Slashdot Mirror
NASA Gives OK to Fix Hubble Telescope
Erick writes "NASA has decided to rescue the Hubble. This will come as great news to all of those who have advocated for fixing the ailing 'scopes sensors, gyros, etc. The article states that nine to 12 months of planning will precede a mission to the Hubble Telescope."
Make it a reality series! I know I'd watch them prepare and fix it.
The Hubble has served us well, and like the Enterprise, it has at least another spin around the galaxy before its time is up.
Nothing gives me more pride than to see a project for which I was a team leader for stay in the game against all odds.
"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."
-- Obi-Wan Kenobi
Don't beleive that stuff, Be more cynical. Bush is allocating 1 billion a year for the moon and Mars. Impossible. In return, NASA is being asked to give up the Hubble, the Shuttle, the Space Station (eventually). And funding for all other programs will be cut or eliminated as well, "for the Mars mission". The "Mars Mission" is twenty years in the future. It will have to survive five administrations, ten Congresses, and the eventually bankrupting of the Federal kitty by the tax cuts and increased non-discretionary spending. Point is, the "Mars mission" won't survive. I've watched the space program for thirty-five years, and things like this don't maintain momentum, especially in hard financial times. NASA, I hear, initially was jubilant; now they realize what they are being asked to give up: everything. For a pig in a poke. You are being just cynical enough. This is a way of disbanding the manned program while looking like heros, or "spatial pioneers", as Bush called them (I am not making that up). Five years from now, NASA will be all but gone, with a few contractors making a bit of money researching new systems that never make it to reality. I didn't believe it would happen so fast! Hubble already given up? I only wonder if Bush is smart enough to have thought this up himself, or if his Grand Viziers came up with the scheme while telling George about Mars and "Spatial Pioneers"? Does the King actually believe what he is saying? Is he that dumb, or that smart? And these comments are "flamebait" if you are a far-right whacko, kids. I'm not laughing.
What we need is more science, less politics.
On a related topic, for which Hubble was sort of a contributor, check out The Perfect Machine (The Building of the Palomar Telescope).
I'm sure that at $1-$1.6 billion to repair the Hubble, many who are not directly affected by the Hubble's latest problems will wonder why we're throwing so much money into something that, to them, is just a big, expensive camera. Personally, I'd like to know what kind of research money we're losing because the Hubble isn't working properly.
I also fail to see how Mr. O'Keefe, who heads NASA, can postpone shuttle missions citing danger to the astronauts' lives. If it seems imminent that another disaster will occur on the next flight, I would understand, but surely we've found ways to resolve the latest problems. Astronauts don't go into the business of space flight thinking they'll have "safe" jobs, and I would think that as long as they're ready to fly again, the administration would be eager to get them back in space.
Live free or die
Google's IPO is actually so they can BUY Hubble from the United States. This will allow them to index the entire UNIVERSE! Imagine being able to search Space!
Oh, and they'll be renaming Hubble to Huugle.
Nevermind the fact that the entire space industry puts AMERICANS to work. So when people have money (from working and not being on unemployment) they can buy items thus boosting the economy back up...oh wait never mind money down the drain Mod me down if you like, I don't care anymore.
As an armchair astronaut (is there such a thing?) I applaud NASA's decision to keep the Hubble Space telescope operational. I have been fascinated over and over again by the images it produces. I think it may be one of the things that can keep NASA in the public eye and help it to get funding for more space exploration. I just hope that the repairs go well.
Cheers,
the_crowbar
Have you read the Moderator Guidelines
This is great news. The Hubble is one of our greatest scientific instruments. Without it or a suitable replacement, the effort to learn more about the universe would be left flapping around like a fish out of water.
This is WONDERFUL news! It's interesting how NASA has kept saying "We'll just let the Hubble de-orbit" while maintaining a "head in the sand" attitude about its replacement. The scientists who rely upon Hubble need it now as much as ever (if not more than ever), but NASA has seemingly ignored them. Oh, I am so happy to hear that they've finally come to the right decision!
I mean, why should we deorbit Hubble if it doesn't already have a replacement up there?! Doesn't make sense.
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
I was getting used to the idea that "We need to move on" and apply these resources to a new instrument.
Now they are going to keep it?
All the people who spent the last 2-4 years on the Hubble Treasury/Heritage Project are wondering why they busted their butts so hard.
I feel for them.
Thank you. I just had a fantastic vision of Omarosa imploding in the vacuum of space...
Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
1. NASA won't be dead "in five years", you asshole.
2. Bush isn't trying to kill NASA.
3. The word "spatial" refers to "space", moron, so while that may not be common use, it does indeed make sense, technically.
