Shuttle woes spell trouble for Hubble

Newsday ^ | 08/12/05 | BRYN NELSON

[KevinDavis]

Although the Discovery space shuttle's Tuesday touchdown eased some of NASA's worst fears, the problems at liftoff that led to an indefinitely grounded shuttle fleet have only ratcheted up the anxiety of researchers over the fate of the Hubble Space Telescope.

The Greyhound bus-sized telescope, launched in 1990 after a lengthy delay in the wake of the Challenger shuttle disaster, has been hailed by Stony Brook University professor Ken Lanzetta as "pretty much the best thing that has ever happened to astronomy."

[KevinDavis]

Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh.........

[KevinDavis]

[RadioAstronomer]

Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh.........

Why laugh at the possible demise of one of our great telescopes????

[Paleo Conservative]

Wouldn't it be cheaper just to send up a series of disposable space telescopes than to send up space shuttle missions to repair the Hubble?

[beef]

The last I heard they weren't going to sent another service mission to Hubble. According to this article, the new Nasa administrator Michael Griffin wants to put it back on the schedule. This is very good news. HST is worth the risk of another shuttle visit

This new guy at NASA sounds like he's pretty good. I heard a while back he wants to revive Shuttle-C, which is a VERY good idea.

[Lauretij2]

Time to build another one. It's not like the technology is lost. They use the same stuff for the Keyhole spy sats they put up every few years.

Replace it and deorbit this one.

[Paleo Conservative]

Did you know this person?

[Paleo Conservative]

Did you know this person?

[mikrofon]

Shuttle's scuttled, program's in trouble
Booster burn, or down goes Hubble...

[RadioAstronomer]

Wouldn't it be cheaper just to send up a series of disposable space telescopes than to send up space shuttle missions to repair the Hubble?

Not hardly.

[RadioAstronomer]

Replace it and deorbit this one.

Not a chance. With the new instruments slated to fly on the next servicing mission, not servicing this telescope would be a great loss to science.

[Lauretij2]

Can't they send up a new one though with a better mirror, and all that implies? And now they could use one of the latest Titan's couldn't they? Seems to be it wouldn't cost that much more than the fixing mission, and it's safer for now.

[Moonman62]

The Hubble should either be repaired or retrieved and put in the Smithsonian.

[RadioAstronomer]

Can't they send up a new one though with a better mirror, and all that implies? And now they could use one of the latest Titan's couldn't they? Seems to be it wouldn't cost that much more than the fixing mission, and it's safer for now.

Building a new one would cost billions. (This one is already up there)

We also would lose all of the years of data between the demise of Hubble and the off chance we may build another.

[RadioAstronomer]

The Hubble should either be repaired or retrieved and put in the Smithsonian.

If you fly up to it to retrieve it, you may as well repair it instead.

[IYAAYAS]

I would look into building a radio controlled robot in permanent close orbit, specifically designed to service hubble.

[tanknetter]

Time to build another one. It's not like the technology is lost. They use the same stuff for the Keyhole spy sats they put up every few years.

A little secret of the HST program is that NASA has enough spare parts on hand (NASA's real motto is why buy one if you can buy two at twice the price?) to build another Hubble very quickly and at minimal cost.

The flight-rate engineering backup "chassis" is on display at NASM in DC. In fact, prior to previous repair missions the servicing astronauts would come up and go over the thing using a cherry-picker. Apparently since it's an exact duplicate of what's up in orbit now, it's more accurate than what NASA has in the tank down at Johnson.

[Nonstatist]

Theres a simple fix to the foam problem , involving a "chicken-wire" casing, and all this smoke about "grounding" the shuttle is just that. If anything, The Hubble repair mission will probably be moved up one on the manifest and launch "on schedule".

You'd have to be nuts to not keep a golden egg like the Hubble still operating, given the instrument upgrades and new radiators, et al they have planned for the next launch.

[billbears]

The cheapest solution would be to get the government to stop wasting tax dollars on a 40 year old idea, namely the spacebus, and the Hubble telescope, as it's not a covered power under the Constitution

Private industry can eventually handle it more efficiently, safer, and cheaper.

[RadioAstronomer]

The flight-rate engineering backup "chassis" is on display at NASM in DC. In fact, prior to previous repair missions the servicing astronauts would come up and go over the thing using a cherry-picker. Apparently since it's an exact duplicate of what's up in orbit now, it's more accurate than what NASA has in the tank down at Johnson.

Has it been kept in a clean room environment all this time?

NASA's real motto is why buy one if you can buy two at twice the price?

What a bunch of crap.