A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hubble Question...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 1st 04, 10:29 PM
Brian Thorn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 20:19:44 +0200, "Roger Conroy"
wrote:


Recovery of Hubble remains technically possible, but NASA has ground-ruled
it out for safety reasons.


How about attaching it to the ISS?
73 Roger ZR3RC


We'd have to launch a Shuttle to go get Hubble. Bring it home. And
then launch it again on another Shuttle to the ISS. The fuel costs are
roughly comparable to sending a rocket up to it to change Hubble's
orbital inclination.

Then Hubble would have to contend with a relatively polluted
environment around ISS, which has rocket thrusters and many spacecraft
coming and going. And Hubble would have to be insulated somehow from
the vibration of humans and machines working inside the Station. And
somehow, Hubble would have to find a way to point itself irrespective
of what direction the Station is pointing.

Leaving it in orbit nearby is not practical, either. Hubble has no
propulsion system, so it would quickly drift away from ISS (which
performs semi-frequent orbit adjustment firings to maintain the
desired altitude.)

Brian
  #12  
Old February 2nd 04, 12:27 AM
jerry warner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...



Bruce Kille wrote:

Apparently, recovery of the Hubble for placement in the Smithsonian is
not possible,


Bruce


*Tell that to Haliburton (sp?) and I'll bet a contract will be let
tomorrow.
Jerry




  #13  
Old February 2nd 04, 12:54 AM
drdoody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...




"jerry warner" wrote in message
...


Bruce Kille wrote:

Apparently, recovery of the Hubble for placement in the Smithsonian is
not possible,


Bruce


*Tell that to Haliburton (sp?) and I'll bet a contract will be let
tomorrow.
Jerry


If it weren't for the fact that they're more than willing to defraud the US
taxpayer at the drop of a hat, Halliburton would be my first choice to build
a manned base on the moon or in the belt.

Doc

--
And if you wish to avoid crushing social embarrassment, it's red wine
with dwarf, white with fetus.

Semolina Pilchard


  #14  
Old February 2nd 04, 02:45 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

Brian Thorn wrote:
Then Hubble would have to contend with a relatively polluted
environment around ISS, which has rocket thrusters and many spacecraft
coming and going. And Hubble would have to be insulated somehow from
the vibration of humans and machines working inside the Station.


Forgetting economic reality for a moment, couldn't you tether a telescope to
the station with a cable that is a few kilometres long ? That would allow the
telescope to benefit from reboosts, while still being far enough away to avoid
the "pollution" near the station and with a tether long enough to attenuate
vibrations.

And at regular intervals, they could pull the telescope to the ISS where
changes could be done by ISS crews doing EVAs from Quest, and then push it
back to its tethered position. From a maintenance point of view, this would
end up costing a lot less since it woudln't require dedicated flights.

I realise at that the ISS altitude, such a telescope wouldn't provide the
ultimate in precision, but wouldn't it still be of useful to many scientists?
  #15  
Old February 2nd 04, 04:35 AM
Hallerb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

Hubble Question

Ahh send up another satellite and launch it then recover Hubble and bring it
home.

Such a dual use flight keeps the costs down.

Heck you dont go to the store to buy just one item and make many trips.ou
combine things where possible
  #16  
Old February 2nd 04, 06:41 AM
Jorge R. Frank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

John Doe wrote in :

Brian Thorn wrote:
Then Hubble would have to contend with a relatively polluted
environment around ISS, which has rocket thrusters and many
spacecraft coming and going. And Hubble would have to be insulated
somehow from the vibration of humans and machines working inside the
Station.


Forgetting economic reality for a moment, couldn't you tether a
telescope to the station with a cable that is a few kilometres long ?
That would allow the telescope to benefit from reboosts, while still
being far enough away to avoid the "pollution" near the station and
with a tether long enough to attenuate vibrations.


Even a tether only a few km long will still generate some tension due to
gravity-gradient torque. HST's attitude control system, optimized as it is
for fine pointing at relatively high altitudes, may not be able to keep up.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.
  #17  
Old February 2nd 04, 06:42 AM
David Nakamoto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

"John Doe" wrote in message
...
Brian Thorn wrote:
Then Hubble would have to contend with a relatively polluted
environment around ISS, which has rocket thrusters and many spacecraft
coming and going. And Hubble would have to be insulated somehow from
the vibration of humans and machines working inside the Station.


