Thread: Hubble's last stand

I 'heard' on the tube the plan to bring Hubble down in the not to distant future. (I think the date mentioned was sometime in 2014.) Just wanted to know why they would bring it down instead of leaving it up there for possible re-use or retrivial.

Without the Shuttle, bringing it down would prove exceptionally difficult (impossible). Leaving it up there would result in it's eventual decay and random crash landing here on Earth. It's fulfilled its mission and then some, and it's been replaced by two newer telescopes which will search the skies in different EM bands so as to add different data to that which the Hubble has contributed.

By bringing it down manually, they can ensure it lands in a very remotely traveled area of the ocean.

Originally Posted by mugaliens

Without the Shuttle, bringing it down would prove exceptionally difficult (impossible).

Leaving it up?

Originally Posted by mugaliens

Without the Shuttle, bringing it down would prove exceptionally difficult (impossible). Leaving it up there would result in it's eventual decay and random crash landing here on Earth. It's fulfilled its mission and then some, and it's been replaced by two newer telescopes which will search the skies in different EM bands so as to add different data to that which the Hubble has contributed.

By bringing it down manually, they can ensure it lands in a very remotely traveled area of the ocean.

I was hoping that they would replace the Shuttle with something else sometime in the (near??) future. As for the decay of orbit, how long would that take? The thinking was that they could construct state-of-the-art replacemjent parts, eventually taking whatever replaces the Shuttle up to 'R&R" the Hubble and possibly even changing its orbit/location to somewhere farther out. It just seems such a 'waste' that they can't reuse it somehow.

Originally Posted by David E. Eaton Sr.

I was hoping that they would replace the Shuttle with something else sometime in the (near??) future. As for the decay of orbit, how long would that take?

The Wikipedia page says it could happen anytime from 2019 to 2032.

Hubble Space Telescope - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Towards the end, under "Orbital Decay."

Originally Posted by David E. Eaton Sr.

The thinking was that they could construct state-of-the-art replacemjent parts, eventually taking whatever replaces the Shuttle up to 'R&R" the Hubble and possibly even changing its orbit/location to somewhere farther out. It just seems such a 'waste' that they can't reuse it somehow.

It sounds like a better one was planned, but that one may be running in to budgetary problems.

There was a plan to do the same with Skylab, send the new manned rockets (i.e., the shuttle) up to boost it before it fell to earth, but they weren't ready in time.

Originally Posted by Coelacanth

Hubble Space Telescope - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the citation, Coelacanth. Maybe in the future (if there is a future for the space program) the powers that be might look into designing with the thought of reusing.

Originally Posted by David E. Eaton Sr.

Thanks for the citation, Coelacanth. Maybe in the future (if there is a future for the space program) the powers that be might look into designing with the thought of reusing.

I agree, at least with respect to a long-term serviceable shell including solar panels and environment. The payload package could be replaced and plugged into the shell.

For example, I'm on my third computer in the last 8 years, but the case remains the same one I first loaded up in 2003. I'm on my second power supply, but my third set of most parts, including mobo, proc, video, RAM, and HD's.

Originally Posted by mugaliens

I agree, at least with respect to a long-term serviceable shell including solar panels and environment. The payload package could be replaced and plugged into the shell.

For example, I'm on my third computer in the last 8 years, but the case remains the same one I first loaded up in 2003. I'm on my second power supply, but my third set of most parts, including mobo, proc, video, RAM, and HD's.

I built a computer once. Not being very experienced with this sort of thing, I wasn't sure what size fan to get. So I just got the largest one in the parts catalog. As a result, my computer sounded like a B-52 taking off.

It died a few years ago. But not from overheating.

Maybe if hubble had been built so that a robot booster could dock with it, to drive it out to an orbit that could be sustained....
But if it requires a man ( a person ) to go out there and tow it to a new spot, then it'll probably be cheaper, and risk fewer lives, to scrap it and put up a new one.
These days, it costs 3 times as much (inc p+p) to replace the element in a kettle as it does to buy a new kettle.
Our Economy is very badly named.
With foresight and a little more communism, all kettles would be the same and a replacement element would be available off the shelf in a high street store. (ahh, the good old days!)
Emperor Napoleon planted forrest - planning that France could harvest it in the year 2000 to maintain the French fleet.

I feel anger on Hubble's behalf.

The new Web Scope will replace the Hubble and will be sent by an unmanned rocket. Hubble is to big to bring back down with what they have now. To bad ! I would of loved to be able to see closeup the "REAL" Hubble.