The prospect of the White House cutting off funding for any
possible mission to service and save the Hubble Space Telescope caught the astronomy
community largely by surprise Friday.
Scientists who have studied Hubble's science value and the safety
and practicality of servicing missions have concluded it is well worth saving.
Congressional hearings in coming weeks were expected to discuss the options
to extend Hubble's life.
Many astronomers deem such a mission crucial to the ongoing
work of studying the origin and evolution of the universe, while some analysts
view the $1 billion or more mission as too costly to be practical.
In a Space
News story Friday, sources said the White House
will direct NASA to drop plans for any servicing and instead mount a mission
that would safely de-orbit the telescope. Hubble, expected to run out of batteries
or lose its ability to point properly in the next 2-4 years, will be scuttled
into the ocean under that plan.
"Great loss for science"
Holland Ford, a Johns Hopkins University astronomer who helped
build the newest camera on Hubble, was surprised. "I sure hope it's wrong,"
he said of the news story.
"It means that a lot of excellent science that could be done
will not be done," Ford said in a telephone interview Friday. "It will be a
great loss for science. It will also be a great loss for the way in which Hubble
communicates science through images to people all around the world."
Hope is not lost, however, because any final decision on the
2006 NASA budget will rest with Congress.
Kevin Marvel, deputy executive officer of the American Astronomical
Society, said Friday there were inklings in recent days that the White House
planned to take the Hubble funding out of the budget proposal.
If in fact no funding is provided in the President's budget
when it is formally presented, then AAS officials, who represent thousands of
astronomers, would still "work to try and make sure some sort of servicing is
made available for Hubble," Marvel said in a telephone interview. "The Administration
proposes, and the Congress disposes."
No replacement
Lofted into orbit on April 24, 1990, Hubble is doing some of
its best science ever, astronomers say, because previous upgrades by spacewalking
astronauts have made its suite of instruments ever more powerful. It has long
outlived its initial mission scope.
There is no other telescope, currently operating or planned,
on the ground or in space, that can see as far into the universe in visible
light with Hubble's consistency, astronomers agree. The James Webb Telescope
-- the closest thing to a Hubble replacement -- is planned for launch in the
next decade. It will be an infrared observatory, however, and won't record visible
light.
Meanwhile, Hubble's batteries are waning much like a cell phone
that's been charged too many times. The orbiting observatory has been through
more than a dozen gyroscopes and is down to four. Three are needed to point
the telescope, and they fail regularly. Previous manned missions have replaced
batteries and gyros.
If not serviced or directed into the ocean, Hubble will eventually
fall to Earth -- likely several years from now -- in an uncontrolled and potentially
dangerous fashion.
Odds are 50-50 that the gyro setup will fail by
mid-2007, according to an analysis
last year. It is unlikely the telescope will operate, as far as astronomy is
concerned, beyond 2008 without being upgraded.
Hubble officials unaware
Hubble is operated for NASA by the Space Telescope
Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore. Steven Beckwith, its director, has been
outspoken in his efforts to secure a reversal of the initial decision
last January, by NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe,
not to service Hubble with a manned mission. That decision caught Beckwith and
other astronomers by surprise just more than a year ago.
Public and political outcry led to O'Keefe considering the robotic
option, which itself appears now on the chopping block.
Beckwith has not been informed of any such decision and did
not want to comment extensively until he sees the White House budget.
"I'm sorry to hear it if true," Beckwith said in a telephone
interview Friday. "Given the events of the last year, nothing is likely to surprise
me."
Beckwith remains "very hopeful that given the tremendous science
importance of Hubble and the great public benefit that it brings to [NASA],
that they would include servicing of Hubble" in the planning of future space
shuttle missions.
One of Hubble's most significant achievements was
the unveiling last March of the deepest
photographs ever taken of the cosmos, the results
of the Hubble Ultra-Deep Field survey.
The images have revealed some of the most distant galaxies ever seen, yet left
astronomers scratching
their heads over the strange shapes, concentrations and gaps contained in
the tiny patch of distant sky. Researchers would love to do other similar deep-field
projects to get a better handle on the overall galactic makeup of the most faraway
places.
For months, given all the uncertainty, Beckwith and his colleagues
have been making decisions about what astronomy projects to do based on the
possible short lifetime.
With Hubble likely to die within three years or so -- possibly
sooner -- and deep-field observations requiring extended telescope time, no
such projects are likely to occur, officials have said.
Going against recommendations
Estimates for a robotic or manned mission have exceeded $1 billion,
in some cases by a lot. But two blue-ribbon panels that have looked at the situation
have recommended some form of servicing.
Louis Lanzerotti of the New
Jersey Institute of Technology chaired the Committee
on the Assessment of Options for Extending the Life of the Hubble Space Telescope.
Lanzerotti's 20-person study board included space scientists, astrophysicists,
robotics experts, and former astronauts, engineers, and systems reliability
experts.
The study was sponsored by NASA, and
the congressionally requested study from the National Academies' National Research
Council (NRC) issued on Dec. 8.
"The Congressionally-requested report that I chaired confirmed
the importance and significance of Hubble to understanding of the universe in
which we live," Lanzerotti told SPACE.com today. "The Committee
confirmed that Hubble is one of the great success stories of the United States
space research program.
"In view of this, the Committee recommended that a fifth
servicing mission should be carried out, and that the servicing should be done
by a shuttle crew," he said. "The Committee was unable to obtain reliable
cost data for a shuttle servicing mission to Hubble, and I understand that the
GAO report on the Hubble was also not able to obtain such data."
-- Leonard David contributed to this report