Was there not also the problem of bringing it down somewhere remote to be
considered?
Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Brett Buck" wrote in message
...
flyguy wrote:
The subject of STS-125 and the Hubble's orbit came up on another group. I
misremembered it being in an equatorial orbit when of course (duh) it was
launched into the same inclination as the 28.5-deg latitude of the Cape.
But this got me to wondering why they didn't put Hubble in an equatorial
orbit, considering the possible benefits of less complicated celestial
tracking and orbital issues such as precession.

It's expensive and probably beyond the capability, but the perceived
advantages are minimal if any. It's not significantly more complex to
handle 28.5 degrees than it is fractions of a degree. It's not like you
could just assume it was zero, you would still have to use the actual
orbit. Might as well be 28 as ~0.

Brett