...........................

Cheers for the desktop pictures :)

They're really quite stunning! I'm having trouble deciding which one to use as a desktop. :confused:

Why is the telescope going to "die", it's solar powered isn't it ?

I thought that they'd decided to 'de-orbit' it?

Did a quick search on the BBC Website http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3405249.stm

Isn't leaving a giant telescope orbiting the planet a bit dangerous for anyone who might go up there in the future ?

Originally posted by nick2
Isn't leaving a giant telescope orbiting the planet a bit dangerous for anyone who might go up there in the future ?

it's not that big compared to the amount of space around. and they do look where they're going.

Originally posted by Cyclone
it's not that big compared to the amount of space around. and they do look where they're going.

But it is travelling at a thousand miles an hour, you look left, you look right, you look left again - Arrgggghhhh! hit by a telescope.

It might not happen like that though.

If does seem a huge shame to lose the telescope though.

The last thing they should do is point it at the moon and try to spot the flag and lander that got left behind.

Originally posted by Cyclone
it's not that big compared to the amount of space around. and they do look where they're going.

I may be wrong, but I'm sure I read somewhere that 'space junk' (old satellites and the like) was getting to the stage where it was becoming a real problem?

I think that all junk is mapped by NASA.

I also believe that the Hubble's orbit will gradually decay, bringing it back to earth, they say, around 2011.

I supose cobbeling it onto the space station is out of the question ?

Originally posted by nick2
But it is travelling at a thousand miles an hour, you look left, you look right, you look left again - Arrgggghhhh! hit by a telescope.

That made me laugh, I can just imagine it now :D

nick, the problem is that it needs repairing, and a manned mission isn't a NASA priority and a robotic mission has been deemed infeasible.

I thought i'd seen something about de-orbiting it.

The proposed $16.5 billion NASA budget includes just $93 million for Hubble, far less than would be needed to repair it. Of that amount, $75 million is intended to develop a robotic mission to de-orbit the telescope into the ocean

There is a tremenndous amount of man made things whizzing around in orbit, lots are still in use but then there is plenty that has just become clutter.
There's a little known idea called the 'cascade effect' which might happen one day, the idea is that two bits of 'clutter collide and break into several pieces that go flying off at different speeds and trajectories. This then colides with more satelites or clutter and so you get lots of bits flying around these then hit more things..... You get the picture?
Every satelite in orbit get's destroyed.

Can't they bring it back down to earth and use it here?

I mean, if no-one else want's it, can I have it please? (would go nicely in the garden shed).

Originally posted by Jamie
Can't they bring it back down to earth and use it here?

I mean, if no-one else want's it, can I have it please? (would go nicely in the garden shed).

Don't wish too hard ... it is not beyond the realms of possibility!

(Did you say "in" or "on"........ or "where's my shed gone??")

Yet more pictures from Hubble:

http://wires.news.com.au/special/mm/030811-hubble.htm#00-titlepage2

:) Sierra

Originally posted by nick2
Isn't leaving a giant telescope orbiting the planet a bit dangerous for anyone who might go up there in the future ?

I don't think it's actually in Earth's orbit. It's a stationary object a bit further out, that's why the US government don't want to service it, because the only vehicle they have is the Space Shuttle which is designed more for orbiting the Earth than travelling to other locations.

I think they are gonna dump it in the pacific. They do this with lots of things (mir too I think). Wont they eventually screw up with one of these and it will be goodbye to some big city?

Originally posted by nick2
Isn't leaving a giant telescope orbiting the planet a bit dangerous for anyone who might go up there in the future ?
There's so much space junk you can't imagine...

Originally posted by Jamie
Can't they bring it back down to earth and use it here?

I mean, if no-one else want's it, can I have it please? (would go nicely in the garden shed).

they are going to bring it back down, didn't you see my quote.

It's certainly not 'stationary' in space, although stationary is rather abstract and would need qualifying against some other object.

I'm assuming that de-orbiting it, means bringing it down on a controlled reentry where it will burn up and the remains will crash into the sea somewhere.

Originally posted by Cyclone
they are going to bring it back down, didn't you see my quote.

It's certainly not 'stationary' in space, although stationary is rather abstract and would need qualifying against some other object.

I'm assuming that de-orbiting it, means bringing it down on a controlled reentry where it will burn up and the remains will crash into the sea somewhere.

I don't see why they can't bring it back down? ... I mean, what goes up, must come back down, right?

Can't they bring it back down in little pieces, then screw it all back together once it's back on earth?

Originally posted by Jamie
I don't see why they can't bring it back down? ... I mean, what goes up, must come back down, right?

Can't they bring it back down in little pieces, then screw it all back together once it's back on earth?

Firstly, I don't think it's designed to be taken apart. It wasn't all put up in 1 go, so it would require multiple trips, and the reason they aren't repairing it is that they've decided a manned mission is too dangerous. If they can't repair it, they definitely can't dismantle it and bring it home.

Originally posted by Cyclone
Firstly, I don't think it's designed to be taken apart. It wasn't all put up in 1 go, so it would require multiple trips, and the reason they aren't repairing it is that they've decided a manned mission is too dangerous. If they can't repair it, they definitely can't dismantle it and bring it home.

Huh ... that figures ... life just ain't fair !!

There's this really fit girl that lives in a flat across the road from me and that hubble telescope would come in really useful *wink* *wink*.

Originally posted by Cyclone
the reason they aren't repairing it is that they've decided a manned mission is too dangerous.

What a bunch of big-girls-blouses, lend us the shuttle and we'll send a British team to fix it.

Originally posted by Jamie
Huh ... that figures ... life just ain't fair !!

There's this really fit girl that lives in a flat across the road from me and that hubble telescope would come in really useful *wink* *wink*.

Yeah jamie you could peer through it and see her hair follicles close up, tres sexy!


As for hubble. It's had a good innings, but time for a better one methinks. The space telescope concept is proven beyond a doubt.

The James Webb Space telescope goes into orbit around L2 sometime in 2011 (it's not the same thing as hubble tho')

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Yeah jamie you could peer through it and see her hair follicles close up, tres sexy!


As for hubble. It's had a good innings, but time for a better one methinks. The space telescope concept is proven beyond a doubt.

The James Webb Space telescope goes into orbit around L2 sometime in 2011 (it's not the same thing as hubble tho')

Is that the one with three separate sections millions of miles apart, connected with lasers? I heard about something like that on the radio, and apparently it should be able to pick up microwaves from the big bang (and, apparently, it's so sensitive it may even be able to pick up an 'umbilical cord' to the parallel universe from whence we came...)

:help:

I could just have been dreaming about all this though.

Originally posted by Greenback
Is that the one with three separate sections millions of miles apart, connected with lasers? I heard about something like that on the radio, and apparently it should be able to pick up microwaves from the big bang (and, apparently, it's so sensitive it may even be able to pick up an 'umbilical cord' to the parallel universe from whence we came...)

:help:

I could just have been dreaming about all this though.

No, although I think I dreamt about that one.

The JWST is designed to look at extremely redshifted distant objects using infra-red. Don't know much more about it than that, but its designed to look even farther back in time than Hubble.

Phew, I'm not going mad. Here's the lowdown on LISA (Laser Interferometer Space Antenna):

http://lisa.jpl.nasa.gov/WHATIS/intro.html

Phew, I'm not going mad. Here's the lowdown on LISA (Laser Interferometer Space Antenna):

http://lisa.jpl.nasa.gov/WHATIS/intro.html