They're collecting observational data, not science. I wouldn't normally be bitter about it, but the Trust The Science™ religion already has a terrible struggle with the basics so we shouldn't make it any harder for them.
But research labs would consume raw materials like wood, metal, Vespene gas, etc., and produce science units that could then be spent to climb the tech tree, no?
It also makes me think of Portal: "And the science gets done, and we built a neat gu--er, telescope..."
Hubble has been accomplished completely without SpaceX, as is James Webb and almost all other amazing advances in space. What do you think about the organizations and people that actually accomplished these things?
I assume anything remotely still classified would be ripped out, so probably only the big (outer) shell would end up in a museum, maybe some of the outdated computer boards.
It's still inspiring, but would it be more fair to go to Florida? Texas? Some state where it was built (if it weren't those)? The Smithsonian?
That's a fun idea! I don't see how you would execute that unfortunately though. Hubble wasn't meant to be re-mounted after deployment. Starship wouldn't be able to just gobble Hubble up and have it rattle around in its fairing during re-entry
One of NASA's biggest mistakes wrt the demise of the STS/Shuttle program was not leaving some way lined up to service Hubble in orbit. The current crop of launch vehicles isn't suited to this task, despite us being ten years out from STS-135.
It's proven itself an absolutely invaluable tool for research, but I think the even more impressive mission Hubble has shown itself as irreplaceable for is stimulating the public's mind for science and exploration. There's nothing like seeing photos of the universe in visual-light spectrum and thinking, "what if we went there?"
JWST is amazing and I'm so glad it's finally launching but for that second use case, it trails Hubble.
I wouldn't lay the blame on NASA. Congress ultimately decides what NASA does and does not do.
Constellation was the system that was supposed to succeed the Shuttle. It had one successful first-stage launch in October 2009. In 2010, Constellation was cancelled by Congress (at the behest of then-president Obama). In its stead, Congress essentially designed a new rocket called the Space Launch System, and tasked NASA with building it. Constellation's crewed capsule, Orion, survived as the SLS's crewed capsule. Unfortunately, the SLS is now 5 years overdue for its first launch. (It currently seems reasonably likely to launch for the first time in 2022.)
The Orion capsule could conceivably service Hubble [1], especially after lots of launches and general experience with the vehicle. If Constellation had not been cancelled, or if Congress had tasked NASA with a less-ambitious rocket to build, (or if the contractors that NASA was obliged to use to build the SLS had been able to keep to the original schedule,) we might have had a spacecraft to service Hubble right now.
I think JWST will be an amazing replacement as most space photos are doctored with visible light "interpretations" of other wavelengths already and nobody seems to notice/care as they have their minds blown. The process almost even adds to the beauty of them.
I thought the experience they had servicing Hubble actually meant that they generally didn’t want to have satellites that they would have to service due to costs involved.
Maybe with the new options it becomes cheaper/ more viable.
Having worked at Lockheed on the engineering side of Hubble for four summers as an intern during undergrad, the idea of the telescope reaching its end of life makes me deeply sad.
That warms my heart somehow, but I thought I had read that that was it for Hubble, like a year ago? Why the change of heart? Anyone got the full story, or did I cross my wires?
There was some equipment failure last year. I think it was later diagnosed as a power control unit that failed. Fortunately there was a backup set they could switch to. Little by little parts are failing with time but they are nursing it along.
I think one of the primary payload computers failed but they were able to flip to auxiliary/backup. That was in July though
It’s pretty much on borrowed time. I think they spent most of that outage trying to bring the main up and gave up.
Must be fun troubleshooting something at like 400 km orbit. Heck I had to tell a lady she couldn’t wfh today because her cell data tethering wasn’t up to snuff to hold a connection to our vpn or do much of anything. She was seeing spurts of 10% loss on downstream and 200+ ms latency.
Making a guess based on my knowledge of photography: probably not. It's taking vast starscapes with a wide lens with a focus range (or fixed focus) made for shooting at infinity. That means the closer something is, the less in focus it'll be. Try looking at something right in front of your face. At its furthest, JWST will be at a proportional distance relative to what Hubble is equipped to focus on. Even stitching images together, it's always going to have similar focus. No amount of resolution will get past the physics of optics.
