Jump to content

Goodbye, Hubble.

Souper

By Souper
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Souper

Souper

Posted
Posted

Remember HST? That space telescope that brought us gorgeous views such as that of the Pillars of creation, and the Horsehead nebula? Or those early pics of Pluto? Or of Ceres?

Ladies and gentleman, while Hubble is great, it won't last for long. Within 5 years (by 2020), Hubble, unable to be repaired, will reenter Earth's atmosphere and likely be placed in a museum. We wil lall remember that wonderous telescope, and i hope the James Webb will do a fine job at finding other worlds around other systems.

To Hubble and everyone associated with its creation and operation, I salute you in the name of human scientific exploration!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sampa

Sampa

Posted
Posted
Remember HST? That space telescope that brought us gorgeous views such as that of the Pillars of creation, and the Horsehead nebula? Or those early pics of Pluto? Or of Ceres?

Ladies and gentleman, while Hubble is great, it won't last for long. Within 5 years (by 2020), Hubble, unable to be repaired, will reenter Earth's atmosphere and likely be placed in a museum. We wil lall remember that wonderous telescope, and i hope the James Webb will do a fine job at finding other worlds around other systems.

To Hubble and everyone associated with its creation and operation, I salute you in the name of human scientific exploration!

Uhm. There isn't going to be much left to put in a museum after that.

I have to agree with NovaSilisko, Unless we have something that can go up and retrieve the telescope, that thing will be torn apart on reentry interface into the earth...otherwise, it's more prudent to just boost the thing into a graveyard orbit and let that be that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NovaSilisko

NovaSilisko

Posted
Posted (edited)

They aren't going to let it reenter uncontrolled, either. The last maintenance mission fitted a docking port - it could be used for a maintenance mission to it, but that would require lots of equipment that doesn't exist. And, more importantly, funding for that equipment doesn't exist. The shuttle really was the only vehicle that could do it effectively.

It's much more likely the docking ring will be used to accommodate a small vehicle that will dock to it and burn retrograde to safely deorbit Hubble over the pacific before it comes down on its own, to avoid the possibility of the giant mirrors (which likely would survive in part through reentry) coming down over a populated area.

I still am a fan of proposal to have captured Hubble in the payload bay of a shuttle and bring it home to be put in the Smithsonian, but that was deemed unnecessary risk for not enough payoff, in the wake of Columbia's destruction.

it's more prudent to just boost the thing into a graveyard orbit and let that be that!

Unlikely. Unless you send it very far away (which means more fuel and thus a bigger tug to move it and thus more money), it would become a major source of debris (via shrapnel thrown off from other debris hitting it) owing to its size.

Edited by NovaSilisko
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NovaSilisko

NovaSilisko

Posted
Posted
On the last shuttle mission to it they should have just brought it home

And leave the scientific community without a visible light space telescope for an indeterminate number of years? I'm glad they're trying to milk it for all they can get out of it, personally. It's an invaluable instrument, and I'd rather have it orbiting earth doing good work til the bitter end than see it switched off and stuck in a museum before its time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sampa

Sampa

Posted
Posted
And leave the scientific community without a visible light space telescope for an indeterminate number of years? I'm glad they're trying to milk it for all they can get out of it, personally. It's an invaluable instrument, and I'd rather have it orbiting earth doing good work til the bitter end than see it switched off and stuck in a museum before its time.

They should have thought of that before they did the same for the space shuttle fleet (in my opinion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
InterCity

InterCity

Posted
Posted
It's more prudent to just boost the thing into a graveyard orbit and let that be that!

IMHO, we should let it burn. Graveyard orbits, while cool, don't really solve the Kessler syndrome problems. Besides, what we do with corpses of famous humans? We burn them! This is the funeral HST deserves!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alshain

Alshain

Posted
Posted (edited)
On the last shuttle mission to it they should have just brought it home

And this is what we would have missed if we did that. It was meant to be in space till it isn't. It's a piece of machinery, it's not alive, it deserves no sentimental attachment to it's parts. It is a tool and we should use it till we can't and then, who cares. To bring it home so it can sit in a museum would have been a tragedy.

