Slashdot Mirror
NASA Cancels Hubble Mission, and Other Space Bits
An anonymous reader writes "NASA Watch is reporting that NASA has cancelled Servicing Mission 4 for the Hubble Space Telescope. The reason given is not for budgets, but for safety." ender81b writes "With all the excitement generated by the Mars Exploration Rovers now is a good time to look at future space exploration missions. One of the most exciting is the Kepler spacecraft which will search for terrestrial planets around nearby stars. Other interesting upcoming missions include the New Horizons mission to explore Pluto and the Kuiper belt, Deep Impact which will fire a small impactor into a comet to study the insides, Messenger which will fully photograph Mercury for the first time, and the ESA's Herschel infrared space telescope and Rosetta spacecraft which will land on a comet for the first time. Whew, good time to be invovled in space exploration!" StarWreck writes "Cnet.com is reporting that the Mars Rover uses Java. The same piece of software that lets people around the world play video games on their cell phones is now letting scientists drive the ultimate remote-controlled car across the surface of Mars."
With all those links, you'd think maybe a Hubble link would surface... Here's a couple good ones:
Hubble For General Public
Hubble For Scientists
--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.
Anybody know what OS the rover uses?
MER2004 Mars Rovers use an OS by Wind River. Read about it at that link (press release).
--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.
we're not talking about especially complicated code in any case, so why bother with the overhead?
The rover isen't just a dumb remote controll car - NASA issues it rather sophisticated commands and the rover moves itself and decides on it own how to cary out those commands.
The reason for it is that Mars is too far away to manage the rover in real time - you have to wait 20 minuite to see the effects of your command.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
BTW, anyone can sign up to have their name put in a CD that will crash into a comet with the Deep Impact spacecraft. Only using the english character set though.
"John Grunsfeld, NASA's chief scientist, said NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe made the decision to cancel the fifth space shuttle service mission to the Hubble when it became clear there was not enough time to conduct it before the shuttle is retired."
"He said the decision was influenced by President Bush's new space initiative, which calls for NASA to start developing the spacecraft and equipment for voyages to the moon and later to Mars. The president's plan also called for the space shuttle to be retired by 2010. Virtually all of the shuttle's remaining flights would be used to complete construction of the International Space Station."
I sure hope Bush follows through on his promise of funding, because NASA is going to be fucked if they start shifting priorities to his ideas and then don't get the money to follow through.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
"The same piece of software that lets people around the world play video games on their cell phones is now letting scientists drive the ultimate remote-controlled car across the surface of Mars." The specific Java program used to run the rover is called Maestro. It is available for Wintel, Mac, Linux and Solaris, from: http://mars.telascience.org/home/ Regular science and graphics updates come in here. You can get/view them just like the folks at JPL see them.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
The rover is supposed to have the onboard smarts needed to discover steep cliffs, and refuse to follow an order that'd lead to it falling off one. Since there's quite a long ping time from here to Mars, true realtime control is impossible. They send it carefully-thought-out vector commands more than actually "driving" it.
You actually have to wait 40 minutes to see the effects of your command. It's 20 minutes there, 20 minutes back.
It takes 20 minutes to have the robot receive the commands, in other words.
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
http://mars.telascience.org/home
They have a data pack from gustav crater and will be updating it with more data packs as the rovers mission progresses.
I did notice that it was a hog of a program, it nearly brought my workstation to it's knees.
Actually it's 10 minutes there and 10 minutes back.
While it is certainly true that the decision is not a direct result of the Bush proposal, it certainly is a factor that was considered.
The main factors include:
So, you really can't say that Bush's proposal wasn't a contributing factor. Oh, and by the way, don't just take my word for it, check out what an employee of the Space Telescope Science Institute has to say.
Bruce Garrett, a member of the Hubble team, has posted to his blog about the matter:
t m# b22
http://www.brucegarrett.com/brucelog_2004_1_1.h
Just thought that was worth mentioning.
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
They are not abandoning HST, they will continue to operate it at least until 2008. In addition alternate space based telescopes are going up (not visible light).
It would be great to get radio and light telescopes up on the backside of the moon. I hope that will take place after we hopefully get a base going on the moon.
Not urban legend.
Check out the cameras used on Russian probes. They used a film camera, then 'standard' television technology to scan the picture and send it back. Not sure what the Americans used, but was probably pretty similar.
