PDA

View Full Version : What to do with Hubble?



ToSeek
2003-Jul-27, 03:13 PM
As clock ticks for Hubble, some plead for a reprieve (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/science/27HUBB.html?th) (Registration required but free)

Astronomers are discussing what to do with Hubble. NASA is currently planning to bring it down in 2010.

Jigsaw
2003-Jul-27, 07:08 PM
Yahoo (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=68&ncid=68&e=4&u=/nyt/20030726/ts_nyt/asclockticksforhubblesomepleadforareprieve) has apparently picked it up, no registration required.


The group has set up a Web site (hst-jwst-transition.hq.nasa.gov/hst-jwst/home.cfm) on which astronomers can post their opinions and read a growing assortment of policy and fact sheets.

Link.
http://hst-jwst-transition.hq.nasa.gov/hst-jwst/home.cfm

ToSeek
2003-Aug-01, 05:30 PM
Hubble may not last till 2010, (http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid= 544&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0) even with the upcoming servicing mission.

Doodler
2003-Aug-01, 06:16 PM
Seems to me to be a lot of "what ifs?" in the models that may or may not happen and they did drop the "conservative estimate" disclaimer. Are these models based on the on-station performance of similar hardware, or is this a pure theory performance model?

Pi Man
2003-Aug-01, 06:20 PM
They better not just put it into a degrading orbit! :evil: It should end up in a museum!

Doodler
2003-Aug-01, 06:31 PM
They don't have enough space (no pun intended) for all the busted up junk they have as it is. Better to let this one go down and be done with it.

freddo
2003-Aug-04, 12:10 AM
They don't have enough space (no pun intended) for all the busted up junk they have as it is. Better to let this one go down and be done with it.

That's some expensive "busted up junk..."

roidspop
2003-Aug-04, 04:10 AM
So, let's follow the lead of the Europeans who saved a satellite in a useless orbit by using the station-keeping electric propulsion system to boost it to geosynchronous orbit. During the last service mission to Hubble NASA attaches an ion motor. The telescope can then be repeatedly boosted to higher orbit as needed, at least as long as the power supply and reaction mass last. Then, give the poor thing to a consortium of astronomical observatories and universities...let them run it for as long as it lasts. NASA looks good, science benefits. Dumping it in the ocean is like burning the Mona Lisa because it's too expensive to dust it off once in a while.

Madcat
2003-Aug-04, 05:02 AM
Ahh c'mon. We all know the truth. "Burned Up" indeed. The evil government is going to use it to burn us ants with a very impressive magnifying glass.

kucharek
2003-Aug-04, 06:41 AM
They shouldn't decomission HST until the JWST is up and working. You never know... On the subject of bringing it down to a museum: A nice would-have monument, but what can you get for that money if invested into science. And risking lives just for this? I like the idea of attaching an ion engine and then boost it up as high as possible. Handing it over to some other organization: Maybe here are some naive ideas how the telescope is controlled. I don't think a few geeks could do it for cheap. And HST also relies heavily on relay satellites (TDRS).

man on the moon
2003-Aug-04, 07:01 AM
They shouldn't decomission HST until the JWST is up and working.

a good idea! i remember the HST having to wait for it's repairs. if the Hubble could be kept working long enough to make sure the JWST doesn't need something similar...


And risking lives just for this? I like the idea of attaching an ion engine and then boost it up as high as possible.
you'd have to risk lives regardless of whether you're attaching an engine or bringing it down to a museum. :-?
also, would it be harder to maintain in a higher orbit? what would be needed if the shuttle couldn't make it to that height? (i don't know the upper limit of the shuttle, sorry.)


Handing it over to some other organization: Maybe here are some naive ideas how the telescope is controlled. I don't think a few geeks could do it for cheap. And HST also relies heavily on relay satellites (TDRS).

true. could sell it to another country, or hand control over to a university or few universities. they could do research with it. trying to get time on the new scope before they graduate could be a challenge, and i imagine the schedule is already well filled (or will be soon). sort of a "junior varsity" or "farm league" type of idea. is that what you're saying?

kucharek
2003-Aug-04, 07:04 AM
And risking lives just for this? I like the idea of attaching an ion engine and then boost it up as high as possible.
you'd have to risk lives regardless of whether you're attaching an engine or bringing it down to a museum. :-?
Of course, but I thought about attaching the engine on the next service mission, some years ahead of decomissioning, not on an extra flight at the end of HST lifetime.

man on the moon
2003-Aug-04, 07:06 AM
i see! that makes sense...#-o

speaking of which, NASA is now saying the shuttle may fly by late spring, barely a one year break. :)

Kaptain K
2003-Aug-04, 07:40 AM
The JWST better work the first time. It will be unreachable for servicing! :o

man on the moon
2003-Aug-04, 12:26 PM
#-o #-o

sun orbit isn't it?

#-o :oops: #-o

ToSeek
2003-Aug-04, 02:20 PM
They shouldn't decomission HST until the JWST is up and working. You never know...

My thoughts exactly.

ToSeek
2003-Aug-04, 02:21 PM
#-o #-o

sun orbit isn't it?

#-o :oops: #-o

Sort of. It will be in the Sun-Earth L2 position, on the far side of the Earth from the Sun, where WMAP is now. Definitely out of reach of the shuttle.

man on the moon
2003-Aug-04, 04:02 PM
you guys and your details. :roll:

it's all good. :wink:

ToSeek
2003-Aug-04, 04:32 PM
Bringing down the house: How to decommission Hubble safely (http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/hubble_demise_030804.html)

man on the moon
2003-Aug-04, 04:44 PM
The JWST better work the first time. It will be unreachable for servicing! :o

maybe they could test it in a high earth orbit before sending it to it's final destination?


If that's the case, Hubble is doomed to spiral in on its own accord. It would reenter and breakup in an uncontrolled manner as it careens through Earth's atmosphere. According to experts at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, "a significant debris field" would hit the surface of the Earth.

could they wait for it to come low enough to be in range of the shuttle on one of its ISS runs? then grab it on the way home? don't know enough about orbital physics, but would it work? or are the two at irreconcilible angles to each other? (as in, the angle off the equator--are the two too different for the shuttle to switch between the two, assuming the orbital altitude was the same?)

if they couldn't do both, then at least wait for Hubble to come low enough to grab? that would fix the "people impact" factor. :-?

kingneptune8
2003-Aug-04, 08:08 PM
They better not just put it into a degrading orbit! :evil: It should end up in a museum!
=D>
Agreed!!!