Oct 31 2006
Prev/Next Posts: « Hubble is GO! || Bulgaria at it again »
Hubble mission update
I originally was going to put this in the previous post as an update, but it got long enough and covers enough topics to make it its own entry.
The mission update is going on right now as I write this. They will install the two science instruments: the Wide Field Camera 3 and the Cosmic Origins Spectrograph, both of which are sitting in a warehouse waiting to go. They’ll replace all six gyros and the batteries. They’ll add thermal insulation blankets on the outside of Hubble. They’ll replace one Fine Guidance Sensors, an incredible telescope that keeps Hubble locked on to its targets (and which can be used for some science). They’ll also install and "over voltage protection device", and a soft capture mechanism on Hubble’s aft end to facilitate docking. Finally, they will try to fix STIS, the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph, which shorted out a few years ago.
WF3 will replace WFPC2, the Wide Field Planetary Camera 2 installed back in 1993. WF3 is cool– it uses the original WFPC chassis with all new optics to seriously upgrade the camera capabilities (unlike the current Advanced Camera for Surveys, it has ultraviolet imaging detectors). COS will replace the no-longer needed COSTAR, the optics originally installed to correct Hubble’s flawed mirror. Now all on board detectors have optics already installed to correct the flaw.
I’m very excited about the potential repair of STIS. I worked on that camera for many years, and if it’s fixed it gives Hubble sight into the far-ultraviolet, which no other camera can do. It will complement ACS, COS, and WF3. However, repairing STIS will be difficult. Taking the cover off the instrument will be the first hard part– there are 111 screws (yes, one hundred eleven) holding the cover on. Worse, those screws are not designed to be taken out by astronauts! But they have designed a "capture device" to make sure they don’t lose any screws. After they get the cover off, they still have to replace the failed electronics board, and that has its own issues. But of course the folks at Ball Aerospace (who built STIS) and at NASA have looked into this as best they can, and they still have time to make sure they understand everything they can about this mission.
This whole mission is going to cost $900 million. A lot of that is already spent, and will be spent over the next 18 months before launch. That includes launch costs, which are significant, of course.
Is it worth it? I think so, but of course there will be detractors. I’ll point out, as I always do, that this kind of money sounds like a huge amount when stated baldly, but in fact if you pro-rate it across the timeline and by the people in the US who will pay for it, the cost is actually pretty low considering what we get out of Hubble– and I don’t just mean the science, which is plentiful, but the sheer inspiration of the mission. If you want to make this mission worth it, then go to Google Images, download a good Hubble image, and stick it on your wall. When I hand out Hubble pictures after I give public talks, the kids rush the stage to grab them. The look on their faces makes it clear how worth it Hubble really is.
worth it. go nasa.
Every time I look at the pictures from the Ultra Deep Field runs, I say to myself, damn, this is a big universe! When I see those pictures and I realize that almost all of the dots and smudges of light are galaxies, I come to the conclusion that ALL of the money past, present and future spent on the Hubble and it’s eventual replacement, the NGST is worth it!!!!!
I ignore the detractors, because they obviously are of small minds and less than critical thinking.:)
One of the main benefits I think these types of missions offer is the ability take one more small step into our evolutionary voyage off the planet earth. The space program is still in it’s infancy and these steps we take today will be the groundwork for much greater things generations down the road.
Thanks,
Brad Henry
Rock on.
“Now all on board detectors have optics already installed to correct the flaw.”
Haha! I love this!
I just hope if they base some of the instruments for the NGST on the ones on Hubble, that they won’t mistakenly also include corrective optics! Then I’d cry.
Well, when the detractor’s public Mouthpiece Of The Day (MOTD) is Katie Couric…
…I don’t think you have to worry too much about them. As it is, it doesn’t take much to convince the average person that Hubble, being space-based, can do a lot better optical science than ground-based telescopes (of course, ground wins when it comes to radio telescopy but… well… more surface area to play with).
“both of which are sitting in a warehouse waiting to go”
The good folks here at Goddard who support the giant clean rooms in Building 29 might not appreciate your calling their facility a “warehouse!”
I have taken many a stroll through Bldg 29, and I calls ‘em likes I sees ‘em.
Actually, I think it was 29 when I stumbled on Hubble’s Faint Object Spectrograph a few years back, before it was sent to the Smithsonian. I have some great pix of that…
This is definitely exciting.
There will always be naysayers, but I am glad that NASA’s current administrators have the wherewithall to go ahead with a Hubble servicing mission.
I have some pics of the Bldg 29 from when I was there…really cool! Some of the instruments currently awaiting installation were there at the time.
Rob
Great to hear that Hubble’s going to be repaired!
Won’t they make back that money in the sale of calendars of Hubble photography? ;->
Let’s see, $900M divided by 300M people, this mission costs each American $3.00. I think it’s worth it!
And of course the science benefits more than just Americans - so $900e6 / 6.5e9 is, I think, about 14 cents a piece (and that’s rounding up). Oh, yeah - its well worth it.
jbs
$0.9 billion! Just think about how much good that much money would do for the starving people of the world…well, for the leaders of the countries with all of those starving people anyway;-)
$900 million is such a tiny amount in the scheme of things governmental that it would seem that no one would even notice it, much less complain about it.
$9X10 to the 8th. Coffee money for most governmental depts. these days.
Bill GAtes probably gives away a lot more than that on a good day,,,
What a tremendous investment is Hubble. Seeing to limits of the universe, nearly. It makes me proud to be human, “merely”.
Gary 7
I’d state the $900 million as an investment to keep it running.
If you have a car and it will cost $1200 to fix it back to tip-top shape, the question to ask isn’t whether $1200 is too much. The question is whether it’s better it’s worth $1200 to get more years out of a $10000 car (the cost of a new hubble these days is likely more than that). In that terms, it seems like a very wise investment.
I think people are making too much of the 111 screws in STIS. The challenge of dealing with 111 screws isn’t any harder than dealing with 15 screws. More tedious and time consuming, yes, but not any harder.
That’s not to say that there isn’t a serious challenge there, but everybody keeps talking about how many screws there are. Enough with the screws!
I’d state the $900 million as an investment to keep it running.
If you have a car and it will cost $1200 to fix it back to tip-top shape, the question to ask isn’t whether $1200 is too much. The question is whether it’s better it’s worth $1200 to get X more years out of a $10000 car (the cost of a new hubble these days is likely more than that). In that terms, it seems like a very wise investment.
I think people are making too much of the 111 screws in STIS. The challenge of dealing with 111 screws isn’t any harder than dealing with 15 screws. More tedious and time consuming, yes, but not any harder.
That’s not to say that there isn’t a serious challenge there, but everybody keeps talking about how many screws there are. Enough with the screws!
[…] “Hubble mission update“, no Bad Astronomy. Já é oficial: vai haver missão de reparação ao Hubble. Ainda sobre este assunto, que é um dos assuntos do momento, “Hubble Mission“, no Tom’s Astronomy Blog; […]
[…] interesting question: if NASA only has funds in the next Hubble servicing mission to repair either STIS or ACS, which should it […]