Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

No Formal Risk Analysis of Hubble Rescue by NASA

Posted by Zonk on from the they-didn't-even-try dept.

Somegeek writes " SpaceDaily.com is running a story that NASA never performed a formal risk analysis of a shuttle mission to rescue the Hubble Space Telescope before they decided to cancel the mission on grounds of risk. The story quotes Fred Gregory, the current acting NASA administrator, as stating that previous NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe made the decision "based on what he perceived was the risk". This perceived risk is in performing a manned shuttle mission that is out of range of using the International Space Station as an emergency refuge. The Hubble's current batteries and gyroscopes will probably fail in a few years, leaving the dead telescope to crash back to earth around year 2020."

3 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. If it is up long enough... by spywarearcata.com · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...then as NASAs competence ramps down, may be private space entrepreneurs' ramp up.

    Perhaps like an abandoned sailing ship the Hubble will be salvaged--and rescued--by private a private space craft.

  2. a long time ago... by eobanb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    NASA really knew what they were doing. they spent quite a bit of money, but we did Apollo, we did Skylab, we did Hubble, and they managed to maintain public support. Then they just somehow fucked it up. I get the feeling it had something to do with the ISS, because that's around when the problems really began. The ISS is not a sustainable or viable presence in space. What we really need to look toward is 1) commercial development in space, which will lead to 2) a continued stay there for humanity. I usually don't like privatisation of government programs, but in this case, I think there may be companies that can construct and launch, for example, inflatable habitats as mentioned in previous slashdot articles, at a low cost. NASA hasn't even really seriously considered something like this, and now look at what we have. A space station that is important for scientific research, yes, but the actual value we're getting out of it for the money we spent is HIGHLY questionable.

    --

    Take off every sig. For great justice.

  3. For What It's Worth.. by PDXNerd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When you are dealing with Red Tape, you cannot just say "We want a new telescope" because the answer is "What is wrong with your current telescope? It sees the universe just fine, right?"

    So, you say your current telescope is old and you need a budget for something new and bigger and better, technology progresses, right?

    What we can infer is that NASA has something else they want to put up that, if they "rescued" the Hubble, would cut into the budget for their new thing they want to put up.