ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 มิ.ย. 2024
- Nasa Officially Refused SpaceX Dragon To Rescue Hubble
===
intro 0:00
(The Hubble rescue mission of SpaceX Dragon) 0:25
(Nasa official declined) 1:07
why did Nasa's officials decline this? 2:53
(SpaceX dares to take risk) 6:20
outro 7:59
===
#techmap #techmaps #elonmusk #starshipspacex #spacex
===
1) SOURCES OF IMAGES AND VIDEOS
Everyday Astronaut: / erdayastronaut
/ everydayastronaut
Tony Bela : / infographictony
===
Nasa Officially Refused SpaceX Dragon To Rescue Hubble
Nasa official declined SpaceX Dragon to rescue Nasa’s Hubble Telescope!
You heard right! The announcement is given after two years with almost no word from Nasa on their opinion
But, why?
Why did Nasa refuse such a good and free opportunity to save its most critical scientific mission?
What do the astronauts and experts think about Nasa’s decision?
Find out everything in today's episode of Techmap.
Nasa Officially Refused SpaceX Dragon To Rescue Hubble
For those living under a rock, after three decades of serving as a prime observer in space, Nasa's Hubble Telescope alarms that it will retire around 2034. That's when the telescope, which is slowly drifting down toward Earth, is expected to burn up as it plunges through the atmosphere.
Nasa Officially Refused SpaceX Dragon To Rescue Hubble
In 2022, Jared Isaacman, sponsoring Polaris Dawn, basically said he'd foot the bill to take a maintenance crew aboard SpaceX Dragon to Hubble.
Within the Polaris Dawn framework, he would partner with SpaceX to perform a boost to Hubble and possibly service it like Nasa used to do, all for free. However, due to the high risk of the mission, Nasa officials and study reviewers are not yet sold on the need for it.
===
Subcribe TechMap: tinyurl.com/3z5ysrtf
This reminds me of when NASA canceled the last two moon missions and wasted 800 million dollars in already built Apollo hardware just to save 20 million dollars.
And then proceeded to remotely turn off all of the nuclear powered science experiments left on the moon by the astronauts - which could conceivably have functioned well into the 2010’s.
NASA is saying it's too risky to show how SpaceX will be able to do it efficiently at a lower price than their traditional scalpers like Boeing!🤣🤣🤣
Afraid of what space x can do is what is going on here. Private cheaper faster than government don't want to be shown up and lose the money..
the White House HATE of Musk and space X is all you need to know
Public outcry works. Its always worked.
Goodbye Hubble
No. Apparently YOU need to know a LOT more than that! 🤦🏻♂
So, I'd like to pose a question. If Nasa decided to officially abandon Hubble, would that make it available to salvage laws? SpaceX could then recover it, retrofit it and use it for their own purposes. Sounds like a viable gamble considering the prize.
Not to mention China Or Russia getting their hand on it, but they have probably made a deal with one of them to take it , it would not surprise me since our money is for them to burn..
I used to love NASA. Not so much these days.
So do I
They haven’t fully turned it down yet, they just want a demonstration of SpaceX Eva’s first.
I’m just angry that the senate keeps slashing the budget
@@scpguy1381 They are slashing the budget and yet tolerating NASA rewarding Boeing with their incompetence? Did you hear that their CEO who's now stepping down to avoid getting grilled and revealing what they're covering up is getting a $33 million bonus?
Why not make a new telescope every few years? Nasa has the dumbest people on the planet.
Why not make a voyager every year? Because there stupid!
This is pure politics with current administration and upper NASA management.
This is not the NASA of the 60s
Yeah. They have more money in the past
@@techmap9 and they had more guts or balls, how people would say today
After starship is completed, they will able to put on orbit a telescope a fuckton bigger, heavier and better than anything else before.
We all know that, but Hubble is still a big part of history
Spacex can transport a thruster pack to Hubble and guide to the ISS for refurbishment
This decision seems very "penny wise, but pound foolish": not maintaining the operation and orbit of HST while the opportunity presents itself will be regretted. The HST is very mission-capable and its observations compliment those from JWST.
If the NASA gang hadn't wasted half a decade and multi-$ billions on the Artemis 'Apollo remake' fiasco..
We could have had another Hubble launched.
Imagine if Elon Musk just goes ahead and fixes Hubble without NASA involvement.
If Jared is suggesting that Hubble be repaired or have its obit raised on the Polaris Dawn mission I totally disagree. NASA is correct to reject such a plan. The current Polaris Dawn mission is necessary to test and validate SpaceX's EVA suit, the EVA demo itself and the flight profile. There is also a definitive need for rigorous training for any repair mission - for which there is NOT adequate time prior to PD. However, Hubble has quite a few years left before its orbit decays beyond reasonable rescue. More than enough time for planning, training and probably using Starship rather than Falcon.
