This is despite the growing
recognition of UK industry that a healthy scientific community
is essential in order for space industry to gain contracts and
indeed prime status within the ESA framework. In the era (c 1990)
of SOHO, Cluster and XMM-Newton the typical UK involvement in
the scientific payload of a large Cornerstone mission was at a
level of some £20 million. The scale factor for present involvement,
such as in the BepiColombo mission is much reduced.
Full exploitation of the potential of space
missions in a number of space science disciplines can only be
achieved when combined with cost-effective coordinated programmes
of ground-based observations, and these should not be neglected
in national policy and planning. This is evidently the case in
all aspects of studies of the terrestrial environment, from remote
sensing studies of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans, to in situ
studies of the outer plasma regions and radiation belts. The importance
of these disciplines to a wide range of technical applications
and in understanding global climate change should be stressed.
In this regard, the rationale behind the recent decision by the
PPARC to terminate their involvement in ground-based experimental
studies of the upper atmosphere and ionosphere is hard to comprehend.
3. The European Space Agency (ESA)
The exceptional level of resource made available
to the planetary science community as a result of the UK's decision
to participate in the non-mandatory Aurora programme within
the ESA Exploration Directorate has overshadowed the rather bleak
financial outlook for the mandatory ESA Science Programme—which
covers solar-terrestrial science, fundamental physics, astrophysics
and the exploration of planetary bodies other than the Moon and
Mars.
The future science programme will be formulated
in early 2007 following responses to the Cosmic Visions
2015-25 call for proposals, which has just been delayed from September
2006 to early 2007. It seems likely that the first mission within
Cosmic Visions will only be launched within the expected Science
budget closer to 2020 than 2015. Access to space seems certain
to be curtailed or indeed lost entirely for a decade for X-ray
Astronomers at Leicester and throughout Europe—where the
proposed new Cornerstone-class (ie €600 million) observatory
XEUS cannot be accommodated within the Science Programme probably
until well after 2020. Other areas of space science and space
astronomy are under similar threat unless the ESA Science Budget
is increased (which requires Ministerial consent).
It has been evident for many years that the
resources available to the national space instrument programme
is at a level which does not match the central investment required
by membership of ESA and participation in the mandatory ESA Science
Programme. As a consequence, potential UK scientific leadership
roles are routinely missed, including, for example, leadership
of the Bepi-Colombo magnetic field investigation proposed by Imperial
College, despite the project having been initiated and promoted
within the UK from that quarter.
The UK space science and astronomy communities
are particularly exposed to the threat caused by an inadequately
funded Science Programme because the small scale of UK national
funding relative to our mandatory ESA contribution does not easily
allow participation in bilateral missions with non-ESA partners.
Such projects are often of smaller scope but remain highly valuable,
allowing access to more frequent flight opportunities in particular
disciplines between infrequent ESA flagship missions. Valuable
political benefits are also in prospect, such as the possibility
of fostering positive cooperation with China at the present time
through projects such as the space weather KuaFu mission. We submit
therefore that the UK should support a future increase in the
ESA Science programme, but necessarily accompanied by the modest
increases in the national budget without which we are once again
like the fabled golfer who, having paid his expensive club membership,
cannot afford to buy any balls or clubs.
4. The British National Space Centre (BNSC)
The hardest question for UK space scientists
to answer when abroad continues to be: "explain the function
of BNSC". No matter how able and well-organised BNSC staff
may be, the worldwide perception is of an organisation with no
budget and therefore without power, whose consultative nature
renders it ineffectual in the promotion of UK space interests.
The coordination by BNSC of the interests of multiple Government
Departments may be successful on the day-to-day working basis
unseen by outsiders, but has suffered some very public disasters,
such as the failure of the UK to join the GMES programme at an
appropriate level. We submit that the UK should consider the establishment
of a national space agency with executive (ie funding and policy)
responsibilities rather than a consultative mandate—on the
model of DLR, CNES and ASI in our major European competitors,
Germany, France and Italy.
5. Knowledge Transfer (KT)
We submit that the way forward for UK space
science requires close working partnerships between Industry and
University groups—such as the framework agreement currently
being finalised between the University of Leicester Space Research
Centre and EADS Astrium (Stevenage). The benefit to the Industrial
partner arises from access to fundamental understanding of mission
requirements, a prerequisite in the preparation of proposals for
mission studies; the University side gains from studentship support,
consultancies and direct influence in the accommodation of the
science payloads. As long-standing proponents of the spin-off
of detector technologies developed for space astronomy into the
life sciences and medicine, we are confident that the scope for
wealth creation from space-based technologies is indeed considerable,
subject to the following provisos. First, KT is a slower process
than the optimistic schedules of most Research Council grant schemes
allow for. Second, the disincentive to small companies of finding
matching funding from their internal resources is almost total.
We submit that the UK examine the Small Business Innovative Research
(SBIR) scheme operated by the Federal Agencies such as NASA in
the United States as an attractive model for innovation out of
the academic space community under the fully-funded leadership
of SMEs.
6. Outreach, Skills and Human Spaceflight
The existence of high-profile UK leadership
roles in space missions results in strongly positive public images
of science, which stimulates public interest in science generally
and importantly encourages the engagement of young people. The
massive media interest in the UK participation in the Huygens
landing on Titan is a recent example. We also note the continuing
public interest in the "heroic failure" of Beagle 2
at Mars, which clearly touched a highly responsive public nerve
specifically because it was a UK-led venture.
The current position (dating from the 1985 review
which also established BNSC) that the UK does not participate
in Human Spaceflight places a unique constraint on the young people
of this country. They, unlike the citizens of every other state,
are effectively disbarred from becoming astronauts not by lack
of funding or talent, but by their Government's negative policies.
We support the findings of the recent RAS enquiry chaired by Professors
Frank Close and Ken Pounds (University of Leicester) that the
UK Government at least reconsiders those policies for the sake
of the likely positive impact on post-14 student recruitment in
the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects,
which are the key to future economic prosperity.
October 2006
|
