A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Hubble's Current Condition?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 3rd 03, 08:40 PM
jojo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hubble's Current Condition?

I was watching a show about Hubble last night but...fell asleep (it was very
late)

anyway, as I understand it only 3 of he Hubble's 6 gyroscopes are working.
Is this correct?

What is it's life expectancy?

Also, are the images for the VLT in Chile comparable to the Hubble images?

Thanks,
jojo


  #2  
Old September 3rd 03, 10:20 PM
C.Swartz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , cgv_2000
says...
I was watching a show about Hubble last night but...fell asleep (it was very
late)

anyway, as I understand it only 3 of he Hubble's 6 gyroscopes are working.
Is this correct?

What is it's life expectancy?

Also, are the images for the VLT in Chile comparable to the Hubble images?

Thanks,
jojo




Hubble is to be replaced by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) in
2011. http://ngst.gsfc.nasa.gov/FastFacts.htm

Just a note: The JWST was formerly known as the NGST (Next Generation
Space Telescope).

-Chris Swartz
  #3  
Old September 4th 03, 12:50 AM
Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"jojo" wrote in
:

I was watching a show about Hubble last night but...fell asleep (it
was very late)

anyway, as I understand it only 3 of he Hubble's 6 gyroscopes are
working. Is this correct?


Could be - the darn things have had to be replaced before. Hubble was
offline for some time waiting for a previous servicing mission to replace
failed gyros. Hubble is supposed to be decommissioned by 2010 and
replaced with the James Webb Space Telescope. I gather that the James
Webb will be primarily used for infrared observations.


What is it's life expectancy?


See above.



Also, are the images for the VLT in Chile comparable to the Hubble
images?


VLT info:

http://www.eso.org/outreach/info-events/ut1fl/

L.


Thanks,
jojo




  #4  
Old September 4th 03, 02:52 AM
Starlord
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That show is OLD, they have replaced the non working ones and even updated the
computer and one camera.


--
"In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
again."

Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Bishop's Car Fund
http://www.bishopcarfund.Netfirms.com/
Freelance Writers Shop
http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord

"jojo" wrote in message
. ..
I was watching a show about Hubble last night but...fell asleep (it was very
late)

anyway, as I understand it only 3 of he Hubble's 6 gyroscopes are working.
Is this correct?

What is it's life expectancy?

Also, are the images for the VLT in Chile comparable to the Hubble images?

Thanks,
jojo




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/03


  #5  
Old September 4th 03, 04:22 PM
Stu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"jojo" wrote in message
. ..
I was watching a show about Hubble last night but...fell asleep (it was

very
late)

anyway, as I understand it only 3 of he Hubble's 6 gyroscopes are working.
Is this correct?

What is it's life expectancy?

Also, are the images for the VLT in Chile comparable to the Hubble images?

Thanks,
jojo



There is an article in Astronomy now that says NASA are looking to deorbit
the HST into the ocean in 2010 a year before the JWST is placed into orbit

For full story...
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0308/14hubblelife/

Stu


  #6  
Old September 5th 03, 12:24 AM
Ralph Hertle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stu wrote:

[ text omitted ]
There is an article in Astronomy now that says NASA are looking to deorbit
the HST into the ocean in 2010 a year before the JWST is placed into orbit

For full story...
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0308/14hubblelife/

[ text omitted ]


.................

Why don't they park the HST in some safe orbit if they don't want to use
it right away, rather than destroy it?

NASA could then later bring it to the Moon, for example, and operate it
from a solid platform there.

However, it occurs to me, that the vehicles for Moon transportation of
their design drawings may not exist. Have they lost or destroyed the
working drawings for the vehicle systems? Is that what we are seeing?
Or, is it becoming known, or dawning on NASA management, that the
Shuttles can't fly to the Moon. Their wings are useless in the vicinity
of the Moon.

Why is there no Moon vehicle system?

One reason I suspect is because the need for wings was the reason of
subjective sentimentalism, e.g., of some imagined notion of safety, or
the need to control the flight of a ship that has a blunt front and
triangular wings. That translates into NASA management's fear of falling
without wings. The principle of the lifting body for re-entry doesn't
require wings.

Still another reason may be that the winged Shuttle design was selected
specifically in order to prevent flights to the Moon. Moon flights would
require totally different hardware. Is it not true that for some reason
the appropriate hardware cannot be recreated and be the cause of future
Moon ventures?

The selection of the next generation Shuttle design has probably also
prevented the continued exploration of the Moon for the foreseeable future.

Moon bases would have followed the ISS, and different types of telescope
observatories, small science project labs, and prototype power
generation stations would probably have been in place on the Moon by
now. The HST may have been a good choice for a starter observatory on
the Moon, had it been designed with that in mind.

A stacked lift vehicle system was the best design solution from the
outset. Early rocket scientists figured that out years prior. That
design would have distributed forces evenly with the lowest level of
concentrated forces. That translates into lower weight and cost, and,
also, structural reliability is a consequence.

If a gun can send an object into orbit from Earth, then in 1/6 gravity,
a long gun on the Moon could be one way to return some objects to the
Earth.

Shuttle aircraft may work in the Earth's atmosphere, or for servicing
the ISS, but they are good only for work in the atmosphere.

The glaring lack is that we missed having the availability of a Moon-
Earth space vehicle system.

The decision to build more winged vehicles for Shuttles, and to continue
the fabrication of the Shuttle/LF_tank/SF_booster system meant that the
radical ultra-light weight axial stacked-component-system, or SCS. that
had the triangular shape was not to be. The decision to prevent travel
to the Moon was reaffirmed at that time. The principle of logic as the
main factor of science, engineering, and design was excluded at that
time. Social adaptation and authoritarianism had to be heeded at NASA as
the over-riding principle principle of vehicle design.

The Shuttle plus separate solid fuel rocket boosters plus separate
liquid fuel tank system required a relatively large and heavy strut and
force distribution system within each of the attached components. There
was also the relatively simple and innovative idea to place the
insulation on the outside or the liquid fuel tank, but unprotected, it
was a lame idea. The insulation could have been incorporated in a
protective building structure until just prior to blastoff when it would
open to reveal the rocket. Weight wise the insulation and support struts
would have been left on the ground. It seemed more important to NASA to
place a school teacher in orbit for social adaptation reasons than to
use a correctly designed vehicle system and to continue the exploration
of the Moon.

Ralph Hertle

 




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
FS: Old Astronomy Books, 23 books at $2 - $6 each Oldbooks78 Amateur Astronomy 0 October 3rd 03 07:54 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:34 PM.


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.