Posted on 12/12/2004 7:52:14 AM PST by snopercod
Rescue missions expensive, ineffective.
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) - Trying to save the famed Hubble Space Telescope with a robot would cost $2 billion with just a 50-50 chance of success, an aerospace research group is advising NASA in the coming days.
And that thumbs-down is likely to be preceded by another potentially negative finding from the National Academy of Sciences, due to report on Wednesday.
Both reports could spell doom for the popular, aging Hubble, whose fans have heavily lobbied to get it repaired to prolong its life and continue its stream of stunning and revealing pictures from space.
NASA requested the reviews of the National Academy and the Aerospace Corp., a California-based not-for-profit research group, in hopes that a robotic repair could be made.
An Aerospace Corp. summary provided to the academy estimates a robotic Hubble mission would cost $2 billion and would take at least five years to be ready for launch. By then there would be a less than 40 percent chance Hubble still would be functioning.
Less than three years would be needed to launch a shuttle mission to Hubble, for no more money and with the usual medium risk of mission success, the company said.
The full 100-page report is expected to come out this week or next, a company spokesman said.
In an interim report over the summer, a National Academy panel of scientists, aerospace experts and astronauts who have worked in orbit with Hubble urged NASA to keep its options open for one last service call by space shuttle astronauts. The panel did not rule out a robotic mission but noted its complexity and the technical challenges.
But NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe has stuck by his guns that regardless of what the academy or the Aerospace Corp. says, no people will risk their lives to fix Hubble.
On Wednesday, the National Academy of Sciences will issue its final report on the subject.
"These reviews have tended to reinforce NASA’s sense that although" a robotic mission "is feasible, it will be extremely challenging and will require very disciplined management," the space agency said in a statement Tuesday.
NASA will spend the coming year evaluating the robotic rescue plan and decide next summer whether to proceed. If nothing else, the space agency promises to launch a deorbit tug to guide Hubble down over the ocean - and not over populated areas - well before it would tumble in on its own during the next decade.
OK, found this that lays the stable and unstable Lagrange points out pretty well (and confirms your comment very nicely, thankyou very much ;^>)
I loved Niven's "belter" stories. I've been convinced for a very long time that the belt was where we should be spending our money. I'm now convinced that someone will contract with Burt Rutan to do just that as a COMMERCIAL VENTURE. I like that.
Niven & Pournelle, Bob Heinlein, and commercialization of space. Space tourism to Luna, and beyond! I could get behind all of that!
So then the Voyager (aircraft, not spacecraft) world flight was pointless because it had no follow-on program?
As long as the Jihadis, or their allies in the EU and UN, don't destroy us, we'll get there. It won't be NASA, though NASA will provide important technologies (like they're supposed to). The struggle I'm having is who do I invest in so that my grandkids will have some stock in "Lunar Enterprises" when all is said and done.
I'm not going to worry about the jihadis. Our guys are killing them as fast as they can, and that is fine by me. Live each day as if it is going to be your last, but remember that tomorrow the sun will rise. Even if you (and I) aren't here to see it. As far as NASA goes, they were a good start. Now it's time to let the American system do what it has always done best, and find a way (or ways) to make it pay well, and function efficiently, and to do it for less. I can think of no reason that a ticket to Mars should be more expensive than a ticket to LA after the system startup costs have been amortized.
What I have been saying for months here on this board. I used to work on a NASA robotic mission and I know the difficulties involved.
Codswallop! It's an administration decision. (I know a number of astronauts and they certainly are not "chicken")
One try only. Ooops.
I am not sure where you heard that one but it is not true.
Here is a quick overview of all the Venera spacecraft:
Venera-1 - Flyby - launched February 12, 1961 : Communications lost enroute to Venus
Venera-2 - Flyby - launched November 12, 1965 : Communications lost just before arival
Venera-3 - Atmospheric Probe - launched November 16, 1965 : Communications lost just before atmospheric entry
Venera-4 - Atmospheric Probe - launched June 12, 1967 : Arrived October 18, 1967 and was the first probe to enter another planet's atmosphere and return data
Venera-5 - Atmospheric Probe - launched January 5, 1969 : Arrived May 16, 1969 and successfully returned atmoshperic data before being crushed by pressure within 26km of the surface
Venera-6 - Atmospheric Probe - launched January 10, 1969 : Arrived May 17, 1969 and successfully returned atmospheric data before being crushed by pressure within 11km of the surface
Venera-7 - Lander - launched August 17, 1970 : Arrived December 15, 1970, was the first successful landing of a spacecraft on another planet and survived for 23 minutes before succumbing to the heat and pressure
Venera-8 - Lander - launched March 27, 1972 : Arrived July 22, 1972 and survived for 50 minutes before succumbing to the heat and pressure
Venera-9 - Orbiter and Lander - launched June 8, 1975 : Arrived October 22, 1975, sent back the first (black and white) images of Venus' surface while the lander survived 53 minutes before succumbing to the heat and pressure
Venera-10 - Orbiter and Lander - launched June 8, 1975 : Arrived October 22, 1975, sent back the first (black and white) images of Venus' surface while the lander survived 53 minutes before succumbing to the heat and pressure
Venera-11 - Flyby and Lander - launched September 9, 1978 : Arrived December 25, 1978, the lander survived for 95 minutes; however the imaging systems had failed
Venera-12 - Flyby and Lander - launched September 14, 1978 : Arrived December 21, 1978, the lander surviving for 110 minutes and recorded what is thought to be lightning
Venera-13 - Flyby and Lander - launched October 30, 1981 : Arrived March 1, 1982, returned the first colour images of Venus' surface and discovered leucite basalt in a soil sample using a spectrometer
Venera-14 - Flyby and Lander - launched November 14, 1981 : Arrived March 5, 1982, a soil sample revealed tholeiitic basalt (similar to that found on Earth's mid-ocean ridges)
Venera-15 - Orbiter - launched June 2, 1983 : Arrived October 10, 1983 and mapped (along with Venera 16) the northern hemisphere down to 30 degrees from North (resolution 1-2km)
Venera-16 - Orbiter - launched June 7, 1983 : Arrived October 14, 1983 and mapped (along with Venera 15) the northern hemisphere down to 30 degrees from North (resolution 1-2km)
I personally worked on the Magellan spacecraft and was on the flight team that flew her.
The new instruments are built, the new gyro packages are ready, etc. Would be a great loss if we just let her burn in.
People thought the Earth was flat at one time as well.
Might help if you did a bit more research before denigrating a fine group of folks.
Because there is a new group of instruments just ready to fly to Hubble. Also the Hubble will burn in on its own.
Orbits at "geo" never decay. They do however dift in both "intrack" and "crosstrack".
Near-IR and Mid-IR. Not visible light.
Getting it there would be a trick. Also the attitude control system would not work at geo.
I would like to see a radio telescope on the far side of the moon. It would be shielded from the RF noise emanating from the Earth.
Paging 'Scaled Composites'....
Why not just make a new telescope that is designed to be an ISS plug-in? If something breaks on it, it would let the ISS crew do an EVA to fix it...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.