Save Hubble Resolution Introduced in House

Space.com via Yahoo ^ | 3/4/04 | Brian Berger

[ZGuy]

A Colorado congressman and seven colleagues introduced a resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives March 3 urging NASA to establish an independent panel of experts to review its recent decision to forgo any further servicing of the Hubble Space Telescope.

Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) said in a statement that he introduced the resolution to draw attention to Hubble's scientific contributions to ensure that the telescope is not abandoned in the next several years without someone other than NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe having a say. NASA announced Jan. 16 that it was canceling a planned space shuttle mission to service Hubble, citing the danger of launching the shuttle to a destination other than the international space station.

Udall wants an independent review of that decision, as well as the underlying safety assumptions that prompted O'Keefe to cancel the mission.

"Precisely because of Hubble's extraordinary contributions in the past and promised contributions in the future, I also believe it is important that the decision to cancel the planned servicing mission to Hubble be reviewed by an independent panel of experts and all options for safely carrying it out be examined," Udall said in the statement.

While the review is under way, Udall said, planning and preparations for the canceled servicing mission should continue.

Udall represents an area of Colorado that includes Ball Aerospace & Technology, the Boulder-based company that builds instruments for Hubble. Udall said canceling the servicing mission could strand $200 million worth of new instruments that are largely finished.

Joining Udall as co-sponsors of the resolution are Reps. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.), Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Nick Lampson (D-Texas), Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), and C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.).

In late January, under pressure from Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), O'Keefe asked retired U.S. Navy (news - web sites) Adm. Harold Gehman, the chairman of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, to review the Hubble servicing mission in light of the recommendations Gehman's board made on resuming shuttle operations. O'Keefe has made clear, however, that he does not intend to change his position based on anything Gehman might say.

NASA and Senate sources said Gehman is not expected to report his findings before the week of March 15, when he is due to return from travel.

NASA, meanwhile, is soliciting ideas from industry about how it might extend Hubble's scientific lifetime without conducting another shuttle servicing mission.

[Pukin Dog]

Udall represents an area of Colorado that includes Ball Aerospace & Technology, the Boulder-based company that builds instruments for Hubble. Udall said canceling the servicing mission could strand $200 million worth of new instruments that are largely finished.

Another 'bought and sold' Democrat. Bitch about spending, but at the same time, jump when his contributers say how high. He's not a representative, just a cheap political whore.

[avg_freeper]

The government should just offer it up for sale to a private company or other government. That way we can get a little bit of our money back. A private company might be able to "fix" the 'scope for much less.

[KarlInOhio]

Right now the only shuttle missions are being planned are ones which can dock with the space station if the mission needs to be aborted while in space. Since the space station is at such a high inclination orbit (put in that orbit to include the Soviets/Russians in the mission), about the only mission the shuttle can do is service the station itself. That means no mission can be made to Hubble with that restriction.

NASA has decided that it can never risk losing another crew again, so most of its manned missions will disappear. I doubt whether NASA as it currently exists could get people back to the moon, much less to mars.

[TheKost]

I tend to think NASA is putting it's energy & money into getting shuttles back into space safely. Hubble isn't going anywhere. They can always service Hubble after they fix the shuttle program.

[Boundless]

> A private company might be able to "fix" the 'scope
> for much less.

NASA could put up the price of the servicing mission as the
prize in a contest to figure out how to perform the mission
without a shuttle. Bert Rutan might win that bet.

Here's my prediction:
After the shuttle makes its next [uneventful] flight to the
space station, a group of astronauts will publically offer
to volunteer for a Hubble mission, if NASA is willing to
risk an orbiter. The drama. The suspense.

[Jambe]

15+ years ago, TRW (and perhaps others) were developing a remote controlled orbital "service shuttle pod" (my term) or "tug" that would be used to place and retrived satellites in various earth orbits.

The pod could be used to go out where many communication satellites orbit (22,000), latch onto the desired satellite and bring it back down to low Earth orbit. Once there, it could be serviced/updated and/or refueled (by shuttle crews) and returned to it's original orbit using the "service pod".

The "service pod" would be refueled and await it's next assignment.

Given the original cost to build and launch a satellite, plus the fact that the original electronics are lasting many years longer than originally expected, why hasn't a shuttle tug been developed? If it has, what's it current status?

Other than safety issues related to the ISS, why couldn't a tug be used to go out, retrieve "other" orbiting satellites, bring them back to the ISS area for service and then returned back to their orbital slot?