One other thing. They aren't going to re-enter it on January 1st 2020 at midnight. If they can keep using it past it's schedule they will. Opportunity's planned mission was 3 months, here we are 11 years later and it's still going.

p1501ay.jpg

Edited by Alshain
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LordFerret

LordFerret

Posted
Posted
And leave the scientific community without a visible light space telescope for an indeterminate number of years? I'm glad they're trying to milk it for all they can get out of it, personally. It's an invaluable instrument, and I'd rather have it orbiting earth doing good work til the bitter end than see it switched off and stuck in a museum before its time.

There are 4 other visible light telescopes still up there. Hubble was a landmark, that almost wasn't a number of times, and will be missed... but we're onward to bigger and better things. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newt

Newt

Posted
Posted

Just because we have other telescopes, does not mean that Hubble is obsolete. It is incredible, the competition to get observing time with the thing, because it is far better than any Earth based telescope in its field, even if we had five Hubble like telescopes, there would be demand for their use. We should keep the thing up as long as it is more practical than putting up a newer better version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newt

Newt

Posted
Posted

Not, it will not be.

My point is more that the thing still is useful, and it should preferable be used as long as it can be. We are at the point where it is impractical to maintain it, but we should continue to use it until that, too, is impractical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alshain

Alshain

Posted
Posted (edited)
I hope it'll birth a new hubble, but it can't :P

Kidding aside, what happened to this thing?

(inb4 Kryten being awesome coming out of nowhere to give the answer)

http://www.exelisinc.com/solutions/JWST/PublishingImages/JWST/jwst4.jpg

The JWST is still being planned for a 2018 launch as the successor to the Hubble. They even have still frame webcams you can watch the clean room where it is being built.

Edited by Alshain
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nibb31

Nibb31

Posted
Posted
Can it not be used as a docking practice target for e.g. SpaceX and in exchange brought up to a better orbit?

Basically any test flight could be used to dock and push it a bit - India, China ... ?

That would be a hell of an expensive mission just for "target practice". Dragon V1 doesn't dock anyway, it berths. Dragon V2 will dock automatically, so crew practice is irrelevant. It's nothing that can't be simulated on computer.

However, that's not a bad idea for the disposal mission. It might well be cheaper to launch a Dragon V2 to deorbit Hubble than to design and build a dedicated automatic vehicle to do the job. Hubble is at an altitude 5 times higher than the ISS, so that Dragon would have to be stripped down to save weight and probably unmanned. It might be a good way to flight test a reused vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sampa

Sampa

Posted
Posted
Not, it will not be.

My point is more that the thing still is useful, and it should preferable be used as long as it can be. We are at the point where it is impractical to maintain it, but we should continue to use it until that, too, is impractical.

I concur with Newt. Even though NASA JPL constantly sets deadlines for a spacecraft's mission, those deadlines are merely GUIDElines or even goals. What I am saying is, they can take an unmanned spacecraft and design it for an X amount of year mission. However, as both Spirit and Opportunity rovers have proven, those spacecraft can still be quite functional PAST that said deadline. Either until Hubble encounters a fatal disaster/error will they fully shut the thing down, but even then, they would still make attempts to raise the thing until all systems have failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cantab

cantab

Posted
Posted

As far as continued use goes, if it breaks down then it breaks down. I don't think it can be economically fixed any more, so we just wait for its orbit to decay and then possibly send a tug up to do a controlled deorbit.

If it gets to the point where it's still working but its orbit has decayed too much, then I'd really like to see an orbital boost mission done at the very least, especially if there isn't a new space telescope covering the same wavelengths. There's no reason to trash a good scope.

In either scenario, keep in mind that the orbit is probably a lot lower than it is now when the deorbit or orbital boost is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...