Forgetting economic reality for a moment, couldn't you tether a

telescope to
the station with a cable that is a few kilometres long ? That would

allow the
telescope to benefit from reboosts, while still being far enough away to

avoid
the "pollution" near the station and with a tether long enough to

attenuate
vibrations.


And what are you going to do if and when it drifts into the ISS; expend
more fuel on ISS to avoid it? Sure it could be done, but given that MIR got
smacked by an experimental rocket once gives the Astronauts food for thought
that they might fight such a proposal.



And at regular intervals, they could pull the telescope to the ISS where
changes could be done by ISS crews doing EVAs from Quest, and then push

it
back to its tethered position. From a maintenance point of view, this

would
end up costing a lot less since it woudln't require dedicated flights.


Push it back how? The ISS isn't that manueverable.

Of course, this is academic. Given that they're in such totally different
orbits, for a reason, to avoid a collision, getting Hubble to the ISS would
require a lot of propellant, something the shuttle doesn't have, given that
the cargo bay would be filled with Hubble and unavailable to hold extra
fuel.



  #18  
Old February 2nd 04, 10:30 AM
Ante Perkovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

John Doe wrote:

Forgetting economic reality for a moment, couldn't you tether a telescope to
the station with a cable that is a few kilometres long ? That would allow the
telescope to benefit from reboosts, while still being far enough away to avoid
the "pollution" near the station and with a tether long enough to attenuate
vibrations.


Yes!!!
Maybe Hubble would be useless, but ISS astronauts would have _really_
big jojo to play

Ante
  #19  
Old February 2nd 04, 10:39 AM
Ante Perkovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

David Nakamoto wrote:

fly the shuttle
up there, grab Hubble, attach the rocket, release it, have the rocket align
itself and Hubble in the right direction, and fire away.


Could they build simple attachment, with few gyroscopes, that can also
boost it to desired orbit few more times?

I red somewhere about little satellites that can save existing
satellites from deorbiting. This one would just need to have few more
gyros.

Ante
  #20  
Old February 2nd 04, 11:01 AM
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble Question...

Ancillary question...
Why was the Hubble placed in the orbit it is in. Pity nobody thought about
access when it was put up. I'd have thought that there could have been
orbits that would be reachable from ISS without the huge thrust requirements
that the current one requires. Or is it just a case of nobody knew which
orbit Iss would use at the time, so then the question could be asked about
the orbit chosen for the ISS??

Also, considering the main , or one of the main parts of this new
initiative is to get humans onto other worlds, where they are on their own
for long periods, surely, if Hubble could be preserved in orbit, it could
serve as a relatively safe practice mission destination for any new craft
that might be designed.

Brian

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


"Bruce Kille" wrote in message
.. .
| With or without any future service the Hubble will some day go offline.
| There have been a lot of ideas floating around as to what to do then.
| I was wondering if it could be possible to boost it to a LaGrange Point,
| rather than de-orbit it? Is an earth-moon point stable? I know the
| earth-sun point can be used as the SOHO satellite is there, but it
| would require a lot more fuel to reach. Apparently, recovery of the
| Hubble for placement in the Smithsonian is not possible, so I wanted
| to put an alternative idea out for discussion.
| Bruce
|
|
|


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free, so there!
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.576 / Virus Database: 365 - Release Date: 30/01/04


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NASA Details Risks to Astronauts on Mission to Hubble Scott M. Kozel Space Shuttle 174 May 14th 04 09:38 PM
NASA Urged to Reconsider Hubble Decision Scott M. Kozel Space Shuttle 116 April 2nd 04 07:14 PM
Don't Desert Hubble Scott M. Kozel Space Shuttle 54 March 5th 04 05:38 PM
Hubble Question... Bruce Kille Space Shuttle 67 February 29th 04 06:30 AM
The Hubble Space Telescope... Craig Fink Space Shuttle 118 December 6th 03 05:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.