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.
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'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
I'm sure all the astronomers of the world thank you. Someone had to be in charge of catering.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Why would she implode? If she were exposed to the vacuum of space, I could see her lungs bursting (exploding) if she tried to hold her breath, but I would figure that every fluid in her body would boil away, and that's what would kill her.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
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...
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.
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 happened to notice this, and for once felt the need to say it really is from Mahatma Gandhi. Just an off-topic FYI.
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.