Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Astronauts Should Fix Hubble

Posted by michael on from the just-do-it-already dept.

Re-Pawn writes "NASA urged to send shuttle to Hubble - Astronauts, not robots, should fix the Hubble Space Telescope, says a new report by the US National Research Council (NRC). That conclusion is directly at odds with NASA, which is opposed to a human mission on safety grounds, following the Columbia disaster."

3 of 67 comments (clear)

  1. O'Keefe (!NASA) is opposed, safety not the issue by Attitude+Adjuster · · Score: 4, Informative
    It is NASA's administrator that is opposed to a shuttle mission to Hubble, but that is not a consensus opinion, nor is it based on any scientific or engineering recommendation. We could discuss why that is - the answer is his career in politics. Word is O'Keefe may be rewarded for his loyalty and ability to make tough unpopular decisions by the WH and get a higer profile job in the administration...

    Furthermore, as the National Academy of Sciences panel, and other panels before it, have said, the difference in safety (or chance of disaster, which ever way you want to look at it) of a single shuttle mission to Hubble is essentially the same as that of a single mission to the space station. The astronauts, when asked, all were in favor of going to fix Hubble. And they're much more likely to get the job done than the robotic mission, which is rather unlikely to work (read the NAS press release)

    Of course, the plan is for 25-30 missions to the ISS, so the chances of horrendous disaster doing that is far higher cumulatively.

  2. Cheaper to replace it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The NASA FAQ says:
    How much does Hubble cost?

    Initially Hubble cost $1.5 billion to build and put into orbit.
    The linked article has a higher pricetag to save it:
    And though they differ in many respects, both a human and a robotic mission share similar price tags. The Aerospace Corporation and the US Government Accountability Office estimate that each type of mission would cost about $2 billion.
    Seems like we could just send up a new one for significantly less.
  3. What is the shuttle for, anyway? by VernonNemitz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure the original description of the Shuttle was to be a kind of "space truck", for both transport and servicing missions. To say it is too unsafe to use for its intended purpose just underscores the incompetence of whatever committee it was that bollixed the design. Get rid of them, and post a big sign in EVERY meeting room that (A) describes the debacle, and (B) recommend that it never, ever happen again. (Now, if only somebody in those meeting rooms actually paid attention to the sign....)