NASA Science Mission Directorate
Oral History Project
Edited Oral History Transcript
Reta F. Beebe
Interviewed by Jennifer Ross-Nazzal
Las Cruces, New Mexico – 26 April 2017
Ross-Nazzal:
The planned maneuvers [for the Cassini mission]—it was interesting
how they’re hoping things are going to go through the rings
and [plunge into] Saturn. Not elsewhere, where they think there might
be life.
Beebe: There’s
a database that they use for planning. The teams have this coded request
and they submit it. It will be for a time interval, and there will
be pointing demand and that kind of thing. That’s all stored
in a database called CIMS [Cassini Information Management System].
I’m slowly learning how to penetrate CIMS in order to retrieve
useful information about the whole data set and the way it was acquired.
I decided “Well, okay.” I looked at the little bodies,
three of them. “Oh, that’ll be easy. I can build a quick
table for them, full description.” Then I pulled the Titan [largest
moon of Saturn] one out, and there’s 10,526 requests. Now, these
are for blocks of time to collect data, so there can be many, many,
many files in one of those requests. We need to characterize 10,000
different requests to really get the information that should be stored
for the future. Now, we won’t be doing Titan anymore. Essentially
that mission component is over, so I can start work on it without
having to revise it and revise it, as I’ve done some of the
others as the mission went on.
Ross-Nazzal:
That sounds like a lot of work. That’s going to become part
of the PDS [Planetary Data System], this work on the CIMS as well?
Beebe: Yes,
this thing that I’m working on will be expanded. If you follow
a line across, there’ll be a description and you can understand
what was involved there. I will simply build a very big spreadsheet
that will be available for people to mine to get what they want out
of it.
Ross-Nazzal:
I thought we would start today by talking about the PDS. Maybe you
can give us a history of when it was created, why it was created,
what it includes.
Beebe: In
[January] 1996 there was a special issue of Planetary and Space Science.
It described the PDS. Previous to that, there had been an ad hoc self-appointed
committee that interacted with NASA Headquarters [Washington, DC]
demanding an archive. Then COSPAR [Committee on Space Research], which
is an international organization, came up with some criteria for how
science should be archived. Out of that, Bill [William L.] Quaide
at NASA Headquarters set up a prototype. It was PPDS [Pre-PDS].
At that point in time, there were most of the nodes that we have now
[in the PDS]. University of Colorado [Boulder] had the [Planetary]
Atmospheres Node, then they [NASA] moved to the Planetary Data System.
I think that [contract] was competed, but these people who had already
been in the prototype had so much advantage that it was just sort
of a handoff. It was more forcing them to do a full description of
what they were going to do. University of Colorado was not appreciated.
They were actually trying to build interactive interfaces before the
web was in position. They were penalized for not rushing to archive
all the old data that was decaying at that point, and they were not
selected in the next go-round.
About 20 years ago, the Planetary [Atmospheres] Node was put up for
competition. At that point in time, Lyle [F.] Huber, one of my students,
had just told me that he didn’t want a Ph.D., that he wanted
a life. I probably pushed him into the traffic one or too many times.
So basically I asked him if he wanted to apply with me for this node,
and he said yes, so we applied and were selected. Lyle Huber is still
downstairs working on this.
Ross-Nazzal:
Did he end up getting his Ph.D.?
Beebe: No,
he didn’t, no. He was really serious. Lyle is the kind of guy
that you can walk in and make some comment about a sports event 15
years ago, and he’s got great recall. He likes what he does.
He’s got a family, two kids that are now in college. As far
as he’s concerned, he’s happy with his choice.
Ross-Nazzal:
So you ended up competing for this, and you ended up winning. This
is just for the Atmospheric Node portion? Or is this the entire PDS?
Beebe: Actually,
when they put out this competition they selected other nodes in other
areas. To them there wasn’t an acceptable Atmospheres Node,
so they reissued a request for proposals. Before that, we were a subadvisory
node for the Boulder node, so we didn’t compete with them when
they went in for competition. After they had been eliminated, then
we did compete for it. We got it, and there have been several competitions
since. We have been renewed. The last one occurred last year, and
I’m no longer the PI [principal investigator]. Nancy [J.] Chanover
is the PI. She’s one of my former students, and she’s
now my boss.
Ross-Nazzal:
Would you tell us about what you proposed to do with the Atmospheres
Node? In terms of what was different from UC-Boulder and what you
were going to do to save all that data that was slowly dwindling?
Beebe: In
those days the PDS was an archive, it wasn’t a public interface.
Ross-Nazzal:
Can you explain what an archive is for a planetary scientist? I know
what it is for a historian.
Beebe: What
we were basically doing was building data sets. When we finished a
data set, we had a mailing list. We sent out CDs [compact discs] that
contained the data sets so that the various institutions had their
own copies of these data. Various people who were interested in this
particular mission, this type of instrument would get those CDs and
have them in their own desk drawer. It was a mail order place, because
anyone who wanted one would just send a request and they would get
the hard copy shipped in the mail.
The major concentration then, in order to get selected, was to recognize
the data sets that needed to be preserved, to show that you had some
expertise in this area, and then a plan of the time schedule in which
you were going to get it done.
Ross-Nazzal:
How far back did the archive go? I know, for instance, from looking
at your book [Jupiter: The Giant Planet] that you did some work in
London [United Kingdom] into the British astronomical archives. Was
it going that far back, or was it just NASA missions?
Beebe: The
PDS is limited. NASA was not keeping good track of its data that it
was generating. A lot of it was essentially lost. Not all of the Pioneer
data, for instance, is available.
Ross-Nazzal:
It just disappeared?
Beebe: People
just weren’t archiving. The idea was that the PI owned the instrument,
and it was his data and his team produced the science results out
of it and the publications were the end product. It wasn’t until
this ad hoc committee—are you interviewing Ray [Raymond E.]
Arvidson?
Ross-Nazzal:
I don’t think so. His name doesn’t ring a bell, no.
Beebe: Washington
University, Saint Louis [Missouri]. He was much involved. He was the
Mars component of the gang. Got Larry [Laurence A.] Soderblom on your
list?
Ross-Nazzal:
No, but he was on the Voyager team, correct?
Beebe: He
was too, yes. Ray [Raymond J.] Walker, UCLA [University of California,
Los Angeles]?
Ross-Nazzal:
No.
Beebe: Those
people were all involved in that. Got Jeff [Jeffrey N.] Cuzzi at [NASA]
Ames [Research Center, Moffett Field, California]?
Ross-Nazzal:
No, but I’ve seen his name multiple times.
Beebe: He
was the initial rings proposal.
Johnson: These
are all names that we could go back and suggest [we interview].
Ross-Nazzal:
We can suggest them to Dr. [James L. “Jim”] Green.
Beebe: Those
are all basic people that started with the PDS. Then there’s
this [journal, the Planetary and Space Science special issue on the
Planetary Data System]. You’ll want to take that reference because
there are descriptions of all of the nodes except the Atmospheres
Node, which didn’t exist at that point in time.
Ross-Nazzal:
Would you tell us about what you proposed, and then what eventually
ended up happening here at New Mexico State [University, Las Cruces]
with that node?
Beebe: We
proposed to essentially get the data, which had been safed in various
NASA places, and transfer it here and set it up so that people could
get to the documentation and create CDs. You had masters so that you
had a mail order situation set up. It was basically retrieve the data
that could be retrieved.
They had been dumping it in the NSSDC [National Space Science Data
Center] at [NASA] Goddard [Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland],
but in forms that were, in many cases, not really retrievable. We
worked on the Pioneer data, the tapes that we could get, for months.
They were labeled the “flyby of Jupiter.” When we finally
broke out the codes, we found out that all we had was cruise data
on the way out. The other was lost. The cruise data wasn’t very
useful, because it wasn’t documented. That was a lot of the
kinds of things that we found. The imaging data for Pioneer was stored
on microfiche.
Ross-Nazzal:
Did it have vinegar syndrome?
Beebe: It
had syndromes before they ever stored it. There’s a really nice
color publication, special report of NASA [Pioneer Odyssey, NASA SP-349/396,
1977], that encompasses the Pioneer imaging, and that’s about
all there is. If you go to the UCLA PPI [Planetary Plasma Interactions]
Node and look at Pioneer, they will have slots for the instruments,
but they will specify that the data is uncertified. All they have
managed to do is save the bits.
Ross-Nazzal:
Did you try and reach out to the former PIs and ask if they had materials?
Maybe those tapes?
Beebe: Oh,
yes. That’s where I got these tapes that were supposed to be
the Jupiter flyby. I went to University of Arizona [Tucson], where
the PI had been. They looked, and they got me computer printouts on
some stuff. They got me these tapes, but the tapes didn’t contain
what they claimed to have, so I didn’t find it. It hadn’t
been archived in the NSSDC, it wasn’t retrievable.
Ross-Nazzal:
What a shame. How long did that process take, from the time that you
found out you were going to be establishing this node until things
were up and running?
Beebe: That
one was pretty quick, because NASA Headquarters had decided they just
wouldn’t have an Atmospheres Node. Then they got blowback from
the community, so they put it in and implemented it. It was just an
add-on, so that went pretty fast.
Ross-Nazzal:
It was just you and Lyle? Or did you have other graduate students
helping?
Beebe: We
had some graduate students, but the budget was very small because
they had redistributed the budget. So now they had to come up with
a pocket of money to fund it. When we first started, our node was
underfunded compared to the others by quite a bit, so we were slow
coming up.
Ross-Nazzal:
At what point did you make the switch from mail order to being live
and online?
Beebe: I guess
it was about 10 years ago that we started pushing to come online.
