Darn it! Hubble's busted

[Count Chocula]

And it doesn't look good: link

[Knife]

Meh, build a new and improved one rather than waste millions of fixing the money pit. It was cool, it took cool pictures, but to put some sort of nostalgia one is due to those accomplishments is ridiculous.

[Solauren]

Bring it back to Earth, put it in a museum, and put a improved one up.

So basically, let it retire in comfort.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Time to call it a day, Hubble. We need money ploughed into the James Webb Space Telescope project instead. Can't have such an important piece of kit fall into the state Hubble did, so hopefully that international co-operation will provide better tech support. How else will we be able to spot incoming alien invasion fleets?

[Count Chocula]

I heard on the Art Bell show that the last images Hubble recorded was something large, gray and triangular, then a flash of blue....

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Meh, build a new and improved one rather than waste millions of fixing the money pit. It was cool, it took cool pictures, but to put some sort of nostalgia one is due to those accomplishments is ridiculous.

The problem with such sentiment is that we've got nothing that's going to replace the HST in the pipeline. JWST? Sorry, that's an IR telescope. It doesn't do visual or UV like Hubble can. And it's not even due to launch until halfway through 2013. And that's if everything goes well. If anything, the JWST is a replacement for the Spitzer space telescope, which goes kaput in 2009 on the account of running out of coolant. The furthest a true replacement for Hubble (a space telescope covering UV, visible, and near-IR) has gotten, thus far, is the "Gee whiz, well, wouldn't it be cool if..." stage.

Ideally, a repaired Hubble will still be around when JWST goes up, giving us coverage of the EM spectrum from UV to deep IR.

(Arguably, though, we've got ground-based telescopes with adaptive optics that will be capable of outperforming Hubble. Though a space telescope doesn't suffer a ground-based telescope's restrictions, nor does it have to worry about the sorts of things a ground-based telescope does. Chief among them being the weather, pollution, and growing paucity of suitable sites.)

Bring it back to Earth, put it in a museum, and put a improved one up.

So basically, let it retire in comfort.

No. De-orbiting it intact would require a Shuttle mission. Quite an involved and risky one, at that. If there's anything we'd really like to give a well-deserved send-off, it's that boondoggle known as the Shuttle. When Hubble comes back to Earth, it will do so in a spectacular fireball far out over the Pacific.

[Zor]

It had a good run. Rest in peace, Dear Hubble.

Zor

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Oh well, it was good while it lasted. I doubt anyone wants to launch another telescope anytime soon when funding is difficult enough.

[Commander 598]

As it turns out, not having a giant space camera is not the end of the world.

[Knife]

The problem with such sentiment is that we've got nothing that's going to replace the HST in the pipeline. JWST? Sorry, that's an IR telescope. It doesn't do visual or UV like Hubble can. And it's not even due to launch until halfway through 2013. And that's if everything goes well. If anything, the JWST is a replacement for the Spitzer space telescope, which goes kaput in 2009 on the account of running out of coolant. The furthest a true replacement for Hubble (a space telescope covering UV, visible, and near-IR) has gotten, thus far, is the "Gee whiz, well, wouldn't it be cool if..." stage.

Funny, I remember the same arguments the last time it was broken. As long as they keep that thing marginally ticking with duct tape and tang, I don't think you'll see a real push to make another one.

[Sarevok]

As it turns out, not having a giant space camera is not the end of the world.

Well there is that tiny bit of chance said giant space camera may have warned us about rock of doom headed towards Earth. Though space rocks of doom are usually handled by telescopes elsewhere its kind of unfair to dismiss such a marvelous instrument being completely useless to be included in end of the world scenarios.

[Junghalli]

Well there is that tiny bit of chance said giant space camera may have warned us about rock of doom headed towards Earth. Though space rocks of doom are usually handled by telescopes elsewhere its kind of unfair to dismiss such a marvelous instrument being completely useless to be included in end of the world scenarios.

And I'm sure it's made contributions to the science of astronomy. I don't see why blue-sky science should automatically be regarded as nothing but a waste of money.

[WacoKid]

My dad is a physicist the Space telescope Science Institute. I just spoke to him, and he says that the problem is pretty easily fixable. They're delaying the servicing mission they were going to do in October so they can make sure they have a good, working replacement piece for the piece of electronics that broke. It may take a few months, but the Hubble should be fine, up, and running normally again. He doesn't seem to think that it's time for the Hubble to retire at all. His reaction when I mentioned that was "What?! No! Why?!". I'm pretty sure it'll be fine.

Any specific questions people have, I can try to get him to answer though.

[Commander 598]

Well there is that tiny bit of chance said giant space camera may have warned us about rock of doom headed towards Earth. Though space rocks of doom are usually handled by telescopes elsewhere its kind of unfair to dismiss such a marvelous instrument being completely useless to be included in end of the world scenarios.

And I'm sure it's made contributions to the science of astronomy. I don't see why blue-sky science should automatically be regarded as nothing but a waste of money.

I'm not calling it a waste of money, just saying that not having an immediate replacement for it isn't really "OHGOD YOU FOOLS" material.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

My dad is a physicist the Space telescope Science Institute. I just spoke to him, and he says that the problem is pretty easily fixable. They're delaying the servicing mission they were going to do in October so they can make sure they have a good, working replacement piece for the piece of electronics that broke. It may take a few months, but the Hubble should be fine, up, and running normally again. He doesn't seem to think that it's time for the Hubble to retire at all. His reaction when I mentioned that was "What?! No! Why?!". I'm pretty sure it'll be fine.

Any specific questions people have, I can try to get him to answer though.

Assuming that they can send a shuttle mission before they decommission the fleet, the Hubble ought to be able to stay in orbit longer. Otherwise, yeah, keep it running.