Hubble Verdict: De-Orbit

theonetruekeebler writes "CNN reports that NASA has reached a final decision for the Hubble space telescope: De-orbit. At some future date a liquid-fueled rocket will dock with the telescope and fire, hurling Hubble into the ocean. However, "Our best estimate is we probably will be able to continue to do science as we're doing it ... somewhere into 2008," according to program executive Mark Borkowski."

Comments

Ocean?

[AAeyers]

Why drop it into the ocean? Why not just blast it off into space and see what it finds until we lose communicaiton? It seems like a waste to me...

Why not bring the thing back intact?

[Douglas Simmons]

I realize it would cost a lot of cash money (if even possible) and would probably require more than one shuttle mission, but the Hubble is in the top ten of NASA's items of greatest symbolic value in our history. The thing belongs in a museum, not the ocean. It'd be a bitch to retrieve and we'd be risking lives, but you gotta respect the Hubble and figure out how to get that puppy back without disintigrating it too much.

How 'bout it, science?

Re:Why not bring the thing back intact?

[arodland]

I don't know how serious you're actually trying to be, but let me add a word or two. Back in 1962, Kennedy promised that the exploration of space would be the "most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked." The fact that we've come through it with so little lost is partly the result of a great attention to safety and detail, and partly the result of the fact that it hasn't been much of an adventure for the past 32 years.

And that's the real pity of the space shuttle program. It's still space, and it kills people on occasion. Considering that the technology is ancient, it probably kills more people than it really should. And yet, we use it to go nowhere, and do nothing really interesting. If it was actually "shuttling" someone on the first leg of a longer voyage, maybe it would have a purpose. But we don't have any intent of doing that; everyone knows the space station will never get any real use either, so together they're just massive wastes of money and life. I'm not crying at the grounding of the shuttle.

Re:If its been decided...

[rpj1288]

Try a google for Kepler Syndrome. You'll find sites that explain it better than I can, but basically, debris hits something, and it creates more debris. These go on to create more collisions and more debris, eventually closing off an entire orbit plane.

Re:Fear

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, these days we have ground-based observatories that rival Hubble. Those can hold us awhile while the ESA or JAXA work out the next big space observatory... ;-)

That's the claim anyway. But even if the resolution rivals Hubble, Hubble is still sensitive to wavelengths that are blocked by the atmosphere. Moreover the observatory in the article I found from your reference is in Chile; so it's only useful for astrological objects visible south of the equator, whereas Hubble has a full 360 view.

But aside from that, you might have a point.

Re:Fear

[orthogonal]

"A shuttle mission could repair the Hubble."

I wish we had the money

"Report Says Pentagon Spending on Weapons to Soar"

to save Hubble

"The government is readying a plan to spend more than $2 billion on a routine 10-year overhaul to extend the life of the aging warheads. At the same time, some weapons scientists say the warheads have a fundamental design flaw...."

but I guess basic science

"The shift away from basic research is alarming many leading computer scientists and electrical engineers, who warn that there will be long-term consequences for the nation's economy."

never did

"The voice of science is being stifled in the Bush administration"

us any

"Led by twenty Nobel laureates, the scientists say Bush's government has systematically distorted and undermined scientific information in pursuit of political objectives."

good.

"For Bush, science is a dirty word"

Re:Fear

[Jivecat]

I'm reminded of an editorial cartoon that appeared after the Challenger accident in 1986. It had a picture of a Conestoga wagon crossing the prairie with no one at the reins, along with a caption saying "Alarmed by the many dangers, the early pioneers abandoned further exploration except for a few unmanned probes."