The students were online before other people were, and the students
are still better at it than we are. We still use undergraduate computer
science majors to do a lot of our work. Something sneaky about this—we
can pay students, but the university won’t let us give students
the salary that they deserve. They’ve got this upper lid. Many,
many, many kids can be employed at peon labor [rates], but there’s
a gotcha that you can use—you can pay the tuition. So you can
get kids that are really committed to helping you, and good ones.
Ross-Nazzal:
Oh, that’s a nice perk. Before you went live, were you accepting
data in different formats? You had this mail order system, but the
web was really coming into its own before 2007.
Beebe: We
were going to leave mag [magnetic] tapes because they require so much
maintenance. The question then was what medium would we go to. It
wasn’t until a business association accepted the CD as their
archiving medium that we made the shift. When they recognized it as
a useful medium, then we figured it would be around long enough that
it would be worth doing.
Those were CDs, then we transferred to DVDs [digital versatile discs].
By then we had Internet, but there were quite a few people that still
wanted the data they asked for on the CD. So we had this transition
period. Even now, a lot of what we design is trying to minimize the
number of bits we transfer, because people don’t have high baud
rates where they’re trying to work. If you’re stuck in
a hotel room and you’re trying to finish a proposal, you want
the minimum amount of bits to dump that you need. We design our webpages
to satisfy that kind of thing, as well as someone who wants the whole
data set.
Ross-Nazzal:
How long did it take you to make that transition from physical data
to online digital data?
Beebe: Several
years. Because you can start it, but you still have to service the
other one until everybody is up. People that are located at universities
don’t have a lot of money to keep up with the latest events,
and that was slow in coming. The communication links were bad, so
you had to be able to deliver on hard copy for quite a while.
Ross-Nazzal:
Internet connection can vary.
Beebe: Considerably.
Ross-Nazzal:
Yes. Were there any significant challenges that you had to overcome
when you made this transition?
Beebe: No,
Lyle was one of these guys who liked to play on the web, so he was
up-to-date on it when we started. There wasn’t that much of
a problem. That was like 20 years ago that we started to be able to
access the web.
Ross-Nazzal:
I had read recently that you were managing the PDS node when it was
in trouble. I was curious about when the node was in trouble.
Beebe: The
PDS node is always in trouble.
Ross-Nazzal:
This was an award that you had won.
Beebe: You’ve
always got people complaining. It’s amazing who they will complain
to, they’ll go to their senator to complain.
Ross-Nazzal:
What are some of their complaints?
Beebe: Just
rage that it doesn’t work. The standing joke with us is that
there are people who want to put in their name and the title of their
paper and have it spit out for them.
Ross-Nazzal:
We understand that.
Johnson: We
call it they want an easy button.
Ross-Nazzal:
They think you can type in a [question], and the computer spits out
an answer for you.
Beebe: They all want the data in the format they want it, and that’s
almost a red flag saying this guy doesn’t know enough about
manipulating data to put it in his own form. You’re going to
let him go and let him run.
Dan [Daniel S.] Goldin [former NASA Administrator] used to talk about
the brilliant sophomore in high school who ought to be able to do
creative research if we had our system set up right. Well, that brilliant
little guy ought to be learning something about instrumentation. If
he’s going to change the world, he should know how clunky some
of these things are and be able to do something else instead of sucking
up some kind of finished numbers that he applies somewhere.
Ross-Nazzal:
I had also read that the [National Research Council] decadal survey
[Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022]
mentioned the PDS and that it was so vital, so important to researchers
that it needed to be supported. Can you talk about that? That was
a recent publication.
Beebe: I’ll
give you a little bit of history on the decadals. We’re in our
second decadal now, I think we’re about five years into it at
this point.
Ross-Nazzal:
Yes, I think it came out in 2013.
Beebe: Back
when we did the first one, Ed [Edward J.] Weiler was managing the
science division [Science Mission Directorate] of NASA. Astrophysics
had done these decadal studies before, and he was an astrophysicist.
He said he couldn’t sell the other science components on the
[Capitol] Hill if he didn’t have decadals. The decadals are
generated by the National Science Academy [National Academy of Sciences],
and the people on the Hill think the National Science Academy speaks
truth.
They do, in the sense that they boil the subject down to the point
that they really get to the nucleus of the problems. There has been
a fairly longstanding relationship between the agencies—NASA,
NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration], and the Academy.
The Academy is privately funded, but what happens is Congress will
decide that a study should be done on some aspect of NASA. NASA and
the Academy then negotiate this. They define the terms of that study
very closely and the cost value of it. It’s a flat contract
that the Academy takes from NASA, and NASA then gets the chance of
reviewing the report as well and reacting to it.
It is really a good working system. He wanted that kind of credibility
tied to things, so we did the first decadal study. I was the chair
of the outer planets subcommittee. The way it’s set up is you
have a main committee, and you have subcommittees. The chair of the
subcommittee is responsible for the report. Your cochair or your subchair,
whatever you want to call him, [(this was the case)] is a member of
the major committee, so he’s responsible for integrating your
component into the main one. Andy [Andrew P.] Ingersoll was the person
for the outer on the first one. We did the review and recommended
what flagships, what intermediates, and what smaller missions should
be accomplished in the 10-year period and the characteristics of those
missions.
When the first one was done, there was a lot of naïve approach
to it, even inside of NASA. It didn’t have the right cost constraints
to really accomplish what they claimed they were going to do in 10
years.
So when it came time to renew that, in the second one, NASA Headquarters
negotiated that contract so that any mission that was proposed had
to be subjected to a preliminary costing. It had to fit in the right
[cost] bucket, or you couldn’t put it in that bucket in the
report. I thought there was a major step forward when we did the second
one. On the second one, I was only a member of the outer planets committee.
Heidi [B.] Hammel was the chair and Amy [A.] Simon-[Miller] was the
person who represented us on the main committee.
The comments about data archives and the PDS were generated in that
main committee, so they looked at what was going on. One of the things
that people don’t realize is that the budget for the PDS is
really small compared to the budgets that are set up for archiving
at HST [Hubble Space Telescope Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI)]
and astrophysics and the Sun-Earth and the Earth monitoring. We’re
much tighter in the way things have to be done. So no, we don’t
accomplish quite as much as some of the others do, but part of the
reason is that we’re not staffed to do all the cutesy little
things that can be done. We don’t publish glossy publications
about what we’ve accomplished.
Ross-Nazzal:
I think all I found was a little link to the database itself. That
was it, I couldn’t find too much more.
Beebe: We’re
starting to argue, “We’ve got to do a better job of selling.”
We’ve got to get our community now to transfer over from this
ODL [Object Description Language] system that they invented inside
of [NASA] JPL [Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California] to
an XML [Extensible Markup Language]-based system. The younger kids
have no problem with it. The older guys are going to balk a lot unless
they get stroked properly.
Ross-Nazzal:
Can you describe the difference between the two systems?
Beebe: The
ODL has a label, and it’s human-readable. It’s either
attached or detached to the data, but it belongs to that particular
piece of data. When you go into an XML system, you’ve got a
lot of structure in your label that links. You’ve got this label,
and it’s associated with that little piece of data, but there
are links in there that will take you to the documentation that describes
it.
When you take this data set that you’ve created, this bundle,
and you put it through a registry, then everything that’s in
there has a unique identifier. So if somebody has generated a table
in a paper, the first column will be the identifier. All people would
have to do is take that and paste it in a request, and it’ll
come back.
It’s like a DOI [Digital Object Identifier] for a journal article.
Modern linkage is what’s built into it. If you don’t know
anything about that and you unload this header, the first time you
see it you go, “Good God.” Unless somebody has told you.
If you don’t know anything about XML, just start at the bottom
and read up, because the stuff that they’re used to seeing is
all still human-readable at the bottom. It tells you what the columns
are. But the top then are the links to all of the related information
that you might have in the archive.
Ross-Nazzal:
Do you provide training for older folks who are used to a different
format?
Beebe: Actually,
we have to migrate the old data to the new. What we’re doing
here, in our node, is keeping the old label. Now when somebody comes
in and orders a product—which would be the data file and the
XML label—because the old label is small, they just get it whether
they want it or not. If you belong to the younger generation, you
use the PDS4 label. If you’re one of the old guys and you don’t
want to change your software, you’ve got the [PDS]3 label. You
can go ahead and do what you want until you retire.
The other reason we’re keeping it is if we screw up in a migration,
we can go back. We’re not throwing it away. In XML, it becomes
just another related factor. You have a link in the label for that,
so when you want to fish them out, it comes out. That’s part
of the set that you pull when you ask for that URN [Uniform Resource
Name].
Ross-Nazzal:
When someone makes a request for this material, how long does it normally
take?
Beebe: We’re
automating it so that the length of wait they’re going to have
is going to depend on their own baud rate. We’re reading the
labels on a whole data set, setting up an index, and it will be the
unique identifier and then the parameters are associated in the label
that we’ve extracted. We build this help sheet so they can set
their limits on the various parameters, and they can get it to the
point that they’re just downloading one product if that’s
what they want. Or they can do searches to figure out what’s
in it.
Since we’ve built the index which describes the whole data set,
we allow them to download that too, and slice and dice it any way
they want to. Then when they say, “Oh, there’s only 20
files in here I want,” all they have to do is copy those URNs,
paste them into the sheet, and it will bundle that and send it to
them. So most of the time is spent in the transmission.
Ross-Nazzal:
How long is the migration intended to take at this point?
Beebe: NASA
Headquarters is pushing us to do it, but they’re not coming
up with the money to do it. They’re starting to ask how much
it would take to bring it forward. NASA does that all the time, “How
much would it take to do this in six months?”
