Hubble Camera Lost "For Good" 190
Several readers wrote in to tell us, following up on the recent story of the shutting down of Hubble's main camera, that program engineers are now saying that the camera is probably gone for good. The trouble resulted from a short circuit on Saturday in Hubble's most popular instrument, the Advanced Camera for Surveys. NASA engineers reported Monday that most of the camera's capabilities, including the ability to take the sort of deep cosmic postcards that have inspired the public, had probably been lost. We'll be pining for more of those amazing images until the James Webb launches in 2013.
Update: 01/30 23:28 GMT by KD : Reader Involved astronomer wrote in with an addendum / clarification to this story: "I'm a grant-funded astronomer at the Space Telescope Science Institute (www.stsci.edu) in Baltimore. I am very concerned that the article conveys the wrong idea about HST. While HST's science capacity is diminished with the loss of ACS, HST lives on and will continue to produce world-class science, even before its servicing mission in Sept. 2008, which will upgrade the instrument suite with the most sophisticated imagers in history." Read on for the rest of his note.
I'd like to point out these facts:
Update: 01/30 23:28 GMT by KD : Reader Involved astronomer wrote in with an addendum / clarification to this story: "I'm a grant-funded astronomer at the Space Telescope Science Institute (www.stsci.edu) in Baltimore. I am very concerned that the article conveys the wrong idea about HST. While HST's science capacity is diminished with the loss of ACS, HST lives on and will continue to produce world-class science, even before its servicing mission in Sept. 2008, which will upgrade the instrument suite with the most sophisticated imagers in history." Read on for the rest of his note.
- A fuse blew on ACS side two electronics — This will LIKELY (we're not 100% sure yet) render the Wide-field channel and the High-resolution channel (e.g. 2/3rds of the camera) inoperable. The solar blind channel will likely be returned to operation.
- While we have lost (2/3rds) of ACS, NICMOS and WFPC2, two fantastic imagers, are still operational. WFPC2 is responsible for many of the gorgeous images that grace many of your desktop wallpapers.
- ACS had an expected lifetime of 5 years. It met that lifetime. The loss of ACS, while of course disappointing, is not necessarily a shock.
- Servicing mission 4 is currently scheduled for Sept. 2008. It will upgrade HST to never-before-seen scientific capability and productivity. The Wide-Field Camera 3, which will be installed then, will essentially be an even more sophisticated successor to ACS.
You can view one of our press releases on this here: http://hubblesite.org/acs/.
Looks like my wallpaper won't be changing for a (Score:2)
Re:Looks like my wallpaper won't be changing for a (Score:5, Funny)
You mean this one [photobucket.com]?
Play re-runs (Score:2)
Misleading. You will still have great wallpapers (Score:5, Informative)
Hubblesite.org has a good layman's description [hubblesite.org] of the instruments on the Hubble.
Also, we're still getting many fine images of the planets, stars, galaxies, and nebulae around us from the Spitzer [nasa.gov] and the multitude of ground-based [nasa.gov] scopes that make great backgrounds. And don't forget the fantastic Mars rovers [nasa.gov] or Cassini. [nasa.gov]
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not exactly true... it totally depends on the image and which Hubble camera took the picture. For instance the pictures of mars and the other planets are pretty much spot on (when they haven't been color enhanced to show otherwise invisible physical deta
Re:Looks like my wallpaper won't be changing for a (Score:4, Funny)
There is absolutely no way that we can extrapolate any color [hubblesite.org] from those images.
think i can wait... (Score:2)
I think I can wait...
Re:think i can wait... (Score:5, Informative)
For those of you questioning whether or not Hubble should be serviced or just wait for James Webb, you ought to know that Hubble and James Webb will not cover the same wavelengths. Hubble covers UV, visible, and near-infrared. James Webb will cover Near to mid-infrared. James Webb can't do all the science that Hubble can and vice versa. However, ground-based adaptive optics imaging are hoped to be able to provide image quality as good as Hubble by the time it is ready to be retired sometime in the next decade. Also, because of the atmosphere, from the ground, we cannot observe all the infrared wavelengths that James Webb will be able to.