4. You're the "whacko". Sorry. If all you can see is 100% conspiracy, evil, and malevolence in everything Bush or his "cronies" do, then you're the only "whacko" around here.
I'm glad that Hubble will be repaired but I fail to comprehend why it has to be by robots. It's in near Earth orbit! If we can't send humans to near Earth orbit then we have no business sending them to, say, Mars.
Even Discovery Channel perpetuates the same error.
James Webb can't replace the Hubble. They see at different wavelengths. Webb can't even be reached once launched, let alone be repaired.
I know people here at /. know these things, but to see even so-called science channels misleading the public is disheartening.
Nasa will send plenty of missions to continue constructing the ISS. But, how much scientific information do we gain from the ISS? As I understand it, most of the work currently done on the ISS is maintaining the ISS.
The Hubble on the other hand has a proven track record of sending back fascinating images that have advanced the astro-sciences.
There are no plans to replace Hubble with a space based telescope that takes images in the visible wave lengths.
So, where are we sending astronauts?
Where law ends, tyranny begins -- William Pitt
it's getting them back that's the problem.
Best Slashdot Co
Many more years of neat looking background images. What would we do without Hubble!
The Free iPod thing is a scam.
This is like the last minute rescue of a Geek Superhero(tm).
Right before he falls to his doom, his support team arrives and restores him.
Seems to me they issue this sort of announcement every other Tuesday. How many times now has NASA gone through this "we're gonna get rid of Hubble... we're gonna do it... PSYCH!" dance?
The cynical side of me says that they're holding it hostage for better funding and popular support, because it's such an icon. The last time they announced that they were junking it I didn't believe them for a second... and now, surprise, looks like it has a new lease on life.
Yes, because nothing in the universe has ever broken a second time. Ever.
In related news, a Russian Soyuz rocket was prepared for the Hubble repair mission. In an effort to cuts costs on the project as much as possible, NASA officials are using the Russian-made space vehicle to facilitate the mission.
Additionally, NASA will supply the two astronauts assigned the project a bottle of Windex and a roll of Bounty paper towels to clean the Hubble optics. If the budget permits, a Philips head screwdriver and one of those fancy Sears/Craftsman "GRIP" wrenches will also be thrown in to the duffle bag the astronauts are carrying with them for the flight.
IronChefMorimoto
This is amazing news to hear considering the current political atmosphere of the country. George W. Bush may want to gain favor with the scientific community quickly in order to get some more support for his reelection. Since the project will take 3 years George W. could scrap it after the election to go for more ambitious and prestigious plan that will bolster up his presidency. So, if George W. Bush gets reelected, I think there is a chance that this project gets scrapped. Now if Kerry gets elected, there may be a ?weeding? of all things Bush and it may get scrapped that way too. So, given our current political atmosphere, I do not think that the fixing of the Hubble is a sure thing
Nuttles
Christian and proud of it
Great news that NASA will seek to keep the Hubble up and working. Sounds like NASA will be able to schedule a service mission in about 3 years (with one of those years just planning). However, I am a little worried that there is not a lot of press covering its replacement - the James Webb Space Telescope. This isn't scheduled to be launched until 2011. The extension of Hubble closes the gap between current and future platforms. Interestingly Webb has a mission life of 5 - 10 years. In contrast Hubble was launched in 1990 and will be in use for at least another 3-4 years. Let's hope NASA is being conservative in their estimate of the duration of the Webb...
How many kids would be studying their asses off if they knew they could pilot a mecha?
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Secretary of State Rumsfeld insisted NASA "repair" the hubble by turning it around and pointing it at Earth.
That's his last name? "Schnitzel"?
I think "red-headed stepchild" of NASA and government funding. That poor thing has been broken and talked about so many times that it was tough to decide if they should actually salvage it or just let it burn up. Money and promises of future technology be damned, I think we should keep the thing around. Hubble is one of the few things that keeps the explorers of the "undiscovered country" in the news and connecting with the public (even though so often, the news is that it's busted again). Besides, the fact that they can keep fixing the thing is a tribute to functional technological design. Someone should explain to Microsoft programmers that if NASA, an often-underfunded agency, can replace lenses and precision gyroscopes on a piece of metal orbiting the earth at high speeds, Microsoft should be able to patch their software without all this racket.
Let's see if they follow through with the repair mission *after* the election.
It costs about 300 million every year to operate (for a total cost of four billion two hundred million) so I would guess about 6 billion dollars so far. Using various web resources I estimate US military spending for the same time period to be three trillion four hundred seventy-four billion four hundred million.