“It ain’t possible, buddy. I can’t go hire somebody
for six months. The university requires me to be able to pay them
for a year before they’ll let me even advertise.” That’s
this kind of thing that’s going on now.
How do you prioritize them? The MESSENGER [MErcury Surface, Space
ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging] mission just finished producing
all of its reduced data products. We’re going to migrate it
right away because the data set that we have is an ablation atmosphere.
We already have a PDS4 mission to the Moon, LADEE [Lunar Atmosphere
and Dust Environment Explorer], and we’ve already got that data
implemented. We will migrate the MESSENGER so that we’ve got
the entire data set for the community that’s interested in that
kind of atmospheric problems. That one will get pretty high priority.
We’ve got the Juno [to Jupiter] coming in. Juno was conceived
and approved before we switched to 4, so that data is coming in as
PDS3. We’re going to migrate that one as it comes in. We already
have their cruise data in house. We’re migrating it so that
when we get the first delivery, which will be June 1 [2017], it will
go in as the dual option for people who are on their mission, who
got their software all developed for 3, they can use the 3 label.
The people who are outside and just starting to come in will use the
4 labels.
Ross-Nazzal:
I’m curious about this data that’s generated by American
spacecraft. You mentioned you were working on the International Planetary
Data Alliance [IPDA]? Can people from other nations, including China
for instance, use the data that’s in the PDS?
Beebe: We’re
open to anyone. [Anyone] who can read English can come in and extract
data. It doesn’t matter what your credentials are, which means
you got [to have] a pretty weird firewall.
Ross-Nazzal:
How’s that?
Beebe: Because
you’ve got to make certain that you’ve got the rest of
the university fenced out of your area.
Ross-Nazzal:
I see, that makes sense. You guys do a lot of work for DOD [Department
of Defense] and other [groups]. Will you tell us about your work with
the International Planetary Data Alliance? It sounds very interesting.
Beebe: Years
ago, ESA [European Space Agency] decided that they needed an archive,
probably more than we do. The way ESA operates is that the countries
that belong to the agency support ESA to develop a spacecraft, to
have the program, and make the selections, that they’re going
to do. But then, the individual countries propose to build the instruments
and support them. Their teams then have the first claim on the data
analysis.
So for a while ESA was doing this, but the same countries that were
doing this were complaining because their citizens didn’t have
access to the other data. They were saying, “If you don’t
give our people access to all of the data, we’re not going to
support you anymore.” It was like the left hand biting the right
hand for a while. We had already developed our data system, and they
sent a fellow named Joe [J.] Zender over. He spent a semester or so
at the Small Bodies Node at the University of Maryland [College Park]
learning what their whole structure was. Then Joe took what he liked
about it back and set up the PSA, Planetary Science Archive, at ESA.
Basically, they were using a part of PDS3. That wasn’t powerful
enough to keep everyone happy, but there wasn’t really money
to decide to do a unique system. Because their users were already
familiar with the PDS system, it made sense that they join us in the
PDS4 development. They have been really aggressive in developing and
moving forward, and moving their missions into the PDS4 mode. They
have a Mars mission right now [ExoMars 2016] that’s going to
be their first PDS4 [based mission].
Then they’ve got BepiColombo [mission] that goes back to Mercury.
That’s a dual mission; it’s two spacecraft [Mercury Planetary
Orbiter (MPO) and Mercury Magnetospheric Orbiter (MMO)]. The other
one, [the MMO], is Japanese [Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)].
For the groups to use [the data] they all need to use the same data
system, so the Japanese are coming into the PDS4 database. They too
have the same problem. They’ve all been Google-ized. So they
all want this easy way to get stuff, but people have no funds to do
it.
We’ve circled our wagons to solve the problem, and the system
is pretty open. We did our best to put together an organization that
wasn’t administratively heavy. It’s individually driven,
actually. We have a face-to-face meeting once a year that will be
in Berlin [Germany] this year in July, and we have telecons. We have
a steering committee and a technical advisory group. Those are the
only standing committees in the whole thing.
The system is based on identifying problems and defining a very well-defined
project with a basic goal and a time schedule for doing it. Then somebody
that’s involved in either the steering committee or the advisory
group will volunteer to chair that. They can pick then, from the various
agencies, people to work on that together. The projects are all carried
out electronically. We may, at some other meeting, schedule a day
for people to get together for a real work session. When somebody
implements something, the other people review it. That’s working
quite well.
Japan, India [Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO)], U.A.E. [United
Arab Emirates]—they have an atmospheric Mars mission that they’re
working on, and ESA. Then the individual countries within ESA that
are involved in development of instruments are also members. We’re
working on getting South Korea now [(South) Korea Aerospace Research
Institute (KARI)]. They have a lunar mission [Korean Pathfinder Lunar
Orbiter]. We’re aggressive in trying to get everyone sharing,
because nobody has really got the resources to do what the world would
like to have.
We’re barred from talking to China, so we can’t deal with
them in any way that is supported by any government funds. Individually,
or if you’re a private university and you can fence off a donor
who is totally uninvolved with government, then you can have conversations.
The Geo [Geosciences] Node [Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri]
has done a little bit of that. The problem that we have had is every
time we’ve established somebody in China who is really good
to work with, they get promoted and they disappear. We don’t
have a critical mass of people.
When we have a meeting in Europe that is sponsored by a European agency,
there’ll be quite a few Chinese planetary people [that] show
[up]. We’re allowed to talk to them within a group. The other
ruling that we’ve had is it doesn’t matter where people
are from, if they come into our node, and we give them only the same
kind of help we give everyone else, then we’re not in violation
of those rules. We don’t have to ask them if they’re mainland
Chinese before we say, “No, that’s not the way it works.”
But that’s pretty frustrating, because I’m pretty sure
that they’ve got a lot of development. I wouldn’t be surprised
if it isn’t very parallel to ours, because XML is a very powerful
way of hooking everything up.
Ross-Nazzal:
I’m curious if you can talk about standardization with that
committee, in terms of formatting. So many different groups have different
ways of handling information and putting them into data sets differently.
How do you handle that with so many different countries involved,
so many different cultures? Probably even on the PDS, how did you
institute, “These are the standards”? How did you tell
the PIs, “This is how we need the data to come in, this is what
we need you to do when you send it”?
Beebe: The
PDS4 was developed from the ground up, slowly. You start with a data
model. The data model will be fairly simple when you first start,
but it describes the standards. As you develop, if you’re going
to change anything you have to go back and change the data model so
that it’s pretty controlled.
Yes, there’s a constant argument about which formats should
be integrated in. If you decide that you’re going to integrate
a format in, then the type of structure that’s allowed in that
format is not everything that the entire community is using. It will
be a very standard one. Anyone who’s going to put data into
one of our archives will have to adhere to that standard. There’s
a FITS [Flexible Image Transport System] format that the astrophysicists
use. The level of creativity that people demonstrate in that file
is amazing, but the description for the PDS FITS is very standardized.
You can do quite a bit with it, but you can’t do some of the
layering that people have done inside of [FITS files].
Ross-Nazzal:
What sort of things can people include?
Beebe: First
of all, we like them to include ASCII [American Standard Code for
Information Interchange] files as much as possible, because years
from now people will be able to read an ASCII file. If it’s
just a table, then we really prefer for them to do an ASCII file with
the simple XML label.
If something comes along that’s better than XML, there’ll
be migration software. So if you’ve got the simplest possible
structure in your archive, then you’ve got the one with the
greatest longevity. If you’ve got an image, a 2D [two-dimensional]
array, where everything is specified in the label, is the base that
we would like to have. If it’s a 3D [three-dimensional] then
you want a simple cube.
A lot of teams in the past—with the pretense that it saves downlink,
and I doubt it—[have hung] a lot of parameters off the side
of every row of an image. You have to be able to decode all those
parameters. Those are really forbidden. The image should be the image,
and the documentation should be in other files. You’re allowed
housekeeping files.
Ross-Nazzal:
What are housekeeping files?
Beebe: Usually
ASCII files, where you can put all this information that you want
to save, instead of hooking it up inside of the data product. That’s
the part that’s expensive, building the data model and setting
up the structure to adhere to the data model. At this point in time,
the PDS4 development is housed at JPL, but there’s an IPDA representative
on the council.
There’s also a representative on the change control board, which
is the group that have to say that a format could be acceptable. “You’ve
got to go back guys, and fix the data plan so that it will accommodate
this kind of thing.” Basically, the people that are represented
in the IPDA [committees] are out of ESA. A young engineer named Santa
Martinez, that is really sharp and a terrific organizer, is on the
committee.
Ross-Nazzal:
We’ve spent some time talking about the PDS, and I stumbled
across something that I wanted to ask you about. You and your husband
[astronomer Herbert A. “Herb” Beebe] worked to ensure
that there were certain papers of leading astronomers and other scientists
like Clyde [W.] Tombaugh that his papers were going to reside here
at New Mexico State University. I thought that was very interesting
that, as astronomers, you saw the value in that, the importance in
that. I wonder if you could talk about that.
Beebe: Actually
that’s Herb’s work. Herb retired fairly young. He got
tired of being a department head, didn’t want to be a dean,
so he retired and got involved in that. He did the oral history of
people who had known Clyde and worked with the library to set up that
archive. So he learned a little bit about what it takes.
We had a friend [Walter Lwowski] who was a chemist. He had been at
Yale [University, New Haven, Connecticut] and been part of a Nobel
Prize team. He was born in Germany and had lived there during the
Second World War and had a great collection of German history books.
We were his executors, and when he died [in 2010]—it wasn’t
in his will, but we took the risk. He was leaving everything he had
to the chemistry department.
The chemistry department had an office there that was in as bad a
shape as the house, so we contracted with the library. My lawyer said,
“You’re probably going to end up having to pay for that
yourself,” because it wasn’t in the will. So I thought
well, the best thing I can do is go talk to the guys in chemistry.
I knew some of them. I took the archivist with me, and the archivist
said, “We’ll do the whole thing for our bid.” The
guys in chemistry just couldn’t shove it out the door fast enough,
because they had no idea what to do with it. The library was delighted
especially to get his German collection, but he had enough history
that they were interested in, too. Again, Herb worked with the library
on that one. I didn’t do that work.
Ross-Nazzal:
You received credit for it, just so you know. The New Mexico State
webpage [gives you credit].
Beebe: I signed
some of the checks.
Ross-Nazzal:
Maybe that’s why they put your name on it. I just thought that
was interesting given his history, and the other folks as well that
I saw, the papers that were donated.
Beebe: I still
end up as the consultant when people outside are looking for something
for Clyde, and they’re too naïve to know that there’s
an archive. They’re usually absolutely delighted when they’re
just sent to the webpage.
Ross-Nazzal:
It’s a great resource, and it’s nice to see that it got
preserved. You did mention the decadal planning surveys, and I did
want to ask about that. You gave us a little bit of a history on the
first one, and you mentioned that of course they couldn’t withstand
the budgetary numbers. These missions were—to use the phrase—pie
in the sky.
Beebe: So
had the astrophysics been. Now when NASA negotiates these with the
Academy, they’ve got a definite section about realistic costing
before you say, “This is the decadal plan.”
Ross-Nazzal:
In that first one that you participated in, did you reach out to other
astronomers who weren’t part of that group, just to get an idea
of what other astronomers were thinking?
Beebe: Oh
yes, we had town hall meetings. The Academy does a very good job.
When you’re working on something like this, you have multiday
meetings that they have planned. They bring in people who are not
on the committee at all. I remember one of the guys saying when he
died, if he made it to the golden gate [in heaven] he was going to
check to see if they had [Microsoft] PowerPoint before he went in.
You spend day after day looking at PowerPoint presentations of what
you should be doing and what this group would like to have. It’s
a very detailed process that the Academy goes through. Then you finally
put the report together based on the contract, and it goes up the
chain of command in the Academy. It’s heavily reviewed to see
that what you’re saying stays within their guidelines. When
one of those is released, it’s in good shape.
I worked on one of the [National] Academy of Engineering [reviews]
on starting up production of plutonium-238, and the procedure is the
same. The Space Studies Board presides over the Academy of Sciences,
the Academy of Engineering, and the medical group. People from all
of those are represented on the Space Studies Board. The Space Studies
Board gets a report from every one of these committees that are developing
these studies.
Ross-Nazzal:
What ended up happening to some of the missions that you proposed
in that first decadal?
Beebe: We
just didn’t make it through all of them.
Ross-Nazzal:
Just lack of funding?
Beebe: We
won’t make it through all of the ones that are in the next one,
but it sets the standard. Then when NASA says that they want to do
a particular mission, they have this well-grounded description of
what that mission is, what the science goals were for it.
Ross-Nazzal:
Were there any big debates for that first decadal?
Beebe: Oh,
yes.
Ross-Nazzal:
Can you talk about some of those debates?
Beebe: I don’t
remember that much in the outer planets. But when you start meshing
them together and then saying that a comet mission is better than
a mission to Uranus, that’s where the debates go. It’s
surprising what gets ironed out and what doesn’t get ironed
out as it goes along. In this last one, it was the Europa [Clipper]
mission [to Jupiter’s Europa moon] versus maybe a mission to
Uranus or Neptune. That’s tough to give that up because you
know if you give it up you’re not going to see it in your lifetime.
So people fight it out.
Ross-Nazzal:
I can imagine. Are there certain camps that you’ve come across?
Beebe: Oh,
yes. After we finished the first decadal, I served as the chair for
a committee called COMPLEX for four years, I think. It was the Committee
on Planetary and Lunar Exploration. Within the Academy, they have
standing committees. They’re the ones that accept these demands
from the agencies to do studies. [As] that one was set up, it was
peopled by people throughout all of planetary science to respond to
these studies. Sometimes a study would be so specific that they’d
go outside of that standing committee and set up another committee,
but most of the time it’s the standing committee that addresses
this sort of thing. The standing committee has the right to isolate
certain problems that they would like to address themselves, internally
within the Academy.
Ross-Nazzal:
During that time the President [George W. Bush] announced a new Vision
for Space Exploration. Were you involved at all in discussions going
on about, “we’re going back to the Moon, we’re retiring
the [Space] Shuttle”?
Beebe: No.
After the Challenger [STS 51-L Shuttle] accident [in 1986], the higher-ups
at NASA were really worried about the future of NASA, and that was
done internally. The Academy didn’t really participate in those
decisions.
Ross-Nazzal:
Talk to us about that second decadal survey. You obviously had learned
quite a bit from the first one and were knowledgeable about, like
you said, budgets. We have to be aware of the constraints that NASA
has. What role did politics play? [Congressman] John [A.] Culberson,
for instance, is really pushing that mission to Europa. Were there
other people that you were keeping in mind?
Beebe: No,
the nice thing about the Academy is they really try to fence that
part out. You’re really trying to say, “Okay, this is
the field. Where are the holes in our knowledge? How could you fill
them? You’ve done this, this, and this. What’s the next
logical thing?” You can expect that anyone who thinks that they’ve
got a big input into their community is going to be lobbying on the
Hill to get things done, but that’s not what you’re doing
when you’re working for the Academy. You’re herding cats
when you’re working for the Academy.
Ross-Nazzal:
What were some of the major concerns of the group? What sort of things
were people thinking, “this is what we would like to see achieved”
for this next decadal?
Beebe: When
we did this last decadal study, we had the Cassini mission. It was
functioning well. We had the Galileo mission [to Jupiter and its moons],
and its probe functioned well. You get some ground truth when you
can go into the atmosphere and actually measure the components. You
get some ground truth that you don’t get otherwise.
One of the mid-cost mission desires was a Saturn probe that was going
to finish the Cassini mission. That had to get into a bucket where
the mission would cost less than $1 billion. One of the major things
I did on the committee was to head up the costing study for a Saturn
probe. I got to use the tiger team that JPL has for costing missions.
It was fun to work with them because they’re used to designing
a mission that has a bell and a whistle for everyone in the whole
community, but that wasn’t the game we were playing.
The game we were playing is what you call the “floor of the
mission.” You specify what the science goals of the mission
should be and then you design a spacecraft that will do that, period.
That was the costing. The costing formula that they gave us was much
more rigid than the one they’re applying to the current New
Frontiers [Program] missions that are being competed right now. It
was really a tight squeeze to get it in, and it was fun to watch these
engineers. Suddenly, they were digging a little deeper into their
software than they had dug before. They were pretty sure if we didn’t
get that in that cost bucket, we weren’t going to see it in
our lifetime. That was fun to do.
Some of the other studies—I don’t think the person from
the committee was really aware of how much cost was going to play
in getting missions lined up and selected. I think they allowed the
teams to expand the cost of the mission more than was necessary. When
you’re trying to cost something like this, I’m all for
designing a floor mission. By the time you get there to really build
the mission, things may have changed.
An example of that was I wrote the text for a mission that would have
sent a probe into Jupiter. A mission that would have done what Juno
is doing but carried a probe. It got into the decadal, and it got
competed. When the guys at JPL and Scott [J.] Bolton started putting
this together, they couldn’t get it in the bucket with the probe.
They began to realize that microwave sensing had advanced far enough
that you could do a pretty good job of probing the atmosphere if you
had [six] different microwave antennas on your spacecraft that were
designed to look at different frequencies or wavelengths. One of them
would be stopped by the absorption at a certain level, another one
wasn’t sensitive to that so it would go deeper. You could actually
build a set of probes. So the guys out at JPL put together Juno with
a microwave radiometer instead of the probe, and it fit the Frontiers
budget.
Then NASA Headquarters had to question whether that fit the requirement
of the probe or not. So Headquarters put together a subcommittee to
advise them on this. The subcommittee said, “Yes, it does it.”
I was on that subcommittee. Not only did it do it, but it did something
else better than what we had described, and that was because the spacecraft
is rotationally stabilized.
When they take the spacecraft and it’s coming this way [demonstrates]
and they turn the spacecraft [90 degrees] so it’s coming this
way and it’s rotating, the microwave sweeps across the planet.
As it’s making its sweeps, it’s looking at the same cloud
deck from many different angles. So the data that’s coming out
of those five sensors is not only probing to depth, but it’s
also getting the geometry of the cloud structures. That wasn’t
in the original plan. So their plan was actually better than the spec
[specification]. We said, “Yes, this one is acceptable.”
There were a couple others—I’ve forgotten which ones they
were—where somebody had done something innovative to overcome
cost. That’s the way you want it. It’s not cut-and-dried
that you got to have this instrument and that instrument in order
to do it. By the time they get around to doing it, there may be a
better way to do it.
Ross-Nazzal:
I think it’s fascinating how you were able to work on that team
and come up with all of that data for the decadal to figure out if
it would fit those budget requirements.
Beebe: We
got to use NASA’s costing expertise. [John Hopkins University]
APL [Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, Maryland] and JPL volunteered
to allow the Academy to use their costing expertise. That was part
of the agreement of the contract, so that NASA Headquarters could
trust the costing.
Ross-Nazzal:
How long did it take you to draft those plans and to figure out that
it would fall in those requirements, it would meet that bucket?
Beebe: That
probably took us six months total. You set it up so you meet about
three times, working that costing and getting everything written up
and justified and cross-checked.
Ross-Nazzal:
Did you spend a lot of time working with engineers? You’re an
astronomer, but did you spent a lot of time working with those people
working on spacecraft over the years?
Beebe: When
you’re working on these, you don’t even know who’s
who. You’ve got people whose expertise was computer science,
you’ve got engineers, you’ve got physicists. You’ve
got geologists, you’ve got meteorologists. It really becomes
an integrated team, and as the mission progresses they share their
knowledge and people become pretty well-versed in other people’s
fields.
Ross-Nazzal:
What was the reaction of the planetary science community to the last
decadal? Were they pleased with the outcome, or was there any outcry
about decisions that were made?
Beebe: I didn’t
get much blowback. There was something we put in there on purpose
that got used later, and that was in the New Frontiers section. It
basically allows NASA to choose a mission that’s not in there.
The reason for that was we knew Cassini was going to do the grand
tour of the Saturn system, and we didn’t know how rich that
was going to be. There was lots of discussion about, “We can’t
define a Titan mission, because we don’t know enough about Titan
to define a mission.” But this decadal report—the time
it’s going to span is the time that we’d probably like
to do a Titan mission, if it turns out that Titan is very rich. So
we put it in. All of our arguments, that I can recall, were based
on protecting the possibility of doing a Titan mission.
It turns out that by the time we got done with the Saturn system,
there are a lot of people who want to do an Enceladus [sixth-largest
moon of Saturn] mission as well. So if you can get them in the New
Frontiers bucket, the phraseology that was included in the Academy
allows NASA that wiggle room. If these guys can really come up with
these missions that are really worthwhile, they’re competitive.
Then NASA had to go back and write a description of them that was
acceptable, so that the level of competition was the same for the
missions.
Ross-Nazzal:
I wanted to go back and talk about your time as disciplinary scientist
at NASA Headquarters.
Beebe: I was
sitting here minding my own business—Herb had retired—and
I got this phone call from Jay [T.] Bergstralh, whom I had known for
a long time, asking me if I would consider at all coming to NASA Headquarters.
I said, “Well, I would really have to talk that over with Herb.”
Within 10 minutes, Henry [C.] Brinton—whom I was really fond
of, a truly honest man—who was the head of planetary exploration
at the time, called me up and asked me when I was coming.
I talked to Herb, and Herb says, “Yes, it sounds like fun.”
We got an apartment in Crystal City [Virginia]. My salary was lower
than what they had expected, because I’m from New Mexico State.
I said I couldn’t come unless I could keep my house. I have
an old adobe down in the valley that was one of the original ranch
houses. I got a housing allowance for the apartment, so we had the
apartment and the house.
The first year I was there 100 percent of the time, but I still had
graduate students. Amy Simon was finishing up, but she’s quite
an independent human being. We were used to talking to each other
[by phone], too lazy to get up and walk downstairs, so there was no
real problem with communication. Henry used to come and watch her
communicate with me, because [around] 3:00 in the afternoon would
be the time that she would make her communication with me. He had
said that he would get her offices at the University of Maryland if
she wanted to come and work with me, but that wasn’t necessary
because she was quite capable of handling herself.
So I finished working the first year there and learned all of the
routines. I was managing the grant program for planetary atmospheres,
and the data analysis program for the Galileo mission. The second
year and a half that I was there, I commuted. I was there for two
weeks and here for two weeks. During this whole time, we kept the
node going. That worked pretty well, too.
Ross-Nazzal:
Were you on sabbatical from the university at that point?
Beebe: I started
out on loan. They have this program, IPA [Intergovernmental Personnel
Act], it’s renewable each year. I started to get pressure from
a couple of the profs [professors] in the department that I should
make my decision as to whether I was going to come back or stay. There
was a young postdoc [postdoctoral researcher] in planetary science
who thought the position was hers if I turned it loose, who was really
pressuring me.
I decided, “I’ve produced enough students, I’ve
had enough of this.” I went to see the dean [E. Rene Casillas].
I told him that I would send him a letter asking him to remove me
from my tenure-track position and put me in an ordinary staff position
based on NASA funding, if he would guarantee that he would replace
me with another planetary scientist. He said, “So what’s
the alternative?”
“You can’t fire me. You loaned me to NASA. I’ll
stay in the position till hell freezes over.” We knew each other.
He says, “I figured that’s what you were going to say,”
so he agreed.
So I sent the letter. After I had been at NASA Headquarters for one
year, then I gave up my tenure-track position and just worked as a
staff person. That was in ’98.
Ross-Nazzal:
Was it tough for you to make that decision?
Beebe: No,
no. It gets really, really hard to keep teaching and trying to do
good work and interact with the rest of the community. After all,
how many people should you spawn? They were doing well, but how many
do you keep putting out?
Ross-Nazzal:
Did you enjoy your time at NASA Headquarters? It’s a very unique
place to be, and quite different from New Mexico, I must say.
Beebe: I didn’t
have any problems with it. Henry advised me, when I first went there,
to spend my money as fast as I could. It turned out to be really great
advice. You actually receive your proposals, and you do your peer
reviews before you know what your budget is going to be. You’ve
got a rough cut, but you can’t really set up your funding plan
until after you know what your budget is going to be. But because
you’ve got a rough cut, you can go through and set up a spending
plan with possible high-water marks of what you can do if.
I would do the best I possibly could in funding the research I thought
should really be funded in this plan. As soon as they told me what
my budget was, then I would fill out all of my little folders and
send them out to Goddard and get them out of the house. Nobody could
take my money. And they do!
Ross-Nazzal:
How much money were you overseeing at the time? Do you recall?
Beebe: It
was $3 million or $4 million in each one of those two slots, it wasn’t
huge. I also did a lot of internal reviewing. You’re managing
a series of proposals, and most of these proposals span three years.
You’ve got the ones that you’re just funding out, and
then you’ve got the ones that you’re harassing to get
their reportage in so you can keep things going in the right order.
I got quite a bit of help from a couple of people at Headquarters
on how to set it up and what to do. How to minimize it, and how to
make friends with the people that were going to handle the stuff out
at Goddard to move it forward to get the contracts moving.
Something I found really unbelievable was a lot of the people that
were working at Headquarters seemed to feel that it wasn’t necessary
to develop a good working relationship with the person that was going
to be handling their stuff. I got some advice that I really should
just get on the van and go out to Goddard and meet these people and
set up some kind of agreement and arrangement.
What I agreed to was that when I sent one of my folders out, it would
be in the envelope and there would be a sticky tag fastened to it,
white with big black letters, that had my name on it. I guaranteed
that everything they needed to process that would be in that envelope
before I sent it. The other people were sending stuff that was incomplete,
and then these people [at Goddard] would have to worry about all the
communication and getting the pieces. When I talked to these people,
I found out that their job assessment had to do with how many pieces
they handled in a day.
If you’re going to make friends with these guys, you guarantee
that your piece can be handled. If there’s anything weird about
it, that’s in a note right on the front of the thing. I had
no problem working with them. One I inherited, the atmospheres one,
was pretty messed up. Working with those people, we found money that
was buried and could fund a couple of rocket-type development projects
that weren’t originally in the budget.
Ross-Nazzal:
Was there any project that you funded that you really enjoyed the
proposal, and you were surprised to see it come across your desk?
Beebe: No,
I don’t remember that. Most of the things I remember are the
kids who got their first grants when I was taking care of it. Bob
[Robert T.] Pappalardo, who’s the [project] scientist on the
Europa mission, was one of them who got his first grant when I was
working on the Galileo data analysis program.
Ross-Nazzal:
So you’ve seen some of these people grow up essentially and
mature into professionals. That’s exciting. You came back to
New Mexico State. How was it different, no longer being a faculty
member and being a staff member? Was it a big adjustment?
Beebe: I don’t
have to go to meetings! I can pick and choose. I don’t have
to worry about the state budget; I don’t have to worry about
the national budget. I used to have to worry about both of them.
Ross-Nazzal:
One item we hadn’t talked about—and I guess we’re
jumping around, I apologize—we hadn’t talked about your
work with the Hubble Space Telescope and I didn’t want to overlook
that.
Beebe: Yes.
Hubble was delayed in its launch for quite a while.
Ross-Nazzal:
I was going to ask what impact that had on your research.
Beebe: I chaired
a group of people, and we put together a team and proposed a rather
large observing program for both Jupiter and Saturn. We put our proposal
in and there were the delays, but we got it accepted. We implemented
it like half a Jovian year later than what we thought we were going
to do initially. It included both imaging and spectroscopy of both
Jupiter and Saturn, and it was for multiple years. The first time
they advertised that was allowed, but before we finished up that proposal
they had revised it. The load on the system was great enough that
they had revised our observing program.
There was another series of events that were interesting. After they
had launched Hubble and found out that the [mirror] had a problem,
Saturn decided to have its most spectacular storm that it’s
had in photographic history, while the engineers were still using
the spacecraft. The storm was observed by an amateur as a big white
spot on the equator. The last one of those had been like 30 years
earlier.
Ed [G. Edward] Danielson was on the camera for HST. He was out of
Caltech [California Institute of Technology, Pasadena], a real good
guy. I called Ed, and I said, “Ed, this is big.”
He says, “Well, meet me at the Colonnade and we’ll see
what we can do.” That was the hotel that was nearest the Hubble
Space Telescope [STScI]. He had arranged for us to go out to dinner
for steak and beer with two of the engineers. We discussed what it
was that we had, and what we would like to do with it. They found
it interesting because we wanted to do the same thing orbit after
orbit after orbit. We just wanted to monitor the storm, multicolor-monitor
the storm. We went to see the director [Riccardo Giacconi] the next
morning, and he immediately went like this [demonstrates]. He was
a rather pompous Italian guy. To show us how impossible this would
be, he called these engineers in.
Ross-Nazzal:
Not knowing you had talked to them earlier.
Beebe: They
listened to him, and they said, “Well, maybe we could accommodate
that.”
“Okay, if the Wide Field Camera crew will accept this, we’ll
give it a try.”
So we monitored, and that poster up there, the far one [demonstrates],
is the result of that sequence of observations.
It was also interesting to watch the team, because the team had a
bunch of astrophysicists on it that thought that planetary was second-rate
science. But as they started on the deconvolution of these images,
the sharp edges that Saturn’s rings have, they really got turned
on to it. Everybody was having really a great time on this. We got
that set of observations before anybody else got anything out of HST.
Ross-Nazzal:
That was before the mirror was fixed?
Beebe: That’s
right, they had to be deconvolved. It was a major step to do them.
Ross-Nazzal:
One of the other things I had read that you were involved with was
a comet that was going to hit Jupiter [in 1994], the Shoemaker-Levy
[9] comet. You spent some time out there doing some work with HST.
Would you talk about that?
Beebe: Again,
I did a backdoor kind of thing. As soon as I heard that was going
to happen, working with the person at HST that I knew, I put in a
proposal to observe it. An open-source proposal so that anybody could
use the data we got, that was to make certain that it was an open
source. Headquarters started to get proposals, and the other proposals
weren’t quite as up on how to make certain you got what you
wanted.
They ended up then setting up a campaign, and they picked Heidi Hammel
to head the campaign. Andy Ingersoll, myself, [John T.] Clarke from
[University of] Michigan [Ann Arbor], [Arvind] Atreya from Michigan—I’ve
forgotten who else was on the committee. Some of us took graduate
students with us to work on it, and it was an event.
Of course, HST hadn’t had an event yet, so that when I saw the
first stuff coming in, I was, “Oh shit.”
Ross-Nazzal:
Why’s that?
Beebe: “Here
comes the press. Ay-ay-ay, what are we going to do?” I asked
the gal who was heading up the group for two people on her staff to
help us process images for the press. By the time she decided I could
have them, those kids were already in there working on the images.
They were so turned on with it. They would have spent their nights
working on them if she hadn’t released them to do it.
Right away, because Andy and I had worked on Voyager, we talked the
people who were handling the press into the bull pen approach. We
introduced them the day before to what was going to be released the
following day, what was anticipated, which pieces were coming in,
which others would be coming around to be seen again. It was lots
of fun to work on it.
Ross-Nazzal:
In your book, you talked about what you anticipated was going to happen.
Is that what actually happened, what you observed?
Beebe: No.
What actually happened—when a piece would come into Jupiter,
it was running into so much resistance that it was vaporizing pretty
much immediately. It had to go somewhere, and because this pathway
that it had come in on had been heated, that was the path that had
the least density. So it blew right back out, out of the path that
it came in on. And it blew high enough that when it came back down
under gravity, it was hitting the atmosphere at such speed that it
superheated. Essentially turned everything to carbon. The big black
clouds that formed—and they were really in the upper atmosphere—were
the result of the fact this thing went in and then blew right back
out.
It turned out that there was this group up at Sandia [National Laboratories,
Albuquerque, New Mexico] who had been doing modeling of particles
entering the atmosphere. They had the software pretty much ready to
go, and they did some real nice modeling of the rejection of the particles.
Ross-Nazzal:
How long were you up there working on the comet that was coming in?
Beebe: Two
or three weeks.
Ross-Nazzal:
I thought it was an interesting event to be involved with. Were there
other things that you used Hubble to look at over the years?
Beebe: Jupiter
and Saturn, I continue to get time to use the system for them.
Ross-Nazzal:
Was that exciting for you seeing the [STS-61 Shuttle] crew out there
fixing the Hubble, seeing their EVAs [extravehicular activities (spacewalks)]?
Beebe: Yes,
I actually met them at NASA Headquarters after they had finished the
repairs and were there to get a little award. They were pretty funny.
Ross-Nazzal:
We’ve interviewed some of the crew. They had an interesting
crew.
Beebe: Oh,
a really neat one was that Collins—was that the first female
[Shuttle] commander?
Ross-Nazzal:
Yes, Eileen [M.] Collins [became the first female Shuttle commander
on STS-93 in 1999. The mission deployed the Chandra X-ray Observatory].
Beebe: When
she came back down and was at the spaceport in Florida, Dan Goldin
went down, and [singer Judith M. “Judy” Collins] had written
a song about the other Collins. Dan Goldin thought this was really
great, so he invited her to come to Headquarters for the presentation
for the crew. She was going to [present a concert near] DC anyway,
so she accepted his invitation.
I was at Headquarters then. So we came [attended the presentation],
and it was really neat to see the two Collinses because they were
highly impressed with each other. It was like two fans meeting. Then
Dan Goldin had her sing her song, and he stood up there and he had
tears down his face. He says, “Oh, doesn’t that bring
you back to the ’60s?” Judy said, “Sir, if you remember
the ’60s, you weren’t there.”
Johnson: That’s
funny.
Ross-Nazzal:
Did you ever get any opportunity to go down to the Cape [Canaveral,
Florida] and see any launches other than Voyager 2?
Beebe: That’s
the only one. I’ve had invites but didn’t bother.
Ross-Nazzal:
Too busy working on other things?
Beebe: Yes,
and it’s not that exciting.
Ross-Nazzal:
It’s pretty awe-inspiring, I think.
Beebe: The
one I’m waiting for right now is much more exciting to me.
Ross-Nazzal:
Oh, Cassini?
Beebe: And
did it make it through [the rinds]? It won’t start to talk to
us until [April] 27 [2017].
Ross-Nazzal:
I imagine you’re on pins and needles for a while. One of the
other things that I had read about your career was that you managed
the Tortugas Mountain Observatory [Las Cruces, New Mexico] for a while.
Beebe: Yes,
that was monitoring Jupiter and Saturn for the Voyager program. We
continued after that, too. As time went on, I transitioned away from
Clyde Tombaugh’s team. [A.] Scott Murrell stayed with this,
and he was a rather crusty little New Mexican who made a fabulous
transition from working in that staff culture to working in the department
with the graduate students. He loved the graduate students. He took
them up to the mountain. He taught them everything he knew.
One of them converted him from a photographer into a CCD [charged-couple
device] camera observer, handling the computer. The relationship they
developed was practically father and son, just terrific. He taught
Nancy [Chanover] how to drive a four-wheel drive vehicle with a stick
shift. He had a pickup, and he helped the kids move when they needed
to move. He just became the friend of the kids. The standing routine
was that he was always 100 percent behind me, unless it had to do
with a student. Then I was dead wrong. Basically he did most of the
observing, or was introducing students on how to do things.
Ross-Nazzal:
How has the astronomy department here changed since you started in
’74? You’ve seen a wide period of time.
Beebe: When
we first came here in ’69, they had just started the astronomy
department. They hadn’t recruited graduate students. Herb was
involved in setting up the initial recruitment of graduate students.
He was just fresh out of graduate school himself at that point in
time. The entire reputation of the department has developed over this
period of time.
The [department carried] on, working very hard to recruit and produce
the best students we could to build up a reputation. Then the department
got involved in developing Apache Point Observatory [Sunspot, New
Mexico] in conjunction with Princeton [University, New Jersey], [University
of] Chicago [Illinois], University of Washington [Seattle], and Washington
State [University, Pullman]. I think that was it when they started.
That has continued to build and be developed. Various original partners
have pulled out and new ones have come in over time but having that
large facility has really helped the department.
As we started to get involved in that, Jack [O.] Burns joined us as
department head, and he’s an aggressive pusher who gets things
done. He’s at the University of Colorado now. He recruited a
couple of pretty outstanding faculty. One of them is a cosmologist,
so that opened up the theory a little bit in the department. It’s
a good department.
Recently, the university competed to take over Sacramento Peak Solar
Observatories [National Solar Observatory at Sacramento Peak, Sunspot,
New Mexico]. They didn’t get that, but in the process of competing
the university opened up two solar physics positions. We got really
good people into those. So we’ve seen an ongoing evolution that’s
been really good.
Ross-Nazzal:
Sounds like the department has grown quite a bit since you’ve
been here.
Beebe: It’s
a small department, but it’s a very successful department. We’re
not very threatened by upper administrators. They don’t want
to mess us up because they get overhead out of us. For every dollar
we spend, they pull out 48 cents. That’s their wiggle money.
Ross-Nazzal:
I wanted to ask you about your work with the Division for Planetary
Sciences [DPS of the American Astronomical Society]. I know you were
a member of that, and also you chaired it for a year.
Beebe: I was
on the council first [from 1982 to 1985], and I was the first female
to be elected to a position in the DPS. That was a council position.
Then Carle [M.] Pieters was elected as chair a couple years later.
I got this call from Faith Vilas [on the DPS Nominating Subcommittee]
asking if I would run for the chair. She said, “We’d like
to put you up because we don’t think the guys will notice you’re
a girl.” Because I was working with the guys all the time.
Ross-Nazzal:
That’s kind of an odd comment to make.
Beebe: Faith
is blunt. They elected me as chair [for 1992 to 1993]. That was during
a period of time when NSF [National Science Foundation] decided that
they weren’t going to fund planetary science. I was talking
to Jurgen [H.] Rahe, who is gone, and Vern [Vernon L.] Pankonin at
NSF. We were trying to figure out how to stop this.
At the same time, the university hired two young physicists who had
grant money from NSF, and they paid them considerably more than I
was being paid. So I complained to the graduate dean about this, and
he sent me back this letter pointing out that their research was much
higher quality than mine because it was funded by the NSF, not NASA.
I faxed this to Jurgen and Vern. We wrote a letter to the head of
NSF asking him to consider this attitude that academia had about NSF
and not make the decision to stop funding planetary and turn it into
a second-rate applied science. It worked. That was a major action
that I got done when I was chair of the DPS.
Ross-Nazzal:
Wow, that’s a big coup. Did you do any work at all with Congress
or the [presidential] administration at the time?
Beebe: A little
bit. We weren’t in danger there at the time. There was a guy
at the University of Texas [Austin], Harlan [J.] Smith, who mentored
me on how to go hit the Hill. So we did a couple of times. That was
very interesting.
Ross-Nazzal:
Any memorable anecdotes or any folks that you remember meeting?
Beebe: Actually,
they’re negative enough I shouldn’t talk about them. Because
Harlan was well known, I was seeing the staff behave as they always
do—“What are we trading off to get this? What are you
supposed to do here?”—addressing the senator and shoving
him out the door to go vote.
Ross-Nazzal:
We talked about the decadal surveys, and you mentioned some of the
other reports that you had worked on, one of those being the report
on plutonium [Radioisotope Power Systems: An Imperative for Maintaining
U.S. Leadership in Space Exploration, 2009]. I was curious about your
involvement in that, because plutonium is so important for space science
missions, particularly missions to the outer planets. I was wondering
what your thoughts were about that report and the production of plutonium,
and why it was so vital to U.S. space missions.
Beebe: First
of all, there were two people from [the National Academy of] Science
who were assigned to that committee, Ralph [L.] McNutt [Jr.] from
APL and myself. We both worked on the outer planets. The idea was
that this committee needed that sort of [science] input, as well as
the technical input, to do the best argument we could.
Basically we ended up arguing that without plutonium the exploration
of the solar system was not going to go much beyond Mars. You’re
really limited when you use solar [power] out at Jupiter. That was
really a fun committee to work on because I was exposed to people
that I had never been exposed to before that had real expertise and
real understanding of things. Yes, it was something that was very
important to us.
We bought plutonium from Russia, but then there was no more plutonium
to buy there. They were willing to sell it. The Russian space exploration
[program] is more like a business. If they can get some money, they
can keep it for their own purposes. So it was possible to buy from
them, but they aren’t making any more. The facilities that might
have made it are being used for medical isotopes, and that’s
a lot more profitable.
Basically, the problem was that either we were going to really limit
the exploration of the solar system, or we needed to start up plutonium
again. It turns out that the atom that we need to bombard to make
plutonium, neptunium, is pretty stable. We made quite a bit of that,
and we’ve got it shelved. So we don’t have to start all
the way down the chain if we want to start up again. What we really
need is the processing facility to remove the plutonium from the targets
and pelletize it and to reconstruct the targets and send them back.
We’ve got enough neptunium to build the targets. We’ve
got reactors. If you want to make plutonium-238 instead of plutonium-235,
which is the nasty stuff, you want to put your targets as close to
the reactors as you can get them. When the military makes a run, those
holes are normally empty because they don’t want that stuff.
It’s totally useless to them, and they can’t process it.
So the argument was that the facilities are there to make plutonium.
The facility to refine it and get it out is the piece that needs to
be brought up. This study that we did was part of something that Jim
Green had implemented. He set aside some money to seriously look at
what it would take to start up the production of plutonium-238. Then
he committed a contract to the Academy to do this study. The people
they brought in were people who had worked on reactors and understood
all of these steps, and it was just really neat to work with them.
Ross-Nazzal:
Did you get any pushback from people saying, “We went to the
Moon, certainly we can come up with some other way of sending spacecraft
into orbit”?
Beebe: No,
when you pointed out that you needed a good energy source to operate
your instruments and to have a powerful enough signal to get it back
home, I didn’t get any blowback from people. The idea [was]
that this kind of thing was really going to limit us.
With Juno it’s solar-powered, so we collect our data when we
go in. The teams are perfectly happy staying in a 53-day orbit because
that gives them plenty of time to dump all their data. There’ll
be no data loss. You put it on board, and you hold it until you’ve
pulled away from the planet. Then you download it. You’ve got
to download it slowly, [because] you’ve got to keep charging
your system. To do it at Saturn or Uranus is just four [or nine] times
harder than for [Jupiter].
Ross-Nazzal:
The production has started, I heard when we interviewed Jim Green.
That’s going to be exciting, because I’m sure it impacted
missions as you were working on the decadal. If that production wasn’t
there, what could you do?
Beebe: The
amount that can be produced is still small. It’ll need to be
accumulated. We were getting down to the point that you couldn’t
even heat spacecraft on the Moon or on Mars at night. Night is kind
of long on the Moon, if you’re going to put a station up there
and do something with it.
Ross-Nazzal:
Speaking of Mars, you chaired a committee to review Mars architecture
in 2006 [Committee To Review The Next Decade Mars Architecture, Assessment
of NASA's Mars Architecture 2007-2016]. I thought was interesting,
given your knowledge of the outer planets, that you would be asked
to look at Mars architecture. Can you talk about that?
Beebe: When
I worked for the Academy, the committees that I chaired delivered
on time. The Academy would ask me to chair a study where it was critical
that we get it out of the door at the right time. That was the one
where NASA Headquarters wanted really serious consideration of where
the holes were in their Mars plan. A team was put together, we used
well-known people that had worked for the Academy in a constructive
way before. We knew if they said they could work on it, they would
work on it, and we could get the job done.
The conclusion of that was that there were two holes in the plan.
One, there was no exploration of the interior of the planet. Two,
there was no study of the rate at which the current atmosphere was
being lost, so it was pretty hard to say that you were building a
model that would tell you what atmospheric loss had gone on over the
past. Those were our conclusions.
What were the two small missions that were selected for Mars? MAVEN
[Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution], which does atmospheric loss,
and InSight [Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy
and Heat Transport], which does the internal structure study—we
did what they needed, and they filled it with a Discovery [Program]
mission.
Ross-Nazzal:
There were just a couple others I wanted to ask you about. You served
on An Assessment of Balance in NASA’s Science Programs in 2006.
Basically the [Space Studies] Board was pretty critical of what NASA
was being asked to do with the fact that it really wasn’t receiving
much funding.
Beebe: I don’t
even remember that one.
Ross-Nazzal:
It seemed like you had so many. You did one other that I thought was
interesting, in 2008 on the New Frontiers programs and the announcements
of opportunity [Opening New Frontiers in Space: Choices for the Next
New Frontiers Announcement of Opportunity]. I wondered what your thoughts
were on the New Frontiers program.
Beebe: Did
I do that for the Academy or Headquarters?
Ross-Nazzal:
It was for the Academy, that I downloaded all these reports from.
I know after a while you work on some of these and they all blend
together.
Beebe: They
just blend together.
Ross-Nazzal:
I wanted to ask if you would talk a little bit about working with
scientists from all across the globe. We’ve talked about you
working with NASA and Headquarters, and your work with Voyager and
some of the other missions. I wonder if you would talk a bit about
that.
Beebe: I think
planetary science is probably more international than a lot of the
other areas. One of the things that NASA has allowed is for countries
to propose to build one of the instruments and be part of the teams,
so there’s been that kind of integration. For quite a long period
of time, NASA was the lead in terms of providing science data in planetary
development, especially Mars exploration. There’s a tradition
of working together.
When you work on these things, you become friends. It’s necessary
to become friends. There’s not a lot of socializing—you
get to know the people in terms of what they can do, what they can
deliver. You ask them for what they can deliver, basically. That leads
to pretty tight working groups because, “Okay, we’ve got
this hole, we need this kind of thing done. Who can do it?”
It may pull them in from different countries.
You develop a lot of interactions, to the point that I have trouble
remembering last names. We never use them. “How the hell should
I remember that name?” It’s that kind of thing. As I have
grown older, people have gotten kinder. They take care of me if they
want something out of me.
Ross-Nazzal:
They’re being respectful. You’ve done some work with NASA
and with ESA, JAXA, I presume some of the other agencies. Would you
talk about some of the differences between those groups, if there
are any, that you’ve noticed in working with them?
Beebe: One
of the things that inhibits [others] is the fact that they have pretty
rigid approval structures. “What can you say you can do? How
many people do you have to get to sign off on it before you can say
you can do [it]?” In working for NASA, if you can stuff it into
your day, you can do it. You have quite a bit of freedom of choice.
If you really want to make a personal commitment to do something,
they’re not going to step in and stop you.
I find that the chains of command are more rigid in some of these
countries. Japan is known for being pretty rigid, but I think it’s
harder to move things up the chain of command in India. India has
got some other problems too. The space program has trouble staffing,
because we’ve outsourced so much stuff at higher salaries than
their government can pay, they’re constantly struggling to keep
the places pretty well-staffed. Japan is in a state of reorganization
now. The one guy we have been working with is staying with our programs
though. But you can see that he’s waiting for decisions to be
made on what’s going to be done where.
The U.A.E. is struggling to come into space exploration. The U.A.E.
is struggling in general to diversify its capabilities. They figure
they’ve got 20 years of oil [remaining], so they’re trying
to get into various other activities.
Ross-Nazzal:
Yesterday you showed us an interesting image that an amateur astronomer
had provided to you of Saturn and its rings. Sandra and I were talking
when we left, and we were curious what amateurs have contributed to
the field. What have they contributed that you wouldn’t have
known, or NASA wouldn’t know or have access to without their
work?
Beebe: That
Saturn storm was one where it was an amateur who discovered it and
started the report going. They’ve been looking for impacts on
the Moon. There’s a gang that does this. They monitor Jupiter.
