How time flies. I remember before I started the U of Delaware in 1993, the Hubble Space telescope was launched. It was going to be the next big thing in space research. The hopes were high, that we would soon be able to see to the edge of the Universe.
After the launch, it was realized that the Hubble’s lenses – or eyes – were not focused right. So, the choice was to scrap the entire telescope, or send a Shuttle up with astronauts to do a series of spacewalks to repair it. The decision was to send people up to fix the Hubble in 1993.
When I got to college, I watched much of the live Hubble repair missions on NASA TV as a freshman. It was interesting. We built something, we broke it, and now we’re fixing it 300 miles up.
For over 10 years now, the Hubble has brought amazing imagedry from all corners of the Universe, steller imagines that have amazed children and made scientists cry.
Here is a gallery of Hubble pics taken over the years. Enjoy
http://www.seds.org/hst/hst.html
Due to Bush’s budget constraints for space research, he has decided that the Hubble is no longer valuable. There will be a ‘next generation’ telescope going up in a few years, but there will be a non-activity period of a few years between when the Hubble gets retired and when the new telescope goes up, which i believe is in 2011.
I don’t have a problem with the Hubble being retired, but as the article points out, it’s going to be destroyed. We’re going to spend money to build something to launch into space so it can guide the HST to a semi-graceful death, by diving into the atmosphere and burning to bits on re-entry. This is not how the Hubble should be retired.
The Hubble needs a Shuttle to go and get it, bring it back down safely to Earth, and have it tour the World, finally resting for good in the Smithsonian. Is that too much to ask? We’re going to spend millions to destroy it, why not spend a little more to save it.
————-
NASA budget would kill Hubble
Budget hike for 2006
Monday, February 7, 2005 Posted: 9:14 PM EST (0214 GMT)
CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (AP) — With the moon on its horizon, NASA sees a slight increase in the budget proposed by President Bush on Monday, but it’s not enough to save the Hubble Space Telescope.
Only $93 million in the space agency’s $16.45 billion budget would go toward Hubble’s survival: $75 million to develop a kamikaze robot that would steer the orbiting observatory into the ocean at the end of its lifetime, and $18 million to try to eke out as much scientific observing time as possible from the telescope through clever remote controlling.
No money is in the budget to send either a robotic repairman or shuttle astronauts to Hubble to extend its lifetime, a decision that is sure to anger astronomers and members of Congress.
Late last year, a National Academy of Sciences panel recommended one final visit to Hubble by astronauts.
The proposed budget for NASA — 2.4 percent higher than last year’s — sets aside $9.6 billion for science, aeronautics and exploration, and $6.7 billion for exploration capabilities.
That includes $4.5 billion for the space shuttle program, on track for resuming flights this year for the first time since the 2003 Columbia disaster, and $1.85 billion for the international space station.
Just over a year ago, Bush announced a new exploration vision for NASA geared around returning astronauts to the moon by 2020. Everything now revolves around that.
NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe said even though the space agency is not getting as much money as envisioned by the president a year ago, a 2.4 percent budget increase is “rather remarkable” given the federal deficit and the spending cuts elsewhere in the government.
As for Hubble, O’Keefe said the National Academy of Sciences panel presented such a bleak assessment of a robotic mission to install new parts on the space telescope that it made little sense to presume success and, consequently, no money was put aside for such an endeavor.
“We’ll see. In a month’s time, there may be an epiphany,” O’Keefe said. “But I think it’s going to be a very difficult mountain, a steep hill, to climb.”
O’Keefe reiterated his long-held view that a shuttle flight to Hubble poses too many dangers in the wake of the Columbia catastrophe.
“It is a judgment call and this is a judgment call that is my responsibility for however period of time that I reside here,” said O’Keefe, who will leave NASA in less than two weeks to assume the chancellor’s job at Louisiana State University.
————————————-