So I estimate that Hubble cost 1/579.1 of what what is spent on the US military
(thanks google calculator)
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
You're an idiot.
The original poster has gogt a valid point. Spending money on $500 hammers helps Americans - as long as Americans produced that hammer.
Hubble is one of the most fruitful scientific projects ever. Since the nineties, it has continuously shaped our view of the universe, think, e.g. of the Hubble deep field. Besides, it is still the only way astronomers can take a peek into space (in the visible part of the spectrum) without having to accept athmospheric disturbances. That is, it is still our sharpest eye out there and will surely help in bringing us some great science. Thanks a lot, NASA!
Black holes were created when god tried to divide by zero
I'm a big fan of Hubble, but your argument is ridiculous. If it is a waste, then why not put AMERICANS to work building me a house, and another car, and... I could keep them busy for a while.
"Is he that dumb, or that smart?"
Oh, that's easy. He's a total moron.
Check out his response to today's question about the [native american] tribes' sovereignty:
Audio:
Related news story:
Since it wasn't a scripted question, the prez had to use his vast intelligence to come up with this answer. I think it speaks volumes about how smart he really is. Or should I say, is speaks [a single blank sheet] about it?
"If you could only see what I've seen with your eyes..." - Roy Batty
If people can watch hours and hours of nobody's talking about nothing they can watch a spacewalk.
Personally I don't think it is the audience. I think it is the tv-producers that are the ones to stupid to watch anything wich requires more then 2 braincells.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
And once they finish building your important things, they could go on to build houses for everyone else in the world that needs'm. Imagine that, if they built a house (with all the working amenities like drinkable water and sanitation) for everyone in the world who needed them, maybe the world would be a bit less anti-americain. Seeing as invading ppl hasn't helped yet. Sorry, a touch off topic there. Anyway, I'm glad to see that the hubble's getting repaired. It's solid economic sense to maintain something that valuable. After all, they do benefit from it, and it's a nice source of national pride too. *sigh* I wonder what would happen if the US millitary's budget accidentally got transfered to NASA for, say, a decade. I bet they could accomplish some fairly spectacuar things fairly quickly, especially if they knew said budget would vanish again at the end of the decade.
Z
I for one, welcome our new Hubble fixing overlords....
love is just extroverted narcissism
They need more Astronauts like Story to gain interest. Am I the only one who remembers their kickass EVA on STS-61 ? Of course, adding in a Zero-G sex act would probably increase viewership way more than the intellectual challenge.
So what you're saying is... we aren't spending enough on our military. Or, like a typical liberal, you're comparing apples to oranges and producing a pear. But a pear that you think forwards your agenda, I guess.
Better yet, have "real people" (TM) apply to be the astronauts or maybe celebrities. Send them out there to do something that looks like they are working on the Hubble while the real astronauts do the work.
Maybe send vicious animals in EVA suits out with them, set up a fight scene or something. That will get people watching. They could advertise and pay for the whole shebang!
"Oh oh, Alec Baldwin looks like he's in real trouble here folks. Will he make it back inside the airlock before his suit completely depressurizes? Find out after these messages!"
Everything we do in space is good... barring of course bringing the damn military and weapons into space.. that wont go well for anybody...
Yeah, just like Microsoft saves a buck while producing the best software, or Ford saves a buck by producing the best car...
Private industry is no panacea. Particularly since the main client will continue to be the US Government and nobody has ever accused government contractors of producing the best product. As one astronaut once said "I try not to think about the fact that every part of the rocket underneath me was built by the lowest bidder."
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch
If your god is an indian who turns into a wolf and is coming for me with a razor, how it s/he planning to use it? Wouldn't they lack the opposible thumb to properly utilize the razor?
Just curious.
It take more faith to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God
Mod parent up please. Poster seems to be the only one to have RFTA and note they are planning a ROBOTIC mission.
US has 5% of the world's population and 50% of the world's spending on military and it's not enough ?
I'm sorry, the number you have dialed is an imaginary number. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and dial again.
Mathematics is not science. It's an allied field but since the ultimate criterion of truth is different, the disciplines are different.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
While not exactly servicable, there is the original OV-101 Orbiter, Enterprise. That would be 4 shuttles still [nominally] in one piece.
SNIP
So I estimate that Hubble cost 1/579.1 of what what is spent on the US military
I think you need to learn a little something about how to use significant figures and uncertainty.
make world, not war
This sounds to me like a stalling tactic, not like NASA is actually going to fix the Hubble. Think about it:
They have 9-12 months to design a robotic space mission. Then how many years will it take to build it and implement it? By the time this "mission" is underway, Hubble will have been floating dead in space for years and will probably have tons of other problems that will make this mission obselete.
