Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg "What we've told everyone is that there is an elevated risk to virtually any satellite in low-earth orbit," (http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/02/gonehubblegone.html)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/hubbleeaglespires.jpgby Alexis Madrigal - Wired – Feb. 18, 2009

This could be a really huge setback for astronomical research -- Ed.

The spectacular collision between two satellites on Feb. 10 could make the shuttle mission to fix the Hubble Space Telescope too risky to attempt.

Before the collision, space junk problems had already upped the Hubble mission's risk of a "catastrophic impact" beyond NASA's usual limits, Nature's Geoff Brumfiel reported today, and now the problem will be worse.

Mark Matney, an orbital debris specialist at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas told the publication that even before the collision, the risk of an impact was 1 in 185, which was "uncomfortably close to unacceptable levels" and the satellite collision "is only going to add on to that."

Matney said that it could be one or two weeks before NASA knows if the mission will go ahead. If it does, the shuttle Atlantis is expected to reach the telescope in mid-May. ..http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/02/gonehubblegone.html

I'm gutted about this.

ollie

That's one of my favorite pictures of the cosmos.

I like to think there are always options.
If its too dangerous to take the shuttle to the hubble, find a way to bring hubble to the shuttle.

I like to think there are always options.
If its too dangerous to take the shuttle to the hubble, find a way to bring hubble to the shuttle.

How to bring Hubble to the Shuttle? Hmm. Telepathy. Think good vibes. Hire some space aliens to move it. Pray for the physical constants of the universe to change. Sprinkle some magic dust around.

I can't think of anything that will be less expensive than simply sending up a replacement. The upcoming James Webb Space Telescope will hand the IR band much better than Hubble. Something else is needed for the visible and UV bands.

You can use the good vibes of space fairies if you like, but I was thinking more in terms of a satellite designed to grab other satellites. It is launched and does a rendezvous with the problem equipment. It latches on and using rockets tows/pushes the equipment to be recovered into a different orbit. Another option, is a smaller satellite launched from the shuttle with a tether to pull both satellites back. The tech is needed for other jobs in space, so now is as good a time as any to finish developing it. Did I forget to mention that NASA is already looking at this concept? Once ready, it could be used to remove some of junk that is already up there so we don't have to worry about what it will bump into or where it might land.

Hubble wasn't cheap & still has value. Yes the James Webb is better, but there is never enough time on a single satellite, so having two is better. And using both in tandem could create options that neither one alone could ever provide. And imagine the value of the space station if we could get the various satellite to it when they need repair.

a satellite designed to grab other satellites. It is launched and does a rendezvous with the problem equipment. It latches on and using rockets tows/pushes the equipment to be recovered into a different orbit.
I think thats in the pipeline. How long before it becomes operational is anyones guess.

ollie

Well if there is life out there we are certainly leaving enough trash for our neighbors to notice. Wonder if there is a Community Owners Association for our galaxy? Bet the past due fees are going to be killer. - Dale

... a satellite designed to grab other satellites. It is launched and does a rendezvous with the problem equipment. It latches on and using rockets tows/pushes the equipment to be recovered into a different orbit. I think thats in the pipeline. How long before it becomes operational is anyones guess.

Anything "in the pipeline" is already too late to fly on the Shuttle, which is supposed to retire next year.

The Shuttle never came within an order of magnitude of the claims (cost, flight frequency, turn around time) used to sell the program to Congress and the public.

Well if there is life out there we are certainly leaving enough trash for our neighbors to notice. Wonder if there is a Community Owners Association for our galaxy? Bet the past due fees are going to be killer. - Dale

On the bright side, I have always wanted a planet with rings! A moon is so passe.

Anything "in the pipeline" is already too late to fly on the Shuttle, which is supposed to retire next year.
Unfortunately true. Are there any successors planned for it? The way things are going, i fear that the whole space program will retire with the space shuttle.
Regarding collecting all this space junk, the only thing i can think of thats remotely doable is a large slab of aerogel orbiting the earth. Given time and luck that it held together, it should clear a lot of space. At least the orbits most often used anyway.
In any case, space is becoming less and less accessible as time goes on. Which is funny because we have things like spaceship one bringing space travel within reach of the (admittedly loaded) average joe.

ollie

We already have other launch vehicles other than the shuttle, but they are unmanned and inteneded for satalites only. The new lauch vehicles currently being developed look more like classic rocketry than the fly-up, fly-down plane style aproach the shuttle was supposed to demonstrate. In terms of dollars, we should have never developed/flown the shuttle. Traditoinal tech & a space station was a far cheaper and safer way to go, but it was difficult for a nation with stars in its eyes to see that until we dedicated ourselves to the wrong path.

The space shuttle...
A 50s idea, using 60s tech, assembled in the 70s, flown in the 80s and beyond.
That can't be good. It was built obsolete, but it was so cool.