Guidance

Space Frontiers 2035 – Q&A 

Updated 18 November 2025

White Papers 

Do you want white papers about science questions or missions? 

White Papers should start with and focus on your scientific question which may be addressed by a mission or missions. It should then outline the specific mission concept (if there already is one) or the kind of mission that will be needed, and the technologies that will need to be developed or enhanced to implement it. 

How broad or focused should the white papers be; do you want papers about the general science questions which motivate us or papers about a specific topic that we study? 

We want science led white papers, describing the questions you want to answer, UK leadership opportunities and what technologies are required. White papers may have a broad or a narrow focus. 

You have placed science as the main driver but then described welcoming white papers about specific technology/missions or measurements. So, do you want to know what science we want to do in the next 10 years or what missions we might want? Given that there is no direct mapping between one question to one measurement in exploration. 

The Frontiers work should be science driven. However, submissions should, where possible, identify future missions that could meet these science questions. The level of maturity of the missions concepts can be from very low (top level concepts) to specific, well-scoped mission ideas. 

Would making a case for a particular science goal, without being tied to a particular mission or spanning multiple missions, be in scope? 

Yes. As long as the science question is valid, then a white paper would be welcome. 

How should we tackle science questions that are addressed by data from several missions including those out-of-scope? 

Describe in the white paper how the science case needs to be addressed by the appropriate combination of data and results from all relevant missions. 

How will the science exploitation of implemented missions be represented alongside these white papers in the STFC prioritisations? 

There will be a specific section of the final report that addresses science exploitation of implemented missions, to ensure that they are considered within the prioritisation process. 

We welcome white papers on additional or extended science for implemented missions; we do not wish for people to submit white papers on the mission science that has already been reviewed and accepted. 

Are labs used for analysis of extraterrestrial samples in scope? 

Yes. 

Are ground-based instruments out-of-scope? 

Yes. There is an ongoing STFC process for ground-based facilities. 

Will the white papers be published? 

Yes. All submitted white papers will be published publicly on a UK Space Agency/STFC-hosted or partner website shortly after the submission deadline, unless a justified confidentiality request is submitted. 

The timeline for white papers is very short, and you may not receive a comprehensive response, can the deadline be extended? 

We do not plan to extend the deadline. We will also take note of ideas from the community workshops as well as white papers. 

Should the authors and co-authors be UK-based only? 

Only the lead author needs to be UK-based (or have a UK affiliation); the co-authors can have any other affiliation. 

Given the short timeline, will allowances be made for white papers reading as if they have been rushed? 

We expect the white papers to present well thought out science-based questions that describe how the objectives can be achieved. 

If current missions (e.g., JUICE, LISA) are out of scope, will white papers that recommend theoretical/laboratory/data analysis work to enhance the science return of these missions also be considered out of scope? 

Any additional programmes or projects that do not have adequate existing UK Space Agency/STFC commitments should submit white papers. White papers concerning such programmes would be in scope, as would current missions that might require additional support should the mission be extended. 

Why is the Interstellar Mapping & Acceleration Probe (IMAP) not on the list of approved missions? 

IMAP is supported through the UK Space Agency’s National Space Innovations Programme and hence has been funded to date by a different funding strand; it will be included in the section of the report on approved missions. 

Do you expect these white papers to be different from those for Voyage 2050 and from ESA priorities in general? 

Not necessarily. Frontiers covers UK interest in Voyage 2050 L-class missions, possible areas of future interest in smaller mission classes (M, F and mini-F) as well as possible bilateral programmes with agencies other than ESA (e.g. NASA, JAXA etc. as well as individual European agencies) 

Final Report 

Will there be one list of priorities for the three themes, or will each theme have its own priority list? 

The panels should not be seen as being in competition with each other and will produce their own priority lists. The Steering Group will work to produce a balanced prioritised programme across the three themes. 

Will the Frontiers final report be used to petition the Treasury for more funding through the Department of Science Innovation and Technology (DSIT)? If so, is that essentially the main function of the report? 

A strong community driven report, with clear recommendations, priorities and links to the UK industrial strategy can only be a good thing for making the case for why UK science from space platforms is important. However, it will not be used specifically to petition for additional funding. 

Will there be any Phase 0 Invitation to Tender (ITT) for studies following the Steering Committee Final Report? 

No commitments to funding are being made as part of Frontiers. White paper submissions on, for instance, the benefits of coordinated Phase 0 activities between STFC and the UK Space Agency would be welcome. 

How will the success of the Pilot Programme be assessed? 

There are no specific success criteria. The pilot programme will be judged as successful if: (i) there is strong community engagement (we are on the way to achieving this with 112 people joining the Town Hall Meeting); (ii) the process produces a balanced report containing exciting and challenging ideas, reflecting the aspirations of the community, and which can be used to inform the UK Space Agency and STFC decision-making; (iii) the process can be applied in other subject areas. 

Working with other funding bodies/partners 

We currently work with other bodies, such as the European Space Agency (ESA) and NASA, which have science/mission prioritisation processes of their own. How do you see these interacting with the pilot programme. 

The steering committee has members who are part of the ESA prioritisation process, so we have insights into their priorities, and UK Space Agency and STFC are talking to ESA and other agencies such as NASA and Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA). This process should deliver a clear prioritisation list for the UK, optimising UK Space Agency investment in missions, thus enabling the UK Space Agency to have greater influence on the ESA Science Programme. 

How does this fit in with future European Space Agency (ESA) selections? 

There are many future mission slots in the ESA long-term implementation plan, and many proposed missions currently being assessed following the M8/F3/Mini-F calls. ESA mission selection will not be directly affected by the Frontiers work. However, national priorities and committed contributions to these missions do have influence on mission studies and development. Clear UK priorities should also facilitate well-prepared and high-quality proposals for future UK-led mission concepts. 

Where does Earth Remote Sensing from satellites fit into the 3-themes concept? 

EO as well as human space flight and microgravity research are out of scope for this programme. If successful, the UK Space Agency will look at the possibility of similar programmes in these areas. Note that we would need to involve other UKRI research councils. 

How can we in academia encourage partnerships with industry to drive new science? 

This depends on the type of interactions. For the mission and platform level, the UK has several system-integrators that would be keen to work with UK academics. The in person workshops would be an ideal opportunity to meet and discuss possibilities. There is also potential for greater collaboration at instrument level (payload contributions).

The early identification of UK priorities for future missions, which is a key potential benefit of this exercise, will provide opportunities to forge mission-specific links between UK science institutes and industrial partners, and this is something which the UK Space Agency will be keen to facilitate. 

Miscellaneous  

Will the Town Hall meeting be recorded? 

The Town Hall meeting on 22 October was recorded.

You can watch here.

Where can I find the timeline/schedule for the Pilot Programme 

The current programme schedule can be found here.

What is the email address for information and resources? 

spacefrontiers@ukspaceagency.gov.uk 

Do we have a process to address Conflicts of Interest? 

Yes, both STFC and the UK Space Agency have processes in place to address conflicts of interest.