[+] [-] kevinventullo|4 years ago|reply
Reminds me of strategy games where feeding enough “science units” into opaque “research labs” unlocks branches of the technology tree.
[+] [-] throwawaylinux|4 years ago|reply
My back yard rain gauge is not sciencing either.
[+] [-] actually_a_dog|4 years ago|reply
What's the proper unit of measurement to quantify how much "science" they've collected, anyway? Bits?
[+] [-] beefok|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitwize|4 years ago|reply
It also makes me think of Portal: "And the science gets done, and we built a neat gu--er, telescope..."
[+] [-] tablespoon|4 years ago|reply
Or Scully babbling on about "the science", referring to some MacGuffin or other during the later seasons of the X-Files.
[+] [-] VWWHFSfQ|4 years ago|reply
NASA had an outage 350 miles above the surface of the Earth and managed to fix it.
There's a difference in software reliability priorities and operations here.
[0] https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2010/sscl/moglen-software...
[+] [-] bongoman37|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Causality1|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wolverine876|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _moof|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mjevans|4 years ago|reply
I assume anything remotely still classified would be ripped out, so probably only the big (outer) shell would end up in a museum, maybe some of the outdated computer boards.
It's still inspiring, but would it be more fair to go to Florida? Texas? Some state where it was built (if it weren't those)? The Smithsonian?
[+] [-] melling|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ianvorbach|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] the__alchemist|4 years ago|reply
https://parade.com/249407/carlsagan/the-gift-of-apollo/
[+] [-] make3|4 years ago|reply
Maybe we should inspire people by doing useful science instead.
[+] [-] downWidOutaFite|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] skurtcastle|4 years ago|reply
I'm excited for Dec 22nd when the James Webb launches. Crossing fingers big time.
[+] [-] xattt|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bryanlarsen|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] echelon|4 years ago|reply
This launch is going to be so scary as it represents the scientific promise and investments of a generation.
[+] [-] savant_penguin|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kunai|4 years ago|reply
It's proven itself an absolutely invaluable tool for research, but I think the even more impressive mission Hubble has shown itself as irreplaceable for is stimulating the public's mind for science and exploration. There's nothing like seeing photos of the universe in visual-light spectrum and thinking, "what if we went there?"
JWST is amazing and I'm so glad it's finally launching but for that second use case, it trails Hubble.
[+] [-] avhon1|4 years ago|reply
Constellation was the system that was supposed to succeed the Shuttle. It had one successful first-stage launch in October 2009. In 2010, Constellation was cancelled by Congress (at the behest of then-president Obama). In its stead, Congress essentially designed a new rocket called the Space Launch System, and tasked NASA with building it. Constellation's crewed capsule, Orion, survived as the SLS's crewed capsule. Unfortunately, the SLS is now 5 years overdue for its first launch. (It currently seems reasonably likely to launch for the first time in 2022.)
The Orion capsule could conceivably service Hubble [1], especially after lots of launches and general experience with the vehicle. If Constellation had not been cancelled, or if Congress had tasked NASA with a less-ambitious rocket to build, (or if the contractors that NASA was obliged to use to build the SLS had been able to keep to the original schedule,) we might have had a spacecraft to service Hubble right now.
[1] https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3965/1
[+] [-] scottyah|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] duxup|4 years ago|reply
Maybe with the new options it becomes cheaper/ more viable.
[+] [-] nradov|4 years ago|reply
For the near term it's always going to be cheaper to launch replacement satellites instead of servicing broken ones in orbit.
[+] [-] mkw5053|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] keyle|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pkaye|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] croutonwagon|4 years ago|reply
It’s pretty much on borrowed time. I think they spent most of that outage trying to bring the main up and gave up.
Must be fun troubleshooting something at like 400 km orbit. Heck I had to tell a lady she couldn’t wfh today because her cell data tethering wasn’t up to snuff to hold a connection to our vpn or do much of anything. She was seeing spurts of 10% loss on downstream and 200+ ms latency.
[+] [-] sydthrowaway|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] onetwentythree|4 years ago|reply
https://jwst-docs.stsci.edu/jwst-opportunities-and-policies/...
[+] [-] wumpus|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lawrenceyan|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smingo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wumpus|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kye|4 years ago|reply
Just a guess. I could be wrong!
[+] [-] NikolaeVarius|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] inter_netuser|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] webasha|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]