NASA Review: Hubble Headed For Deorbit-Option Only

space.com ^ | April 1, 2005 | Leonard David

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Hubble is reaching the end of its service and there are better ways to use shuttle flights (finish station) and get on with the business at hand - an Earth-Moon system (exploration capability).

[Congressman Billybob]

It will cost additional hundreds of millions of dollars to "de-orbit" the Hubble. Why not sell the Hubble to Richard Branson for $1, since he has developed a cheaper method of going from here to there.

The private contractor just might be able to salvage the Hubble, which the gummint cannot. It's worth a go.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "Terri Schiavo, Requiescat in Pacem"

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Interesting thought! Though I think this one will be NASA's clean up job.

But, more and more technology and services are going to be bought from the private sector.

[Starrgaizr]

How about conceding defeat, de-orbiting the station, grounding the shuttle, build a new telescope, build a new manned system with technology from this century, and start on Mars.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

There are about 4 new telescopes flying or in the works.

Scientists just can't stand Bush's vision of building capability to move into space.

No, they want to go to Mars in their life-time - national security, space capability, human expansion, economic growth be damned.

[6SJ7]

I like that. Salvage rights. Private space exploration will ultimately be the way to go. The free market will always find the most expeditious means of solving a problem.

[kidd]

Richard Branson developed a way to get into space, but he did not develop a way to get into orbit.

Hubble is the size of a bus and is moving faster than a bullet.

[KevinDavis]

I'm thinking the whole Hubble controversy is just another way to bash Bush. I would like to know the scientists reaction if Clinton or another Democrat decided to shut down the Hubble?

[KevinDavis]

They think space is their personal playground..

[Paleo Conservative]

Hubble is reaching the end of its service and there are better ways to use shuttle flights (finish station)

The shuttle is a rather inefficient way to ferry modules to the International Space Station, because most of the mass comes back down to Earth. It's too bad a cargo only version of the Shuttle launch system was never built. It would take many fewer launches.

[The_Victor]

In a joint statement released this week, Mars Society president Robert Zubrin and Space Frontier Foundation founder, Rick Tumlinson, called upon NASA "to do what is necessary and mount a human mission to repair and upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope."

OK, what is necessary to put a human in orbit at the altitude of Hubble (now that the shuttle is operationally restricted to ISS rendevou orbits) is to build a new human-rated launch vehicle. Hubble begins to fail in three years, so that's a lot of work in a short period of time. How much money are the Mars Society and Space Frontier Foundation willing to put toward the effort?

[Brett66]

Maybe they could build future space telescopes with a design more accommodating to robotic servicing. Of course the James Webb space telescope will be in a Lagrange point over 240,000 miles away, better hope it doesn't develop glitches because there's no currently manned spacecraft that could reach it.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

They think space is their personal playground..

And that we should shut up and fund their grants.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Yes it is.

Perhaps some hybrid will be adapted to lend a hand.

[airborne]

Why not sell it?

[KevinDavis]

Exactly..

[airborne]

OOPS! You had the idea first. I should have read the whole thread first.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

When those two team up to "save Hubble" I guess they know they're out of bullets.

[KevinDavis]

I don't know either.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Yes. Then we'd see how really valuable it is. Not.