"starman" wrote in message
...
You certainly have a knack for hyperbole. Like it or not, public opinion
is part of the equation which determines NASA's funding. The public has
seen the results of Hubble and they (finally) like what they've seen.
That's more than can be said for the ISS so far. Most people don't know
it exists. It would be foolish to squander public support for a proven
space research tool, just to save the cost of one service mission.
Hubble has many years of good science left in it. It could be a long
time before we build another optical (visible light) research scope in
space.

I completely agree with you. The public dismay/outcry over the decision to
scrap Hubble should be seen as an opportunity for scientists, mission
planners, administrators and politicians. When was the last time we saw such
interest in any component of the space program?

Yes, as some have said, people like the pretty pictures. But what people
really crave is inspiration. The pretty pictures of our incredible universe
provide that. The space shuttle, in itself, does not. ISS does not. Like the
Hubble, journeys to other planets (with cameras to send back those pretty
pictures) do.

If I were the decision maker, I'd get my people started tomorrow designing
and building an advanced, optical space telescope and a mission (shuttle or
expendable launch vehicle) to get it into orbit as quickly as possible. And
I'd phase out as quickly as possible the ISS and shuttles. I'd have teams at
work designing a new, powerful, expendable launch vehicle to handle
requirements for future missions for the next decade or so -- or buy the
capacity from the Russians (or partner with them). I'd expand our solar
system exploratory robotic probes and get a serious program on the drawing
board for humans to return to the moon to establish a base for an
astronomical observatory and related research.

Maybe for the public: "It's the pretty pictures, stupid."

But coincidentally, there's some pretty science that piggybacks thereon.

LewBob