James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

RedStreak · 2007-02-11 11:26:29

I think the trouble the space/earth sciences are facing right now isn't due to the Constellation program; its due to the fact that both the STS and CEV are being run simultainiously. That, as its already made itself clear, is gonna put enough of a huge strain on NASA, and since Congress is pinchy on its purses something has to give since neither professional engineers nor the likes of us space enthusiasts want either to go.

All that can be done is just wait for the space shuttle to retire. At that point budget stresses will finally be relieved and the sciences will be free to romp around as before. Better still, with a lunar program underway this'll give the space sciences more opportunity - for instance solar science is dependent on getting beyond the Earth's magnetic field and VanAllen belts to taste the solar wind. Orion would give such instruments a free ride into the kind of enviorment you rarely get with Earthly satellites - aside from the Lagrange points between Earth and Sol the Moon (or Lunar orbit as well) is the next best spot for their job. I certainly wouldn't mind a Hubble 2 placed in one of the Lunar Lagrange points with the possibility of servicing from Orion perhaps every other year.

RedStreak · 2007-02-11 11:47:00

Webb ought to be impressive in the end, it is ALOT bigger than Hubble.

My only concern is the lack of optical and UV science the Hubble sported. If they develop a new telescope I would wish the devote it to that since Webb was fixated on near-infrared.

GCNRevenger · 2007-02-11 14:28:17

Webb will only be in IR, but UV/Vis is the realm of ground telescopes too. With advances in adaptive optics and synthetic apature systems, large ground telescopes can do lots of stuff too. Plus it isn't fair to compare todays' telescopes with tomorrows' UV/Vis space telescope either.

And from a science perspective, UV/Vis can make pretty pictures, but its usefulness is limited since it can't see through dust like Webb can. Just science per dollar, doesn't IR make more sense?

cIclops · 2007-02-11 14:59:18

I think the trouble the space/earth sciences are facing right now isn't due to the Constellation program; its due to the fact that both the STS and CEV are being run simultainiously. That, as its already made itself clear, is gonna put enough of a huge strain on NASA, and since Congress is pinchy on its purses something has to give since neither professional engineers nor the likes of us space enthusiasts want either to go.

JWST has been a big part of NASA's problem, it has way overrun its budget .. by over a billion ... its total development budget is around $3 B ... and it's two years late.

GCNRevenger · 2007-02-12 16:21:09

That would be because the people who came up with the price tag were either incompetent or swindlers, or both. NASA has had a lot of the latter case over the years.

Cheap price tag to get the project started, no matter how inaccurate, then only after its too late to cancel (when the whiny astronomers pitch a cry-baby hissy-fit) does the "real" price become apparent.

See "Space Shuttle"

SpaceNut · 2007-02-24 20:34:40

It was meantioned that the launch on a European Ariane 5 rocket was the way it was going to be placed.
With the cost over runs and the possibility that it will get further delayed I wonder if we should be looking at an Ares derived launch vehicle as a means to accelerate the build of both Ares I and Ares V.
Possibly use a shuttle tank, a couple rs68's and 4 segment srb with the Ares 1 upper stage.

GCNRevenger · 2007-02-24 22:36:31

Nah, Ariane-V and Ares-I are about the same size, perhaps our rocket being a little bigger even. Just put JWST on Ares-I.

cIclops · 2007-02-25 05:25:29

Nah, Ariane-V and Ares-I are about the same size, perhaps our rocket being a little bigger even. Just put JWST on Ares-I.

The Ariane V launch is part of a barter deal between NASA and ESA in exchange for observation time, it also reduces NASA's cost which is already way over budget.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2007-02-25 05:30:52

Nah, Ariane-V and Ares-I are about the same size, perhaps our rocket being a little bigger even. Just put JWST on Ares-I.

What you say makes sense but there are still 2 problems with this, Ares-1 will be man-rated, twice as safe as an Atlas or Delta-derived design and therefore more expensive than a Delta/Ariane et cetera
A more expensive rocket will only add to the cost of the JWST telescope.
The Ares I was designed for safety, not cost. Ares I can not compete with the Atlas V or the Ariane in terms of cost for any unmanned payload

Ares is still in Design/Definition phase, so far Thiokol's Ares-I looks like a good launcher - but it may not be ready in time, the next Presidential budget in a few years might want NASA to start hacking bits off Ares for cost cutting.

GCNRevenger · 2007-02-25 06:55:08

No. Man-rating doesn't add substantially to the unit cost for simple rockets, but rather the development cost. If we're going to put Orion on Ares-I anyway, then this cost would be zero for JWST.

