Hubble Replacement on Slow Track

iamlucky13 writes "The targeted launch date for the James Webb Space Telescope, an infrared space observatory currently nearing the completion of the design stage, has been pushed back 2 years to help deal with a price tag that has grown to $4.5 billion. This advanced telescope is designed to build upon the achievements of the Hubble after its retirement, peering into deep space with it's large 6.5 meter primary mirror from the L2 point 1.5 million kilometers from earth. As the highest priority science mission on NASA's agenda, a decision was made to spread the extra cost over additional budget cycles rather than compromise it's instrument package. Regardless, some of the lower priority missions may feel the impact of the JWST cost growth."

Comments

Re:Total lack of fiscal responsibility

[Bombula]

the largest portion of the expense always goes to the labor fee

I hear this a lot about the space program, but if you quickly crunch the numbers:

1,000 staff x $100,000/year (generous) = $100 million/year.

So where is this $4.5 billion really being spent? I think it raises a lot of questions. Setting aside, say, $500 million for the launch itself (again, generous), and $1 billion for 10 years of operating costs (still pretty generous), can the materials and construction of a telescope really cost more than $2.5 billion?

I hate to be cheeky, but if I could pay 1,000 people $100k/year, I could build you a seriously awesome space telescope for a lot less than $2.5 billion.

Re:$4.5 billion

[TummyX]

Um, what did Thailand ever do to them? Why are they beheading school children, teachers and buddhist monks? Why is the Thai government now having to arm their own citizens in the south?

They can always find a "reason" to hate you. For the extremists, it seems that "oppression" is when everyone around them isn't islamic.

Re:$4.5 billion

[TummyX]

I'm no fan of christians either