Hubble Telescope Loses Power in Camera

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,119
18,646
146
Hubble Telescope Loses Power in Camera
By ALEX DOMINGUEZ
AP
BALTIMORE (Jan. 29) - Two thirds of the observation ability on the popular Hubble Space Telescope's main camera have been permanently lost following power supply problems, NASA announced Monday.

The Advanced Camera for Surveys shut down again over the weekend, the third outage in less than a year for the instrument. The orbiting observatory entered a protective "safe mode" Saturday morning and an initial investigation has determined that its backup power supply failed, the space agency said.

Observations are expected to resume this week using the Hubble's other instruments. One of the three cameras on the ACS, the solar blind channel, is expected to be returned to operation, possibly by the middle of February.

The outlook is not good for the other two, said Dave Leckrone, a senior scientist on the Hubble Space Telescope project at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt.

"We're not optimistic at all that those will be restored," Leckrone said.

The ACS, installed during a March 2002, servicing mission, increased Hubble's vision greatly and has provided the clearest pictures yet of galaxy formation in the very early universe. The instrument consists of three electronic cameras, filters and dispersers that detect light from the ultraviolet to the near infrared.

The ACS was the most heavily in demand from the astronomical community and accounted for two-thirds of the latest proposals for observing time on the Hubble, said Preston Burch, associate director and program manager for the Hubble Space Telescope at Goddard.

Astronomer Mario Livio at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which coordinates use of the Hubble by the scientific community, said the ACS was a "serious workhorse" but astronomers can fall back on Hubble's other instruments.

"So, clearly the observations will continue, science will continue, but it's a great loss, no doubt. It's a great loss because this was a fantastic camera that just produced incredible science," Livio said.

In October, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin announced the scheduling of a 2008 space shuttle mission to repair and upgrade the 16-year-old telescope. The decision was a reversal of one made by the previous NASA chief, who decided against a mission because of astronaut safety concerns.

Without the servicing mission, batteries and stabilizing gyroscopes would run out of power near the end of the decade, bringing to an end the life of the popular space telescope.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
So launch another one?

We can rebuild it. We can make it stronger, faster. With super-vision eyes.

With this news, it's time to get the misson started. Just think of the advancements in communication/digital imaging that have taken place in the...what? 15 years since it's launch?
 

AMDMaddness

Platinum Member
Sep 1, 2003
2,406
2
81
I bet its a case of those cheep capacitors that where going around in 2000-2004. I want to get my hands on it and recap it heh. Looks like Hubble will no longer be serviced and left to die shame really.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
19
81
Originally posted by: spidey07
So launch another one?

We can rebuild it. We can make it stronger, faster. With super-vision eyes.

With this news, it's time to get the misson started. Just think of the advancements in communication/digital imaging that have taken place in the...what? 15 years since it's launch?

Exactly. I've read that it'd be cheaper to build and launch another one than to send the shuttle up to service the existing one. One of the major costs of spacecraft development is the designing of each probe. That's already been done. Follow the plans, add the upgrades, and launch.
Do that, and we get the added, obvious bonus of an entirely new telescope. The one that's up there has loads of issues, most notably its failing gyroscopes, and the fact that its batteries are the same ones up there since 1990. Hubble orbits once every hour and a half. In that time, it charges and discharges those batteries. That's a LOT of cycling for any battery to have to deal with.
 

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
29,391
2,738
126
what?

Building the Hubble II, and lauching it from Earth is cheaper than sending the Space Shuttle up and fixing Hubble I???

How much does a Space Shuttle mission to Hubble cost?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,119
18,646
146
Originally posted by: JEDI
what?

Building the Hubble II, and lauching it from Earth is cheaper than sending the Space Shuttle up and fixing Hubble I???

How much does a Space Shuttle mission to Hubble cost?

$1.3 billion per launch
 

swimscubasteve

Senior member
Jun 10, 2005
523
0
0
We should just check out of Iraq 2 weeks early and put 3 more, upgraded versions of the damn things up there.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
Originally posted by: Jeff7
Originally posted by: spidey07
So launch another one?

We can rebuild it. We can make it stronger, faster. With super-vision eyes.

With this news, it's time to get the misson started. Just think of the advancements in communication/digital imaging that have taken place in the...what? 15 years since it's launch?

Exactly. I've read that it'd be cheaper to build and launch another one than to send the shuttle up to service the existing one. One of the major costs of spacecraft development is the designing of each probe. That's already been done. Follow the plans, add the upgrades, and launch.
Do that, and we get the added, obvious bonus of an entirely new telescope. The one that's up there has loads of issues, most notably its failing gyroscopes, and the fact that its batteries are the same ones up there since 1990. Hubble orbits once every hour and a half. In that time, it charges and discharges those batteries. That's a LOT of cycling for any battery to have to deal with.
They are building a new one, it just won't go up until 2013 (says Wikipedia), so extending Hubble in the meantime seems to be the best option.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JEDI
what?

Building the Hubble II, and lauching it from Earth is cheaper than sending the Space Shuttle up and fixing Hubble I???

How much does a Space Shuttle mission to Hubble cost?

$1.3 billion per launch

But in all seriousness.....

A monumental satellite was launched. As I said the advancements in technoloy over the last 15 years has been astonishing (imaging/comm).

It's time to set Hubble II to the skies. Damn atmosphere get's in the way.
 

Goosemaster

Lifer
Apr 10, 2001
48,775
3
81
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JEDI
what?

Building the Hubble II, and lauching it from Earth is cheaper than sending the Space Shuttle up and fixing Hubble I???

How much does a Space Shuttle mission to Hubble cost?

$1.3 billion per launch

we need some sort of payment plan.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JEDI
what?

Building the Hubble II, and lauching it from Earth is cheaper than sending the Space Shuttle up and fixing Hubble I???

How much does a Space Shuttle mission to Hubble cost?

$1.3 billion per launch

we need some sort of payment plan.

Like rent time out to people wanting to spy on women.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
19
81
Originally posted by: Lonyo
They are building a new one, it just won't go up until 2013 (says Wikipedia), so extending Hubble in the meantime seems to be the best option.

That's the James Webb Telescope. It sees in infrared, not visible light, thus it isn't really a replacement, per se.

And really, if it is cheaper to build and launch a new one, there doesn't seem to be much point to extending an already dying one if we can get a whole new one cheaper.
Maybe they could even use Hubble I as a mission goal for the private space industry, with some kind of prize money available for successfully and safely de-orbiting Hubble.