This sounds more like a way to funnel money to people studying robotics than a way to save the Hubble. An interesting thing to do would be to see which companies are supposed to develop these robotics and what connections they have to the administration.
The most obvious question is whether the money spent doing whatever we do in space would do more good on earth. I'd bet AIDS research could use a few more billions. I'm glad NASA, and others, are starting to explore ways to encourage private investment in space technology.
The most obvious question is whether the money spent doing whatever we do in space would do more good on earth. I'd bet AIDS research could use a few more billions. I'm glad NASA, and others, are starting to explore ways to encourage private investment in space technology.
And many, many years ago:
Tharg: "Ogg stop playing with rolly wheel-things! Come hunt mammoth! Do more with time!"
May we never see th
Life just doesn't get any better...
Oh. Wait it does, the script works on Windows too and I can save to Excel format. I'll worry about sig figs tomorrow!
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
there are so many examples of it. For example in school textbooks and magazine articles you'll often see sentences like "XYZ Lake is about 100 miles wide (that's 160.93 kilometers)". Or near my old house there was a sign saying "Speed bump - 252 feet". And the width of the speedbump was about 5 feet anyway.
So yeah, that's just one of my pet peeves. sorry, didn't mean to be too much of an ass ;-)
make world, not war
Can we please, please have a rule on Slashdot that says anybody who gets on a soapbox and proclaims, "Mod me down if you like" just gets modded down automatically?
Think about The Real World for a second. They have months of videotape but only show a couple of hours. They only show "the good stuf".
NASA should make a miniseries focusing in the interesting parts of the process. Interview the families, inquire about their feelings, their fears. Take an angle of the fearfull yet proud son in the arms of a teary eyed wife of some astronaut who is about to risk his life in an extraterrestrial voyage to benefit mankind. Then play a multiple angle scene of the shuttle taking off. To be continued on the next episode...
The movie Adaptation provided a similar answer when the character played by Nichola's Cage said that there was nothing interesting about real life. Everytime, everyday, someone does a heroic act, someone dies for what he believes in...
Cheers,
Adolfo
If your god is an indian who turns into a wolf and is coming for me with a razor, how it s/he planning to use it? Wouldn't they lack the opposible thumb to properly utilize the razor?
I think that the statement that he could turn into a wolf was more of an aside than a claim that he'd actually do so before whipping out his razor. Like, I can write software and out-arm-wrestle a lot of people, but it'd be really inconvenient to do both at once.
A good analogy might be a Special Forces guy who can shoot someone at 500 meters and kill someone with his bare hands, but not at the same time.
May we never see th
Damn drunken astrophysicists. Affeciandos of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy know how much trouble they are.
May we never see th
People seem to think of scientific advancement like they think of pumping up skills in a video game. If we have 8 points to distribute we should put them all in strength in order to bash our enemies!!! Isn't it more the case that scientific advancement across the board is the only way to really solve any problems? My bet is that any AIDS treatment will likely depend on technology or instruments developed by NASA.
This attitude also ignores the fact that not every scientist in the US would actively want to research a cure for AIDS, I mean some of them afterall are astronomers, geologists whose interest is not directly AIDS related but in fact could inadvertently help the cure along.
Geologists could discover a mineral analysis method that would later be applied to AIDS and the search for its cure.
Astronomers have already helped, that seti@home project probably has some huge applications in all fields of scientific study. Just goes to show you that people who think we shouldn't be searching for aliens use rather infantile logic in assuming it poses no benefit for humanity if we dont find any aliens.
Taking from NASA in order to cure AIDS is more than likely going to hamper any AIDS cure rather than speed it along.
Good links:
v es /Bush%20-%20Tribal%20Sovereignty.mp3
p la yarticle&article_id=4881
http://www.majorityreportradio.com/weblog/archi
http://www.nativetimes.com/index.asp?action=dis
"If you could only see what I've seen with your eyes..." - Roy Batty
Why not spend 1.5 billion on a replacement telescope and launch using some other vehicle than the shuttle?
(I just wish it would report "bazillion")
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
"Well Jennings, it looks like your plan to overheat and break the STIS worked. Good work. Unfortunately this just only balances out the fact that the mirror was mishappen due to your negligence. We'll let you have a unix machine now - you don't have to try and work on Windows anymore as punishment for past deeds."