If something happens on Jupiter between this perijove and the next
perijove, or if it’s on the other side of the planet when you
go by, they’ll fill that in for the mission.
The ground base is going to be an interesting baseline for the Juno
mission. That’s being pursued actively by the mission itself.
Glenn [S.] Orton is heading up the interface between the amateurs
and the mission. Candy [Candice] Hansen-[Koharcheck] is handling the
camera, the JunoCam camera, but I don’t think she’s doing
that much interaction. She’s providing stuff to the guys. I
myself am going to do a little tutorial and send it to the microwave
guys, just a little heads-up, “Hey, this isn’t quite like
Voyager. Don’t use Voyager to interpret it.”
Ross-Nazzal:
How have ground-based telescopes changed since you’ve been in
the field?
Beebe: They’re
not being used for planetary very much anymore, not the imaging ones.
The big infrared telescopes, the interferometers, and that sort of
thing are being used quite a bit. Conor [A.] Nixon at Goddard is utilizing
some of that and getting some nice results out of Titan. That will
carry on after Cassini. Some of the big telescopes with adaptive optics
out in Hawaii are making contributions to Uranus and Neptune. It’s
much more longer-wavelength that is now being done.
Ross-Nazzal:
If you look back over the span of your career, what do you think was
your greatest challenge?
Beebe: Me,
it was me. My folks had a farm-ranch in southern Colorado when my
mother married my father. She was a schoolteacher who came to the
district to teach. Then we had the seven years of drought. They not
only lost everything, but they went deeply in debt with federal loans.
So I grew up as an Okie. That was the pocket that society put me in.
My sister, just younger than me, once characterized us saying, “When
people know that your mother is poor, pale, Protestant, and prolific,
they know you’re trash.”
I grew up with people looking down on me, and smart enough to know
they were, and smart enough to know that they didn’t have any
grounds for doing it because they weren’t so special themselves.
So I didn’t have a whole lot of confidence, and there wasn’t
a whole lot of support for females to do things. When I applied for
graduate school, I didn’t apply for funding. I assumed I couldn’t
get it. It was Marshal [H.] Wrubel who came back with a letter saying
why hadn’t I applied. That was the level of confidence that
I had about things.
I had developed quite a bit of computing skill, so when I started
working in planetary there was a niche that I could fill right away
that wasn’t fully filled at the time—someone who had the
science background who could also code. It was a long slow process.
Interestingly enough, there were a lot of guys that if you were to
ask them now, they would tell you they mentored me. They did, and
they meant to. They helped. It was a lot of positive support. Part
of that was because when they gave me a job I finished it for them,
which is the way you really establish credibility in the planetary
group.
Ross-Nazzal:
Were you the first female tenured professor here at New Mexico State
for astronomy?
Beebe: Oh,
yes.
Ross-Nazzal:
I imagine you were one of the few women here for quite some time.
Beebe: Yes.
Which meant I was a minority, so I got to serve on all the minority
committees. I knew every minority on campus.
Ross-Nazzal:
Obviously you overcame those things and did tremendous things with
your career.
Beebe: Yes,
but I was my biggest challenge. I think that’s true of a lot
of kids. What you find out is that every time you move to a new group,
you have to reestablish yourself. If you’re not pretty confident
in who you are, that’s very difficult. The guys have the same
problems. They just act like they’re big. I tell the graduate
students here that a revelation I had one time was “Those guys
can’t be as special as they think they are if I’m still
succeeding in this field.”
Ross-Nazzal:
What do you think was your greatest accomplishment?
Beebe: Actually,
the work that I have been doing since ’97, the international
integration. I worked quite a bit on European projects—I guess
it’s been about seven years or so since I stopped working on
specific European projects—getting to know the whole community.
I’m a nagger, I’m a professional nagger. I’m the
one that when the IPDA says, “Hey, we haven’t talked to
the Koreans for a while. We’ve got to get back and talk to them
again, see if they can push their administration to let them in.”
“Hey, we haven’t heard from so-and-so for a while,”
that’s the role that I tend to play.
Ross-Nazzal:
Without you things would not get done. I’m going to ask Sandra
if she has any questions for you before we finish today.
Johnson: You
covered it already, but the changes in technology throughout your
career from when you first started. Not just the technology as far
as [astronomical] observations, but even day-to-day technology and
how that’s affected the work you do. You pointed out this computer
back here with the floppy drives, and now you’re sitting here
with these gigantic screens and these Macs [Macintosh computers].
You can pull up these images so quickly. As far as the day-to-day
work, maybe you can talk about that. Even the students, and their
ability to access technology [is] different than when you were in
school.
Beebe: I had
a student named Chris [Christopher D.] Barnet who used to say I was
stepwise illiterate. He was very clever, and he was the best documenter
I’ve ever encountered. He was older when he came in, and he
had a really strong influence on the younger graduate students. That
interaction included Lyle and Nancy. It even extended to Amy, even
though they never overlapped here. These interactions with the students
were so strong that even after he left and was working as a postdoc,
or for a company at Goddard, they were still relying on Chris.
He’s outstanding in the sense that he basically transitioned
me to being able to use that system over there [points]. He did the
coding for it and the documentation for it. That system actually saved
us. We were able to do imaging science without having to go to a [NASA]
Center to do it, before a lot of the other people even on the Voyager
team were able to do that.
Basically, a lot of my upgrading has come from my students. If you
are a professor and you’re working in a university, if you don’t
take advantage of that you’re going to be quickly dated. The
kids are willing to tell you you’re stupid and show you how
to do things, [they] don’t hesitate at all. You’re forced
to stay on top, because every kid that comes in wants to do everything
all over again. You have to know where you are in development and
what needs to be done next and be able to define it, control it. The
main way to stay active is to keep interacting with the younger tech-savvy
kids. They’ll train you for what they need you to know, that’s
for sure.
Conor Nixon is a neat guy. I saw him at the last Cassini meeting and
he’s started to work with a very good graduate student. Conor
has neat ways of expressing himself. He said, “Working with
graduate students is interesting. First they arrive and it’s
like, ‘Where’s my lunch?,’ and then the next step
is, ‘What are we having for lunch?,’ and then the next
step when they really get there is, ‘Here’s your lunch.’”
That’s the way it goes. About the time they become really useful,
you market them and they’re gone. But you still interact with
them for quite a while.
Ross-Nazzal:
Is there anything that we haven’t covered about your career
that you would like to talk about? Or anything on your mind today
that you want to share about Cassini or anything else?
Beebe: Not
really. Cassini is now a big challenge for me because Cassini is over
for some of these things, like the Titan exploration. It’s finished,
so now I have to really start worrying about what I can build out
of what they have. I went into their system, which they use for all
of their plannings and their uplinkings, using a formula that one
of the engineers gave me to extract all of the requests that were
made for Titan. There’s 10,523 requests to observe. I got the
table, and there are sections of the table that I need to translate.
What I’m planning to do is to extend this to a very large flowsheet,
including these [pieces] of information. I don’t care how far
out my columns extend or how many of them I have. What I’m trying
to encapsulate is what happened, as far as Titan is concerned, during
this whole 13-year period. I need to get a lot of other information.
The thing that I get from this table is the request, but that was
the planned uplink.
Getting the downlink is another story. I have another file that the
engineers have been supplying me that just gives me the times that
they had interruptions and didn’t get data. I need to fold that
in to indicate that some of these requests never came down, and then
develop much more, all the information I can about these requests.
There’s a computer program on the Navigation [and Ancillary
Information Facility (NAIF)] Node. It’s called WebGeocalc. If
you give it a time and a mission and a target, it will compute the
geometry for the footprint of the spacecraft. So I could take the
midpoint of these observations, get that, and out of that I would
come close to getting the closest approach of the events. I’m
now asking engineers if there’s a list of these. “Are
there other ways to get more stuff that I can fold into this flow
sheet to make these requests much more useful for people?”
One of the other questions is, I can tell that at this particular
time the ultraviolet spectrometer, the infrared spectrometer, and
the imaging camera were all observing at the same time. What were
they doing? What filters was the camera using? I’m trying to
find all of the places where we can strip this out and start really
integrating it into as detailed a description of the Titan encounters
as possible. I will do it for each one of the bodies, once I get the
guys to show me where to go to get all these pieces.
I have computer access to the system, I just don’t know where
these things sit. Not everybody knows. The telecon I was on yesterday
includes one group of people who are looking at it from the point
of view of icy bodies or Saturn’s atmosphere or Titan. They
call themselves the discipline groups. There’s another group
called the [Discipline Legacy Group. Shawn Boll], the guy who is heading
that really understands this one system that I’ve already accessed.
It’s just a question now of continuing to muck around for the
next year among the team and the four different committees I was sitting
in on to find the pieces that I can use to really do the final summary
of the mission that will be useful five years from now.
When people put in a request, they put in the start and stop time
for that request. When we migrate this data to PDS4, I can build a
spreadsheet where they’ll be able to put in a series of start
and stop times. That information can be referenced to another index
which is related to the unique identifiers. I can build a system where
it will pull all of the data that they’re requesting out.
By using this master sheet, they can decide which instruments they
want during which time intervals, and they’ll be able to pull
out all the data that was associated with that particular system.
I would assume that in Titan they might be particularly interested
in the longitude and latitude, so they would want to know what the
sweep across the planet looked like. I need to collect that into some
kind of a file, too. I know that that one exists, I just need to get
it into a form where people can access it five years from now.
Ross-Nazzal:
Right, we understand that. Thank you so much for sharing part of your
afternoon with us and yesterday afternoon. We really appreciate it,
and we enjoyed it.
[End
of interview]
Return to JSC Oral History Website