According to NASA, in 2005 "Space Technology 3" is due to fly. It is a pair of formation-flying telescopes which will (hopefully) result in the first orbital stellar inferometer. The project website: http://nmp.jpl.nasa.gov/st3/proj/index.html
Let's hope for a more inspiring name between now and then.
There is currently an inferometric project underway at Keck, HI -- http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/Keck/keck_index.ht ml
Hubble is a close cousin of the KH-12 "Keyhole" spysat. Think its a coincidence that the USAF drew up the original lift requirements and cargo dimensions for the Shuttle?
"Total cost" of the Hubble would seem to be at least $1.2 billion by your calculation, since there have been three Hubble-dedicated shuttle missions involving HST (1 launching it, 2 for servicing).
Let's not forget that without manned spaceflight, Hubble's flawed primary mirror would have made it almost worthless.
Slashdot Mirror
According to NASA, in 2005 "Space Technology 3" is due to fly. It is a pair of formation-flying telescopes which will (hopefully) result in the first orbital stellar inferometer. The project website: http://nmp.jpl.nasa.gov/st3/proj/index.html
Let's hope for a more inspiring name between now and then.
There is currently an inferometric project underway at Keck, HI -- http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/Keck/keck_index.ht ml
Hubble is a close cousin of the KH-12 "Keyhole" spysat. Think its a coincidence that the USAF drew up the original lift requirements and cargo dimensions for the Shuttle?
Many thanks.
That's what I was thinking. Here is a nice article, with a pretty picture of that contrail.
"Total cost" of the Hubble would seem to be at least $1.2 billion by your calculation, since there have been three Hubble-dedicated shuttle missions involving HST (1 launching it, 2 for servicing). Let's not forget that without manned spaceflight, Hubble's flawed primary mirror would have made it almost worthless.