If I was worried about Karma, I'd eat tofu.
I'm always amazed when someone proposes putting Java in a small, simple computing device and then someone else wonders if that's possible. Remember, Java was originally developed for embedded computing and nothing else. Yes, if you include all the Standard Edition class libraries, it takes up a fair bit of memory, but NASA can leave those out since they don't need them. (And there's very little chance of Sun suing NASA over a non-compliant Java implementation...)
Plus, think of the advantages. Java has no pointers, has array bounds checking, and has garbage collection. Ergo, assuming a proper JVM implementation, there is no such thing as crash due to accessing memory you shouldn't have. Going off the end of an array leads to an exception -- which can be caught and dealt with in a civilized manner -- and not a crash. Basically, you've got the memory protection advantage of an MMU, but without the hardware.
Now, NASA is unlikely to put Java on a spacecraft in real life, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be a good candidate for doing so.
In fact it is approximately 10 minutes there and 10 minutes back. Here's how to find out. Go to John Walker's Orrery to find the current planet positions. Mars is indicated at 1.257 AU from Earth. Since we know one AU (Sun to Earth) takes about 8 min, then 8 x 1.3 = ~10 min. Check it out yourself, it's a great tool.
For this and more, check out the link in the sig below.
--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.
The following estimates state that servicing mission 4 (really 5 considering there was 3A and 3B) spent about $200 million so far developing instruments. But the NASA head administrator (Sean O'Keefe) estimated that only $40 million remains for funding to completion. IMHO, it's a total shame and waste to pull the plug now, if we're only $40 million away from goal.
Another note regarding safety is really suspect. Supposedly all future shuttle missions will go to ISS in case of failure, so the astronauts can stay there and maybe use an escape pod if absolutely necessary. Hence, no more Hubble missions in the interest of safety.
What is missing from this discussion is that NASA is still keeping with their plans to bring Hubble back down from orbit as per an international treaty regarding space debris above a specific size. This entails heavily modifying one of the shuttles as Colombia was the only one large enough to fit the HST inside its cargo bay.
So they consider bringing Hubble down intact (as opposed to crashing it into the ocean, for instance) higher priority than keeping it running. I think that's a shame, again.
SM4 is important. Hubble only has 3 functioning gyros right now (SM4 would replace these and batteries, as well as install new instruments). If one of these gyros breaks, Hubble is severely crippled, and can do some, but only limited pointing and hence less science. If the next gyro breaks beyond this, then Hubble is effectively next to useless.
Come on NASA, change your mind and keep the SM4. It's been in progress for a long time, and its estimated cost is a drop in the bucket compared to some other USA funded endeavours (cough IRAQ cough).
make world, not war
Slight clarification, after re-reading the link I just posted:
/.)
The Americans used pretty standard television technology for their cameras. The Russians developed a slightly different technology - still based on the 'cathode/anode tube thingy' idea, but with more sensitive equipment and a pan-n-scan technique for sending photos back. The cathode tube thingy (Photoelectron Multiplier Tube) would scan across the photo film, so that the entire image could be scanned a piece at a time, and with better clarity.
Read the above link for more info, it's pretty cool stuff. The site has quite a bit of interesting information on the Russian space program, including some enhanced and reprocessed images of Venus (previously seen on
If I was worried about Karma, I'd eat tofu.
For US residents:
If you'd like NASA to reconsider, http://savethehubble.org is carrying a petition to uncancel the servicing mission.
You might also consider sending a message to your representative. The house.gov website makes it easy.
1. NASA already has Hubble's replacement telescope in line for 2011.
2. NASA will be able to operate the Hubble until 2007 or 2008.
3. There are a limited number of shuttle launches possible before 2010 when the station is complete. NASA needs to spend those launches on finishing the station, not upgrading a telescope that is being replaced, just so it can last a few extra years.
4. Since the Columbia disaster, non-station trips require TWO shuttles prepped for every ONE launch, so that there is a rescue shuttle available. That is a tremendous waste of resources for upgrading the Hubble, which is being replaced in any case.
In sum: The Hubble is being replaced in 2011 with an improved space telescope, so it is a waste of limited resources (shuttle launches) to upgrade it just to drag out its lifetime by three years or so. The time and energy saved from not upgrading Hubble can be spent on getting other projects done.
