NASA Urged to Reconsider Hubble Decision

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

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

I suspect a lot will depend on who is in the Whitehouse after the election.

I'd be amazed if they could not actually find the people willing to crew the
mission, I guess it really depends on the availability of a Shuttle and the
cost commitment involved, not any eye on safety.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________
__________________________________


"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
|
http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/b...ory?coll=bal-l
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


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free, so there!
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.573 / Virus Database: 363 - Release Date: 28/01/04

IMHO a further HST service mission would not take any more risks like the
five previous HST successful missions
(including launch) especially the foam issue is solved.

albert

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
I suspect a lot will depend on who is in the Whitehouse after the
election.

I'd be amazed if they could not actually find the people willing to crew
the
mission, I guess it really depends on the availability of a Shuttle and
the
cost commitment involved, not any eye on safety.

The one issue I can see is that of schedule. It isn't just a question of
slotting a shuttle to go up there, but also ensuring that the mission occurs
after NASA has completed development of independant inspection/repair capabilities.

Consider that NASA was very lucky that the shuttle was grounded at a time when
the station was symetrically assembled. Had the truss been asymetrical, it
would have posed interesting issue, especially when you consider the CMGs's
fragile health.

With the requirement to launch daytime, this may present interesting
scheduling requirements between ISS and Hubble launches as well as maintenance schedules.

On the other hand, if on can launch hubble during a long period when you can't
go to ISS due to daytime launch requirement, it would not have much impact on
ISS assembly.

The BBC has an interesting article about mounting support for Hubble,
including a petition.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/science/nature/3437309.stm

Save the Hubble' campaign soars

By Dr David Whitehouse
BBC News Online science editor

A petition website calling for the Hubble Space Telescope to be saved is
attracting a growing number of hits.

http://www.SaveTheHubble.com was established by University of Brasilia
lecturer Fernando Ribeiro following the US space agency's decision to abandon
the scope.

"I hope it will become a forum about Hubble's prospects and a launch pad (so
to speak) for a campaign to save it."

Left alone, Hubble, called the most important scientific instrument ever,
could only survive another three years.

Safety concerns

Astronomers were stunned when Nasa's chief, Sean O'Keefe, decided on 16
January to cancel the fifth, and final, visit of the space shuttle to service
the Hubble Space Telescope (HST).

A service call is essential to ensure Hubble's smooth operation until the end
of the decade.

The telescope has only three working gyroscopes, down from its compliment of
six, and cannot afford to lose any more.

" Let the voters say: "We don't want to go to the moon! We want to go to
infinity and beyond!" "
Fernando Ribeiro

O'Keefe decided that in the wake of the Columbia disaster it was unwise to
send astronauts on a shuttle mission that could not reach the safety of the
International Space Station in the event of a problem.

Dismayed astronomers understood O'Keefe's logic, but many pointed out that
there would now be a gap of several years between the demise of Hubble and its
replacement reaching orbit.

They also wondered if there was any way to save the telescope.

Noise from Brazil

In Brazil, Fernando Ribeiro also wondered if Hubble could be saved.

"The HST is such an important, complex, fascinating and cost/benefit effective
instrument that it is hard to imagine someone could ever suggest it should be
dumped into the ocean, let alone Nasa itself," he told BBC News Online.

"I am fan of science and of space. I was standing in front of a huge black and
white TV set when Neil Armstrong took the small step (or the giant leap if you
prefer) on the Moon. I was seven and never forgot the thrill of the moment."

Mr Ribeiro first heard about Hubble's demise from the internet.

"I sat in front of the monitor and stared at it for several minutes
recollecting all the facts I knew about Hubble. Its planning, building, the
flawed mirror, the device to fix it, the book I had: Gems of the Hubble. I
thought about the loss it meant to the whole human
race."

So www.SaveTheHubble.com was born.

"I imagined that it could be a good idea to build up a site where people could
voice their feelings and ideas about the whole story. My role would be to put
together as many references as I could about the struggle to save the
telescope."

