Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    P. Edward Murray's Avatar
    P. Edward Murray Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble



    The old adage is that if something sounds to good to be true it
    probably is...
    President Bush just told us that we are going back to the Moon &
    eventually to Mars...and there were questions on what may be cut.

    Tonight we know what will be cut...The Hubble Space Telescope. The
    next
    reservicing mission will not occur..it will never occur.

    I'm asking you to join me,the American members of sci.astro.amateur,
    to write to the President,your Congressman or Congresswoman and your
    Senators to defeat
    this unjustified and plainly stupid action.

    Thanks,

    P. Edward Murray
    Past President,
    Bucks-Mont. Astronomical Assoc., Inc.
    A Membership-Based 501 (c) 3 Educational Organization

  2. #2
    Chuck Taylor's Avatar
    Chuck Taylor Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    As I understand it, Hubble is not being bypassed because it conflicts with
    the moon. It is being bypassed because new safety standards require a
    shuttle on standby for any flight that can't dock with the ISS.

    An even more critical question may be: What's the status on the Hubble
    replacement and how will that be impacted?

    Clear Skies

    Chuck Taylor
    Do you observe the moon?
    Try the Lunar Observing Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/
    ************************************************** **********



    "P. Edward Murray" <eddiestardust@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:26c1aed8.0401161956.6ce858ca@posting.google.c om...



  3. #3
    Tony Turner's Avatar
    Tony Turner Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble


    "P. Edward Murray" <eddiestardust@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:26c1aed8.0401161956.6ce858ca@posting.google.c om...



    ,snip

    All the letters in the world, all the indignant, or emotional, or reasoned
    newsgroup postings can't hide the fact that Bush's proposals are bullshit.
    Two eyes and an abacus can tell us that.
    Does ANYone take that man seriously?



  4. #4
    Michael McCulloch's Avatar
    Michael McCulloch Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    The Hubble has served it's purpose and has had a good life.

    The future of telescopes is ground-based interferometry and adaptive
    optics. Such observations have already exceeded the capability of the
    Hubble in some instances and are much less expensive to deploy and
    maintain.

    How many state-of-the-art ground observatories can be built for the
    cost of one Hubble servicing mission?

    ---
    Michael McCulloch

  5. #5
    Starlord's Avatar
    Starlord Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    NONE, it cost even MORE to build those massice scopes and the computers and
    optics to do what the Hubble does without them.

    Oh I know, let's tear down any house that's 10 years old, lets trash any
    car/truck,etc. that's 10 years old, lets tear down any office building that's 10
    years or more old.



    --
    "In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
    towards an east that would not know another dawn.
    But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
    lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
    again."

    Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

    SIAR
    www.starlords.org
    Freelance Writers Shop
    http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com
    Telescope Buyers FAQ
    http://home.inreach.com/starlord
    Ad World
    http://adworld.netfirms.com

    "Michael McCulloch" <michaelm@nospam.invalid.net> wrote in message
    news:gshh00dme7f6r82hdfjrql0nh5tt6l5grp@4ax.com...


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 1/8/04



  6. #6
    BllFs6's Avatar
    BllFs6 Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    >NONE, it cost even MORE to build those massice scopes and the computers and

    Nope.....

    A shuttle launch cost roughly 500!!! million dollars.... (and NASA may well be
    hiding some of the real costs elsewhere in their budget...and then you have to
    add how much it cost for training the astronauts....and designing and building
    the replacement instruments....

    THAT kind of money would buy a handful of LARGE state of the art ground based
    observatories....or even hundreds to thousands "small" but never the less
    extremely useful telescopes/observatories (contrary to popular opinion size
    aint everthing ....

    Dont get me wrong...I love astronomy and the space program.....but the shuttle
    was just a good try at an idea that just didnt work ever (cheap resuable
    spacecraft)....

    Now the ISS thing has been a rolling disaster from the start and is pretty much
    useless....

    The two main reasons for an orbiting space station are making things in zero g
    (or trying to at least...ie crystals...metals etc....) and studying the effects
    of 0 g on humans....

    Well, we AND the russians figured out long ago that 0 g was BADDD long term and
    nothing really fixed it....

    The ISS moves and vibrates too much to really be a decent 0 g environment.....

    So, it aint good for the one of the 2 things and the other thing aint worth
    wasting your time on still more when there ALREADY is a reasonable solution to
    the problem....

    take care

    Blll

  7. #7
    Rod Mollise's Avatar
    Rod Mollise Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    >

    Hi Dennis:

    You're kidding--or using a little hyperbole--right? The Hubble program was much
    more expensive than any ground-based observatory.

    Peace,
    Rod Mollise
    Author of _Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_
    Like SCTs and MCTs?
    Check-out sct-user, the mailing list for CAT fanciers!
    Goto <http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index.html>

  8. #8
    Thomas Womack's Avatar
    Thomas Womack Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    In article <gshh00dme7f6r82hdfjrql0nh5tt6l5grp@4ax.com>,
    Michael McCulloch <michaelm@nospam.invalid.net> wrote:

    Between three and six, I think.

    http://www.noao.edu/system/tsip/keck_cost.html

    suggests that the Keck project cost about $230 million for two 10-metre
    telescopes plus detectors. The VLT (four eight-metre telescopes, plus
    significant site development costs) seems to have cost about $800 million
    to date.

    You do start to wonder whether you could get more science return
    building half a dozen more ten-metre telescopes than landing two golf
    carts on Mars; whether the UK might not have been better off building
    a six-metre scope than sending a probe whose budget was so pared that
    it ended up not working.

    Tom

  9. #9
    Stephen Astro's Avatar
    Stephen Astro Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    bllfs6@aol.com (BllFs6) wrote in message news:<20040117095122.26490.00000111@mb-m07.aol.com>...


    Don't forget the possible spin-offs that a Mars effort might bring.
    We might get a new class of lifter that could launch a Hubble big
    brother. Also, I don't get why it has to be the shuttle that services
    the Hubble. Couldn't a Soyuz do the same thing?

    Steve O

  10. #10
    Russell Wallace's Avatar
    Russell Wallace Guest

    Default To Good To Be True....Let's save the Hubble

    On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:33:08 -0500, Michael McCulloch
    <michaelm@nospam.invalid.net> wrote:


    It's far from the end of its useful life yet.


    As other people have noted, ground based observatories can't fully
    substitute for Hubble.


    Well, if they cancelled all manned spaceflight for cost reasons, that
    would at least have a consistent logic to it. What makes this perverse
    lunacy is that they're still spending the money anyway, on busywork
    trips to that useless orbital camping trailer. It doesn't even make
    sense from a political standpoint; if they can't do routine
    maintenance work in low orbit, there's not much chance of people
    believing the talk about NASA sending people to Mars.

    --
    "Sore wa himitsu desu."
    To reply by email, remove
    the small snack from address.
    http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. the only way to save Hubble
    By richard schumacher in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-23-2005, 07:33 PM
  2. Nasa to save Hubble !
    By astrog in forum UK Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-15-2004, 04:57 PM
  3. SAVE THE HUBBLE FOUNDATION!
    By Michael in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-21-2004, 09:02 PM
  4. Help save the Hubble
    By P. Edward Murray in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-21-2004, 07:19 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin®
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:58 PM.