Updates WFIRST Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope Updates

[anemazoso]

Yes pretty pictures with an absolute HUGE price tag. Meanwhile rover, orbiter, and lander data cheap, useful for future manned missions, science helps in understanding Earth and its development more than pretty space pictures.

I agree that SLS is utter fantasy. Anything involving ATK needs to go. Tho I MIGHT have more hope for it if the rumored LRB side to it comes around.

Yet just throwing 300M (BTW not even close to how much it will take to launch even one of these telescopes) of it's budget towards pretty pictures isnt a solution at all. If anything that 300M should go towards aeronautical research which lately seems to have been NASA's best contribution.

No. I must disagree. Nasa cotributing $300 mill to be the first couple of launches on Falcon Heavy would do more than loft a couple of telescopes to orbit. It would provide a subsidy for FH and make it way more likely to succeed. Plus if they do make it to orbit we have cool telescopes to provide the masses with pretty pictures. So they support space science. Most of the sheeple equate all soace stuff to the same thing and will help the cause. This is good PR!

 

[Zachstar]

Again 300M will not even start to fly both birds. You mise well give them 300M to launch a concrete block into Orbit.

---------- Post added at 09:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:42 PM ----------

So, we aren't going to question how NRO got to purchase two "useless" satellites in the first place? They couldn't foresee their own technological advances that would render such systems obsolete? Or they got to purchase spares that were never meant to be launched in the first place. Those things can't be cheap.

There is a reason they are called "spares" As in ready to be fitted with the instruments and launched in short order if the primary failed. This is not NASA where the loss of a telescope is horrific in cost but not in much of anything else. Extended loss of a bird costs the NRO ability to do it's job.

 

[anemazoso]

Again 300M will not even start to fly both birds. You mise well give them 300M to launch a concrete block into orbit.

$300M is about the cost of 2 FH launches. And for signing up to be the first and second they could surely negotiate with the advantage. If SpaceX is going to launch the first on their own dime anyway... I think this idea has merit.

 

[Cosmic Penguin]

I'm hearing that the hardware to be transferred are two mirrors and assemblies from the late 1990's / early 2000's period (probably from the cancelled FIA imaging program).

The optics looks very impressive, but I'm not sure the American astrophysics programs have the dollars to do it now....

Anyway there's a detailed report here.

 

[Codz]

There is far more to it than just tossing them into orbit. Research teams, fitting it with instruments, possible future maintenence, etc.

 

[anemazoso]

There is far more to it than just tossing them into orbit. Research teams, fitting it with instruments, possible future maintenence, etc.

Nah. Share the cost with colleges for the research and do all the hardware integration with commercial. Done and...done. It doesn' t have to be mega bucks if we really try to do it on the cheap. Plus if anything fails its really no loss. We get two funded FH launches which will be worth more in the long run even if it serves nothing more than to scare the crap out of ULA and make them more competetive. Same with potential DoD launch contracts for FH.

 

[boogabooga]

This is starting to remind me of those people who win a car or something else expensive on a gameshow. I've read that it looks good at the moment, but sometimes people can't afford the tax and insurance. Then, they have to sell it and if they have problems selling it, it really won't feel like a gift at all...

 

[NovaSilisko]

I find it incredibly depressing how quickly this thread turned to a "lol nasa is doomed" and "lol sls sucks" sort of direction

 

[anemazoso]

Now that I've read he report posted by Penguin Im not so sure. That is a lot of work. Everything is in pieces. When I first read the story I thought the scopes were built. Bummer.

 

[Yoda]

Too bad NASA didn't keep a shuttle "flight ready" so they actually have a vehicle to bring these things up and service them.
Too bad our excisting shuttle's are beeing ripped apart by tug boat captains......:rofl:

 

[jimblah]

What else can they give away?

I wonder what else the 'secret space agency' had laying around... We'll take that too...
:lol:

 

[Zachstar]

$300M is about the cost of 2 FH launches. And for signing up to be the first and second they could surely negotiate with the advantage. If SpaceX is going to launch the first on their own dime anyway... I think this idea has merit.

There is no way in hell NASA would launch such an expensive piece of hardware on a rocket's first run (Even if it is based on the flight proven Falcon 9)

And you said it. 300M just for launch operations. Which are but a small part of the cost of running a telescope in space.

So 300M to launch a chunk of concrete into Orbit.

 

[Namahage]

Perhaps not such a surprise for NASA. This potential mission sounds like more than just Hubble 2.0.

However, it is likely that one will be repurposed into “WFIRST”, which was the Frankenstein-style mission proposed by the latest astronomical decadal survey to provide further observational constraints on Dark Energy. Many had wondered why no significant funding lines were opening up for WFIRST, but it seems likely that this has been the deep-background plan for a while.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/

 

[Zachstar]

So the brazillions it takes to get these flying.

To look at dark energy...

Trying to give political ammo to those trying to cut NASA budget?

 

[Namahage]

So the brazillions it takes to get these flying.

To look at dark energy...

Trying to give political ammo to those trying to cut NASA budget?

It shouldn't take more than 50-100 well-trained Brazilians.

Also, there are some other toys on WFIRST including imaging equipment. Dark energy sound interesting to me. I'll chip in my $2.50 in taxes.

 

[RisingFury]

Astronerdgazm! :thumbup:

Man, the awesomeness we can do with TWO telescopes in orbit at once! I wonder if there's a way to do interferometry with visual light, kinda like with radio...

 

[N_Molson]

I wonder if there's a way to do interferometry with visual light

There is definitively a way, the [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_Large_Telescope"]VLT[/ame] in Chili uses that technology.

 

[RisingFury]

There is definitively a way, the VLT in Chili uses that technology.

No. Wrong.

VLT does that directly with light by actually reflecting the light using various optical systems and interfering it. What I'm talking about is something that goes on in the radio astronomy, where the light is recorded on a computer on telescopes that are thousands of kilometers apart, than the interferometry is done from both recordings by a program on a computer.

Obviously when you have two satellites in orbit, unless you control their orbits and set them up for actual optical interferomenty, the only thing you have left is recording the light. But I'm not sure if there are any systems quick enough to do that with visual light.

 

[orb]

Spaceflight Now: NASA has a mission for grounded spy telescopes

Space News: Donated Spy Satellites Could Enable Cheaper Dark Energy Mapper Mission — If NASA had the Money

NewScientist: Spy telescopes could help NASA pin down dark energy

 

[Keatah]

It's going to take years to even find the money to finish building these things.
At the same time, the military-industrial complex is so over-funded they can afford to "Trash" these.. Something's wrong here, eh?