Slashdot Mirror


Space Tug to Save the Hubble?

Aglassis writes "In an article at SpaceRef, the CTO of Orbital Recovery Corporation claims that his company will be able to develop a space tug that could save the Hubble Space Telescope (from becoming 'a ballisticly implanted reef in the Pacific') by either moving it into a much higher stable orbit, or by moving it to the ISS where it could be maintained and operated. Some of the reasons that he cites are that the Hubble's replacement, the James Webb Space Telescope, could be delayed or suffer some sort of failure. Since the JWST will be at the L2 point, servicing will be impossible."

3 of 325 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Wrong by aborchers · · Score: 5, Informative
    Are there any? Doesn't atmospheric distortion limit the imaging ability of ground-based systems?


    Adaptive optics can do a lot to cancel atmospherics. The real problem is that the atmosphere just plain obstructs much of the spectrum.

    --
    Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
  2. Letter sent to European astronomers by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Informative

    I attach below the text of a letter recently sent to European astronomers, regarding the demise of Hubble support:

    Dear colleague,

    As you may know, NASA has decided to cancel all further servicing missions to Hubble. Servicing Mission 4, originally scheduled for next Spring/Summer, was designed to refurbish HST and enable it to continue operating in the current efficient and successful way. NASA has decided that all future Shuttle missions will be devoted to the International Space Station. Hence, no upgrade in capability or maintenance is planned for HST. A direct consequence is, of course, the end of WFC3 and COS as HST instruments. A discussion is developing, however, on the possibility of launching one or both of these instruments as part of a "fast-track 2 meter class telescope" mission.

    Without the replacement of failed gyros there is a high probability that HST will have to be operated in a two-gyro mode relatively soon, with substantial restrictions on the science observations. A controlled de-orbit of the spacecraft will have to be achieved using a special robotic mission at some time in the future as yet unspecified.

    There is little we Europeans can do directly to change NASA's decision which, apparently, is final. We believe strongly, however, that it should be made known how universal the feeling of disappointment is within the scientific community. As European members of the Space Telescope Users Committee (STUC), we have asked the ST-ECF to open a web page where you can send comments on the fate of HST and on the loss for the scientific community. We encourage you to share your views with us, visiting the site and sending e-mails to the address given.

    The site is now available at http://www.stecf.org/SM_cancellation.html

    Best regards,

    Eric Emsellem and Monica Tosi

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  3. Wrong and Wrong Again by davecl · · Score: 5, Informative

    Which of the wavelengths that the hubble can shoot which ground based cannot will fail to be served far, far better by Webb?

    The UV. Our atmosphere is opaque to the UV, and JWST, being an infrared optimised telescope, isn't going to be capable of observing the UV at all.

    Its important to note that JWST is not a simple upgrade to HST. It has a very different mission and set of instruments. Its not just HST with a bigger mirror.