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

Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

science.nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 115 posts

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#31

Post by Mawr »

willis936 wrote: post #11

Part of the story is everyone being shocked at being under budget and ahead of schedule. I don't know everything, but I think this is reasonably attributable to the fact that this is a retrofit of an obsolete spy satellite. The leftovers of the security sector will be the most advanced scientific space surveyor. I have to wonder what things would look like with different priorities.

> I have to wonder what things would look like with different priorities.

Things aren't as simple as more money = more good.

Rapid progress requires adversity, the kind you'll find when nations compete for military power, for example.

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#32

Post by dylan604 »

I'm really excited about observations we're about to see over the next decade. Bringing NGR online and combining with Rubin, Hubble, and JWST will give us imagery and hopefully new discoveries and understanding.

I had the fortune of letting some of my neighbors through a telescope for the first time for the partial lunar eclipse. I say fortune, because it is amazing to be a part of someone having that experience that never disappoints. Even if they've seen images from NASA/ESA, putting your eyeball directly to the 'scope is much more meaningful.

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#33

Post by dylan604 »

ck2 wrote: post #3

I'm still holding my breath on this one, will be most amazing telescope in my lifetime parked in L2 a million miles away with 500mbps data transfer rate (1.5TB per DAY) we've made it past DOGE destroying it we've made it past him renaming it after himself and putting his mugshot on it but Musk still needs to send it out of orbit without explosions, so here's hoping (Falcon Heavy, don't tell me the odds) * https://nex…

> * https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/6983/

06:25 AM Window Open

06:26 AM Window Close

Is it really just a 1 minute launch window? That seems incredibly tight. If there's any hitch in the countdown, that would pretty much mean a scrubbed launch. Not being well versed in orbital mechanics, why would the window be so short?

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#34

Post by _djo_ »

dylan604 wrote: post #30
willis936 wrote: post #11

Part of the story is everyone being shocked at being under budget and ahead of schedule. I don't know everything, but I think this is reasonably attributable to the fact that this is a retrofit of an obsolete spy satellite. The leftovers of the security sector will be the most advanced scientific space surveyor. I have to wonder what things would look like with different priorities.

Isn't that also how Hubble started? I'd assume there's a lot of lessons learned to avoid costly research on conversion of the platform.

No, Hubble didn't reuse any components from spy satellites. However, the chosen mirror diameter was decided by the size of the mirrors being produced for the Keyhole programme, as it meant NASA would be able to reuse Perkin-Elmer's existing fabrication facility.

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#36

Post by Morromist »

ChocolateGod wrote: post #29
dfxm12 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People shouldn't be shocked that employees of the US government can deliver things ahead of schedule and under budget. The problems are that anyone gave Musk/doge the time of day and that we're too used to the president giving no bid contacts to incompetent donors.

Musks company provides not only the most cost effective but also the most reliable access to space that is currently unparalleled by any other company. We should thank the government for spending tax money efficiently. You should blame the legacy aerospace companies whom purposely inflate contracts and take forever to do things for there being a lack of competition, not Musk.

As I see it Musk is lobbying the goverment to give him money to do useless stuff & expensive in space like land on the moon again - basically redirecting funds away from useful stuff like the James Webb Telescope for publicity stunts. Not any different from the legacy aerospace companies, who also lobbied like crazy, except on a bigger, dumber scale.

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#37

Post by gjm11 »

lokibumdo wrote: post #35
macintux wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose we should be grateful he didn’t force his own name at the last minute. I suppose he still has time.

[flagged]

Very unlike Obamacare, which so far as I can make out was mostly a name given to the thing by its (and Obama's) opponents.

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#38

Post by Starman_Jones »

danilor wrote: post #23

I'm wondering what are the considerations for having multiple detectors instead of a single large one! Does anybody have an idea? is it just because it's easier?

The primary detector is the wide-field instrument, which, believe it or not, takes pictures with a wide field of view. The secondary detector is the coronagraph instrument, which uses a bunch of funky filters to block out the light from the star to see the halo around it.

Edit: These are the detectors, which are the cameras. There is only one mirror assembly (with two mirrors) that focuses light into these instruments.

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#39

Post by ChocolateGod »

Morromist wrote: post #36
ChocolateGod wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musks company provides not only the most cost effective but also the most reliable access to space that is currently unparalleled by any other company. We should thank the government for spending tax money efficiently. You should blame the legacy aerospace companies whom purposely inflate contracts and take forever to do things for there being a lack of competition, not Musk.

As I see it Musk is lobbying the goverment to give him money to do useless stuff & expensive in space like land on the moon again - basically redirecting funds away from useful stuff like the James Webb Telescope for publicity stunts. Not any different from the legacy aerospace companies, who also lobbied like crazy, except on a bigger, dumber scale.

Starship is mostly funded by Starlink.

Yes, Musk is a crappy character, but that's not a reason to make things up. This isn't Reddit.

Re: Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope

#40

Post by pjscott »

ck2 wrote: post #3

I'm still holding my breath on this one, will be most amazing telescope in my lifetime parked in L2 a million miles away with 500mbps data transfer rate (1.5TB per DAY) we've made it past DOGE destroying it we've made it past him renaming it after himself and putting his mugshot on it but Musk still needs to send it out of orbit without explosions, so here's hoping (Falcon Heavy, don't tell me the odds) * https://nex…

> but Musk still needs to send it out of orbit without explosions, so here's hoping

The Falcon Heavy has made 12 launches and all of them have been successful. It's built using the same engines as the Falcon 9, which has become the boringly reliable workhorse of space launch, and the rocket cores are very similar in design. I'd bet on a successful launch, and probably on a successful landing of the side boosters.

(Do we really need to politicize launch vehicles, of all things?)

Post reply on HN