Ares-I was not designed solely for safety, which is half the reason for using legacy Shuttle bits and pieces, to limit costs. You could say that Ares-I is the "hollistic," comprehensive solution to the need.

cIclops · 2007-02-25 07:26:33

Ares-I was not designed solely for safety, which is half the reason for using legacy Shuttle bits and pieces, to limit costs. You could say that Ares-I is the "hollistic," comprehensive solution to the need.

Safety is not the sole design criteria, reliability and low operational costs are also important, but safety is the prime one. Having said that, for a payload of such enormous cost as JWST, it would make sense to use the most reliable launcher available. JWST is due to fly in 2013, Ares I will have had only a few flights by then, it would be hard to convince the JWST team that it's more reliable than any other launcher.

cIclops · 2007-05-07 06:25:40

Full scale model at GSFC - ripped from JWST project status May 2006 (8MB PDF)

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2007-05-08 12:17:38

Full scale model at GSFC -

wow, it looks great

SpaceNut · 2007-05-23 21:10:01

Here is an unexpect twist: NASA Adds Docking Capability For Next Space Observatory
just in case a visit by astronauts aboard a future Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle is needed to complete deployment of the multibillion-dollar orbiting observatory. The U.S. space agency made the announcement May 10 during the unveiling of a full-scale model of the JWST on the National Mall here.

Probably not a big increase in cost but if the Orion is to survice JWST one would be needed.

cIclops · 2007-05-24 05:04:43

Here is an unexpect twist:

Not that unexpected

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2007-10-08 01:38:08

Nah, Ariane-V and Ares-I are about the same size, perhaps our rocket being a little bigger even. Just put JWST on Ares-I.
What you say makes sense but there are still 2 problems with this, Ares-1 will be man-rated, twice as safe as an Atlas or Delta-derived design and therefore more expensive than a Delta/Ariane et cetera
A more expensive rocket will only add to the cost of the JWST telescope.
The Ares I was designed for safety, not cost. Ares I can not compete with the Atlas V or the Ariane in terms of cost for any unmanned payload
Ares is still in Design/Definition phase, so far Thiokol's Ares-I looks like a good launcher - but it may not be ready in time, the next Presidential budget in a few years might want NASA to start hacking bits off Ares for cost cutting.

Primary disadvantage in using Ares-I is the increased cost per flight, it will be over-cost, inefficient. So far it's clocking up $ 4,562,675,783 to develop and per launch will be twice as expensive as the Delta/Ariane class....
Soyuz in comparison is one of the cheapest and effective rockets can launch payloads for about 45 million dollars. This is why space tourists love it - but its limited by payload (aprox 6 000 kg or 13 000 lbs) and there is sometimes political fallout for depending on the Russians.
Ariane is the best option for now !

The advantage of using Ares-I in the next years is its said safer than the STS config for getting manned flights into space, it will lift larger payloads because Shuttle's payload is nearly all Shuttle and it will be a whole lot less expensive than the Space Shuttle which costs about $ 1,090,576,000 Per Launch !
talk about a crazy price !!

cIclops · 2007-10-08 03:09:13

The most important advantage of using an Ariane 5 for launch is that ESA are paying for it

cIclops · 2008-02-29 06:44:31

Current concept

Amazing Miniaturized 'SIDECAR' Drives Webb Telescope's Signal - 20 Feb 2008

SIDECAR ASIC means "System for Image Digitization, Enhancement, Control And Retrieval Application Specific Integrated Circuit." This tiny advanced low-noise, low-power microprocessor-based control chip was designed by Teledyne Imaging Sensors, Thousand Oaks, Calif. to convert the analog signals (which is what television stations currently broadcast) into digital signals (which television stations will broadcast starting Feb. 2009). Like televisions, the Webb telescope is getting several of those" converter boxes." Digital signals can be easily transmitted and stored.
There are also several benefits to the extreme miniaturization of the SIDECAR. Further, it's about the size of a half-dollar and can do the same job as an electronics box weighing 20 pounds. It's smaller weight also makes it easier to launch.

cIclops · 2008-03-24 03:34:11

Engineering model of the sunshield, called the pathfinder. Credit: Northrop Grumman