And certainly no UV.... (Score:2)
But even with ground-based AO and JWST, we will have no access to the UV after Hubble signs off. Although Hubble doesn't do a lot of UV imaging (see GALEX for that), the UV spectroscopy from it has taught us a fantastic amount about the composition, motion, and physical conditions of tons of astronomical objects including nearby interstellar gas and hot stars as well as distant ac
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I thought the Large Binocular Telescope [arizona.edu] was already doing that, producing images 10 times sharper [wikipedia.org] than Hubble.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, having some peripheral involvement with NICMOS (our company designed the replacement cryocooler for it), we get very regular status updates. When the ACS system safed, NICMOS and it's cooling systems went into safe mode as well, but on monday afternoon they restarted the NICMOS cooling system, and, as of yesterday noon, the NICMOS system was almost back down to operating
Re: (Score:2)
If the military can colorize the output from infrared goggles realtime to look 'real', I'm sure the brains at NASA can colorize infrared images just like they colorize the Hubble images.
The Spitzer telescope has produced a few pretty images.
No time in the upcoming servicing mission (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:No time in the upcoming servicing mission (Score:4, Interesting)
I do wonder about that Hubble repair launch. Their not big on changing mission profiles significantly, and I'm certainly no expert on what they're doing to it, but it seems that some of the repairs may not be worthwhile if that camera is down, or if they might decided that not doing as much (i.e. letting it die sooner) but replacing the camera might be worth it. But like I said, I don't know much about how the Hubble works and what the current repair plans are.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Information on the Hubble Servicing Mission can be
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Better just the ACS than the whole telescope.
And hey, if we're fortunate, they might put in another nice camera in 2008 to hold everyone over until that infrared one gets launched. They can make time for it--this was clearly a well-loved camera, and the people and science boards have some voice.
I really
Re:No time in the upcoming servicing mission (Score:5, Insightful)
Webb in 2013? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
With all the people excited about the images that Hubble has given us, let alone the science, hopefully some will begin to reali
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that you've done that, can you explain your point?
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously.
Name them.
And small Mars missions don't count. I'm talking about things that cost at least a billion and were scheduled for 5 plus years in the future. The fact is, 99% of the time, if you can't build it in 5 years, you basically can't build it at all without some breakthrough happening. NASA's planning teams always assume that sometime in the next 10 years we'll learn how to use unobtanium to keep the cost of the heat s
it's not dead (Score:5, Funny)
Will those images be of the fjords?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm sure if we went up there we'd find the only reason it remains perched where it is, is because it's been nailed there.
Re: (Score:2)
Could the NSA help? (Score:3, Interesting)
I realize the optics aren't set up to do far-field imaging, but maybe it'd be cheaper and quicker than waiting to fix the Hubble?
Re:Could the NSA help? (Score:4, Informative)
I realize the optics aren't set up to do far-field imaging, but maybe it'd be cheaper and quicker than waiting to fix the Hubble?
An intriguing idea. However, I don't think it will work. The focus would not be the major issue though, as the difference in focussing between 500km and 500pc is relatively minor.
I suspect the main issue would be noise. Hubble's CCDs were specifically designed to have the lowest possible noise, whereas in the case of an NSA satellite, they have so much more signal from Earth (>1000x) than from the next dimmest thing in the solar system that the system might not be physically capable of taking the necessary long exposures. However, they might be able to do some sort of astronomy with a series of stacked images, much as is done with web cam astronomy. [navy.mil] Anyway, just some thoughts... there are probably other reasons it hasn't been done yet that I haven't thought of yet....
Re: (Score:2)
Dead spy satellites don't last long (Score:2)
No, they couldn't. (Score:3, Informative)
Mainly because NSA doesn't have any cameras up there. You're thinking of NGA, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and yet... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't say the whole amount, he said part. There's plenty to go around.
See also: NYT article, "What $1.2 Trillion can buy" [nytimes.com].
Re: (Score:2)
It just seems kind of stupid to me, to complain that we're spending our spare change on one luxury item instead of another luxury item, with all the trouble in the world today...
