MIST is an informal community of UK-based scientists with interests in physical processes within the Sun-Earth system and other planets. This includes studies of the mesosphere, ionosphere, thermosphere and magnetosphere of Earth and of other planets and the solar wind.
The role of MIST is to help promote these interests to the public, wider scientific community and other stakeholders as well as provide a platform for scientists to present their work to the rest of the UK community. Regular bi-annual meetings are organised: a one day meeting in London in the autumn, sponsored by the Royal Astronomical Society, and an out-of-town meeting each spring. Reports of meetings have been published in the RAS house journal Astronomy & Geophysics, and its predecessor Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society.
From its inception, MIST has been strongly linked with and supported by the Royal Astronomical Society. All MIST scientists are invited to join the RAS.
Recent News
- In-situ measurements of space plasmas
- EISCAT 3-D
- Climate and vertical coupling
- Fundamental space plasma physics
- Geomagnetism
- Ionospheric science
- The Aurora
- Fund the Aurora programme
- Cut grants, fellowships and studentships
- Largely cut in-situ plasma and magnetospheric measurements in space
- Loss of northern hemisphere 8m telescopes
- Top priority be given to grants/studentships/fellowships
- In situ plasma and magnetospheric studies were highly rated (and are key to 3 of the 7 prioritized NUAP science sub-questions)
- The NUAP community was sharply divided on Aurora
- Some Northern Hemisphere optical telescopes were high on our priority lists (for 2 of the 7 prioritized sub-questions)
- 10% reduction in support for future exploitation grants
- managed cessation of lower priority areas
- 25% reduction in new studentships and Fellowships - resulting in zero postdoctoral fellowships, 25% cut to studentships, 15% cut to advanced fellowships in 2010
- £14m from other research councils to allow STFC to meet its commitment to existing grants
- continued commitment to ESA including cosmic visions and Aurora but with an overall lower level of support, including post-launch support for lower priority missions
Briefing Papers
submitted 29 January 2010The first two new briefing papers on areas of MIST science are now available. These have been developed by members of the MIST (and UKSP) community to provide information on areas of specific UK expertise. It is hoped that these executive summaries will help to inform the public and media of the work carried out in the UK by our community whilst also plugging holes in the understanding of policy-makers and funding agencies as to the relevance and importance of our work.
The first two topics that have been covered are Space Weather and Planetary Exploration.
|
|
|
| Planetary Exploration | Space Weather |
Many thanks to Gabby Provan, Chris Arridge, Stan Cowley and Dave Andrews (Planetary Exploration) and Jim Wild, Lyndsay Fletcher, Alan Thompson and Mike Hapgood (Space Weather) for devoting the time and effort to create these papers.
We intend to develop the next set of papers by the Spring MIST. The following are further topics that have been identifed but are not exhaustive.
If you wish to contribute to any of these topics or if you have an idea for an alternative paper please do get in touch with a member of MIST council.
MIST response to the STFC Prioritisation
submitted 8 January 2010Following consultation with members of the MIST community, MIST council has issued the following statement regarding the results of the STFC prioritisation:
STFC published its 5-year science programme prioritisation just before Christmas 2009. This prioritisation represents the second set of cuts in two years that STFC has introduced without a clearly defined science strategy in place. The current prioritisation calls for major cuts in existing science programmes including “managed withdrawal” from five space science missions in which the UK has key leadership roles (Cassini, Cluster, SOHO, Venus Express and XMM). STFC has also announced that it will cease to fund research based on data from these “lower priority” missions, all of which have publicly accessible archives that will support much new world-class science over the next five years.
The MIST community appreciates the financial constraints on STFC that have driven this approach, but is deeply concerned about the strategic consequences of these cuts. The programme of managed withdrawals seeks to cut all UK instrument support for space missions actively making in-situ plasma measurements. It undermines an internationally recognised area of UK leadership and influence, and one with great future potential for discoveries about, and deeper understanding of, universal processes that shape the plasmas which fill most of the solar system and the wider universe.
The in-situ study of space plasmas is a recognised part of space science around the world and, in particular, forms a significant element of the ESA Science Programme. In-situ plasma measurements form a part of the payloads of Rosetta and Bepi-Colombo, and similar measurements are planned on many of the Cosmic Vision candidates (e.g. Solar Orbiter, CrossScale and Europa-Jupiter System Mission). These European missions are complemented by similar plans in the other major space-faring nations, not least the US, where we know UK science participation is welcome. Thus we expect there to be a wealth of new space plasma data available from the middle of the coming decade and would expect an overall STFC strategy to reflect this by providing a level of support for projects and exploitation that ensure UK capability to respond to these opportunities.
We also note that in-situ studies of space plasmas are an essential complement to remote sensing techniques, e.g. as used to observe the Sun, solar ejecta and planetary aurorae. This complementarity is an increasing important element in international scientific efforts to study cosmic plasmas – the emerging science of heliophysics. We would expect an overall STFC programme to recognise this.
