It seems the contractor and basic design for the NGST has finally been chosen. Now they can get down to the details of actually building it.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/806090.asp?cp1=1

http://nytimes.com/2002/09/17/science/space/17TELE.html (registration required)

The articles say the mirror has been shrunk from 26 feet to 20 feet in diameter (What, not in meters?), but that it still should be powerful enough to image things 100 times fainter than the HST in visible light and 400 times fainter in infrared.

They also seem to be focused on avoiding the kind of manufacturing goof-ups that they've had in the past. And since the telescope will be non-serviceable, they will build the critical systems to last longer.

I can't wait to see what kind of images we'll get with it. If Hubble made our mouths water, just imagine what this one will do. But can we hold out until 2010?

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

One of the few gripes I'd have is the choice in names. It seems this one is more politically motivated than the naming of the HST.

I suppose the 20-foot dimension was for the benefit of us Americans and our silly standard measurement system. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]


-Adam

I would say it's more financially motivated. Management holds the purse strings. If naming the scope after one of their own is what it takes, it is a small price to pay to get it funded. Also, as I read the NYT article, the astronomers have no beef with the name.

So, call it a six meter scope if that makes you happy. At least they didn't call it a "240 inch" [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

_________________
Be alert! The world needs more lerts.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Kaptain K on 2002-09-17 13:05 ]</font>

That gave me a flashback to an old Bill Cosby skit about Noah and the Ark. God goes through this lengthy explanation of the ark's design and dimensions. After all the details, Noah just looks dumbly at God and goes "What's a cubit?"

You have to hear Cosby do it to get the full effect [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

I've got a nickel that says that sometime during the life of the new scope, there will need to be a servicing mission. Anyone want to take the bet?

No kidding. Not serviceable? Why does that make me cringe?

I can already see it:

Senior technician: Alright, the inaugural photo went well, time for photo #2.

Junior technician: Sir, we have a malfunction with the telescope.

Senior technician: D'oh!

__________________
Isn't the fact that they don't visit us proof that intelligent life is out there?

The Confused Philosopher - RCAF

That should be interesting since they're putting it out at L1. That would be one heck of a shuttle mission!

In fact, that would be the furthest from Earth a human has ever been, wouldn't it?

"Bill Cosby Is A Very Funny Fellow, RIGHT" I still have the record album from about '64. I listened to that track so many times I could quote the whole thing from memory. A wonderfully funny skit! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif[/img]

__________________
It's just one of those damn things of which there are many few. -- Dan Blocker

The Chandra X-RAY Telescope cannot be serviced in its orbit. That's why they didn't do as much pre-launch publicity. Not as much egg on the face if something goes wrong.

L1 would definitely be the farthest from Earth anyone has ever gone if a mission was attempted!

And when Noah asks God, "What's a cubit?" God says, "Oh, a cubit...I used to know this one"

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Rob

Make that L2. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]
Yup! And beyond our current capabilities. This has "Murphy's Law" written all over it in dayglo ink. I'm hoping for the best, but I sure hope that someone is at least planning for "less than optimal" scenarios. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson

They wouldn't be able to make it through the deadly radiation of the van Allen Belt!

L2? I stand corrected.

I hadn't thought of that. Won't that fry the satellite anyway? I mean, if we can't protect a couple people from it how can we possibly protect billions of dollars of sensitive equipment? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Rich on 2002-09-17 17:23 ]</font>

It's a joke, it's what the moon hoaxers cite as the reason NASA couldn't go to the moon.

It won't be serviceable, but it will also
be ALLOT cheaper than the last space telescope. There are allot of more expensive, non-serviceable satelites and probes out there.

I wouldn't be surprised, though, if they made 2 of them. Especially if they are using unusualy new tech and need super-high precision. The second spacecraft does not cost nearly as much once you've built one. The second craft would be either a backup or a bonus depending on how first one worked. The Viking and Voyager missions were built this way.

It may be possible to have robotic servicing missions. This is being seriously considered for commercial communications satelites in geosynchronous orbit - though all that would be attempted at first would be to simply attach a new motor + fuel to a satelite that had run out.

As has been stated before re the moon hoax -
The Van Allen belts do not pose any danger for humans as long as you don't dilly-dally in the worst parts. If you go right through - your ok, the added radiation dose isn't terribly significant. Kind of like Fire walking - the ritual where you take three quick steps as you walk over a bed of super-hot coals.

Satelites can be hardened to withstand the Van Allen belt radiation. The Galileo probe even braves much worse regions near Jupiter.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Cloudy on 2002-09-18 02:47 ]</font>

Andrew,

I got that... hence the: [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

I for one don't have a problem with naming the telescope after the best administrator NASA's ever had, and one who tried to support science in addition to his clear mandate for "man-moon-decade." Heck, they ought to call the whole agency the James Webb Space Administration!

And I would expect that the "20-foot" figure is a press release number for the benefit of the metrically illiterate.

Well, how much resolution on Pluto will we get from the NGST (or whatever it's called now)? Will it compare to the data obtained from the Pluto-Charon eclipses?

Ask Reiner Illig at Ball Aerospace. rillig@ball.com
Ball won the Webb Space Telescope contract along with TRW, and Reiner has long been interested in similar problems, like even attempting to resolve extrasolar planets.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Technology and contractor selected for JWST mirror

Ball Aerospace did COSTAR (Hubble's "eyeglasses") as well as numerous other notable spacecraft systems over the years.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.