Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
NASA

Webb Telescope Launch Date Slips Again (arstechnica.com) 80

Posted by BeauHD from the slight-change-of-plans dept.
The James Webb Space Telescope, the largest science observatory to ever be placed into space, won't launch as scheduled on Halloween this year due to a "combination of different factors." The new launch date is expected to be pushed into November or possibly early December. Ars Technica reports: During a press briefing with reporters on Tuesday, the telescope's director for launch services, Beatriz Romero, said that there are a "combination of different factors" to consider when setting a new launch date. These factors include shipment of the telescope, the readiness of the Ariane 5 rocket, and the readiness of the spaceport in South America as well. Romero said she did not expect to identify a new launch date until later this summer or early fall.

NASA plans to ship the telescope to the launch site by boat late this summer. (NASA is keeping precise plans vague due to concerns about piracy at sea. Seriously.) The space agency's chief of science, Thomas Zurbuchen, said Tuesday that "we don't have a lot of reserve" left in the schedule to prepare for shipment. However, he added that NASA and Webb's primary contractor, Northrop Grumman, are close to folding up the telescope and putting it into a shipping container. He said that this should happen toward the "end of August." The launch campaign, which begins when the telescope arrives in French Guiana, requires 55 days. Asked whether this means that Webb will not launch until mid-November at the earliest, Zurbuchen said this assessment was correct.

The rocket is also not ready. The Ariane 5 booster, a venerable rocket in service for more than 25 years, has been grounded since August 2020 due to a payload fairing issue. However, officials with Arianespace, which manages launch for the Ariane 5, said the fairing issue's cause has been diagnosed and addressed with a redesign. Two Ariane 5 launches are scheduled before Webb's launch to ensure that the fairing issue has been fixed. (Those launches are scheduled for July and August, but delays are possible.) Finally, there are concerns about the spaceport itself, where operations have been limited by COVID-19. Vaccines are not yet widely available in French Guiana, and officials have said that if virus activity worsens, it could further slow operations.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Webb Telescope Launch Date Slips Again More

Webb Telescope Launch Date Slips Again

Comments Filter:

  • Not Shure If Slashdot Dupe: (Score:3, Informative)

    by bettersheep ( 6768408 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2021 @05:46AM (#61446472)

    We've only seen this same story here about 5 times before:

      NASA Delays James Webb Space Telescope To October 2021 (theguardian.com)

      James Webb Space Telescope, NASA's Next Hubble, Delayed Yet Again (space.com)

      James Webb Space Telescope Will 'Absolutely' Not Launch In March (arstechnica.com)

      NASA Again Delays Launch of Troubled Webb Telescope (nytimes.com)

      James Webb Space Telescope, NASA's Next Hubble, Delayed Again (cnet.com)

    and maybe hints at the cause of the real problem:

        GAO Denied Access To Webb Telescope Workers By Northrop Grumman

        How the Webb Space Telescope Got So Expensive

  • Catastrophic loss (Score:3)

    by JoeRobe ( 207552 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2021 @06:06AM (#61446488) Homepage

    What would happen in the event that the launch fails and the telescope is lost? Would a second one be built quickly (on JWST timescale) or would it get scrapped?

    • If another JWST could be built quickly and relatively cheaply, I think it would have already be built.
      There are more places to explore in the Universe that JWST can look at in a lifetime.

      Unfortunately, the mirrors can't be made neither quickly nor cheaply, and the space telescope lives or dies by the quality of its mirrors.

    • Starship will launch an array of large telescopes into high orbit before another Webb-like project can be designed.

      By using an array and good software we can see much more than one large mirror for /most/ observations.

      Webb's large-mirror successor may be better off constructed on the dark side of the Moon. Maybe the Chinese will do it.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by ArmoredDragon ( 3450605 )

        The idea behind putting JWT at the L2 Lagrange point is that it's always dark there. The "dark" side of the moon isn't always dark.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          The idea behind putting JWT at the L2 Lagrange point is that it's always dark there.

          Someone is in for a big surprise given that it is solar powered.

          • Someone is in for a big surprise given that it is solar powered.

            From https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/... [nasa.gov]

            Webb requires a distant orbit for several reasons. Webb will observe primarily the infrared light from faint and very distant objects. Infrared is heat radiation, so all warm things, including telescopes, emit infrared light. To avoid swamping the very faint astronomical signals with radiation from the telescope, the telescope and its instruments must be very cold. Webb's operating temperature is less than 50 degrees above absolute zero: 50 Kelvin (-223 C or -370 F). Therefore, Webb has a large shield that blocks the light from the Sun and Earth (and the Moon), which otherwise would heat up the telescope, and interfere with the observations. Webb will be placed in orbit around the Sun at a special location where its sunshield can block both the Sun and Earth (and Moon) all the time.; the second Lagrange point (L2) of the Sun-Earth system has this property. L2 is a semi-stable point in the gravitational potential around the Sun and Earth. The L2 point lies outside Earth's orbit while it is going around the Sun, keeping all three in a line at all times. The combined gravitational forces of the Sun and the Earth can almost hold a spacecraft at this point, and it takes relatively little fuel to keep the spacecraft near L2. The cold and stable temperature environment of the L2 point will allow Webb to make the very sensitive infrared observations needed.

            That wouldn't work out too well on the dark side of the moon. It does work in the l2 lagrange where it's always dark and thus colder. It won't be totally eclipsed by the sun or the moon, in fact they're going out of their way to avoid that, and it will have plenty of sunlight for its solar panels.

      • Webb's large-mirror successor may be better off constructed on the dark side of the Moon. Maybe the Chinese will do it.

        In what way would it be better on the moon? The current mission is for JWST to be at L2. At that orbit it has a much larger field of view than being fixed in place on the Moon. Also I am not sure that the expense of constructing something on the Moon is cheaper than launching it from Earth.

      • Starship will launch an array of large telescopes into high orbit before another Webb-like project can be designed.

        No Webb-like telescope should ever be designed again. When launch costs were astronomical, it made sense to invest a couple of decades in engineering in order to get a couple of decades of service out of a single flagship telescope, even if you had to invent materials and processes and instruments along the way. With the upcoming availability of Starship and a launch cost that could be less than the salary of a big university's football head coach, spending more than two decades developing the telescope y

    • Seriously. If spending billions, and decades, and irreplaceable unique expertise and processes, building the most advanced telescope satellite ever, why "on Earth" would you only build one, with maybe a, what, 1 in 20 chance of launch or orbit insertion failure?

      Use economy of scale, and always assemble 3 identical copies, thus reducing chance of failure to 1 in 8,000. Or if the chance of launch and orbit insertion failure is e.g. 1 in 100, that would get you to 1 in a million ish chance of failure, assuming

      • This is exactly what I was thinking. A lot of engineering and hours go into the design, sourcing, manufacturing of parts for something like this. In my experience if that much effort goes into making one, it's actually much less effort and cost to make a second one. For example I bet a lot of the mirror cost went into building the structure and tooling to make the mirrors. Once that equipment is built, the cost of making another primary mirror (granted it's a segmented primary) is much less.

        I've generally w

  • If this continues, we will need a similar telescope to see the end of the timeline

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by GoTeam ( 5042081 )
      Which timeline? Downfall, child, or adult?

      • About 2x as long as my gf expects to wait for me to propose...

        (Yaya this is slashdot where gf's probably don't exist - but these days nerds get laid too - take advantage before we become uncool again)

        (and that wasn't misogyny it's misogamy)

  • Into the future ... I want to fly like an eagle!

  • Science! (Score:3)

    by necro81 ( 917438 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2021 @06:48AM (#61446560) Journal
    This is excellent news: it means we have a new datapoint for XKCD: https://xkcd.com/2014/ [xkcd.com]

    I mean, this is a scientific endeavor, after all - making pretty plots is what it's all about, right?

  • Vocabulary is important. The telescope is not being moved by boat. It's being moved by ship. Sloppy reporting. If they got such a simple detail wrong, what other errors are there?

  • Already 14 years late, way over budget, with now-obsolete technology, and named after a racist bureaucrat who contributed nothing to the field of astronomy. Just scrap it, NASA, and start all over again, this time honoring an astronomer.

    • Re:Color me surprised (Score:5, Informative)

      by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2021 @08:19AM (#61446734) Journal

      The "obsolete technology" is still far and above anything else that actually exists. Hubble is dying, and is well past it's planned service lifetime. It had plenty of detractors too, but ended up being one of the most important tools for discovery that humans have ever built. Remember, Hubble was supposed to launch in 1983, didn't actually launch until 1990, and wasn't actually useable until 1993. It's now been up there 30 years, likely to last another 10 years before it finally dies.

      Are you going to change your tune when we start to get pretty images from JWST too?

      • It's far and above anything else that actually exists - in space. At this point, I would be pleasantly surprised if and when deployed it works at all. And this time around, unlike Hubble's case, there is no fixing it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jythie ( 914043 )
        I am trying to figure out how something even even be obsolete when it is unique.
        • Well for some people they think that because it does not have the latest tech must mean it is already obsolete without thinking about purpose and uniqueness of the use. There are not any suitable alternatives to JWST at this point in time that I am aware. The only other IR telescope is planned for launch in 2025 and does not have the same capability as JWST.

    • Re:Color me surprised (Score:5, Informative)

      by prisoner-of-enigma ( 535770 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2021 @08:34AM (#61446788) Homepage

      Already 14 years late, way over budget, with now-obsolete technology, and named after a racist bureaucrat who contributed nothing to the field of astronomy. Just scrap it, NASA, and start all over again, this time honoring an astronomer.

      While I can't argue with categorizing Webb as a bureaucrat who contributed nothing to astronomy, you may want to update your knowledge of him as a racist: https://hmoluseyi.medium.com/w... [medium.com]

      Racism is thrown around as a casual slur far too often, frequently with zero context or supporting info.

