seriously.

They could take what they know about the hubble, and design an even better space telescope for the price of a robotic repair mission (which was cancelled anyways)

NASA are working on a new space telescope.

http://www.jwst.nasa.gov/

---

Regards
Chris

> NASA are working on a new space telescope.
>
> http://www.jwst.nasa.gov/

Yes, but the JWST will look at only the infrared part of the spectrum and not do the same type of work that the Hubble currently does. In this day and age of pork-barrel projects, I would think the Government would spend money on something that, you know, actually WORKS and HAS BEEN WORKING for the past decade? Damn Republicans spend my tax dollars feeding some Sunni who turns around and kills my fellow country-men while we let something that has pushed forward our understanding of the universe by leaps and bounds go broke. Lovely...

---

We could.. just like we could do many cool things and dont.. Back in 40s-50s we would have done just so. (Im college age so dont call me ageist here.)

In modern America though we'd much prefer to spend ourselves out in studies, prove that the project was too expensive anyway, and then cancel it. We spend just as much money but noone has to worry about failure.. Instead of just having the guts to take the budget at hand and make it work.

We're losing our edge in innovation to places and people learning from our knowledge, that have the grit to actually use it too.
D

> seriously.
>
> They could take what they know about the hubble, and design an even better
> space telescope for the price of a robotic repair mission (which was cancelled
> anyways)
>
>
>

> > NASA are working on a new space telescope.
> Yes, but the JWST will look at only the infrared part of the spectrum and not
> do the same type of work that the Hubble currently does. In this day and age
> of pork-barrel projects, I would think the Government would spend money on
> something that, you know, actually WORKS and HAS BEEN WORKING for the past
> decade?
>

You said it, brother!
BTW, off topic, sorry all, but how do you like living in Hawaii? Been up the hill to the big scopes? I've never been to Hawaii. Should go. Love to see Keck.
Read your profile. Good stuff. A Duck in the Islands. Seems like a good thing. :->
Regards from 818,
Robert

---

> You said it, brother!
> BTW, off topic, sorry all, but how do you like living in Hawaii? Been up the
> hill to the big scopes? I've never been to Hawaii. Should go. Love to see
> Keck.
> Read your profile. Good stuff. A Duck in the Islands. Seems like a good thing.
> :->
> Regards from 818,
> Robert

Well, borne and raised on the island helps a lot towards sentiment. There's nothing quite like it and I always get a kick outta people's reactions when I tell them that Maui puts me to sleep since I go there like 3 times a year and Kauai's like my backyard.(I live on Oahu) I've been to the Big Island and made my way to the Subaru Telescope and did a report on Keck. They are really nice people up there and the snowboarding up there is great.(Yes, Hawaii gets SNOW!)

Anyway, hope Bush remembers that Hubble's the "grey silver thingie" and not the "one named for a bowl of Curry", though both Hubble and Chandra compliment each other nicely. Forget the moon and definitely forget Mars. We'd learn more if we fix Hubble, bring up JWST, push Kepler and the TSF program.

---

This bothers me, with both shuttle losses, lower ranking people warned management about the danger but was ignored. Now with the latest fix to the external tank insulation, it is too dangerous to use the shuttle except to go to the ISS. The shuttle is now safer than before its last launch, but cannot be used to repair Hubble or to launch another telescope.

---

> This bothers me, with both shuttle losses, lower ranking people warned
> management about the danger but was ignored. Now with the latest fix to the
> external tank insulation, it is too dangerous to use the shuttle except to go
> to the ISS. The shuttle is now safer than before its last launch, but cannot
> be used to repair Hubble or to launch another telescope.
> As a flight engineer in the Airforce on the C141A, I had the authority to refuse an airplane that I found unsafe to fly. I could not be overridden, not even by the assigned aircraft commander. NASA needs to institute authority to the engineers to refuse to launch if they feel its unsafe.

---

If they were smart - they would seek donations for the next scope. I'd be more than willing to give some money to see that it is all that it can be. There are enough people interested in astronomy that a small investment made by the masses could give us something.....phenomenal.

I've loved the Hubbel - but...let's go beyond it. What is the current technology and what will it cost? The thing is - don't send a "budget" new scope out....what does the ABSOLUTE BEST cost - and...then DO it. I'll send a check, what about you?

---

Frankly, I think that would be a noble gesture but ultimately doomed to failure. The costs of the upfront physical components are at most 40% of the total budget package that gets presented to Congress for authorization. Working in politics at the state level, there's so many figures and charts and numbers one has to crunch even just to get to the first stage of proposing. You would need to get a line of scientists to generate mounds of paper and then another group of scientists to look over the first group's ideas, condense it, and then present it to the committee. I've seen a project to fix a 1/2 mile lane of highway take 12 years to complete just because of the constant shifting of funds from one group to another, misallocation, overruns, budget cuts, partisan bickering, and this is all in one small tiny state. I hate to imagine how much goes on in DC for a big budget item like a Space Telescope.

And that's what it'll amount to, anyway. All the generous donations by Americans alone will not amount to even half the total costs of the telescope, not to mention the actual building of the craft, all of the testing that it requires, final checking. Then you have to cover the transportation costs to the rocket site,(the rocket might also be needed), then the time it takes for launching the rocket, testing the scope, and then running it for the years projected. I'm sure the Government would love if the country donates the money but it's pie in the sky.

Why doesn't the government just allocate more money to science? Dunno, why don't we ask the Shiites and the Sunnis? They're getting $82 Billion more while NASA gets a cut. Too bad there's no oil in space, GW would be all gang-busters if there were...

---