"There has been an exponential growth of the public outcry in favour of the
instrument, and it is just the beginning! Since the matter is obviously
political, public pressure will certainly play a big role, especially in an
election year."

The petition will be sent to Nasa and US politicians.

"Let the voters say: 'We don't want to go to the moon! We want to go to
infinity and beyond!'," said Mr Ribeiro.

So just slip one extra Shuttle mission in with the rest - the Hubble's good
science, and more importantly for NASA, good PR.






"John Doe" wrote in message
...
The BBC has an interesting article about mounting support for Hubble,
including a petition.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/science/nature/3437309.stm

Save the Hubble' campaign soars

By Dr David Whitehouse
BBC News Online science editor

A petition website calling for the Hubble Space Telescope to be saved is
attracting a growing number of hits.

http://www.SaveTheHubble.com was established by University of Brasilia
lecturer Fernando Ribeiro following the US space agency's decision to
abandon
the scope.

"I hope it will become a forum about Hubble's prospects and a launch pad
(so
to speak) for a campaign to save it."

Left alone, Hubble, called the most important scientific instrument ever,
could only survive another three years.

Safety concerns

Astronomers were stunned when Nasa's chief, Sean O'Keefe, decided on 16
January to cancel the fifth, and final, visit of the space shuttle to
service
the Hubble Space Telescope (HST).

A service call is essential to ensure Hubble's smooth operation until the
end
of the decade.

The telescope has only three working gyroscopes, down from its compliment
of
six, and cannot afford to lose any more.

" Let the voters say: "We don't want to go to the moon! We want to go to
infinity and beyond!" "
Fernando Ribeiro

O'Keefe decided that in the wake of the Columbia disaster it was unwise to
send astronauts on a shuttle mission that could not reach the safety of
the
International Space Station in the event of a problem.

Dismayed astronomers understood O'Keefe's logic, but many pointed out that
there would now be a gap of several years between the demise of Hubble and
its
replacement reaching orbit.

They also wondered if there was any way to save the telescope.

Noise from Brazil

In Brazil, Fernando Ribeiro also wondered if Hubble could be saved.

"The HST is such an important, complex, fascinating and cost/benefit
effective
instrument that it is hard to imagine someone could ever suggest it should
be
dumped into the ocean, let alone Nasa itself," he told BBC News Online.

"I am fan of science and of space. I was standing in front of a huge black
and
white TV set when Neil Armstrong took the small step (or the giant leap if
you
prefer) on the Moon. I was seven and never forgot the thrill of the
moment."

Mr Ribeiro first heard about Hubble's demise from the internet.

"I sat in front of the monitor and stared at it for several minutes
recollecting all the facts I knew about Hubble. Its planning, building,
the
flawed mirror, the device to fix it, the book I had: Gems of the Hubble. I
thought about the loss it meant to the whole human
race."

So www.SaveTheHubble.com was born.

"I imagined that it could be a good idea to build up a site where people
could
voice their feelings and ideas about the whole story. My role would be to
put
together as many references as I could about the struggle to save the
telescope."

"There has been an exponential growth of the public outcry in favour of
the
instrument, and it is just the beginning! Since the matter is obviously
political, public pressure will certainly play a big role, especially in
an
election year."

The petition will be sent to Nasa and US politicians.

"Let the voters say: 'We don't want to go to the moon! We want to go to
infinity and beyond!'," said Mr Ribeiro.

Plus, it would be a real shame not to get this into the Smithsonian. I think everyone just
assumed this would happen. But would that have to be an entire mission itself...just to bring
it back?

I agree with another post...I astronauts would jump at the opportuity to not only fly a
mission to service the HST, but to also bring it home. If I wold hate to see it just die and
burn up, I can't image how folks in the organization feel.

Mark

Plus, it would be a real shame not to get this into the Smithsonian. I think
everyone just
assumed this would happen. But would that have to be an entire mission
itself...just to bring
it back?


Use the ghubble retrieval to launch something else firstr then pick up hubble
and bring it home

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.