Catherine Slaughter, M.Sc.'s Avatar

Catherine Slaughter, M.Sc.

@catieslaughts

Imagining others complexly | @ slaughter.climbs on Instagram πŸ§—πŸ»β€β™€οΈ| Astronomer 🌌 | Astrobites Author πŸͺ | Cubs Fan ⚾ | PhD Candidate UMN ⭐️| Leiden MSc β€˜23 πŸ‡³πŸ‡±| Dartmouth β€˜21 🌲| she/her πŸ’™πŸ’œπŸ©· VIEWS MY OWN www.catherineslaughter.space

2,988
Followers
696
Following
1,915
Posts
02.05.2023
Joined
Posts Following

Latest posts by Catherine Slaughter, M.Sc. @catieslaughts

Email from Chris Reynolds to the AXIS Team. Subject is disappointing AXIS news. Text of e-mail reads: Dear AXIS Friends,


The AXIS team has received some very disappointing news – we have been informed by NASA HQ that AXIS is not eligible for selection and hence the Concept Study Report (CSR) will not be subjected to the full review process.   


AXIS represents the scientific aspirations of a large international community. As a member of one of the AXIS science working groups, you deserve a candid explanation from the PI of what happened and why.  That is the purpose of this note.


NASA’s decision was programmatic and not based on a review of the technology or science; the mission profile described in the submitted CSR was over the allowed budget and schedule.  How was such a thing possible?   In short, with NASA-GSFC as the AXIS managing center, the mission formulation process was critically compromised by the seismic shifts occurring in NASA and the Federal government.  The AXIS study team was hit hard by three unprecedented challenges: 


NASA’s Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) and the pressure at GSFC to resign/retire created a rapid and uncontrolled loss of over 20 personnel with key expertise during a critical mission formulation period, including the main GSFC Project Manager (Jimmy Marsh) and the X-ray mirror lead (Will Zhang) and many discipline engineers.

Email from Chris Reynolds to the AXIS Team. Subject is disappointing AXIS news. Text of e-mail reads: Dear AXIS Friends, The AXIS team has received some very disappointing news – we have been informed by NASA HQ that AXIS is not eligible for selection and hence the Concept Study Report (CSR) will not be subjected to the full review process. AXIS represents the scientific aspirations of a large international community. As a member of one of the AXIS science working groups, you deserve a candid explanation from the PI of what happened and why. That is the purpose of this note. NASA’s decision was programmatic and not based on a review of the technology or science; the mission profile described in the submitted CSR was over the allowed budget and schedule. How was such a thing possible? In short, with NASA-GSFC as the AXIS managing center, the mission formulation process was critically compromised by the seismic shifts occurring in NASA and the Federal government. The AXIS study team was hit hard by three unprecedented challenges: NASA’s Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) and the pressure at GSFC to resign/retire created a rapid and uncontrolled loss of over 20 personnel with key expertise during a critical mission formulation period, including the main GSFC Project Manager (Jimmy Marsh) and the X-ray mirror lead (Will Zhang) and many discipline engineers.

GSFC priorities rapidly realigned to the FY2026 President’s Budget Request (PBR) that eliminated the Probe program, further reducing the availability of GSFC engineering and mission formulation personnel (incl. cost analysts and schedulers) over the critical Summer and Fall months. Key work was halted for almost seven weeks when the core GSFC AXIS study team, dominated by NASA civil servants, was furloughed during the government shutdown.  NASA HQ’s extension to the CSR submission deadline (from 18-Dec-2025 to 29-Jan-2026) was inadequate compensation for the disruption and lost time.


Taken together, these factors disrupted the basic grass-roots costing process (which requires extensive β€œreach back” to the discipline engineers to assess labor requirements) as well as the cost-design iteration process that is central to the formulation of a cost-capped and schedule-constrained mission.  While the mission design was finalized in April, our initial grass-roots costing (which was ~10% over budget) could only be completed in September due to the lack of assigned resources.  With the subsequent government shutdown and then β€œpens down” in early-December forced by the GSFC Executive Review process, there was no opportunity to work through the set of cost/schedule savings that had already been identified by the AXIS team. 


