There was a moment when I worried that NASA would lack the spine to repair the Hubble Space Telescope, arguably the best (after the Mars Rovers) space project of this generation. Glad to see they’re not complete idiots.
Undaunted by the dangers that almost led NASA to eliminate his mission, the space agency’s most experienced visitor to the Hubble Space Telescope was named Tuesday to a new astronaut team for the final overhaul of the flying observatory.
“I feel like a mission to Hubble is worth risking my life for,” said John Grunsfeld, an astrophysicist who is headed back to the Hubble as a spacewalking repairman for the third time. “This is really important for our country.”
NASA chief Michael Griffin announced Tuesday as anticipated that the agency will go forward with the $900 million mission in 2008 after years of debate about the risks.
The mission is intended to make Hubble more powerful than ever as it looks back at the cosmic frontiers to unravel new mysteries of the universe.
If we’re lucky NASA will maintain it into the forseeable future. That and other projects like it are a far better use for our orbital payload capacity than the ISS.
This is like a sentimental value rather than pratical, as it’s going to be replaced soon, and it outlived it’s lifespan.
What to bet that they’ll bring replacement batteries and a new solar array for the Mars rovers when we next fly there?
Seriously, at least one astronaut will face a larger risk of loss of life, and the whole crew flying in the antique space shuttle.
Astronomers can wait for the next telescope scheduled for 2010, and I’ll bet it’s delivery could be sped up.
NASA has trouble resupplying the space station! Pretty pictures can wait four years.
that is great news — except for one simple fact
all of physics is wrong and the hubble space telescope is helping to foster misinformation.
you see, the universe was only created 7000 years ago, and so everything hubble sees must be less than 7000 light years distant from us, because light from anything further away than that would not have reached us yet.
oh yeah and everything hubble sees must also be less that 7000 light years in diameter. otherwise, it would be bumping into us.
either that or the speed of light as been grossly miscalculated, or perhaps einstein was just plain wrong,
any creationist can tell you that there is no need to study physics or science at all, because it’s all just theories. you big silly
NASA has *never* been about “science” or “exploration” – it has always been operated as a means of funneling federal money to the companies run by relatives/friends/constituents of those currently in power. Good projects like the rovers or Hubble happen only when the science and the greed/corruption coincide. I’ suspect the Hubble repair was not OK’d until someone got a Halliburton subsidiary the contract to provide the repair parts.
wow… I never thought this was the thread that would bring the loons home to perch…
#2: Nice statement of your ignorance of reality… “any creationist can tell you that there is no need to study physics or science at all, because it’s all just theories.”
Theory: “A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.”
Religious arguments can’t be verified, by definition, since the deity they posit is outside of our reality, and therefore can’t be observed. “Because it says so right here in this book” isn’t enough verification.
It’s perfectly OK to use your religion to determine your ethics if you wish, but leave science to scientists.
#1 – Saying Hubble is about “pretty pictures” is about the same as believing all we got out of the lunar missions is a “bunch of rocks”.
The amount of useful science we’ve gotten out of the HST dwarfs the ISS by huge amounts.
On the other hand, if the gov’t would just declassify the Stargate program, we wouldn’t need telescopes because we could just go there and observe up close..
5. I think 2 simply forgot his “S…/S” to indicate sarcasm. (I can’t believe I’m the one to point this out given I’m constantly guilty of the same thing. You see, people like 2 & I are simply amazed that our brilliance is not obvious to all. Unless… your comment is the sarcastic one and also to be recognized for its brilliance. No, wait – this very comment… Actually… maybe I’ll now go with #4.)
Besides, how self-evident does it have to be that God has the power to configure the entire universe, including all the photons, just any little way He chooses. Like, what? supposedly He’s ok with the creating an entire Universe part but photon placement is a college elective He skipped to play pool?
ohhh, ok: /S.
RBG
#6 looks like I needed sarcasm tags too !
From the POV of the public, that have pushed the Hubble issue into a political one.
My POV is, true science is measured of decades and lifespans. What’s five years of waiting worth?
Is it really worth it risking the lives of those men & women to go up there to fix it, when there’s already a much better telescope in the works? Will be up there in less than 5 years.
Already here on earth, by combining info from multiple airborne balloons, we can get pretty close to Hubble quality, for fraction of the cost.
For the love of God, I hope they make it back alive & safe. Speaking of God,
#2 loved the sarcasm, made me lol.
#8 – OK. I’ll give you some sarcasm points, but I say it is worth it. Among other things, who says things scheduled 5 years out will actually happen?
(And I’m serious about the Stargate program 😉 )
The HST does lots of great science but I think it’s more important role is giving the regular Joe a look at what is out there. And it’s my understanding the follow on projects that are planned to replace Hubble will not be visual spectrum so they while providing great stuff for science won’t bring photos like this. http://biphome.spray.se/stoffe.trygg/astronomipics/Hubble.jpg
No. 2 makes the point that creationists and other christian wackos have far to much influence in our culture.
Floyd, I beleive he was joking.
Nasa is such a fucking joke.
Nasa Mission list
“Find out of bees can produce honey in space” Project cost 2.2 billion dollars
“Find out if spiders and mate in space” Project cost 4.5 Billion dollars.
They need to stop playing around and get back into the business of real space exploration. The legit missions they do are so far and few in between the crap they “Accomplish”
What a big waste.
8,
Five years is a very long time.
In addition, the Hubble was designed to be maintained for the forseeable future with a modular component design. For a fraction of what it cost to create and put up there we can continue to use it until our kids rent time on it via muTube.
Yes, a second ‘scope is going up, but there isn’t enough observation time with the Hubble. It would be better to add the second ‘scope instead of using it as a replacement.
There’s plenty of good life left in the Hubble, and it’s repayed our investment in spades. Let’s keep a good thing going.
Smarty, great post, but what’s your logic for placing Hubble second behind the Mars Rovers?
From my point of view, we’ve learned more from Hubble than we could possibly learn from the Rovers… unless the Rovers found “life”.
The Hubble has delivered more science, true. But the rovers are a greater technical mission success, IMNSHO.
Why is this the last service mission for the Hubble? Not because it will be obsolete, or because it will be to old and mechanically creaky… noooo…
The USA has NO plans for a manned vehicle to replace the space shuttle, so there will be no way to reach the Hubble after 2010 when the two remaing shuttles are retired. That’s it for manned orbital flight by US systems.
The only thing on the design board is some ridiculous rerun of the Apollo program, with planned lunar landings, as a stepping stone for a trip to Mars. Since the prospects of that happening are slim to none, this is the end of US manned space flight. We just won’t have a manned heavy lift orbital delivery system.
The new system coming online has no cargo capability, no cargo manipulator, now stow and return, return to land but probably splashdown on water. The only thing coming back is the same capsule type thing from the 60’s.
Goodbye manned US space flight.
Are they planning to beam astronauts to the Space Station and the Moon?
RBG