NASA Urged to Reconsider Hubble Decision

It's silly isn't it... You know any savings from the launch will just fall
thru the cracks, so what do they do with the stuff they already got built?
Seems like an aweful waste to me.

Kris
my Energia HLLV site: http://www.k26.com/buran/

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...

http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/b...ocal-headlines

"NASA urged to reconsider Hubble decision"
The Associated Press
January 28, 2004

Maryland's congressional delegation sent a letter to NASA administrator
Sean O'Keefe urging him to reconsider the space agency's recent decision
to cancel the final servicing mission for the Hubble Space Telescope.

"The scientific returns we have received from Hubble's service thus far
have exceeded our expectations. Given the President's recent
pronouncement of a vision to rededicate the Nation's commitment to space
exploration, we believe that NASA should make every possible effort to
retain this proven window on the universe," reads the letter, which was
sent Tuesday and made available to The Associated Press on Wednesday.

Earlier this month, NASA announced it won't send the space shuttle in
2006 to service the orbiting telescope, a mission needed to enable it to
keep operating. Without the servicing mission the orbiting telescope is
expected to stop working several years before its scheduled 2010
retirement.

Hubble's scientific operations are conducted at the Space Telescope
Science Institute, located at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. The
telescope is managed and operated by the Goddard Space Flight Center in
Greenbelt.

After NASA's decision was announced, Mikulski, the ranking minority
member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that oversees NASA's
budget, sent a letter to O'Keefe last week, asking him to reconsider the
decision.

The Baltimore Democrat said she was shocked by the decision given the
extraordinary contributions to science by the Hubble, which has
revolutionized the study of astronomy with its striking images of the
universe. Mikulski is also scheduled to meet with employees of the Space
Telescope Science Institute on Friday.

The lawmakers noted the next generation space telescope, the James Webb
Telescope, is not scheduled to be launched until 2010, several years
after the Hubble is now expected to stop working.

"The gap created between the operation of these two telescopes will rob
scientists of several years of invaluable data," the letter reads.

The lawmakers also noted about $200 million has already been spent on
two new instruments that were to be brought to the Hubble by the space
shuttle, and it may cost more than $300 million for a mission to return
the Hubble safely to earth.

"In light of these costs, which total approximately a half-billion
dollars, as well as the several decades of funding already devoted to
Hubble, a decision to cancel the Hubble program several years shy of its
goal appears to make little economic sense," the letter reads.

In addition to Mikulski, the letter was signed by Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes
and Representatives Steny Hoyer, Ben Cardin, Wayne Gilchrest, Roscoe
Bartlett, Albert Wynn, Elijah Cummings, C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger and
Chris Van Hollen.

[end of article]

--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

Hansel wrote:

It's silly isn't it... You know any savings from the launch will just fall
thru the cracks, so what do they do with the stuff they already got built?
Seems like an aweful waste to me.

Kris
my Energia HLLV site: http://www.k26.com/buran/

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...

http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/b...ocal-headlines

snip above article

The issue is not the cost of the extra flight, but that of the
additional safety hoops the current environment would demand for
such a "unique" flight. The shuttle is basically required to
complete the ISS, and in the remaining "life span" ,as dictated by
the CAIB and reinforced by the President's speech, there are not
many non-ISS slots available.

How many of the congress folk quoted in this article joined the "how
could NASA let this happen" dog pile following the Columbia breakup?
Funny how their tune changes when the solution negatively affects
folks in their districts. If they really want to save Hubble, maybe
they should be supporting a faster schedule for the proposed ApolloR2
vehicle as a ISS/shuttle assured return vehicle. Mostly I suspect
that this was simply a "free" opportunity to whine about the actions
of the current administration without having to commit to an
alternative solution.

In article ,
Eric Pederson deZ to respond wrote:
...The shuttle is basically required to
complete the ISS, and in the remaining "life span" ,as dictated by
the CAIB and reinforced by the President's speech, there are not
many non-ISS slots available.

The number of flights available is not something that is dictated by God;
it is itself a decision. A modest investment of additional resources can
make more flight slots available, within limits.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. |