The Hubble, IMNSHO, represents everything that NASA does right. An automated, cost-effective tool for astronomers worldwide, the Hubble telescope expands our knowledge of the heavens daily. Let’s hope NASA decides the effort to save the Hubble is worth it.
The future of the Hubble Space Telescope hangs in the balance today in Washington as top NASA managers weigh the feasibility and risks of sending shuttle astronauts on a fifth and final servicing mission to the observatory.
“There is talk about very little else at the moment. Everybody wants to know what’s happening,” said Matt Mountain, director of the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, which manages Hubble science. “This is basically going to renew the telescope that is so very critical to us.”
The mission could launch as early as 2008, providing 7,000 astronomers worldwide with five more years of access to the famous telescope — along with better instruments to explore the depths of the universe and its evolution.
Do you think it’s worth the effort to save the Hubble, or is it good money thrown after bad?
“The Hubble, IMNSHO, represents everything that NASA does right.”
Yeah, right. Millions of dollars down the tubes and they still haven’t found the firmament!
There is one very obvious way to ensure continued funding for Hubble – add a nuclear-powered 1-gigawatt laser to it that can vaporize whatever it’s looking at (on Earth anyway!). Turn it into a weapon and Bu$hCo will eagerly back it.
I believe its the only optical scope we have in space or on the table. Its done its job well. I say keep it going or replace it with another optical. The images we get from Hubble are fantastic.
Hubble, the Mars rovers, and Voyager. They should be the models upon which all future space projects are based. Well, except for that Hubble focusing thing in the early days.
4,
They did manage to fix the mirror issue though, and not many remote installs, even here on Earth, have been able to pull repairs off.
If science finds new knowledge, the HST has been a good instrument for science. Astronomy has moved along, microlensing and adaptive optics have increased the effectiveness of land based optical telescopes, but astronomers would agree that a space based telescope is very useful. The replacement for Hubble is past due, it would take another five to ten years to loft one. The sky has turned black.
Hire a Russian Proton so send a booster to Hubble that would slowly move it to rendezvous with the Space Station to become an integral part of the station.
7,
The only problem there is that the ISS is in such a low orbit it would increase housekeeping woes. Not only would we have to worry about fixing it, we’d have to keep it from falling out of the sky along with the ISS when we pull its funding.
I vote we offer to give the Hubble to the first group that agrees to maintain it once its replacement is launched. Even if superceded, it can’t be replaced, as there are more eyes that want to use it (and its future replacement) than it has time for.
Better two ‘scopes than one, and the Hubble is not only already up there, it was designed for servicing and parts replacement.
Let’s see… Pull a couple million to fix something that is helping to advance science and enricg mankind…
Or funnel that money to Baghdad so the Iraqis can fund snacks after afternoon prayers before going out to shoot eachother some more…
Tough choice…
The ISS is throwing good money after bad. If there was a firm economic commitment to the station it would be one thing. Right now the thing is going to fall apart before it even gets built. This is more about keeping the Russians happy than science.
10,
I agree with you about the ISS, but we’re talking about the Hubble here.
The Hubble scope and the Spitzer Space Telescope are both exceptionally successful. The Spitzer works in the far infrared, and can often see beyond dust that blinds the Hubble. Many cool pics and good science have come from both of them.
There’s another optical scope that’s supposed to go into orbit in 2013, but who says that we can’t have two optical scopes in orbit at once?
If the Hubble is not worth one Shuttle launch, Then the International Space Station is not worth launching a kite for. The Hubble produces more science in a week than the International Waste Station ever has or will. The follow up plan for NASA is something called Moon, Mars and Whatever, it is W’s “vision” for space. Hallucination is the correct word. Technology has completely removed the requirement for humans to go beyond the moon in order to explore. That money would be more wisely appropriated to building larger, more advanced space telescopes and remote sensor systems. This Hubble Servicing Mission MUST launch. Serious plans should be made for yet another upgrade 5 years down the line, even though newer telescopes will be coming on-line by then. This thing just keeps getting better after each visit. It is the most cost efficient science investment ever made.
Bob Hamilton
Chicago
They probably wont think it worth the money, it can’t blow anyone up….
Hubble could be the next Bible