NASA gives up on Hubble

[rbV5]

Link

NASA curtails further missions to service Hubble raising the likelyhood that Hubble will fail before its replacement, the James Webb Space Telescope, is expected to launch (in 2011). Safety issues were cited. NASA chief scientist John Grunsfeld says the telescope should continue operating until 2007 or 2008 even without servicing.

Apparently NASA's new mandate leaves the Shuttle to finish the Space Station, while much of the rest of NASA'a energies will be directed to the Presidents Vision, leaving Hubble out.

Bummer

 

[MovingTarget]

Well, they are going to send a rocket to deorbit Hubble as its orbit finally degrades. I would say that they should extend its life somewhat to fill the gap before the new telescope begins service and instead use said rocket to boost Hubble's orbit, if even for a short time. Let it continue service till the batteries run out completely or the gyroscopes finally die. There have been many studies into using rockets/microsattelites to refuel/recharge/reboost the current sattelite fleet, extending their lifetiime of service. But, if the new space plan is implemented by congress, then I suppose its for the best. There are going to be a few casualties even in the best of plans.

 

[Moonbeam]

Another reason to vote for Dean

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Another reason to vote for Dean

? Dean will save Hubble? or Dean won't support a bold space initiative such as what Bush has proposed, that makes Hubble a casualty? Sarcasm maybe? Where did this come from?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Another reason to vote for Dean

? Dean will save Hubble? or Dean won't support a bold space initiative such as what Bush has proposed, that makes Hubble a casualty? Sarcasm maybe? Where did this come from?

Dean would support the private Company (X) to take care of projects like the Hubble so the Country could focus on the other Projects.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Another reason to vote for Dean

? Dean will save Hubble? or Dean won't support a bold space initiative such as what Bush has proposed, that makes Hubble a casualty? Sarcasm maybe? Where did this come from?

Dean would support the private Company (X) to take care of projects like the Hubble so the Country could focus on the other Projects.

You mean something like MirCorp and the former Russian station? If we are going to abandon Hubble, I wouldn't mind letting a private company try to revive it. That is, if we can find one who would bear the cost.

 

[charrison]

The fact is, the hubble has lasted longer than expected and nasa already has a replacement planned that is bigger and better than hubble. The new one will go up in 2011, shortly after the hubble is decommisioned.

Also ground based telescopes are promising to do better than hubble right now.

 

[Yossarian]

Since we are limited in the number of shuttle runs left, I think it's a good idea to use the remainder to finish up the space station.

 

[heartsurgeon]

this is going to be tragic.
several institutions have entire programs established around Hubble astromy, professors, projects, grad students, etc...
yikes, there going to be in major trouble when their imaging device goes off line...

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: charrison
The fact is, the hubble has lasted longer than expected and nasa already has a replacement planned that is bigger and better than hubble. The new one will go up in 2011, shortly after the hubble is decommisioned.

Also ground based telescopes are promising to do better than hubble right now.

Wow. I didn't realize that Hubble was temporary (Well. I know it wasn't going to last a hundred years, but you know what I mean)
It seems like just yesterday it went up. Damn, I feel old.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
this is going to be tragic.
several institutions have entire programs established around Hubble astromy, professors, projects, grad students, etc...
yikes, there going to be in major trouble when their imaging device goes off line...

The hubble cost 1.5 billion and has been repaired repaired several times(500M just to launch the shuttle).

Cost of the new James web Space telescope 824M. It does seem cheaper to let the hubble splash down.


linkage

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Another reason to vote for Dean

? Dean will save Hubble? or Dean won't support a bold space initiative such as what Bush has proposed, that makes Hubble a casualty? Sarcasm maybe? Where did this come from?

Dean would support the private Company (X) to take care of projects like the Hubble so the Country could focus on the other Projects.

bah, the govt and private companies should all be working together, as far as space exploration is concerned.

 

[rbV5]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
this is going to be tragic.
several institutions have entire programs established around Hubble astromy, professors, projects, grad students, etc...
yikes, there going to be in major trouble when their imaging device goes off line...

The hubble cost 1.5 billion and has been repaired repaired several times(500M just to launch the shuttle).

Cost of the new James web Space telescope 824M. It does seem cheaper to let the hubble splash down.


linkage

It was not a budgetary decision, safety is the reason cited by Grunsfeld.
Because a shuttle visiting the Hubble could not reach the international space station if something went wrong, Grunsfeld said NASA would have to have a second shuttle on the launch pad and ready to conduct an orbiter-to-orbiter rescue in an emergency
Seems to me, thats a BS statement, or NASA has totally lost confidence in the shuttle. There was a single mission planned in 2006 that would have kept it operational until after the 2011 replacement. If the James Webb Space Telescope runs behind schedule, or dies due to funding or focus issues, it will be a seriously huge blow. Hopefully it will hang on longer than they expect, but even the 3 year gap they throw out as optimistic, is alot of research time lost and I don't have a lot of confidence in NASA timelines.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Another reason to vote for Dean

? Dean will save Hubble? or Dean won't support a bold space initiative such as what Bush has proposed, that makes Hubble a casualty? Sarcasm maybe? Where did this come from?

