Slashdot Mirror
Hubble Stops Sending Data, Mission On Hold
mknewman writes to tell us that NASA is no longer receiving data from the Hubble Space Telescope, which could possibly delay the shuttle launch planned just two weeks from now. There is a backup system installed which may be used instead of training the astronauts on the installation of the new component, but that would itself leave no fallback option. "NASA is reviewing whether the mission should be delayed a couple of months so that plans can be made to send up a replacement part for the failed component, said NASA spokesman Michael Curie. It would take time to test and qualify the old replacement part and train the astronauts to install it in the telescope, Curie said. NASA also would have to work out new mission details for the astronauts who have trained for two years to carry out five Hubble repair spacewalks."
After all the Hubble is less responsible for its state than Wall street is for where it ended up!
"Ahh! Arrogance and stupidity in the same package, how efficient of you!" --Londo Molari
Invasion.
... than after the repair mission.
the "thwack" repair method seldom lasts long
Almost three years ago, our dishwasher (which was only a year old at the time) stopped working. After a bit of troubleshooting I determined that the solenoid valve in the water intake was shot - my multimeter indicated that it was receiving an electrical signal, but the valve wouldn't open so the dishwasher couldn't fill.
I whacked it with a hammer and it's been working flawlessly ever since.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
High failure rate?! The HST is a very complex spacecraft. Parts wear out and break. That's why spacecraft are designed with redundant systems. HST was designed to be repaired and upgraded in-orbit, and has already exceeded its design lifetime. In the real world, components fail and increased reliability is not free. Spacecraft engineering is a balancing act. You want to accomplish the mission with minimum cost and a relatively high probability of success. Spacecraft projects that can't manage risks and costs get canceled. There is a limited pool of money and NASA has a responsibility to get the most scientific bang for the buck.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Um, it was launched in 1990. Anyone who thinks NASA is incompetent simply because their stuff doesn't last "enough decades" has an unwinable vote anyway. I love NASA a lot less than you, but I sure as hell don't see this as serious anti-NASA propaganda fuel.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.