Posted on 04/01/2005 5:12:21 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Not if you can accomplish the job without loss of life. We can build a new telescope at the nearly the same cost, no risk to life whatsoever.
Not even close. Billions would need to be spent even if we did attempt to build another Hubble. Also, do you really believe congress will fork the funds over in this day and age?
no risk to life whatsoever.
Nothing in life is risk free. IMHO, it is more dangerous for you to drive to your local store than it would be to fly a Shuttle to Hubble.
With the mindset of "totally risk free" how the heck do you think we will get back to the Moon, much less Mars?
$100's of mil per service mission to maintain 25 year old technology. We can do better.
Nothing in life is risk free. IMHO, it is more dangerous for you to drive to your local store than it would be to fly a Shuttle to Hubble.
Death rate per shuttle flight is ~15% (14 deaths in 100 some odd flights. If you launch a new telescope on an expendable we can perform the launch for < $100 mil plus cost of hardware development. Again we can do better than Hubble.
I don't expect space flight to be risk free, but when we can lower the risk we should.
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.