Dean would support the private Company (X) to take care of projects like the Hubble so the Country could focus on the other Projects.

Maintaining something like that isn't cheap. This is something that only governments (and, to a lesser extent, charities) can afford. There is no profit in keeping that puppy in space.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: rbV5

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
this is going to be tragic.
several institutions have entire programs established around Hubble astromy, professors, projects, grad students, etc...
yikes, there going to be in major trouble when their imaging device goes off line...

The hubble cost 1.5 billion and has been repaired repaired several times(500M just to launch the shuttle).

Cost of the new James web Space telescope 824M. It does seem cheaper to let the hubble splash down.


linkage

It was not a budgetary decision, safety is the reason cited by Grunsfeld.
Because a shuttle visiting the Hubble could not reach the international space station if something went wrong, Grunsfeld said NASA would have to have a second shuttle on the launch pad and ready to conduct an orbiter-to-orbiter rescue in an emergency
Seems to me, thats a BS statement, or NASA has totally lost confidence in the shuttle. There was a single mission planned in 2006 that would have kept it operational until after the 2011 replacement. If the James Webb Space Telescope runs behind schedule, or dies due to funding or focus issues, it will be a seriously huge blow. Hopefully it will hang on longer than they expect, but even the 3 year gap they throw out as optimistic, is alot of research time lost and I don't have a lot of confidence in NASA timelines.

The part about the shuttle needing to reach the space station is due to a new rule adopted since the Columbia disaster.


On other fronts...Hubble is running just fine...however it will likely fail by '07 IF not maintained. The robotic rocket mission to bring it down is also due to a commitment by NASA...Not because there is Anything wrong with Hubble.


Also Webb's not going up untill 2011...4 years without an orbital telescope isn't what I'd call a short amount of time. That is if Webb it makes it, and keep in mind that it will be stationed a million miles from Earth...no easy maintenance / repair missions there.

So please don't blithely write off Hubble like it's outmoded or failing...It's been probably one of the greatest bargains as far as cost / information gained in the entire space program. And please don't be so confident of a flawless insertion of a replacement. Space missions are far from routine or predictable.

Lastly, this was a decision by NASA, not the administration, and can easily (and I hope will) be reversed by Congress.


Over and Out...........

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Another reason to vote for Dean

? Dean will save Hubble? or Dean won't support a bold space initiative such as what Bush has proposed, that makes Hubble a casualty? Sarcasm maybe? Where did this come from?

Dean would support the private Company (X) to take care of projects like the Hubble so the Country could focus on the other Projects.

Maintaining something like that isn't cheap. This is something that only governments (and, to a lesser extent, charities) can afford. There is no profit in keeping that puppy in space.

From the article..........NASA officials said the cancellation of the Hubble servicing mission was driven by concerns about astronaut safety ? heightened in the wake of the Columbia disaster ? not budget issues.




It was never about the money.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Another reason to vote for Dean

? Dean will save Hubble? or Dean won't support a bold space initiative such as what Bush has proposed, that makes Hubble a casualty? Sarcasm maybe? Where did this come from?

Dean would support the private Company (X) to take care of projects like the Hubble so the Country could focus on the other Projects.

Maintaining something like that isn't cheap. This is something that only governments (and, to a lesser extent, charities) can afford. There is no profit in keeping that puppy in space.

From the article..........NASA officials said the cancellation of the Hubble servicing mission was driven by concerns about astronaut safety ? heightened in the wake of the Columbia disaster ? not budget issues.




It was never about the money.

Hubble is a popular mission. Bush told NASA that it's priority is getting back to the moon. Bush tells us that most of ite the money will come from "other" projects. Bush tells NASA that the Hubble is one of those "other" items. NASA says it's about safety. Sure. Yeah. Right.

At least they could tell it like it is. Anything that depends on the Shuttle is on borrowed time. That's ok, just dont try to fox us (yet again) GWB.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
this is going to be tragic.
several institutions have entire programs established around Hubble astromy, professors, projects, grad students, etc...
yikes, there going to be in major trouble when their imaging device goes off line...

The hubble cost 1.5 billion and has been repaired repaired several times(500M just to launch the shuttle).

Cost of the new James web Space telescope 824M. It does seem cheaper to let the hubble splash down.


linkage

I agree. They could also put some extra money into the new one and move it up a year. 2-3 years without a space telescope is bad, but we can live with it.

 

[Babbles]

It is kinda sad to see the Hubble die out and fade away, however it is understandable.

Funny, though somewhat typical, of the Dean supporter throwing in their clueless opinion.