|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
James Webb Space Telescope is a boondoggle
James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is going to
take mostly infrared pictures of the universe. To reduce unwanted infrared light coming from the Sun, JWST will be launched into the Sun-Earth L2 point, which is 1.5 million kilometers away from the Earth. This far out location was justified by the shade made by the Earth. A quick calculation proves that the L2 point is *not* in the Earth's shade! The complete shade, called umbra, extends only to a distance of 1.39 million kilometers beyond the Earth, i.e., 110,000 km short. The L2 point is in partial shade called penumbra. If JWST is launched into the L2 point, it will sizzle in the sunlight almost as much as the Hubble Space Telescope. If something goes wrong with the JWST, the telescope will be difficult to repair because the L2 point is far away from the Earth. Worse yet, JWST has a monolithic design not suitable for telerobotic repair or upgrade. My conclusion: James Webb Space Telescope should be redesigned to improve its thermal insulation and compatibility with telerobots, and then launched into low Earth orbit. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Andrew Nowicki" wrote in message ... My conclusion: James Webb Space Telescope should be redesigned to improve its thermal insulation and compatibility with telerobots, and then launched into low Earth orbit. Ain't gonna happen. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Andrew Nowicki wrote in news:4216D559.B6CA6011
@nospam.com: If JWST is launched into the L2 point, it will sizzle in the sunlight almost as much as the Hubble Space Telescope. Which is why it has its own sunshade. Also, it's away from Earth's thermal radiation, which is the real reason for that orbit. What's the problem with this? If something goes wrong with the JWST, the telescope will be difficult to repair because the L2 point is far away from the Earth. Worse yet, JWST has a monolithic design not suitable for telerobotic repair or upgrade. My conclusion: James Webb Space Telescope should be redesigned to improve its thermal insulation and compatibility with telerobots, and then launched into low Earth orbit. What telerobots? You may have noticed they're not going to repair Hubble, either. If JWST breaks, well, that's too bad...and no upgrades. We aren't going to have a Shuttle much longer and it's not clear that CEV will be able to provide similar support at even slightly lower mission cost. --Damon |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Damon Hill" wrote in message 31... Andrew Nowicki wrote in news:4216D559.B6CA6011 @nospam.com: If JWST is launched into the L2 point, it will sizzle in the sunlight almost as much as the Hubble Space Telescope. Which is why it has its own sunshade. Also, it's away from Earth's thermal radiation, which is the real reason for that orbit. What's the problem with this? Absolutely right. It's thermal radiation from the Earth, not from the Sun, that causes problems for infrared telescopes in low orbits, where the 300K Earth fills nearly half the sky. The problem is general heating of the spacecraft, which makes it use up helium coolant much faster. It is very hard to reflect away this infrared radiation, which is mostly at wavelengths of about 0.01mm. Most of the Sun's radiation is visible and near-IR light, which is easily reflected by a sunshade. If something goes wrong with the JWST, the telescope will be difficult to repair because the L2 point is far away from the Earth. Worse yet, JWST has a monolithic design not suitable for telerobotic repair or upgrade. My conclusion: James Webb Space Telescope should be redesigned to improve its thermal insulation and compatibility with telerobots, and then launched into low Earth orbit. What telerobots? You may have noticed they're not going to repair Hubble, either. If JWST breaks, well, that's too bad...and no upgrades. We aren't going to have a Shuttle much longer and it's not clear that CEV will be able to provide similar support at even slightly lower mission cost. --Damon -- Mike Dworetsky (Remove "pants" spamblock to send e-mail) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Dworetsky wrote:
It's thermal radiation from the Earth, not from the Sun, that causes problems for infrared telescopes in low orbits, where the 300K Earth fills nearly half the sky. The problem is general heating of the spacecraft, which makes it use up helium coolant much faster. It is very hard to reflect away this infrared radiation, which is mostly at wavelengths of about 0.01mm. Most of the Sun's radiation is visible and near-IR light, which is easily reflected by a sunshade. Clean, polished gold and silver have *infrared* emissivity in the range of 0.01 to 0.03. They are good enough to reach the microkelvin temperature range in cryogenic equipment. A passive tube-shaped insulation surrounding the telescope in low Earth orbit could reduce its temperature to 70 K or so. It seems that NASA is going to send JWST to L2 because they cannot design decent thermal insulation. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Andrew Nowicki wrote:
A passive tube-shaped insulation surrounding the telescope in low Earth orbit could reduce its temperature to 70 K or so. It seems that NASA is going to send JWST to L2 because they cannot design decent thermal insulation. You're projecting your own cluelessness onto the engineers who designed JWST, who actually know what they are doing. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Andrew Nowicki wrote: A passive tube-shaped insulation surrounding the telescope in low Earth orbit could reduce its temperature to 70 K or so. It seems that NASA is going to send JWST to L2 because they cannot design decent thermal insulation. Hardly. The insulation they designed kept COBE's telescope under 50K in LEO after its LHe supply ran out. Trouble is, that requires that the telescope point pretty much directly away from the Earth. Which is a problem, since as the telescope goes around Earth, that direction changes constantly. This is workable, pretty much, for a sky-survey instrument like IRAS or COBE. It's grossly unsuited to a telescope that wants to point at arbitrary targets, and preferably stare at them for considerable lengths of time. Note that when ESA built an infrared observatory, they went to the extra trouble of putting ISO into a highly elliptical orbit, so it was well away from Earth most of the time. -- "Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Henry Spencer wrote:
[ker-snip] Note that when ESA built an infrared observatory, they went to the extra trouble of putting ISO into a highly elliptical orbit, so it was well away from Earth most of the time. Note also the more recent infrared and longer wavelength observatories and their designated operating locations: Launched missions: WMAP: Earth-Sun L2 Lissajous orbit Spitzer: Earth-trailing heliocentric orbit Planned missions: Herschel: Earth-Sun L2 Lissajous orbit Planck: Earth-Sun L2 Lissajous orbit SIM: Earth-trailing heliocentric orbit SPICA: Earth-Sun L2 JWST: Earth-Sun L2 Darwin: Earth-Sun L2 There are pretty strong trends here. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Mike Dworetsky" writes: It's thermal radiation from the Earth, not from the Sun, that causes problems for infrared telescopes in low orbits, where the 300K Earth fills nearly half the sky. Can't be right, as Mike will see once he thinks about it a bit more. 1.4 kW/m^2 from the Sun, about 400 W/m^2 from the Earth. Actually less than that from Earth because of the atmosphere. The real difficulty, of course, is that in LEO telescopes have to be shielded against both heat sources, Sun and Earth, which are in general in different directions. Shielding is really tough if the spacecraft orbit takes it between the two bodies. Whereas from L2, both bodies are always in more or less the same direction, so one shield takes care of both. Also, from L2 the Earth is a lot farther away and contributes very little heat anyway. spacecraft, which makes it use up helium coolant much faster. It is very hard to reflect away this infrared radiation, which is mostly at wavelengths of about 0.01mm. Most of the Sun's radiation is visible and near-IR light, which is easily reflected by a sunshade. As I think someone else has noted, it is easier to make a shield against IR than visible light. Most metals are more reflective at longer wavelengths. -- Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 Cambridge, MA 02138 USA (Please email your reply if you want to be sure I see it; include a valid Reply-To address to receive an acknowledgement. Commercial email may be sent to your ISP.) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Steve Willner wrote:
In article , "Mike Dworetsky" writes: It's thermal radiation from the Earth, not from the Sun, that causes problems for infrared telescopes in low orbits, where the 300K Earth fills nearly half the sky. Can't be right, as Mike will see once he thinks about it a bit more. 1.4 kW/m^2 from the Sun, about 400 W/m^2 from the Earth. Actually less than that from Earth because of the atmosphere. The Sun tends to lie in the same direction relative to the sky for a fairly long time, so you can easily use a sunshade and point your telescope in the other direction. But in LEO the Earth tends to zoom around the local sky every few hours, and subtends a very large angle while doing so. This is a lot harder to block out and when you do block it out you end up with a very small region of the sky that you can look at safely. The real difficulty, of course, is that in LEO telescopes have to be shielded against both heat sources, Sun and Earth, which are in general in different directions. Shielding is really tough if the spacecraft orbit takes it between the two bodies. Whereas from L2, both bodies are always in more or less the same direction, so one shield takes care of both. Also, from L2 the Earth is a lot farther away and contributes very little heat anyway. Precisely. But for LEO it matters more that the Earth is all over the sky, even a location like L1 where the Earth and Sun are on opposite sides would be preferable, regardless of the magnitudes of the heat inputs, because you could safely view a much larger portion of the sky. For LEO that safe portion looks like two sets of circles (one "up" one "down") on the sky, for L1 that looks like a big, thick vertical strip all the way around the sky (from up to "left" to down to right back to up), for L2 that looks like about half the sky, give or take. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
James Webb Space Telescope maintenance | Andrew Nowicki | Science | 1 | June 5th 04 06:32 PM |
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) | Rand Simberg | Space Science Misc | 18 | February 14th 04 03:28 AM |
Moon key to space future? | James White | Policy | 90 | January 6th 04 04:29 PM |
International Space Station Science - One of NASA's rising stars | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | December 27th 03 01:32 PM |