Hubble was great. It's lifetime is over, and it has lasted longer than scheduled. Time to move on.
Interestingly, Hubble is (soon to be was) the only telescope that could observe certain wavelengths of ultraviolet used to test metallicity. Since Earth's atmosphere is opaque in these wavelengths, space-based observatories are the only way to observe these wavelengths.
Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
Africus aut Europaeus?
This is where you can
. ht ml
submit your name for the Deep Impact Mission
After you give them your name the site even generates a a really cool, serial numbered certificate you can print out and hang up on the wall.
The parent wasn't being a troll by saying it only accepts the english character set:
http://deepimpact.umd.edu/sendyourname/namehelp
"At the present however, our database is unable to accept foreign characters, so please use the English alphabet/character set when adding your name. Also, please avoid using special characters such as quotation marks, ampersands, brackets, underscores, mathematical symbols, etc. These characters may cause unexpected errors, and you may not be able to retrieve your certificate from the database. Numbers, apostrophes, dashes, and letters with accents or other embellishments (such as "e" or "n") are acceptable."
I think its pretty cool I can have my name sent to a comet. The mission wont be launched until 2005 or so but I can wait. The last time NASA did something like this I missed out.
Ground based telescopes have also improved and can take up more of the slack than many expect
For imaging, adaptive optics can sometimes approach space-based acquisitions. But for spectroscopy out of optical (IR and UV) ground-based scopes are very limited.
Plus, Hubble does UV, and James Webb Space Telescope will do near-IR. So UV astronomy will be severly hit. The FUSE telescope will still provide far-UV observations, but near-UV observations will be missing.
The decision to deorbit Hubble has already been made.
Do you mean 'was' made? The decision was to originally deorbit Hubble sometime after SM4, which would most likely be a decade or so after the expected failure of the next 1 or 2 gyros without SM4.
Plus, prior plans were made to bring Hubble down to Earth (only the Columbia shuttle was big enough to fit Hubble). Now, instead, a $300 million rocket will bring Hubble back. Plus, $200 million has already been spent developing new instruments for SM4, which needs somewheres between $500 - $700 million for launch. That's alot of lost science just to put a telescope in the Smithsonian.
Yes, this is not related to the manned mars mission.
NO, the new Manned Mars Mission not only included a $1 billion extra funding, but $11 billion reallocation away from other NASA projects. So YES, the Manned Mars Mission did contribute greatly to the current Hubble funding shortage.
Nothing is being lost here to the new programs
No programs being lost, you mean, except for the programs developing instruments for SM4, the scientists expecting to use these instruments. Plus all the observing that would have continued after the 1 or 2 gyros break, which wouldn't have broken if SM4 went through. Those programs?
make world, not war
The Hubble is being replaced in 2011 with an improved space telescope, so it is a waste of limited resources (shuttle launches) to upgrade it just to drag out its lifetime by three years or so.
The Next Generation Space Telescope, now called the James Webb Space Telescope (first time NASA's named a scientific instrument after an administrator) is not a replacement for Hubble.
Its an infrared optimised 6ish m telescope (downscoped from 8m). It has little optical capability, no UV capability. Its an extension to what Hubble can do not a replacement. There is much excellent stuff that JWST will be able to do, but there is much that Hubble can and could do in the future that JWST cannot. Indeed there has been a lot of debate about keeping HST running so that it can operate concurrently with JWST filling in the missing parts of the spectrum for the new telescope as well as continuing with its own excellent work. The synergy would have been excellent.
To suggest that JWST is a straightforward replacement for HST is very wrong, and demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the capabilities of the two instruments. Do check your facts first.
True, when it was first launched there was a problem with the mirror. But, it got fixed with the first servicing mission. And since then, the new instruments installed on Hubble didn't even need COSTAR (the fix to the aberrated optics). They were designed to account for that in their optical designs.
In addition, and most importantly, the original plan for Hubble was for it to be a RENEWABLE instrument. Four missions to service Hubble were in the plans. Missions to bring new instruments, upgraded equipment (solar arrays, computers, gyros), and new life to Hubble. A notion unheard of when launching satellites!!!
