Nasa Unveils Hubble Telescope’s Successor

[webguru 0]

source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6645179.stm

 

NASA unveiled Thursday a model of the James Webb Space Telescope, the massive space probe that will replace the aging Hubble in 2013 and allow scientists to observe the formation of the first galaxies at the dawning of the universe.

 

 

JWST, a joint project of the US, European and Canadian space agencies, will be three times bigger than Hubble, with a hexagonal mirror 6.5 metres in diameter and five-layer sunshield the size of a tennis court

 

The probe will include 10 new technologies, including an infrared camera and a spectrometer kept at an extremely low temperature for optimum performance. The telescope is expected to have a 10-year lifespan.

 

Launched 17 years ago, Hubble â orbiting 575 kilometres above Earth â revolutionised astronomy by peering deep into the universe, beaming back dazzling images free of the distortions from Earthâs atmosphere.

 

While Hubble was able to peer back to one billion years after the Big Bang, the new telescope, with mirrors that will capture six times more light than its predecessor, will look even further into the origins of the universe, officials said.

 

âClearly we need a much bigger telescope to go back much further in time to see the very birth of the universe,â said Edward Weiler, director of NASAâs Goddard Space Flight Centre. âWith its more powerful mirrors, the new telescope, for the first time, will send images from that dark age in high resolution.â

 

The 4.5-billion-dollar James Webb Space Telescope will be folded to fit inside a European Ariane V rocket in 2013 and will unfurl 1.5 million kilometres from Earth.

 

NASA plans to launch a space shuttle mission next year to upgrade and maintain Hubble in order to keep it operational through 2013.

 

Without a repair mission, the telescope would shut down in 2009 or even earlier, dealing a blow to scientists who have relied on Hubbleâs images to better understand the universe.

[unimatrix 0]

I've heard a lot of debate about this. The James Webb is designed to look at near infrared vs. visable light spectrums like the hubble. An interesting thing is that there was a group of professors who calculated it would be cheaper to build a new hubble, with newer technologies off the shelf, and launch it into orbit via a Delta rocket than it would be to service the old one. In fact for the cost of the service, you could launch a couple new hubbles over the next 20 years given that each one lasts about a decade. NASA does a lot of good. They are one of the few agencies, besides DARPA, that funds basic research. A lot comes from Basic research and since it's through public insitutions, others can then take that research and build practical applications for the technologies developed. Which benefits us all down the road. Still, NASA seems to have a few pipe dreams. I mean like the idea of a Single Stage to Orbit transport like the X-33. For DECADES (even when they were designing the shuttle), areospace engineers and scientists have said that a Dual Stage to Orbit system (Like the private Space Ship One) was not only more practical, but far more cost effective as a people shuttle to and from space. And in that design, you have 2 pieces that are 100% reusable. You only need 2 carriers to fly up to 60 - 70k feet (1 and a back up) and you could have several secondstage vechciles. Hell you could probably have a couple different designs. Say one for sending up people and supplies to the ISS, another with a huge open bay for working on sats, and a third with dedicated science labs for zero g research...and all for the same or less cost without the problems with external fuel tanks. There is the point of, "Hey why spend $XXX hundres of millions to fix hubble when you could replace it with something newer and better for about the same cost?"

[mvs.en 0]

Haha, I was about to say that I'd been reading about the new telescope earlier today but... Then I realized I was reading about it in this thread. XDAnywayI dunno... I'm kinda apathetic on this subjet, really.Which is strange, because I love space-related stuff and generally like to know as much about it as I can.Perhaps though, I just don't understand the full ability of a telescope of this magnitude.I can't really say much about it because I don't have much insight on it and don't really know what it can do... Other than see things really far away >__> And as was mentioned earlier, apparently see into the past to better understand how the universe was formed.((If anyone would like to clarify or explain any specifics to me on the Telescope subject, that'd be awesome since I don't really understand much of it.))WellI guess my reason for apathy is the telescope doesn't really seem to provide any true advancement in space-related-stuff... Other than understanding and research, which I understand is vital.I suppose I'm just hoping that there will be some incredibly signifigant development in space travel like.. Before I die.Even though I know there's a very good chance there won't be.

[Quatrux 4]

Hubble has opened our eyes to the universe, it really did a good job and gather a lot of information, useful information and now if this new telescope which will replace Hubble will be as effective as Hubble, then I will say do it! It really is great how science is moving forward so fast, even though I think it could move even faster, but I don't think that being in rush is good too, 2013 is quite fine, another 6 years to wait and another year to get some useful handled information

[sparkx 0]

Seems very intresting. This new telescope looks real advanced but what gets me is that it only has a 10 year life expectancy. That does that mean they only need to maintance it every 10 years or does it mean that it will stop working in 10 years (im sure it doesn't matter anyway because of the increased rate in technology). I can't wait to see the origans of the univers. What if science was all wrong about it... Once question that keeps getting to me is wouldn't it be cheaper to simply add on to the Hubble or are the changes neccissary to big and its simpler to just send anouther telescope into space?Thanks,Sparkx