Ultimately, the GSFC executive council gave AXIS leadership the choice of submitting a CSR with a non-compliant schedule and cost, or not submitting a CSR at all.  We of course proceeded with the submission, including a narrative that we understood the path to a cost-compliant profile (that we would have discussed with the review panels during the Site Visit). NASA HQ has ruled this stance to be unacceptable.


It is important to stress that NASA’s programmatic decision was before any technical review had been conducted.  The decision was NOT due to any concerns about AXIS technology. Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering

GSFC priorities rapidly realigned to the FY2026 President’s Budget Request (PBR) that eliminated the Probe program, further reducing the availability of GSFC engineering and mission formulation personnel (incl. cost analysts and schedulers) over the critical Summer and Fall months. Key work was halted for almost seven weeks when the core GSFC AXIS study team, dominated by NASA civil servants, was furloughed during the government shutdown. NASA HQ’s extension to the CSR submission deadline (from 18-Dec-2025 to 29-Jan-2026) was inadequate compensation for the disruption and lost time. Taken together, these factors disrupted the basic grass-roots costing process (which requires extensive β€œreach back” to the discipline engineers to assess labor requirements) as well as the cost-design iteration process that is central to the formulation of a cost-capped and schedule-constrained mission. While the mission design was finalized in April, our initial grass-roots costing (which was ~10% over budget) could only be completed in September due to the lack of assigned resources. With the subsequent government shutdown and then β€œpens down” in early-December forced by the GSFC Executive Review process, there was no opportunity to work through the set of cost/schedule savings that had already been identified by the AXIS team. Ultimately, the GSFC executive council gave AXIS leadership the choice of submitting a CSR with a non-compliant schedule and cost, or not submitting a CSR at all. We of course proceeded with the submission, including a narrative that we understood the path to a cost-compliant profile (that we would have discussed with the review panels during the Site Visit). NASA HQ has ruled this stance to be unacceptable. It is important to stress that NASA’s programmatic decision was before any technical review had been conducted. The decision was NOT due to any concerns about AXIS technology. Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering

Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering the key technologies. GSFC’s Next Generation X-ray Optics (NGXO) team successfully demonstrated iridium-coated, stress-compensated mirror segments that meet AXIS baseline requirements (i.e. segment-level performance at sub-arcsecond level).Β  NGXO also built the first AXIS demonstrator mirror module, learning critical lessons about mirror alignment, mounting and bonding. On the detector side, MIT quickly moved to fabricate AXIS-like CCDs and, working with our colleagues at Stanford, recently demonstrated that they achieve the required readout rate and spectral resolution. 


Similarly, NASA’s decision was NOT a judgment of the importance of AXIS science.  The AXIS science case was rated excellent in the Step 1 review, and it only became stronger during our Phase A study.  The AXIS Community Science Book, which many of you contributed to, is an extremely powerful demonstration of the relevance and importance of high-resolution X-ray observations to all areas of astrophysics. The Science Book is one of the most important legacies of the AXIS Phase A study and, I believe, will help define future mission concepts for many years to come.  I thank you all from the bottom of my heart for all of your work on this.


AXIS has been a long journey; we started under the leadership of Richard Mushotzky more than nine years ago.  During that time, it’s been an enormous privilege to work with amazing people; the AXIS science team, the incredible/brilliant GSFC and Northrop Grumman engineers, and the wider astrophysics community.  I am, quite frankly, livid that AXIS ultimately fell victim to the programmatic chaos of 2025. The astronomical community deserves better. I hope that NASA leadership, especially at GSFC and HQ, can have an honest discussion about how to better support and protect programs during extraordinary times.

Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering the key technologies. GSFC’s Next Generation X-ray Optics (NGXO) team successfully demonstrated iridium-coated, stress-compensated mirror segments that meet AXIS baseline requirements (i.e. segment-level performance at sub-arcsecond level).Β  NGXO also built the first AXIS demonstrator mirror module, learning critical lessons about mirror alignment, mounting and bonding. On the detector side, MIT quickly moved to fabricate AXIS-like CCDs and, working with our colleagues at Stanford, recently demonstrated that they achieve the required readout rate and spectral resolution. Similarly, NASA’s decision was NOT a judgment of the importance of AXIS science. The AXIS science case was rated excellent in the Step 1 review, and it only became stronger during our Phase A study. The AXIS Community Science Book, which many of you contributed to, is an extremely powerful demonstration of the relevance and importance of high-resolution X-ray observations to all areas of astrophysics. The Science Book is one of the most important legacies of the AXIS Phase A study and, I believe, will help define future mission concepts for many years to come. I thank you all from the bottom of my heart for all of your work on this. AXIS has been a long journey; we started under the leadership of Richard Mushotzky more than nine years ago. During that time, it’s been an enormous privilege to work with amazing people; the AXIS science team, the incredible/brilliant GSFC and Northrop Grumman engineers, and the wider astrophysics community. I am, quite frankly, livid that AXIS ultimately fell victim to the programmatic chaos of 2025. The astronomical community deserves better. I hope that NASA leadership, especially at GSFC and HQ, can have an honest discussion about how to better support and protect programs during extraordinary times.

For now, as a community, we must look forward. There is still one excellent mission under consideration for the Probe program, PRIMA, and we wish them a smooth and speedy path to selection and flight.  In X-ray astronomy, the SMEX and MidEX programs represent concrete pathways for focused, high-impact missions, and the scientific case we built for AXIS provides a strong foundation for those concepts. The technologies we advanced in Step 1 and Phase A, particularly the NGXO mirror work and the MIT/Stanford detector demonstrations, can anchor the next generation of proposals. Most importantly, the AXIS Community Science Book, representing more than 500 scientists across, is a living document and a powerful signal to NASA leadership that this community is organized, serious, and not going anywhere. I encourage everyone to use it actively, as a resource for future concept development, for Astro2030 engagement, and for building the next mission that will deliver high angular resolution X-ray imaging to address the fundamental questions about black hole growth, galaxy evolution, and the hot universe that motivated AXIS from the beginning. This community built something remarkable over nine years and that doesn't end here.


Thank you again for your support of AXIS over these times.


Best

Chris and the AXIS leadership team

For now, as a community, we must look forward. There is still one excellent mission under consideration for the Probe program, PRIMA, and we wish them a smooth and speedy path to selection and flight. In X-ray astronomy, the SMEX and MidEX programs represent concrete pathways for focused, high-impact missions, and the scientific case we built for AXIS provides a strong foundation for those concepts. The technologies we advanced in Step 1 and Phase A, particularly the NGXO mirror work and the MIT/Stanford detector demonstrations, can anchor the next generation of proposals. Most importantly, the AXIS Community Science Book, representing more than 500 scientists across, is a living document and a powerful signal to NASA leadership that this community is organized, serious, and not going anywhere. I encourage everyone to use it actively, as a resource for future concept development, for Astro2030 engagement, and for building the next mission that will deliver high angular resolution X-ray imaging to address the fundamental questions about black hole growth, galaxy evolution, and the hot universe that motivated AXIS from the beginning. This community built something remarkable over nine years and that doesn't end here. Thank you again for your support of AXIS over these times. Best Chris and the AXIS leadership team

The @axisprobe.bsky.social team learned that the phase A concept study report of AXIS (the Advanced X-ray Imaging Satellite) will not be reviewed because the lost personnel at NASA Goddard and government shutdown impacted our schedule and budget. πŸ”­ Here is the PI's e-mail with the explanation.

09.03.2026 20:05 πŸ‘ 223 πŸ” 95 πŸ’¬ 21 πŸ“Œ 28
Google Search

(Just in case anyone wants to take issue with β€œsingle issue voter”: www.google.com/search?q=hyp...)

10.03.2026 16:14 πŸ‘ 0 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

I’m a single-issue voter for the phrase β€œthe only minority destroying this country is billionaires” Talarico didn’t coin it but I’m glad to hear him say it.