Re: (Score:2)
I meant that if the Iraq war hadn't been funded, there would be enough money to fund NASA, improve health-care and education, and still give millions to needy people in other countries, if that's what was desired.
It just seems kind of stupid to me, to complain that we're spending our spare change on one luxury item instead of another luxury item, with all the trouble in the world today...
It's a matter of scale. Bi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fortunately, in the real world, we're capable of doing more than one thing at once.
Re: (Score:2)
The Beeb Disagrees... (Score:3, Insightful)
From The Beeb [bbc.co.uk]:
So uh, WTF? Who is right? Will this camera be replaced in 2008, or not?
Re:The Beeb Disagrees... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, stop, relax, you're both right. There is a mission planned for 2008 but it will never happen.
Re: (Score:2)
The new WFC3 will be installed in place of the now-inoperative Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) instrument. The ACS was never scheduled or expected to be replaced.
Slightly wrong... (Score:2)
WFC3 replaces WFPC2.
COS (UV spectroscopy) replaces COSTAR (the original optics fix package; all the new instruments have this correction built in).
STIS will have an attempted repair to get it going again. It's a tough job, but we astro spectral-types have our fingers crossed.
There is hope. (Score:2)
My favourite Pascal (Score:2)
That’s normally attributed to Pensees 149, but in all the lists of his Pensees, I see something differnet written. <shrug> it’s the one I like.
service it quick (Score:4, Informative)
If you still want pretty pictures for your desktop - this is not really the point but its astronomy for the soul which is very important - then theres a fairly large collection of ACS images http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/archive/free
Re: (Score:2)
Debris from Chinese tests? (Score:2, Interesting)
Good idea but not quite the correct question. (Score:2)
Correct question: "Is any of the debris from the satellite China blew up now in an orbit that intersects the HST's?"
Blame Mike Nelson. (Score:2, Funny)
James Webb is not a replacement.. (Score:2, Informative)
Far to often people speak about James Webb as the ultimate replacement for Hubble. However the optical and UV bands will be lost without it.
Hubble pictures are nice 'n' all... (Score:3, Interesting)
link? (Score:2)
Oh, c'mon, if it's a great telescope, at least pimp it here. Amazon link with associates id welcomed.
Anyone notice China's cloud of junk? (Score:2, Interesting)
MSNBC said the ACS was the primary producer of data since 2002 and it could not be replaced in a single repair mission. MSNBC also said it failed 2 months short of its 5 year mission. People like MSNBC. They like Keith Olbermann. They trust Keith Olbermann more than their own eyes. MSNBC gave quite a bleaker picture than the funded astronomer.
The real fear
Re: (Score:2)
Pointing figers before even remote evidence supports an accusation against someone would hurt the credibility of any decent press, don't you think so?
Politicians in Washington seemed to developed a habbit. When anything bad happens, they always find a way to blame China or someone who's not likely to defend themselves before the general US public. To suppor
Fuse Blew? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oblig. Futurama (Score:2, Funny)
Kif: "It appears to be the mothership"
Brannigan: "Then what did we just blow up?"
Kif: "The Hubble Telescope"
Re: (Score:2)
Go fucking FIX it then !!!!?!?! (Score:2)
It provided unfathomable, invaluable insight to our own universe - take note of this, the universe word here is not some metaphor, synonym, acronym or any crap for anything - it is the REAL thing, what we exist in.
while squandering hoards of taxpayer dollars for crap that not worth, you nasa can neglect maybe the single scientif
To clarify that clarification... (Score:2)
WFC3/UVis is a clear step down on high-resolution imaging because the 40 mas pixels of
Re: (Score:2)
Should have bought the extended service agreement (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not really . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
My problem with the administration (and Congress) was that it cut NASA's funding. NASA had budgeted the James Webb to go online in 2013 and the Hubble to be serviced until 2013 so there would not be any disruption in service. With budget cuts, NASA had to make hard choices. At the same time, the administration was pushing NASA to start a program to put a man on Mars--an effort that would cost many times more than keeping the Hubble going. That's where I put the blame on the decisions in policy, not so much the "evilness" but policy.