-Adam
I'm sorry but I find the somewhat common reaction of "everything we do in space is good... barring of course bring in the damn military ..." to be somewhat uninformed. Not everything military is "bad."
To begin with, the "damn military" already is in space and has been since, well, shortly after Sputnik. The fact that there is a military element to space is something that won't go away and, actually, is a benefit to the United States in both the near and the short term.
For an extended and highly informative article on this, I would direct your attention toBarry Posen's Command of the Commons: The Military Foundation of U.S. Hegemony. Published in International Security, the text is to be found at:
http://bcsia.ksg.harvard.edupublication.cfm?ctype= article&item_id=619
The short form is that it is currently the case that the US holds the high ground in space and this is not a bad thing. It helps, in some sense, to make the continuation of all the "good" things possible, both now and for a long time to come.
ok freak, care putting those 50-word written out numbers in actual fricken numbers so its a little easier to digest and picture? what are you? some uptight anal english nut?
You wouldn't happen to be a Christopher Moore fan, would you?
I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...
YAY! That's all I have to say. I don't think anymore is required.
Physics makes the world go 'round.
Republican: USA drops more bombs and blames it on the bad pre war Democrat Admin, while blatantly profiting.
Democrat: USA drops less bombs and has a crack at looking like it cares about the rest of the world (fails) while quietly profiting.
Whichever is in charge, FOX, CNN et al tell the Yankies that they are in it for the good of all mankind, and that the Militrarised Corporate Republic is actually the model of Good Democracy.
"The United States is the most dangerous nation in the world because they actually believe thier own bullshit"
If only we could get to Hubble using Soyuz, but unfortunately the Soyuz can't be launched into Hubble's orbital inclination from Baikonur. Soyuz rockets carrying commercial satellites are planned to fly from French Guiana (from which a Soyuz could probably reach Hubble) in the next couple of years. Unfortunately there are no plans to launch crewed Soyuz spacecraft from there.
Payload would be very limited, however, unless a modified Progress were also launched carrying the spare parts. It would be interesting to compare the relative costs of putting this together versus the robotic mission.
I'm just old enough to recall how the Teleoperated Retrieval System (TRS), a robotic mission, was going to save Skylab back in the '70's. It was ultimately cancelled as costs mounted and the schedule became drawn out. I don't want to see a Hubble rescue end as lamely as the Skylab rescue using TRS. The technology is better today but the politics seem about the same.
Just put a $50 million bounty on a robotic repair vehicle in a similar orbit. Let someone else build and launch the thing, then the winner turns over control in order to collect the bounty. NASA gets their repair tool already in place at a cheaper price.
George W. Bush (and his arch conservative allies)
is shovelling some pretty steamy & stinky BS at
the American taxpayer. NASA as we have known it
is doomed, as is the Hubble Space Telescope AND
the ISS -- all current and future USA manned
space flight projects. The Moon and Mars "missions" will not happen in any Bush administration. The ISS project is going into
maintenence mode (preceding shutdown.) New
projects, such as the shuttle replacement, a
permanent manned presence on the Moon (why?),
and a manned mission to Mars are all pipe dreams
that have been starving for cash (which has all
been sucked away into our "optional" war in Iraq.)
If it is not defense-related and a boon to the
military-industrial complex of contractors, it
will not fly.
IANARS (I Am Not A Rocket Scientist), but I was
a subcontractor for the HST Ground Control System
for a number of years. I would like to believe
the the HST could be repaired and continue on.
The prospect of a successful robotic repair mission to keep Hubble Space Telescope "alive
& working" is dubious, at best. The HST was
not designed to facilitate robotic repair, and
in fact was not ever expected to be repaired
"in place" by manned missions. The customized
tools (and the training astronauts had to go
through ) required for repairs were incredible.
No autonomous robot would be able to perform
similar mechanical disassembly/assembly. Remote
control of these "repair robots" from the ground
has little chance for a successful mission --
unexpected events do happen that robotics will
not be able to address.
The NASA/defense contractors will make use of
the money spent on robotics for HST repair for
other things, like keeping the DoD's spy birds
operational & some mischief against other
countries' satellites. A successful HST mission
would not be the primary goal, but refinement of
such capabilities for other purposes would be.
I am a Fermilab employee and have lived in the area for a quarter of a century. This is the most accurate recap I have ever read on the subject. It is better even than anything Drasko or Leon ever wrote. I would have added more details, but that would have have been at the cost of brevity which I liked.
People should MOD the parent post up as insightful.
That's rich from someone who theorizes that a private postal service would be profitable, without establishing the fact that it's ever been done.
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch