Will Hubble II ever launch?

[Quick_Nick]

But the Webb is an IR telescope. No more cool true color pictures.

I don't think the Hubble was designed to ever return to Earth.

Err... Almost any Hubble pic you'll ever see has been edited with false color added. But an IR telescope would give you a different view still. I'm not sure what we'll put up next, but we have to do something. Hubble has really shown just how useful an orbital telescope can be!

 

[Ghostrider]

It would be way more usefull to send it along a nice slingshot tour of the solar system.

Not really, it would take more dV and I'm not really sure the hardware is up to task. It's a BIG mutha, the Hubble, not a nifty little thingie like the Voyager probes and relatives, and you would need a nuke onboard to power it.

And why wait until it has toured the whole solar system? It would take far more for it to come back, and Bart Sibrel may have lost his driving license by then. With the Moon stuff, it will do its job and total Sibrel's car in one week time.

 

[Urwumpe]

What about doing the CIA way of dealing with Sibrel. Extradite him from Earth, bring him to the moon and show him the Apollo 11 landing site.

 

[Zatnikitelman]

But give him Apollo 10's fuel amounts in the Ascent Stage!

 

[garyw]

Not really, it would take more dV and I'm not really sure the hardware is up to task. It's a BIG mutha, the Hubble, not a nifty little thingie like the Voyager probes and relatives, and you would need a nuke onboard to power it.

And why wait until it has toured the whole solar system? It would take far more for it to come back, and Bart Sibrel may have lost his driving license by then. With the Moon stuff, it will do its job and total Sibrel's car in one week time.

That and Hubble is designed to operate in Earth's orbit. Remove it from that environment and it will quickly fail. The heat and cold differences will damage the optics long before the solar arrays give out.

 

[Spicer]

If they're going to add a capture mech...

If they're going to add a capture mechanism in order to de-orbit it...why not boost the satellite's orbit and keep it operational for the forseeable future?

It's a shame to let such a tool burn up!

 

[pete.dakota]

If they're going to add a capture mechanism in order to de-orbit it...why not boost the satellite's orbit and keep it operational for the forseeable future?

It's a shame to let such a tool burn up!

If by 2013, the Hubble's scientific payloads are still working, and it were to be boosted into a higher, non-decaying orbit, eventually, it will die. So, inevitably, it will end up being a piece of orbiting 'junk'. It won't remain operational forever.

Once JWT launches, there will be no effective need for the Hubble. So there's no use spending the 10 million USD/month to keep it operational.

 

[ryan]

If by 2013, the Hubble's scientific payloads are still working, and it were to be boosted into a higher, non-decaying orbit, eventually, it will die. So, inevitably, it will end up being a piece of orbiting 'junk'. It won't remain operational forever.

Once JWT launches, there will be no effective need for the Hubble. So there's no use spending the 10 million USD/month to keep it operational.

I agree, i say bring on JWT it may find new discoveries that Hubble cant.

 

[garyw]

If they're going to add a capture mechanism in order to de-orbit it...why not boost the satellite's orbit and keep it operational for the forseeable future?

It's a shame to let such a tool burn up!

Boost it to where? Go much above it's current orbit and you are into the van allen belts. The radition will render it junk.
Best to deorbit it while you still have attitude control and can pinpoint the entry location. Don't want another skylab situation.

 

[tl8]

Boost it to where? Go much above it's current orbit and you are into the van allen belts. The radition will render it junk.
Best to deorbit it while you still have attitude control and can pinpoint the entry location. Don't want another skylab situation.

No offence but I would love a piece of Hubble

 

[Overmind5000]

Actually that is not true. There are 20% of the sky, where optical telescopes like Hubble can't look (because of our own Galaxy). But IR telescopes, like the JWST, can watch into half of these 20%, seeing 90% of the Sky. And these 10% more are important, as many phenomena happen right in this region of the sky.

You have a very good point there. If webb can see 90% of the sky, What do you suppose are the chances of finding other worlds, at least sustainable for life or us?


-----Posted Added-----

Not really, it would take more dV and I'm not really sure the hardware is up to task. It's a BIG mutha, the Hubble, not a nifty little thingie like the Voyager probes and relatives, and you would need a nuke onboard to power it.

And why wait until it has toured the whole solar system? It would take far more for it to come back, and Bart Sibrel may have lost his driving license by then. With the Moon stuff, it will do its job and total Sibrel's car in one week time.

Erm... Let me say this calmly and softly... A NUKE?!!! YOU THINK A NUCLEAR WARHEAD IS GOING TO POWER IT?!!! THAT'LL TURN IT INTO A BOMB!!!! And why is everyone talking about Bart Sibrel's Car? Besides, WHAT ARE THE CHANCES of Hubble Crashing into that guy's car?!

 

[astrosammy]

Erm... Let me say this calmly and softly... A NUKE?!!! YOU THINK A NUCLEAR WARHEAD IS GOING TO POWER IT?!!!

Yes, that is possible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)

THAT'LL TURN IT INTO A BOMB!!!! And why is everyone talking about Bart Sibrel's Car? Besides, WHAT ARE THE CHANCES of Hubble Crashing into that guy's car?!

Bart Sibrel is a really bad moon hoax guy:

 

[Urwumpe]

You have a very good point there. If webb can see 90% of the sky, What do you suppose are the chances of finding other worlds, at least sustainable for life or us?

Not much better with the JWST, compared to Hubble, it has another job. But there are other satellites planned or already in Orbit, which are specially designed to locate exoplanets.

 

[Ghostrider]

Erm... Let me say this calmly and softly... A NUKE?!!! YOU THINK A NUCLEAR WARHEAD IS GOING TO POWER IT?!!! THAT'LL TURN IT INTO A BOMB!!!!

Nuke as in nuclear reactor, not as in nuclear bomb...

And why is everyone talking about Bart Sibrel's Car? Besides, WHAT ARE THE CHANCES of Hubble Crashing into that guy's car?!

Lots of chances, if I'm steering it.

 

[tblaxland]

Not much better with the JWST, compared to Hubble, it has another job. But there are other satellites planned or already in Orbit, which are specially designed to locate exoplanets.

For example, Kepler, due for launch next April.

 

[Overmind5000]

Lots of chances, if I'm steering it.

Not gonna be That easy, since How in the Name of Grif can you survive the impact, much less get the car into position.:dry: Wait... Scratch that "survive" crap. Modern day Remote Controls.

 

[Ghostrider]

Scratch that "survive" crap. Modern day Remote Controls.

That, and the GPS/GPRS bug I'll put on the target's car.

 

[Moonwalker]

Bart Sibrel is a really bad moon hoax guy

Well, let me express it this way: the intelligence quotient of those people like Bart Sibrel and his disciple doesn't seem to exceed the usual room temperature.

EDIT

This is no insult of course, it's just a finding