U.S. Senator Rushes To Hubble's Defense
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mikulski_hubble_040122.html
by NASA's decision, announced Jan. 16, to terminate what would have
been the fifth and final Hubble servicing mission."
"Maryland is home to two major Hubble facilities, the Space
Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore and NASA's Goddard Space
Flight Center in Greenbelt. Mikulski is the most senior Democrat on
the Senate Appropriations VA-HUD and independent agencies
subcommittee, which must approve NASA's budget each year."
Can we spell P-O-R-K?
TangoMan
Saving the Hubble Space Telescope, which is a premier scientific instrument, the best instrument there is for many tasks, is already paid for, does require operating expenses, but has the hardware completed for its next upgrade, is hardly what I would call pork. Science has been one of the most important reasons for going to space and I think this comment is way off base.
Jay Huebner
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mikulski_hubble_040122.html
"Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) said she was "shocked and surprised"
by NASA's decision, announced Jan. 16, to terminate what would have
been the fifth and final Hubble servicing mission."
"Maryland is home to two major Hubble facilities, the Space
Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore and NASA's Goddard Space
Flight Center in Greenbelt. Mikulski is the most senior Democrat on
the Senate Appropriations VA-HUD and independent agencies
subcommittee, which must approve NASA's budget each year."
Can we spell P-O-R-K?
TangoMan
As a huge fan of astronomy, I agree saving the hubble
is a good thing. The administration seems to think
that only having one scope up at a time is all that is
needed, I strongly disagree agree with this. The more
scopes up there, the more science will be
accomplished.
http://www.savethehubble.org/petition.jsp
I recommend signing it if you're a supporter.
Ryan Z
> Saving the Hubble Space Telescope, which is a
> premier scientific instrument, the best instrument
> there is for many tasks, is already paid for, does
> require operating expenses, but has the hardware
> completed for its next upgrade, is hardly what I
> would call pork. Science has been one of the most
> important reasons for going to space and I think
> this comment is way off base.
> Jay Huebner
>
> [mailto:victoriatangoman@...
>
> U.S. Senator Rushes To Hubble's Defense
>
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mikulski_hubble_040122.html
> . . is hardly what I would call pork. Science has been one of the
most important reasons for going to space and I think this comment
is way off base.
> Jay Huebner
two NASA centers in her district. She wasn't speaking to the values
of science but trying to get money for a center in her district.
Business as usual.
If a Senator from Alaska or Maine had issued the statement, then I'd
be less cynical and be in 100% agreement with you.
TangoMan
Okay, and I am glad you are apparently for the continuation of the Hubble (HST) operations. Most of us can only keep track of so many things, depending on our brain size and energy level. And just because the two NASA facilities are in the district of a person keeping track of them, should not invalidate that person's recommendations concerning them. I agree with you that there is reason for keeping track of such recommendations, but in this case I think their recommendations are justified without earning the label, pork.
Jay Huebner
most important reasons for going to space and I think this comment
is way off base.
> Jay Huebner
I was stressing the point that the Senator who spoke up for it had
two NASA centers in her district. She wasn't speaking to the values
of science but trying to get money for a center in her district.
Business as usual.
If a Senator from Alaska or Maine had issued the statement, then I'd
be less cynical and be in 100% agreement with you.
TangoMan
Read the earlier post by either Andrew or Arthur (I can't remember which)
for a good explanation as to why letting Hubble go is probably OK... Since I
already deleted it out of my e-mail account would the author kindly sum up
what they had to say about the obsolescence of the Hubble and it's
replacement for Jay?
Val
--- In ssi_list@... "Valens Agnitio"
> Read the earlier post by either Andrew or Arthur (I can't remember
which)
> for a good explanation as to why letting Hubble go is probably
OK... Since I
> already deleted it out of my e-mail account would the author
kindly sum up
> what they had to say about the obsolescence of the Hubble and it's
> replacement for Jay?
For good or bad our words will never be lost and they can always
come back to haunt us! LOL
Just log in and search for the post at your leisure.
TangoMan
> Read the earlier post by either Andrew or Arthur (I can't remember
> which)
> for a good explanation as to why letting Hubble go is probably OK...
> Since I
> already deleted it out of my e-mail account would the author kindly
> sum up
> what they had to say about the obsolescence of the Hubble and it's
> replacement for Jay?
should be saved. The Webb space telescope will be an infrared
telescope intended to explore the decoupling of photons from matter
shortly after the big bang. It will not supersede Hubble. If we lose
Hubble we lose the only optical space telescope.
The reasoning behind the abandonment of Hubble is that the risk to the
shuttle is too high. NASA, forced by the CAIB, has finally
acknowledged that shuttle is not even close to an operational system so
every mission has to go to ISS for inspection and to provide a refuge
in the event of an accident. Since Hubble is not in an orbit that can
be visited on the same launch as ISS, this kills the Hubble repair
missions. I believe Hubble is sufficiently important that it's worth
the risk. NASA should fly a mission with reduced crew (pilot, copilot,
one mission specialist to do the repair), and with a free flying camera
to do the external inspection. If there is trouble, additional
supplies (prepped in advance) should be launched to keep the crew safe
until a rescue can be launched (possibly on a soyuz).
If we want to go to space we have to be prepared to take risks. I
believe that it would be no problem at all finding astronaut volunteers
for a Hubble repair mission. Preparing a rescue package and rescue
options may take a long time, but Hubble has backup gyros for when the
mains fail. These are not sufficient for the pointing needed for
observation, but are good enough to maintain attitude for grabbing by
the shuttle.
......Andrew
Just because the Webb Space Telescope is to be better than the Hubble does not mean that the HST will not still be very useful. Most of us probably have more than one car, chair, etc., and there are probably 10,000 working astronomers world wide. Another telescope already proven, on side, etc. would not be a waste. Could all of us get along with one computer? Jay Huebner
for a good explanation as to why letting Hubble go is probably OK... Since I
already deleted it out of my e-mail account would the author kindly sum up
what they had to say about the obsolescence of the Hubble and it's
replacement for Jay?
Thanks!
Val