      • Sometimes I think the smart republicons go around poking up woke fools to take down their enemies from within. (forgetting the fact that increased dysfunction hurts everybody and plays in exactly with the nearly non-stop Russian subversion since the cold war... )

        People are complex you simpletons! Great things have and still are done by really bad people. A person's impact is not defined by a single position on a single issue! Maybe your simplistic grasp of history is where the most controversial word and t

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Pascoea ( 968200 )
      It's already 99.9% built. The checks to launch it have been cashed. We're 5 months (out of 300 total) away from it being in space. Put a "Carl Segan Space Telescope" sticker on it and fuckin send it.
  • By the time they launch the JWST, its tech will be so grossly out of date, that they'll need to start work on a replacement project for another two decades of pork-barrel spending.

    At this point, they should have partnered with Boeing require it to be launched on SLS. Then they'd easily get another 5 years or more.

    • By the time they launch the JWST, its tech will be so grossly out of date

      I'm pretty sure the universe will still be there.

    • And while "out of date", the tech on board will be a massive improvement to anything else in orbit. Remember that Hubble started being designed in 1972, was supposed to launch in 1983, actually launched with myopia in 1990, and started entering service in 1993.

      It's now been up there for 30 years and is still one of the most important (and most used) instruments of discovery that humans have ever built. Why would JWST be any different with it's better orbital placement, much larger mirror, and vastly super

    • Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, SELECT START!

      Always play with a friend where possible!

      Yo Grark

    • Please explain how the tech will be "so out of date." I am not aware of another telescope with it's capabilities.

    • Re:Pork-Barrel Spending At Its Finest (Score:4, Insightful)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2021 @09:16AM (#61446952)

      By the time they launch the JWST, its tech will be so grossly out of date

      Maybe you should read up and understand about the JWST before you talk about out of date. There's nothing super high tech about the JWST, there's only construction that takes advantage of physics. Gold plated mirrors don't go out of date, and in case you haven't noticed there's not been talk of replacing the Hubble with a fancy new CCD or an updated version of Windows. The calls to replace it were not due to the age of its tech and rather the desire to record things it wasn't designed to record.

      The JWST is an infrared instrument, technology didn't make that happen, a different design did.
      The JWST has a larger mirror, technology didn't make that happen, a different design did.
      The JWST is going to sit at L2, technology didn't make that happen either.

      I mean if the JWST gets delayed another couple of billion years then it may be too out of date to do what it was designed to do due to increased red-shift of the galaxies it is designed to observe, but I don't think we'll care by that point.

      Don't compare this to your iPhone.

      • Most of the benefits of JWST are the mission parameters. Being at L2 and having an IR shield increases the sensitivity of it over Earth based IR telescopes. The planned mission is minimum 5 years and maximum of 10 years with the limitation being the fuel needed to maintain it at L2 orbit.

        • I know NASA is generally super conservative with mission length expectations, but man I'm hoping we decide to refuel JWST or find another way to keep it there for decades.

          NG did a mission extension for a large GEO sat recently. Basically dropped a new propulsion system on the sat by attaching inside the rocket bell of the original. Lets them keep it up there longer since the rest of the sat was working.

          • The main problem with refueling is that JWST will be at L2 (1.5M km) and not GEO. That is further than the Moon by 1.1M km. Possible but difficult [nasa.gov]

            Q: What about in-space refueling the telescope? Would it be possible to extend the mission lifespan this way? (asked by @hrissan)
            A: In-space refueling of #JWST? Logically possible but difficult. It would require robots!

        • Most of the benefits of JWST are the mission parameters.

          Yeah that's right, but that wasn't my point. Yeah mission parameters were the benefit, but JWST isn't a replacement for anything nor a technology update. It's a different instrument with a different and scientifically novel purpose. Being 20 years later won't change it's capabilities and won't make it any less useful for its purpose.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jythie ( 914043 )
      Not everything has the short product cycle of consumer trash.
  • Just scrap it and give us fucking money back. This is nothing but a bullshit pie now
    • And how much money do you think we can get from the parts? I can assure you it is not a lot of money comparatively. And to be clear you are proposing scrapping a working satellite telescope instead of waiting for a few months as the rocket delivery system needs to be repaired so the telescope does not explode on launch. To use an analogy that is like asking a store to scrap my order for parts and give me that money because FedEx has delays shipping my order.

      • The rocket is not at a special risk of exploding. Ariane 5 is old, proven and very reliable.

        People managing the JWST noticed it still had trapped gas bubbles in the sunshield that could expand when the rocket fairing would be jettisoned. So they asked ariane group a new fairing that could be jettisoned with a slower pressure drop. They do that by pumping out a part of the air in the fairing before jettison.

        There have been two launches with the new fairing without incident for the payload but there are still

  • No matter what anyone says that date is predicted by machine learning* Here is the data: https://xkcd.com/2014/ [xkcd.com] (* machine learning sounds much better than extrapolation)

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close