For those out there who say that there is a replacement on the way, bear in mind the replacement is 6 years away. That's not too far away, right? Tell that to a scientist who has waited patiently for years for some time with the Hubble. He or she is going to have to do something else in the meantime. Science will have to wait.
Why? (Score:2)
How is aerospace engineering and basic science a waste of money?
What does NASA (Score:3, Insightful)
(hint: nothing)
Re: (Score:2)
This is not a slam on the troops, they are a valiant and necessa
You have just confirmed (Score:3, Insightful)
I see "exploring the Moon and Mars," and the two rovers which have exceeded their life expectancy by a factor of 16 and gathered a huge amount of valuable data, don't count as "basic science" in your world. Fascinating.
Please don't tell me (Score:2)
As for Amtrak, we need a reliable, cheap, fast national rail system, if for no other reason than rail travel is much more efficient than either automobile or airplane travel. Unfortunately, Amtrak has been the victim of bad management and underfunding for many, many years.
Re: (Score:2)
that you're one of those imbeciles who believes the Moon landings were fake.
As for Amtrak, we need a reliable, cheap, fast national rail system, if for no other reason than rail travel is much more efficient than either automobile or airplane travel. Unfortunately, Amtrak has been the victim of bad management and underfunding for many, many years.
First, I disagree that we need a passanger rail sysem. If we did need such a system, it would exist because it would be economical to run it. And you are right that Amtrak is poorly managed like most government programs including NASA.
I think it is ridiculous that our government is so big and wastes so much money.
The last time I checked the constitution, the purpose of the federal government didn't including space exploration.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This time frame coupled with that of the James Webb's 2013 launch date make the servicing mission more economical when you consider the entire benefit. (ie 4+ years of continued HST prod
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Costs are relative...A billion $ is alot of mon (Score:2)
The good thing is that it doesn't matter! Tomorrow you'll be something else! As long as there is some vague enemy that can't really be defeated, everyone is happy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
keeping the masses 'in favor' of spending on space involves giving them some of the stuff they want, namely the magnificent pictures Hubble has been providing for years.
If they can't see it, then they won't want to fund it as much.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm certainly not a specialist, but while visible spectrum images are more stunning for the general public, maybe IR images are more useful to astronomers? What's more, now the Hubble is demised, perhaps it's possible to give the James Webb the option of imaging in other parts of the spectrum as well as IR as an afterthought.
keeping
Re: (Score:2)
1.) You can see in visible light from the ground, and several modern telescopes beat the hubble in that respect.
2.) Ultraviolet (another capability that will be lost with Hubble) isn't as interesting to astronomers as infrared. JWST will far outperform Hubble in IR. Some capabilities you just can't afford, otherwise we'd probably have half a dozen variations on the Hubble in orbit.
3.) JWST will also produce stunning images. They just won't be true color. For that mat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Looks like we will in fact be waiting till at least 2013 for any
Re: (Score:2)
Not true. I was directly involved with the plans to send a robot up to service the Hubble. It was definitely feasible - we even worked on various orbit scenarios to make it happen. The fact that it was decided to use a shuttle does _not_ mean there were no other alternatives. (I used to be a contractor at NASA GSFC.)
Re: (Score:2)
Otherwise, there is one opprtunity only to fix the problem, and that is durring the already scheduled (and full) 2008 service mission.
Re: (Score:2)
That makes a lot of sense... Much like "I've got to finish painting the barn before we burn it down", or "Let me plant this last petunia before you rotory-tiller the flower beds", or "I'm sorry, that paper will need to be signed before we can shred it" make a lot of sense.
I think, in a lot of ways, we need to "reboot" NASA.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The SHUTTLE fleet is being decommisioned, NOT the ISS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Plenty (Score:2)
I have plenty. [grin]
However, in my defense, the sentence "The Shuttle fleet is under the gun big time to get the ISS finished before it is decommisioned." is ambiguous.
"The Shuttles are under the gun big time to get the ISS finished before the fleet is decommissioned." would have been a better way of phrasing it.
Re:Conspiracy theory (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
And let the baggage handlers throw it around and/or put it on the next plane to Botswanaland by mistake? Hardly!