You know, this discussion really ought to be over in BABB, it just occurred to me that it's more appropriate there for the political content, although there's science mixed in. My main objections are to the politicization of science that appears to be SOP from D.C. and not necessarily to the idea of deorbiting HST -- it was going to happen sooner or later.
In an effort to get this back to astronomy though, I'd like to discuss more about what HST can still do in its time left on orbit.
Until the AO situation on the ground is improved to the point where it seriously challenges a 24-hour-a-day capability in space, there will be huge gaps left when HST goes out of commission, possibly as early as late next year (if what I heard about going to two-gyro mode comes true). I'm currently working on a project for an observatory that does do AO and it's pretty clear that the state of the art is "THIS" close to mounting that kind of challenge to HST. The limiting principles, even at the high, dry altitudes at which it works, are still humidity (i.e. atmospheric water vapor content) and plain ol' bad weather.
Last week at AAS we had a wonderful presentation of a deep field taken with the Gemini instruments, for example, and it was pretty clear to me that they are moving into HST's former territory. IN a few years they may well be where HST is today, if they get their added improvements. We also see similar efforts by ESO in Chile, and some of their work is stunning. So, in the natural order of things, HST will cede ground to AO systems. In the meantime, it will continue to probe as far as possible, as deep into time as possible, and also with high resolution. I expect to see further efforts at deepfield work, but I also think in the time that's left, we continuing monitoring planetary changes -- those long-term changes in atmosphere at Jupiter, Saturn, Mars, etc. that give us a much fuller picture of change over time.
Any other ideas?
|