However, the current prioritisation reflects none of this. Taken at face value, the proposed cuts will create a funding gap during which relevant UK capabilities will wither. This exemplifies the weakness of the current prioritisation process and, indeed, of previous exercises by STFC and its predecessor, PPARC. The process focuses on details of specific facilities and prioritises those facilities which STFC has previously indicated a preference towards without regard for strategic balance. It marginalises areas whose facilities are not high in the current list of favourites – to the detriment of long-term science strategy. We note that the results of this prioritisation exercise bear little resemblance to the results of a 6 month community consultation exercise designed to feed into the prioritisation.
We therefore call on STFC to work with the community to ensure that its strategy maintains UK strengths in the study of solar system plasmas and encourages the application of these strengths to the study of cosmic plasmas.
We also call on STFC to acknowledge that it continues to fund the ESA archives for Cluster, SOHO and Venus Express (as part of its ESA subscription) and thus that UK scientists can seek STFC funding to exploit data from these archives.
Email from NUAP chair to STFC with response
submitted 7 January 2010The chair of NUAP sent the following email to Professor Sterling on 22 December to query the decisions made in the recent STFC prioritisation exercise:
To: Prof. Michael Sterling, Chair, STFC Council
Cc: Keith Mason, Richard Wade, John Womersley, Jenny Thomas, Jordan Nash
Dear Prof. Sterling,
I am contacting you as Chair of the Near Universe Advisory Panel, in regard to the STFC prioritization which was made public last week, to ask for your advice and some clarification.
I am being asked by numerous members of the NUAP community as to the reasoning behind some of the decisions which were made; and since a number of them are in clear disagreement with the NUAP advice (via the community) which we presented to PPAN, I hope you will be able to clarify the situation for me so that I am better informed in my responses to the community.
The bulk of the queries I am receiving are linked to the decisions to:
The feedback which PPAN received via NUAP from the community was that:
Any insights you may be able to give me on these issues will enable me to better inform the community on these decisions.
Yours sincerely
Michele Dougherty
STFC Ground Based Facilities Review
submitted 7 January 2010Following the announcement of the STFC prioritisation the final report from the Ground-based facilities review has been published and is available here. Space physics and solar physics were ranked 9th and 10th (out of ten) by the community but with only 7 self-identified Solar/STP respondents. The report states that:
Clearly there was a low turnout amongst particle cosmology, STP, and planetary and solar physics scientists, presumable because particle astrophysics and STP facilities were specifically excluded from this review, and because the UK planetary and solar community is primarily interested in space-based facilities. For this reason we did not evaluate the European Solar Telescope. A review whose scope included these areas, and also space astrophysics, might have resulted in different rankings.
Of particular interest to the MIST community is the following paragraph from page 53 of the report (in appendix 3 - comments from the community):
There is significant opportunity for economic impact from synergistic working between radio astronomy and STP. The ionosphere-plasmasphere system is an important constraint on many radio-based technologies including radar surveillance of space objects, space radar monitoring of Earth’s surface and satellite navigation. Thus there is world-wide interest in maintaining awareness of conditions in the ionosphere and plasmasphere through a complementary mix of advanced modelling and real-time measurements. Future radio astronomy systems can gain impact by contributing to that mix – and could also benefit by gaining access to a wider set of information on ionospheric conditions.
Review of STFC structural issues
submitted 7 January 2010Following the announcement of the STFC prioritisation the Science Minister, Lord Drayson, issued a statement responding to the results. The last sentence of the statement read as follows:
However, it has become clear to me that there are real tensions in having international science projects, large scientific facilities and UK grant giving roles within a single Research Council. It leads to grants being squeezed by increases in costs of the large international projects which are not solely within their control. I will work urgently with Professor Sterling, the STFC and the wider research community to find a better solution by the end of February 2010.
On 23 December the Chairman of STFC, Michael Sterling, issued a response stating that:
- The review will not address the outcomes of the science prioritisation recently completed under the leadership of our Science Board. Decisions announced by Council are now being implemented in time for the 2010-11 financial year.
STFC prioritisation
submitted 7 January 2010In December STFC announced the result of their prioritisation covering the entire science and technology programme. Related documentation can be viewed here.
key results include:
Post launch support at a reduced level will continue for STEREO and Hinode. Bepi-Colombo will be supported as will Cosmic Vision. Cassini, Cluster, SOHO and Venus Express will be projects that are subject to discussions leading to managed withdrawal. LOFAR will also not receive any STFC funding.
Spring MIST - 12-16 April 2010
submitted 8 October 2009 - modified 18 November 2009See official website here
Alan Thomson (BGS) has kindly volunteered to be the MIST representative on SOC
The NAM/UKSP/MIST 2010 program will include slots for up to 42 parallel sessions, each of 90 minutes’ duration, with further sessions in the program dedicated for poster viewing. It is expected that the final program of parallel sessions will be drawn up before the end of 2009. For further details see the announcement at http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/nam2010/news.php, issued by the SOC to the Astronomy community.