Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

science.nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 174 posts

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#121

Post by dylan604 »

consp wrote: post #51
dylan604 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not forget that NRO donated multiple Hubble level satellites. NASA had no budget to utilize them, so they were not used. Of course there were other logistics involved that made the "gifts" not so practical. However, the thing that gets me is that if the NRO was willing to donate these satellites tells me that they have better than Hubble quality imaging looking inwards and absolutely have multiple of them.

Aren't they using one right now? [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Grace_Roman_Space_Telesc...

I guess you can say "using right now", but from your link:

"October 2026 (contracted) – May 2027 (commitment)"

So more like, in the works to use one of them. It does appear that it is beyond the planning to use stage. I did not see the word Boeing once in that link, so maybe they have an actual shot of hitting those dates.

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#122

Post by SergeAx »

jccooper wrote: post #114
wongarsu wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breaking gyros are a recurring issue for Hubble. Hubble has 6 (3 spares, 3 for full operation). They replaced them 3 times with space shuttle missions because they kept breaking. Now Hubble is down to 2 functioning gyros again and we no longer have a space craft with the capability to service satellites. They decided to shut one of the gyros off so they still have a slightly used spare once this one breaks.

Dragon has capability for a Hubble servicing mission. It would need more development than a Shuttle visit, but it's not a huge hurdle since the last visit installed a soft-capture mechanism. (It'd probably cost less than an equivalent Shuttle mission, just due to Shuttle's high launch costs.) SpaceX even prepared a proposal in a Space Act Agreement but NASA declined it recently. Sierra Nevada also has looked at doing…

Servicing Hubble require EVA. Does Dragon has an airlock?

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#123

Post by jlarocco »

dingnuts wrote: post #82
el_toast wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same story with shuttle and that's why it looks the way it is and was as expensive as it was. It would have been a completely different vehicle if Congress weren't meddling.

Congress is the owner. Want a different management ideology? Get different management. NASA is wasteful, eh? Maybe that's because they have no incentive not to be wasteful..

I think the point being made is that NASA is wasteful because the people in charge (Congress) told them to be wasteful.

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#124

Post by wkat4242 »

margalabargala wrote: post #116
dingnuts wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress is the owner. Want a different management ideology? Get different management. NASA is wasteful, eh? Maybe that's because they have no incentive not to be wasteful..

The leadership and composition of Congress has changed numerous times over the years without change to management ideology. It does not seem likely that electing mildly different people will change the management ideology. Management acted in accordance with the incentives they were presented with. I can't say NASA seems particularly wasteful outside ways in which they are mandated to be so.

I think this is because local state concerns are so prevalent here. Political colour doesn't even matter, but getting the pork barrel for the state manufacturing locations is.

This won't change no matter who you vote in. It's like hardwired into the system.

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#125

Post by Analemma_ »

akira2501 wrote: post #119
tempnow987 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except you look at what they are spending on the entire SLS infrastructure vs what they are getting (vs other science options and/or space exploration options) and basically your mind is blown at how wasteful NASA is. SLS is a $2-$3 billion per launch DISPOSABLE rocket. The orion capsule is going to be something like $20 billion(!). I think things like launch abort and service module with all the propulsion etc are a…

> SLS is a $2-$3 billion per launch DISPOSABLE rocket. That's the estimated cost for the first four launches only. > The orion capsule is going to be something like $20 billion(!). We developed it from scratch and it took 20 years and it's capable of sending a crew to Mars. What do you think this _should_ have cost?

NASA also thought the Space Shuttle was going to get cheaper per-launch after a couple years of service, and they turned out to be completely wrong. Why should we trust that this time will be different?

NASA's own Inspector General says, "... NASA’s aspirational goal to achieve a cost savings of 50 percent is highly unrealistic" and "... a single SLS will cost more than $2 billion through the first 10 SLS rockets ... " [0]

[0]: https://oig.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/ig-24-001.pd...

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#126

Post by margalabargala »

wkat4242 wrote: post #124
margalabargala wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The leadership and composition of Congress has changed numerous times over the years without change to management ideology. It does not seem likely that electing mildly different people will change the management ideology. Management acted in accordance with the incentives they were presented with. I can't say NASA seems particularly wasteful outside ways in which they are mandated to be so.

