Lost opportunities Letting Hubble telescope die will shut wondrous window on space	The Hubble has delivered spectacular photos of planets such as Saturn since its launch in 1990. But now plans for a much-needed servicing mission are in limbo.
Howard Burton
April 12, 2004

Astronomers are usually an envied lot in the scientific community. Not only can they sanctimoniously trot out the tag line of "studying the universe" as a day job, but also their work carries with it images of awe-inspiring beauty that resonate with the general public.

In the great sea of public scrutiny of the utility of scientific research, astronomy often stands alone, unquestioned as a sacred good, independent of immediate applicability

So one can understand the shock astronomers felt on hearing that the phenomenally successful Hubble Space Telescope was being prematurely abandoned, with NASA deciding to scrap its last shuttle servicing mission, set for 2005.

The decision was bad enough, but for many, the process was even worse.

In NASA's 2003 budget, the U.S. Congress requested a study to determine how to deal with the transition between the end of the Hubble and the launch of the new James Webb Space Telescope, set for 2011.

NASA responded quickly by creating a review panel of six elite, independent astronomers. Their report was thorough, concise and timely, finishing almost two months ahead of schedule. It was also summarily ignored.

Everyone knew that the Hubble would not last forever -- its original lifespan was planned for 15 years. Launched in 1990 with great fanfare, the orbiting telescope briefly became the butt of late-night comedians resulting from the flaws in its mirrors and optical systems.

But following repairs by a shuttle crew in 1993, it has contributed enormously to our knowledge of the cosmos, routinely producing images of enormous impact and breathtaking wonder.

Regular shuttle servicing missions have always been recognized as an essential part of the maintenance program, with internal gyroscopes and batteries the two main areas of concern.

Hubble has six gyroscopes, which ensure its stability and direction -- two are now broken and were scheduled to be replaced in the next servicing mission.

Hubble's rechargeable nickle- hydrogen batteries, routinely recharged by sunlight from its solar panels, are also beginning to deteriorate. The review panel strongly recommended that NASA implement the servicing mission (delayed to 2005 or 2006 in light of the Columbia accident) and even consider an additional mission to enable the telescope to continue.

It should be emphasized that the servicing mission was about much more than just prolonging Hubble's existing capabilities. It was also due to add two new instruments -- an improved infrared and ultraviolet camera, Wide Field Camera 3, and a high-resolution device for studying distant interstellar gas, the Cosmic Origins Spectograph.

Acknowledging the possibility that the servicing mission might be scrapped, the panel expressly stated that any premature termination of the Hubble program would be "a major loss of scientific opportunity," stressing that "outside support for NASA could be weakened."

Five months later, NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe cancelled the mission, claiming that it was not in full compliance with the recommendations from the Columbia Accident Investigations Board, which mandated that all future shuttle flights should go to the International Space Station for reasons of safety

But that was hardly the end of the story.

Astronomers are a tenacious group and were not going to abandon the most successful telescope in human history without a fight.

Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski demanded that O'Keefe's decision be reviewed and Admiral Hal Hehman, chairman of the Columbia Accident Investigations Board, agreed to do so.

His final statement, revealed March 11, pleased no one: "I suggest only a deep and rich study of the entire gain/risk equation can answer the question of whether an extension of the life of the wonderful Hubble telescope is worth the risks involved, and that is beyond the scope of this letter."

Another study, this time by the National Academy of Sciences, was requested, with a completion date of July 1. Meanwhile, O'Keefe remains intransigent and is adamant that he will ignore, for safety reasons, any recommendations or conclusions that do not come directly from the investigations board, which has since been disbanded.

Others, meanwhile, protest that a servicing mission would be just as safe, if not safer, than a trip to the space station.

Out of this impasse, some hope that robots may come to the rescue. NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center has recently received 27 proposals from both the private and public sector on possible robot servicing of the telescope, but many are skeptical that current technology is up to the task of servicing such a complex instrument. Most believe a manned shuttle mission is the only answer, and all bets are off on whether that will happen -- or even when we might know for certain either way.

The Hubble Space Telescope has given us an unparalleled window into the nature of our universe, revealing many of its deepest mysteries. But understanding human behaviour is not one of them.