What happened to the TRW project? Anyone?

[Nonstatist]

Udall said canceling the servicing mission could strand $200 million worth of new instruments that are largely finished........

Another 'bought and sold' Democrat. Bitch about spending, but at the same time, jump when his contributers say how high. He's not a representative, just a cheap political whore......

He's right and you're wrong. Hubble is the best bargain out there when it comes to finding new "science" and the instruments are already built and ready to go. This "Mars Exploration" is a bunch of crap that will never go anywhere given the REAL cost of going to MArs (3 trillion dollars). Instead, we'll see one Mars and Lunar mapping exploration after another, yielding nothing much useful; talk about money down a black hole!! How stupid can you get?

[Nonstatist]

The government should just offer it up for sale to a private company or other government. That way we can get a little bit of our money back. A private company might be able to "fix" the 'scope for much less.

You need astronauts and a shuttle to place the new science instruments in HST. No private firm is going to do that. Think of it this way, 200 million down the drain, when the resulting science could be incredibly useful for mankind directly and indirectly. ..

But hey, whats a couple hundred million between friends!?

[Pukin Dog]

Hubble is junk, and always was junk. Those pretty pictures that you see get all their colorization and perspective from "artists" on the ground. The computers in Hubble are of the early Intel 486 variety, the stabilization gyroscopes were known to have reliability problems before Hubble was ever launched. The thing takes pictures that have to be massaged, colored, focused and aligned on the ground. For providing scientific information, it is close to worthless.
How uniformed can YOU get?

[Nonstatist]

Right now the only shuttle missions are being planned are ones (that can) be aborted while in space. That means no mission can be made to Hubble with that restriction.<

Thats right , but it doesent mean those restrictions aren't arbitrary and stupid. In fact, initially, an exception was to be made for Hubble, and I think the decision to cancel was more economic than safety related.

NASA has decided that it can never risk losing another crew again, so most of its manned missions will disappear. I doubt whether NASA as it currently exists could get people back to the moon, much less to mars

Well, you cant go to Mars without people, so that cant exactly be it... No risk, no gain. Too much politics in this decision.

[Prodigal Son]

Hubble is junk, and always was junk...For providing scientific information, it is close to worthless.

You're kidding right?

[Nonstatist]

For providing scientific information, it is close to worthless.

You dont know what youre talking about. The science instruments that have been updated every couple years are state of the art. The science discovered has been substantial. Even the replacement gyroscope's life has been extended.

Only a vain nitwit would think three hundred scientists at the Hopkins Space Institute would be on the "take", supporting a total fraud on the science community.

Back to the pound for you, puking dog.

[af_vet_rr]

NASA could put up the price of the servicing mission as the prize in a contest to figure out how to perform the mission without a shuttle. Bert Rutan might win that bet.

NASA is working with the X-Prize group on additional competitions. I'm thinking the cost would be a lot cheaper, the plans simple and safer, than the shuttle.

[Pukin Dog]

No, I am not.

The general public knows very little with respect to what Hubble was supposed to deliver compared to what it actually does.

Hubble is essentially a long range Kodak camera, compared to a 35MM SLR. The public has been fed a steady stream of PR and doctored, painted images and told that they were the real thing, right off the lenses of the telescope.

[Brett66]

It's too bad we can't recover and reuse it. If we had the infrastructure for orbital recovery in place, we could service the gyroscopes and boost it to lunar orbit. It could serve as a lunar reconnaissance orbiter for surveying landing sites before we return to the moon. Since we don't have such capabilities it's a moot point though. Hopefully this will be an option in the future though......

[Pukin Dog]

Uh, that's Pukin'. I earned it, so use it please.

If I had the time, I would walk across the street to my neighbor's house, where a former Hubble engineer happens to live. I get my information from the horses' mouth, not from PR driven press releases, buddy.

Your three hundred scientists wont have much to do once that Flying Kodak otherwise known as Hubble, dies in space. Hubble has been up there a long time, so please share with all of us these "every couple of years" projects where Hubble has been "updated" as you claim?

[RightWhale]

Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.)

Thin air and lack of oxygen strike again. They really need to be working on the follow-on, not putting old machines on extended life support at the expense of new development. Perhaps the congressperson is introducing this measure to keep peace at home; give benefit of doubt.

[Prodigal Son]

So, in your opinion, you are informed on this matter? And also, Hubble is junk?

What is your reasoning behind this if you don't mind me asking?

[backhoe]

-2004- the Year of Returning to Space--