[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 287 KB, 580x441, jwst25.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12248097 No.12248097 [Reply] [Original]

why does it take more than a quarter of a century to build a space telescope? hubble was launched 12 years after the project was started. hubble also came in substantially less than 3000% over budget, which is where jwst is right now. hubble was only 1075% over budget.

>> No.12248130

>>12248097
think of 1995 computers
tech has advanced so much that each year the lure of upgrading the tech on webb before sending it out has proven to be irresistible

>> No.12248141

Isn't Hubble just a spy satellite design? Wouldn't that makes it cheaper

>> No.12248214

>>12248097
First Hubble is the only one of its kinds. We have instruments in orbit but they have specialized uses as does Hubble. For example we have a special probe that only observes the sun. Point Hubble qt the son and it’ll fry the optics. If they wanted to do it fast I bet they could do it 10-30 times faster. But we take it slow and steady. We can’t just take some of the best minds off of things that they are currently working on to take on another project. Plus there are things like funding and many many reviews and feasibility studies by many experts from NASA or ESA before anyone starts building anything. This stuff doesn’t happen over night. Also when we launched Hubble shit was messed up and we had to send astronauts to fix it, twice I think. Before we could use it. Hubble is kind of on its last legs but expected to last until 2030 or so. I believe they said in 2021 or 2022 your pic related will go up in space so that’s going to welcoming. I think that design looks really wack but the capabilities will allow us to see farther than Hubble could theoretically. Why not just scale up Hubble?

Also I think Hubble has like all but 2 of its maneuvering thrusters (out of compressed air whatever) so as soon as possible those stop working we can’t point Hubble at anything and then it won’t be able to correct itself and fall and burn up in the atmosphere. Hubble is unironically a really based because we learned a ton from the data it gave us and it also showed us it’s limitations so I his new one and the ones after it will have accounted for that. I look forward to seeing what new pics this will bring but NASA or whoever else will sit on the data before releasing it in sections every 1 or 2 years like they do with all their other instruments.

I think the statistical nature of these observations are fascinating. I read one thing that for 5 months straight it will look at each portion in 90 second intervals before moving to the next.

>> No.12248229

>>12248097
>hubble was only 1075% over budget.

but does that include the repairs? Hubble was defective when launched. The JWST has to be right or its a total loss, no repair possible.

>> No.12248237

>>12248097
I'm convinced we'll have a working fusion reactor before JWST blows up on the pad lol.

>> No.12248302
File: 1.90 MB, 1869x2569, 1600895183652.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12248302

NASA usd to be able to accomplish all sorts of astounding feats back in the 20th century. I wonder whats changed since then? What management mistakes has NASA made that turned their formerly functioning institution into a bunch of incapable losers?

>> No.12248443 [DELETED] 
File: 33 KB, 828x680, the-way-forward-is-to-look-behind.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12248443

>>12248097
Military, Afrika investments, kangz n sheet, greed/corruption and general disinterest and lack of understanding of importance by majority of the IQ bell curve.

>> No.12248447

NzRmMTU3ZjllY2FkMmI2MmYzNDg2Mjg1Yjg4NGYwZTQ=

>> No.12248717

>>12248130
It's not based on 1995 technology. 1995 was when they started a study to see if it was feasible, it was a totally different observatory back then.

>> No.12249305

>>12248302
complacency and corruption
same with every other government institution in every country
they get guaranteed taxpayer money no matter how little they do, so why bother expending effort
its why SpaceX is doing so well, as a private company, if they sit on their asses, the company starves and dies

>> No.12249354
File: 400 KB, 900x909, reeee.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12249354

>>12249305
>>12248302
Women in STEM has gotten too far as well, we have uneducated people who barely know shit getting the top brass. Additionally, there's too many positions in NASA that don't need to be there (i.e. Assistants to the Deputies to the Assistants, etc.)

>> No.12250359

>>12248302
Well NASA is transitioning from building their own vessels to letting others do it.