Canadian Robot Could Rescue Hubble

NETHED writes "We have all seen Stories about The Hubble Space Telescope and its current problems. Since then, NASA has okayed the fix of the HST. It seems that America's neighbor to the North has some answers. Dextre to the rescue. The mission would not be decided upon until next summer says Sean O'Keefe. It seems that NASA saw this as a good way to listen to the public for about 1.6 billion dollars." Update: 08/11 15:45 GMT by T : Reader Michael Mol dug up a link with a more technical explanation of Dextre, noting "It looks like Dextre's normally supposed to be attached to something before it performs work."

Re:Canadian Robot to fix Canadian Telescope

[shufler]

Err, wait. I retract my statement. I was thinking of the Canadarm.

I'm surprised someone modded me insightful already.

More info...

[SeaDour]

Here's a good link from the Canadian Space Agency's web site on Dextre (Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator): http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/eng/csa_sectors/human_p re/iss/mss_spdm.asp [space.gc.ca]

Re:Didn't realise Canada did that much in Space

[fitten]

There are some good robotics folks in Canada. Most notably are the Canadarm (robotic arm on the Shuttle) and a few deep diving ocean exploration vehicles that have very advanced robotic arms and such on them (one of which, with some cosmetic changes, was used in "The Abyss").

Re:Didn't realise Canada did that much in Space

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to read up on Canada's history in space. We put up the first commercial communications satellite (no bouncing signals off of a baloon!), have the worlds most powerful communications satellites, built a synthetic aperture radar satellite with such precise imaging capabilities that the US refused to launch it, and the list goes on.

Re:Repairs

[Curtman]

Its replacement also isn't scheduled to go up for another 7 years. And doesn't factor in the cost to get it up there yet. Or the labour to build the thing. Or the cost of fixing it when the inevitable problems crop up.

I'll give you a freaking break right away.

Re:Didn't realise Canada did that much in Space

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Canada was in fact the third country in space after the Russians and Americans. We were also the first country to have commercial geostationary satelities in space.

Here's a site with a brief timeline and notes aboot Canada in space [members.shaw.ca]

Re:Canadian Robot to fix Canadian Telescope

[Short Circuit]

Welcome to Slashdot. A community.

Re:Repairs

[madprogrammer]

I thought I read somewhere that while the JWST would "replace" Hubble, there was still some things that Hubble could do that JWST couldn't.

Is that true?

Re:Cool

[aiabx]

Left and Right in the political sense come from the post-revolutionary French National Assembly, where the conservatives sat on the right of the speaker while the radicals sat on the left.

Hey look! A mention of the French on Slashdot without any peurile French-bashing!
-aiabx

Re:Repairs

[stratjakt]

They "see" different wavelengths of light. JWST is designed to see farther. They'll be looking at completely different things.

The question is more like "has Hubble 'seen' enough?"

Are there any more things we can usefully point it at, or do we have enough images to analyse as it is? Besides pretty desktop wallpapers, what type of knowledge or discoveries will that 1.6 billion to keep it up there get us?

Re:here's to...

[worst_name_ever]

Not to mention humour, eh?

Re:Didn't realise Canada did that much in Space

[Mr2cents]

The robotic arms on the mars rovers are also Canadian. It seems like it's their specialty, and NASA is always full of praise of these tools.

Re:Repairs

[rpj1288]

We've all seen the same posts. Repeat after me, James Webb and Hubble see on different wavelengths. Therefore the Webb cannot replace Hubble. Don't be a troll.

It's just an end effector for the Shutttle arm

[Animats]

Here's more info from the manufacturer. [mdrobotics.ca] This isn't a free-flying robot. It's an end effector for the Canada Arm on the Shuttle. So it still takes a shuttle flight. Probably still takes astronaut EVAs, too.

Like the arm, it's a teleoperator, controlled by somebody with joysticks.

Given how much a shuttle flight costs, it would probably be cheaper to just run off another copy of the Hubble and launch that.

Re:Way to go, 51st State!

[Malc]

I always chuckle when Canadians take credit for inventing the phone. Bell [loc.gov] was a Scotsman! He had the idea while in Brantford and before he became an American, but I would say that was more coincidental as he hadn't spent that much time in Canada at that point.

Re:Repairs

[l4m3z0r]

Its replacement also isn't a 'replacement' the James Webb space observatory looks at a completely different set of wave lengths. Its about as much of a replacement as a boat is a replacement for a car.

Re:Repairs

[Curtman]

I'm not talking about costs to service it once its up there. I'm talking about problems that will arise during its assembly, and launch preparations. If they managed to bugger up the mirror for Hubble, imagine what can go wrong with this sucker:

• Although JWST has a planned weight half that of the Hubble, its primary mirror (a 6.5 meter beryllium reflector) is more than 5 times larger. As this diameter is much larger than any current launch vehicle, the mirror is composed of 18 segments, which will unfold after the telescope is launched.

They still don't even know what they are going to use to launch this thing. It's going to orbit further out than the moon does.

There's more issues besides just the cost too. Such as listed in the Report of the HST-JWST Transition Panel [google.com]:

• Many astronomers have written to the panel emphasizing the importance of an overlap in the operation of the HST and the JWST ... In the original NASA transition plan, a three year overlap in HST and JWST operations was scheduled. In the present OSS plan, a gap of one year is scheduled, with a planned cessation of HST operations in 2010 and the launch of JWST in 2011

So where is the money best spent? Extending HST, or putting the rush on JWST? What can be sacrificed in expediting JWST? I don't know, but I assume NASA has qualified people to make those decisions, otherwise this would be an Ask Slashdot. Keep in mind, the US gov't apparently has billions of dollars to throw away on locating non-existent WMD, whats a billion or two on space research?

You must feel sooo cool.
Quite. It's only 6 degrees celsius outside this morning.

Re:Repairs

[homer_ca]

Ditching it isn't free either, unless you're talking about an uncontrolled reentry. From one proposal [space.com] it would cost $300M (not including launch costs) to build an automated booster to attach to Hubble and safely deorbit it.