Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!

Save the Hubble, petition

E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
in Zocalo v2.0
Everyone who lives in US have to go this page ASAP.
And that's not a reaquest, that's an order! (or else... :angryv: )
[url]http://savethehubble.org/[/url]

Comments

  • A2597A2597 Fanboy
    why save it?

    it will slow down work on the space station, and the goal of the moon/mars.

    plus, once it dies, they will replace it with a better one! :D
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Because they might not replace it with a better one, because the better one might die as well, because there aren't plans for the better one until well after Hubble will die without any more servicing missions, and because the better one won't see the same stuff as Hubble due to different features.
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by A2597 [/i]
    [B]it will slow down work on the space station, and the goal of the moon/mars.[/B][/QUOTE]
    [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/library/budget/fy2005-nasa/55385main_01_Front_page_Total_Summary_Table.pdf[/url]
    Compare this to Military budget or this:
    [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/budget/fy2005/index.html[/url]

    [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2004/02/mil-040202-dod03.htm[/url]

    You'll notice that "fat" goes elsewhere than to NASA's funding.
    I would say that Hubble should be kept as backup if it isn't taken back to earths even when Webb is ready, because this new telescope cannot be serviced.
  • the_exilethe_exile Kupo!
    Signed.
  • JackNJackN <font color=#99FF99>Lightwave Alien</font>
    done!

    ;)
  • Mr.GaribaldiMr.Garibaldi Earthforce Officer
    hmmm they should attatch a module onto the space station that IS a space telescope... then the space station will be worth somthing

    It is hard to put forth manned programs when only 2 countries have technology to launch men into space, and russia cant launch anything but a "geo metro" of a manned space vehcile AND our shuttle is using OLD oldoldold technology...
    So... I am at odds for wether to upgrade Hubble... but I'm sure NASA can figure out somthing else to do on the same mission as fixing hubble but human safety is a premium now and I am not sure if it is worth it...

    ** not signing petition..... yet**

    [SIZE=1]ohh an i dont count china having "manned flight" capabilities... they are still in the EARLY 1960's[/SIZE]
  • Captain,SimmondsCaptain,Simmonds Trainee trainee
    Arnt they going to put a new and better Hubble up there?
  • MartianDustMartianDust Elite Ranger
    I think it should be saved. Its not had many troubles and has sent back such beautiful pictures. I can't understand why they want to let it go.
    Ok human safety and all that, I find a tad hypocritical when there's wars around. I know I'm going off topic but still......... :)
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    Well, at least the seem to have money to drop it to pacific ocean:
    [url]http://www.space.com/news/hubble_weiler_040204.html[/url]
    [QUOTE]Weiler said some of the technology needed to carry that mission out still needs to be developed.
    But there is no rush. Regardless of when Hubble stops being scientifically useful, it will remain safely in orbit until at least 2013, he said. The new budget allows $300 million over the next five years to plan for the deorbiting project. NASA has not decided in which year it will carry that mission out.[/QUOTE]
  • MartianDustMartianDust Elite Ranger
    They're having a laugh aren't they? :mad: How much does it cost to get it fixed approximately? Be cheaper to blow it in space surely? Don't want more rubbish in the sea.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Blowing it up in space would make one hell of a mess and an enormous obstruction for other orbiting craft.
  • MartianDustMartianDust Elite Ranger
    Well I didn't meant it literally, but hey it would make a cool firework for a few mins from here perhaps! ;)
  • BekennBekenn Sinclair's Duck
    Servicing would cost $500 million, if I recall correctly, and that was [i]before[/i] the new safety measures that would be required.

    I'm not sure I agree with the wording of the petition. Hubble was always supposed to be brought down around 2010, which would have required one more servicing mission to make sure it stayed in service that long. The only differences here are that that one last servicing mission won't happen, and when the telescope goes silent, they're going to crash it into the ocean rather than trying to put it in the Smithsonian intact. This petition seems to be suggesting that NASA should be required to keep Hubble in service indefinitely, which it was never designed for. My only real beef with the current plan is that the telescope won't make it to the Smithsonian intact (though I'm sure they'd try to recover as many pieces as possible from the ocean).

    Leaving it in orbit without servicing is clearly out of the question, as its orbit would degrade and it would fall [i]without[/i] the benefit of human control, possibly landing in a city or something, which would be really bad. A controlled de-orbit is better than that, certainly. I just want to see it brought back intact rather than crashing it into the ocean.
  • shadow boxershadow boxer The Finger Painter & Master Ranter
    Geo Metro of spacecraft ?

    Well we'd be up shit creek without the old bulletproof stuff the Russians build...

    how long has it been since they had a problem with the 'Geo' hmmm ??

    find a less offensive metaphor mate or retract that statement before you end up in a gulag..:)
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Bekenn [/i]
    [B]I just want to see it brought back intact rather than crashing it into the ocean. [/B][/QUOTE]

    I agree. I can understand their reasons for not having the servicing mission and for letting it die earlier than originally planned, but I really want to see it in the Smithsonian intact and think it is a priceless scientific treasure that should be brought back intact if at all possible. But I can also understand why they don't want to risk a shuttle and crew to get it (despite many astronauts probably more than willing to risk their lives to go get it, let alone service it).

    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by shadow boxer [/i]
    [B]how long has it been since they had a problem with the 'Geo' hmmm ??[/B][/QUOTE]

    If I recall correctly, the last one to return from the ISS.
  • JackNJackN <font color=#99FF99>Lightwave Alien</font>
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by shadow boxer [/i]
    [B]Geo Metro of spacecraft ?

    Well we'd be up shit creek without the old bulletproof stuff the Russians build...

    how long has it been since they had a problem with the 'Geo' hmmm ??

    find a less offensive metaphor mate or retract that statement before you end up in a gulag..:) [/B][/QUOTE]

    Hey! Who said that?!?

    I'll have you know that my 92 Geo Metro kicks ass! ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.