Slashdot Mirror


NASA Debates How And When To Kill Hubble Telescope

Amy's Robot writes "The Washington Post reports that after 13 years of wear and tear, the Hubble telescope may be on the way out. NASA and some outside scientists have become involved in a heated debate about how and when to end the Hubble telescope program. Keeping Hubble in service until 2020 would require an extra maintenance visit by astronauts at a cost of at least $600 million. Some even worry the batteries could fail by 2010, since the next maintenance visit has been delayed by the Columbia accident and space station priorities. Is it worth maintaining our old friend Hubble, or should NASA let him go out in a blaze of glory?"

5 of 555 comments (clear)

  1. Re:$600 Million by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the JWST Website, the next generation space telescope will cost "$824.8 million". What were you saying about comparative cost, again?

  2. Re:Could they bring it back down? by essaunders · · Score: 5, Informative

    It looks like they were planning on bringing it back..

    "Before the Columbia accident, NASA intended eventually to have a crew of astronauts maneuver the 43-foot-long telescope into a cargo bay and bring it home for installation in the National Air and Space Museum as an inspiration for future generations. A general unwillingness to subject astronauts to such risks for a museum exhibit, among other things, eliminated that option, Weiler said. "

    but I know... that's from the second page : )

  3. Hubble's successor will be much improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Hubble Telescope has a 2.4 meter primary mirror (it's a Ritchey-Critien type Cassegrain design). Hubble's successor is currently in development and will have a 6-meter multi-cell primary mirror. This will give the James Webb telescope roughly 25 times the light-gathering ability of Hubble. Improved electronics will let the new telescope resolve objects about 400 times fainter than Hubble.

    What's more, the new telescope will not be in low Earth orbit like Hubble. Instead, it'll reside at the L2 Lagrange point which is about 1.5 million KM from Earth. This means it's a one-shot deal. It has to work right the first time: there won't be any manned repair missions. One of the benefits of sitting at the L2 point is that it can be oriented so that one side always faces the sun...put a good solar shield on that side of the telescope and the rest of the telescope will remain frigid...essentially, you get a cryogenic cooling system for free.

  4. Re:Could they bring it back down? by Shadwhawk · · Score: 5, Informative

    It isn't, actually. The Hubble weighs about 24,000lbs, and the shuttle can bring down about 43,500.

  5. Hubble's a Bargain by So+Called+Expert · · Score: 5, Informative
    If the USA has the dollars (say, $87 billion) to clean up Iraq, the Hubble is certainly worth repairing for $600 million. This is less than ONE PERCENT of the military's budget JUST FOR IRAQ cleanup. Even in light of newer space telescopes being deployed by 2010, the value to humanity of Hubble is enormous, and unlike our Iraq fiasco, the Hubble benefits Humanity.

    This article sums up the scientific value of Hubble so far: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3115159. stm

    • Hubble:
    • Captured the "best ever" image of Mars
    • Gave us the age of the Universe
    • Provided proof of black holes
    • Gave first views of star birth
    • Showed how stars die
    • Caught spectacular views of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9's collision with Jupiter
    • Confirmed that quasars are galactic nuclei powered by black holes
    • Gathered evidence that the expansion of the Universe is accelerating