Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cold Heat
Just take all the spare parts, add a new lens and enclosure, and mount a new scope on the ISS.

Problem solved.

Not really. The ISS is in a much lower orbit that would cause a bigger problem of light pollution from the Earth. The Space Shuttle missions to the Hubble are the highest altitude missions ever undertaken by the Space Shuttle. Another thing is that if it were connected to the ISS, a telescope would have problems with vibrations that would interfere with pointing it steadily.

19 posted on 03/11/2005 9:09:08 AM PST by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Paleo Conservative
Not really. The ISS is in a much lower orbit that would cause a bigger problem of light pollution from the Earth. The Space Shuttle missions to the Hubble are the highest altitude missions ever undertaken by the Space Shuttle. Another thing is that if it were connected to the ISS, a telescope would have problems with vibrations that would interfere with pointing it steadily.

Also Hubble has no hydrazine attitude jets that could contaminate the lens.

31 posted on 03/11/2005 10:10:32 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: Paleo Conservative
Not really. The ISS is in a much lower orbit that would cause a bigger problem of light pollution from the Earth. The Space Shuttle missions to the Hubble are the highest altitude missions ever undertaken by the Space Shuttle. Another thing is that if it were connected to the ISS, a telescope would have problems with vibrations that would interfere with pointing it steadily.

But could they put a "Hubble II" into an orbit that would mitigate (if not completely eliminate) the light pollution issues, while still allowing a shuttle to divert to the ISS if a problem arose?
32 posted on 03/11/2005 10:13:40 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: Paleo Conservative
I realize the orbits are quite different,(300 km difference) but I believe the light pollution would not be as bad as you might think.

The only problem may arise with long exposures combined with a closer earth orbit.

As for vibrations, I would guess that we can do things to minimize it. Both electronically and mechanically.

I think this is better than scrapping it. It does provide some interesting pics, but it is my opinion that it has done all it is going to do as far as advancement of science.

A new scope is going to be launched soon that takes infrared images. We learn more from these and the loss of the Hubble is not going to slow us down.IMO The Hubble has lasted well beyond it's design.

I just did not want the spare parts to go to waste. I also understand that there is another prototype housing someplace. It would be good for charting space and asteroids.

47 posted on 03/11/2005 12:11:13 PM PST by Cold Heat (This space is being paid not to do anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson