Hubble as an Icon

John Creighton · 2004-12-12 15:40:00

Some people say we should save the Hubble because it is a public icon. Aside from the science value of the Hubble which we should agree is a bad investment we must look at the icon value. If it is about heritage then the money should come from the heritage department. If the money was to come from the heritage department is it a good heritage investment? For the same amount of money how many museums could be built? Cathedrals? Ruins restored? Old buildings renovated? What constitutes value in terms of heritage? How much money should we spend keeping old things functional for future generations and how much value does Hubble have in this respect. I suspect it is a bad investment in terms of heritage as well as science. In my town people want to see old wood and brick buildings preserved. I think they are ugly and the only ones that should be saved are the sand stone building. They make a much better monument to the future.

BTW there is a http://www.canoemuseum.net/]canoe museum in Canada that may still needs help. I am sure the US has some struggling museums as well. As for the canoe museum maybe it is doing better now. I remember seeing something on the news about it being closed. Maybe it got funding since then.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-12 21:44:04

I think most over look the fact that it has been service at least 3 other times, which IMO has raise its value of investment. But what is the right way to go is and can be but only one of the 2 directions or choices. With combination on either side of the coin for how each would be done.
choice 1 keep it up there to do the science we need.
choice 2 let it come down by what ever means.
Of course there are sub choices for each.

Rxke · 2004-12-13 04:27:55

I'm looking at this from my perspective of being 'into' art/heritage restoration-conservation...

And my take is: 'Yes, save Hubble, or at least preserve it.'

*IF* there is money and the technology available to do this.
There clearly is not. Refurbishing Hubble (once again) is very pricey, despite the fact that 99% of the planned upgrades are already built, but with the shuttles that need to be used to carry out the job getting in short supply, increased costs with the new safety margins, the simple fact that building a better 'Hubble II' would turn out chaper etc... It increasingly looks like it is time to gently retire Hubble.

BUT, but but... Hubble *is* an icon. No doubt about that. Worth preserving, if economically feasible.

So why on Earth deorbit the beatiful thing? Why not use the planned retrofiring stage to increase the orbit into a retirement one? Out of harm's way, and for about the same price as deorbiting it...

And then, maybe one day when launching-and payloadreturn costs are low enough to make it possible to bring it back to Earth, you can still do it. It would be a centrepiece of industrial heritage, akin to the Apollo capsules, a relic frow back then, the telescope that inspired millions...

The guys working on the ion-propulsion mini-tugs, to be used to change orbits of sats that got into a wrong spot because of launch anomalies... Why not hire them to raise Hubble? It would be tremendeous PR, both for them and the sponsor.

Paul Allen, take note!

John Creighton · 2004-12-13 11:08:10

Rxke, that makes alot of sence. If you can raise the orbit enough so it will stay up there for a long time for the price of deorbiting it why not. Anyone have any cost comparisons. Still there will be a lot of things people my want to keep for heritage and we don’t want to turn earths orbit into one big garbage dump. There will be other telescopes and maybe they will inspire people more. But Hubble was first and from a heritage point of view there is a good case to save it. I just don’t want to see it come at the expense of science and exploration. BTW the same kind of discussion occurred with Mir and we let it burn. Of course it would have been much more expensive to park Mir into a higher orbit. BTW I am not into heritage. Museums fine, monasteries fine but old brick and wood buildings give me a break. Downtowns often need a face lift not a blast from the past.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-14 05:32:15

The actual cost of the rocket to move Hubble in either case will be in the neighborhood of lets say no more than 200 million but the research to design the booster segment that will latch onto Hubble is probably less than 500million of which seed money has been issued on the order of I think 300million.
Seems to me that it should cost a lot less than a shuttle flight but at this rate it looks like those involved are trying to get just the same amount of money for doing so.
The changing of the Guard for Nasa may also play into any future decisions even thou some have already been made to at least try robotically. Of which even that is doubtful at best thou the skills must be obtained somehow even if Hubble meets its demise.

John Creighton · 2004-12-14 09:18:13

The actual cost of the rocket to move Hubble in either case will be in the neighborhood of lets say no more than 200 million but the research to design the booster segment that will latch onto Hubble is probably less than 500million of which seed money has been issued on the order of I think 300million.
Seems to me that it should cost a lot less than a shuttle flight but at this rate it looks like those involved are trying to get just the same amount of money for doing so.
The changing of the Guard for Nasa may also play into any future decisions even thou some have already been made to at least try robotically. Of which even that is doubtful at best thou the skills must be obtained somehow even if Hubble meets its demise.

If the majority of the cost of the robotic repair mission is research then that is money well spent and will add value to many things beyond Hubble. For a true cost comparison I think it is important to look at the cost besides research costs. By that I mean how much does it cost to build and how much does it cost to launch.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-12-12 15:40:00

Re: Hubble as an Icon

#2 2004-12-12 21:44:04

Re: Hubble as an Icon

#3 2004-12-13 04:27:55

Re: Hubble as an Icon

#4 2004-12-13 11:08:10

Re: Hubble as an Icon

#5 2004-12-14 05:32:15

Re: Hubble as an Icon

#6 2004-12-14 09:18:13

Re: Hubble as an Icon

Board footer