Sunshield Preliminary Design Review Complete - 20 Mar 2008

GREENBELT, Md. - The tennis court-sized sunshield built by Northrop Grumman for NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope has completed its preliminary design review at the company’s Space Technology facility.
The Webb Telescope is the next-generation space observatory, designed to explore phenomena from distant galaxies to nearby planets and stars. From the origins of the universe to the formation of star systems capable of supporting life on planets such as Earth, the Webb telescope will give scientists unprecedented access to unexplored regions of space.
"The sunshield is absolutely critical to the Webb telescope mission" says Keith Parrish, JWST Sunshield Manager at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. "It will be folded up around the telescope when the telescope is aboard its rocket during launch. The sunshield will then deploy in space to shade the sensitive, precision telescope optics and science instruments from the Sun and enable the observatory to reach its proper operating temperature and environment. Without it, the telescope and instruments can’t work. Northrop Grumman is leveraging their experience in large deployable structures in space to come up with a design that will do the job for the Webb telescope."
The five-layer sunshield consists of extremely thin, specially coated reflective membranes and a supporting structure. The sunshield blocks solar heat, keeping the telescope’s science instruments operating at cryogenic temperatures so astronomers can study distant galaxies, young stars and planetary systems at near- and mid-infrared wavelengths.

Deployment animation - see how the 6.5m mirror and its sunshield unfold!

RedStreak · 2008-03-24 12:15:44

Not quite as dramatic as I expected, but simpiler the more easy to deploy. As long as it works can't complain I suppose.

cIclops · 2008-03-24 12:25:59

The less dramatic the better! The solar array is surprisingly small.

cIclops · 2008-05-02 02:22:37

Packaging configuration inside the Ariane 5 fairing

From A Bigger and Better Time Machine (PDF) - dated 3 Mar 2008

Well written overview of the JWST from the ESA point of view with details of their NIRSpec and MIRI instruments. NIRSpec can take spectra of up to 100 objects simultaneously!

SpaceNut · 2012-02-13 20:44:46

One thing that has been in the news is cost overrun.....with it coming down to a budget standoff that will cost the ESA support in there mission from Nasa...ExoMars and that is not good....

The proposed budget would give NASA $17.71 billion, about $60 million less than the agency received for 2012. The biggest change in the budget is a $300 million cut in the agency's planetary science program, including termination of planned cooperation with the European Space Agency on the ExoMars program, which included an orbiter in 2016 and lander/rover in 2018. NASA officials said they were restructuring its Mars exploration plan, including potential missions in 2018 and 2020 that were less expensive than ExoMars, while also leaving the door open for renewed cooperation with Europe.

SpaceNut · 2012-04-07 20:34:01

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/04/o … hubbl.html

Extending Missions, Operating Hubble Means Cuts Elsewhere

With an already streched budget then whats the rest of the story when a working mission is set to expire its alloted time... you guessed it its time to take from others to pay when congress and the President lowers the amount of money available

SpaceNut · 2017-05-09 19:07:24

Wow its been that long for the road to getting this multi billion dollar space telescope said to rival the Hubble with capability but it started out as a low cost and kept getting more costly by the year....

Gigantic Space Telescope Set for Long Stint in the Deep Freeze

sttars_b67bb58d69c404fa292b79e0cc018c47.nbcnews-ux-600-480.jpg

NASA personnel transfer the James Webb Space Telescope to the clean room of Johnson Space Center's Building 32. There, the full optical system will go into Chamber A, a vacuum chamber that reaches extremely low temperatures and was originally used to test the Apollo spacecraf

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2007-02-11 11:26:29

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#52 2007-02-11 11:47:00

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#53 2007-02-11 14:28:17

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#54 2007-02-11 14:59:18

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#55 2007-02-12 16:21:09

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#56 2007-02-24 20:34:40

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#57 2007-02-24 22:36:31

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#58 2007-02-25 05:25:29

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#59 2007-02-25 05:30:52

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#60 2007-02-25 06:55:08

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#61 2007-02-25 07:26:33

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#62 2007-05-07 06:25:40

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#63 2007-05-08 12:17:38

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#64 2007-05-23 21:10:01

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#65 2007-05-24 05:04:43

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#66 2007-10-08 01:38:08

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#67 2007-10-08 03:09:13

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#68 2008-02-29 06:44:31

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#69 2008-03-24 03:34:11

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#70 2008-03-24 12:15:44

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#71 2008-03-24 12:25:59

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#72 2008-05-02 02:22:37

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#73 2012-02-13 20:44:46

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#74 2012-04-07 20:34:01

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

#75 2017-05-09 19:07:24

Re: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) - 6.5m mirror, L2 orbit

Board footer