10.03.2026 16:12 πŸ‘ 29 πŸ” 10 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

MTA Route 3 Drivers Fan Club

10.03.2026 13:44 πŸ‘ 0 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

PLEASE

09.03.2026 20:29 πŸ‘ 2 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

Not to reminisce too hard about the Nazi bar but could we bring back Hawaiian shirt Wednesdays?

09.03.2026 13:48 πŸ‘ 2 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

Oh yeah I’m immensely clumsy

09.03.2026 12:33 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

Ah! Those look so nice but my phone is a generation too old!

09.03.2026 01:47 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

Broke my current one 😬

09.03.2026 01:35 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

Does anyone know where I can get a phone case that doesn’t suck? Everything I find is either cheap, drop shipped, ugly, or used AI art

09.03.2026 01:32 πŸ‘ 4 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 7 πŸ“Œ 0
Post image

Heard the MSP feed was sunsetposting, anyone else catch the rainbow?

09.03.2026 01:00 πŸ‘ 23 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

The natural result of dudes with lifelong John McClane fantasies getting control of the might of the US military. Standard β€œI hope someone would try me so I can kick their ass” type of guy.

08.03.2026 19:01 πŸ‘ 2 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

Let’s be clear, this man *desperately* wants them to retaliate.

He’s not being flippant, he’s being hopeful.

08.03.2026 18:58 πŸ‘ 4 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 2 πŸ“Œ 0

Happy β€œbut when’s international men’s day?” day to the absolute most annoying guy you’ve ever met (he doesn’t know how to google πŸ’”)

08.03.2026 17:11 πŸ‘ 10 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

Hey my girlfriend saw your dog from across the coffee shop and we really like his vibe. Can we please pet him?

08.03.2026 14:36 πŸ‘ 22 πŸ” 2 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

HUP HOLLAND HUP!!! 🧑⚾️

07.03.2026 20:01 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 5

That inning was making me very romantic about baseball

07.03.2026 01:51 πŸ‘ 2 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

I do this too! Pair it with a (preferably secondhand) kindle and it’s so great

05.03.2026 01:44 πŸ‘ 3 πŸ” 1 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

Yeah that’s gonna be a β€œhell no” from me

05.03.2026 01:13 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

The β€œvideo games make you violent” people ended up being accidentally right and in the most sickening way possible

05.03.2026 00:56 πŸ‘ 7 πŸ” 1 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

β€œWhat’s your elevator pitch?”

05.03.2026 00:53 πŸ‘ 3 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

Absolutely!

05.03.2026 00:51 πŸ‘ 0 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

The wisdom of the crowd only works when the crowd doesn’t have incentive to artificially skew the wisdom

05.03.2026 00:45 πŸ‘ 3 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

See also: exercise and sleep

05.03.2026 00:44 πŸ‘ 31 πŸ” 2 πŸ’¬ 3 πŸ“Œ 0

a lot of critiques in aughts alleged that pentagon was influencing video games and in truth the relationship seems to be the other way around

04.03.2026 15:22 πŸ‘ 1643 πŸ” 266 πŸ’¬ 25 πŸ“Œ 27

For all the but how can we afford space exploration folks…this means we’ve already spent more on this war that started last week than Cassini cost in the 26 years it took to build, launch, and operate it.

04.03.2026 20:41 πŸ‘ 1487 πŸ” 546 πŸ’¬ 7 πŸ“Œ 7

How much people are willing to spend on a future for XYZ event is NOT THE SAME as the likelihood of XYZ event happening!!!! Oh my god stop calling it a fucking likelihood!!!!!!!!!!!

05.03.2026 00:07 πŸ‘ 4 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

Knowing things is continues to be the worst part about existing in 2026

05.03.2026 00:05 πŸ‘ 3 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

The polymarket stuff is further enforcing my belief that we should be pushing high schoolers to take stats instead of calc in the majority of cases

05.03.2026 00:05 πŸ‘ 14 πŸ” 1 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0