I think this is because local state concerns are so prevalent here. Political colour doesn't even matter, but getting the pork barrel for the state manufacturing locations is. This won't change no matter who you vote in. It's like hardwired into the system.

Exactly. There's not actually much of an incentive for a congressperson to create something broadly positive for the US as a vague whole, like an independently-operating excellent space program.

The incentive massively is instead in favor of that congressperson to have a space program that is meets some minimum bar of competence, and past that point do everything to benefit that congressperson's voting district such as mandate certain things be manufactured there, etc.

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#127

Post by akira2501 »

Analemma_ wrote: post #125
akira2501 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SLS is a $2-$3 billion per launch DISPOSABLE rocket. That's the estimated cost for the first four launches only. > The orion capsule is going to be something like $20 billion(!). We developed it from scratch and it took 20 years and it's capable of sending a crew to Mars. What do you think this _should_ have cost?

NASA also thought the Space Shuttle was going to get cheaper per-launch after a couple years of service, and they turned out to be completely wrong. Why should we trust that this time will be different? NASA's own Inspector General says, "... NASA’s aspirational goal to achieve a cost savings of 50 percent is highly unrealistic" and "... a single SLS will cost more than $2 billion through the first 10 SLS rockets ...…

> and they turned out to be completely wrong.

There were a lot of assumptions that turned out to be wrong. The chief among them was launch cadence and satellite capture and return missions. When these assumptions changed the cost values changed significantly as well.

> Why should we trust that this time will be different?

Do you understand the details of this specific contract? It's limited to 10 launches. It's structured quite a bit differently than the shuttle program was.

> NASA's own Inspector General says

Yes and did you read the recommendations and follow up from that same report? Or is this just a "haha NASA is dumb" rant that's become common around here?

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#128

Post by akira2501 »

dahart wrote: post #113
BurningFrog wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NASA budget is $25B, or about $75 per American.

That’s an average for the year 2024, but as income taxpayers we only pay around half of that, or around $36.40 per American (using the $24.9B 2024 budget and 342M for the 2024 population), or maybe about one week’s morning Starbucks habit for some of us. :P The rest is paid by businesses and other sources. Of course, compared to the amount the military costs & spends, NASA’s really small.

The treasury receives 85% of it's income from individual income tax payers, 7% from business taxes, and 7% from excise taxes.

Around 50% of your taxes go to social security and medicare, and the other 50% are available for program revenue.

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#129

Post by dahart »

akira2501 wrote: post #128
dahart wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s an average for the year 2024, but as income taxpayers we only pay around half of that, or around $36.40 per American (using the $24.9B 2024 budget and 342M for the 2024 population), or maybe about one week’s morning Starbucks habit for some of us. :P The rest is paid by businesses and other sources. Of course, compared to the amount the military costs & spends, NASA’s really small.

The treasury receives 85% of it's income from individual income tax payers, 7% from business taxes, and 7% from excise taxes. Around 50% of your taxes go to social security and medicare, and the other 50% are available for program revenue.

I guess we both need to cite our sources. Mine is this one, which shows the federal budget revenue being comprised of 50% individual income tax in 2023: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59727

NASA’s budget comes from the the federal budget, managed by congress, not directly from the Treasury. I don’t necessarily think that matters, but I don’t know if the federal budget’s revenue differs from the Treasury’s for any reason, so it seems worth mentioning.

That said, I just looked and the Treasury’s own website matches the congressional budget office’s claim, and says that 52% of the 2024 revenue was individual income tax … so where did you get the 85% number?? https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/gover...

Re: NASA releases Hubble image taken in new pointing mode

#130

Post by xwolfi »

jlarocco wrote: post #123
dingnuts wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress is the owner. Want a different management ideology? Get different management. NASA is wasteful, eh? Maybe that's because they have no incentive not to be wasteful..

I think the point being made is that NASA is wasteful because the people in charge (Congress) told them to be wasteful.

You are in charge. Congress is your employee.
Post reply on HN