Servicing Mission 4 was originally scheduled to have happened this year. But b'c of the Columbia tragedy, got postponed till 2005-2006. And to top it all off, the astronomical community was lobbying for an additional 5th mission to service Hubble and extend its life to overlap with JWST, and do some unparalleled simultaneous observations!!
This moon/mars "vision" is like the Jerry Springer shows... gladiators in the past... purely entertainment to get the ratings of the masses..
Actually VxWorks (Wind River's real-time, embedded OS) is not used exclusively by NASA. VxWorks is highly customizeable, which makes it handy for applications where space/speed tradeoffs are often necessary. VxWorks is used is a myriad of applications, from automobiles to EMCs to whatever you can think of. In addition, it's gotten much more robust in recent years, partially due to the exposure it's gotten in the space exploration community (i.e. JPL missions).
This is correct. The planning and execution software used for ground based operations is written in Java. The flight code for MER, however, is not. Currently the biggest interest in Java for flight projects is in Project Goldengate, which is investigating the feasibility of using a combination of RT/Linux and RTSJ to create flight systems. If you google on Project Goldengate (and possibly include Dvorak in your search) you'll find some interesting info. Bottom line: not yet ready for prime time, but not totally out of the picture. Besides, soon there will be no more programmers, and languages as we currently think of them will be a thing of the past...
there are instruments, new cameras that is, ready to go to Hubble that were supposed to be installed in 2006, Bush just screwed not only the people that want to see their instruments used, but all the scientists that made science justifications and have therefore been planning to use those cameras for years and years.
They are throwing out years of scientific planning. Bush is screwing scientists and science, and you can support that or not but he is.
-pyrrho
new cameras were supposed to be installed, and the scientists that made science justifications have been planning for years to use then.
See here.
Why do you trust the President?
-pyrrho
The biggest advantage that the hubble had was the lack an atmosphere.
Adaptive optics have really improved in the years since Hubble went up and largely closed the gap in image clarity. Here on Earth you can afford much larger apertures when you don't have to think about the thousands of dollars per lb for lifting it up to space.
Going above the atmosphere is important for wavelengths that are absorbed by the atmosphere like certain infrared bands. Surprise! That is exactly the mission of the James Webb space telescope. The downside is that it won't be generating any pretty "true color" images to hang on your wall.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
Your list of upcoming missions left out the most exciting of all: The Cassini-Huygens mission to Saturn. It will be entering Saturnian orbit in 165 days; next year, it will be dropping the Huygens probe into the atmosphere of Titan. This is very cool stuff coming up this July. Here's the home page for details: http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/index.cfm
[this
If NASA is going to spend a launch on space telescopes, they may as well put up a new one. The Hubble was designed when NASA PR was claiming that shuttle launches were going to be cheap. They're not. Each one costs about a quarter billion dollars.
I need to correct one small piece of this -- although the NASA PR department persists in calling JWST the replacement for HST, there is no scientific sense to this. HST's reasons for existence are UV astronomy and high resolution, with a lesser role in the very near IR. JWST is an IR telescope. Ground based telescopes may eventually catch up with HST on resolution (though people have been saying this for years), but when HST is gone, UV astronomy is over. There is no planned mission by any country that I know of that replaces it in that capacity.
The Shuttle: TWO out of seven shuttles have been lost. They're outrageously expensive to refurbish. It's time to find a better way. Personally, I believe that seperating the cargo/human parts of the shuttle into different missions, or a return to capsules, would be better than trying to launch the mass of the shuttle every time, then have to rebuild the shuttle before you launch it again. Launch a lab on some Saturn-5 equivalent, then when the orbit is stable, send the astornaughts up in a smaller 'space plane'. Designed right, you could quickly have a better space station than the ISS.
Hubble: See the Shuttle. Manned missions to refurbish the hubble are too risky in terms of human life, and we don't have the shuttles to both keep the ISS supplied and the Hubble repaired, among other things. There are a number of replacement telescopes, some orbital, some not. Just think about how easy it would be to set up a telescope on the moon, and the value of observations from it!
And who says that the Hubble is being given up? Or the decision is by the president? Part of the article:
See? Canceled for safety concerns, and a new policy that the shuttles will only be doing ISS missions.
And these comments are "flamebait" if you are a far-right whacko, kids.
You have a pretty encompassing definition of 'far-right whacko' then.
I don't read AC A human right