It is not unlike if you had a benign brain tumor would you let your neighbor operate on you even if he said it would be free before he could prove he was a skilled brain surgeon?
The biggest problem is that in order to fix Hubble, you need to dock with it. But if Dragon is docked with Hubble, there is no way for the astronauts to get out of the spacecraft to perform an EVA! Docking might work for a re-boost (although the main thrusters used for orbital maneuvers are in the nose and could not be used while docked) but not for fixing anything.
Can we have a solution for this?
That is not the attitude that got us to the moon and back. "failure is not an option?".
It is EXACTLY that attitude... prioritizing lives of astronauts over mission objectives!
They don't want to fix Hubble -- fine. Elon should launch a Starship telescope with a 8.5 meter mirror and blow the socks off of it.
Yeah. But Hubble is still be a milestone
Typical government waste
I think it's a wonderful part of space history
I guess NASA had the experience to perform its initial spacewalk on June 3, 1965, when the organization put Ed White into harm's way for bragging rights over the U.S.S.R. It wasn't to repair or rescue anything or anyone. It was to test the process and suit, to gain the experience.
It appears to me that NASA all of a sudden realizes they will be outdone by SpaceX yet again and would rather pull the plug than lose status or credibility. It seems to me the "If NASA can't do it no one can." sort of mindset is the issue.
Of course, it's risky, it's outer space man. They gonna try and stop a manned mission to Mars simply because "... it's too risky, nobody has any experience doing that sort of thing"
It seems to me, NASA's hubris is what's cancelling this mission. "It's too risky" is an excuse. In my opinion
It is good for all right?
Ed White didn't have to perform complex and dangerous tasks while on his EVA. HUGE difference!
@@markmaz56 regardless, the risk starts when you climb onto a vehicle that's propelled by controlled explosions. Any and every astronaut knows that. So the difference is mute.
Bill Nelson think the back side of the Moon is really Dark all the time.
Unfortunately NASA is no longer willing to take risk on anything. The spirit of the Appollo program is gone. Given you got James Webb, NASA has no incentive on saving Hobble even it is free.
Yeah, JWST may be a reason
Nasa has become a cosmic DEI joke.
It is a tourist attraction living on past achievements.
What diferance is the "only available" vehicle is used to transport the trained repair team.
Well, they've got several years to think about it. A pressurized capsule and independent pressurized suit would help. I'm sure SX will make significant modifications by then. They've got the Polaris Dawn mission to do first and that's been delayed. They also have Starship waiting in the wings. Most importantly, NASA may not even want it. I understand they're looking at a different concept using smaller mirrors spread out over a wide area. Myself, I think NASA is less a dinosaur today that they were three years ago. They have limited funding and have to work in a volatile, "exclusive" political environment. Somehow they have still been able to work with SX to do some amazing things. They've also made strides in complimentary technologies that will help all of these different providers. Imagine what could have been done without the restraints?
Is NASA waiting for Starship to be the solution? A functional solution now is better than waiting until there is no possible rescue option.
This is a great subject to discuss
@@techmap9 Look forward to hearing more about this as a possibility or if it's not even being considered.
Wait 8 years when Hubble is coming to its end and them decide.
You see NASA rejects Spacex rescue of Hubble Space Telescope for political jeleous pique ! 😊
Im sure boeing or lockmart will get a cost plus contract and it will be delayed until the telescope deorbits
SO , spaceX cant use the service module to carry tools .... OR send a CARGO along the way .... please ....
are these "anti-" clowns in another GALAXY?? say Andromeda or Kalium ???? please .... "return on investment" ??? they STARTED program with the LARGEST BIGGEST and mostest critical SCREW-UP in history already !!! it up there , able to CONTRiBUTE !! fix it !!! as a layman , i am not even GUESSING the months and maybe YEAARS of scientists in line for a look ..... NASA , you aint "god" , one way or the other and your SCREW UPs were MASSIVE . so far , privates have beaten you , suck it up , follow along and MAYBE learn something from people who CARE & LOVE the work
Just boost orbit and then fig it out over the next few yrs
What makes the most sense is to plan the rescue/upgrade to happen 5 to 8 years from now(2 to 5 years before reentry). By then Starship should be available and Hubble upgrades should include more advanced technology. However, knowing NASA decisions are primarily political, they may view Hubble as the roadblock that diverts money away from political driven projects (I.e. they want to permanently defund the Hubble by eliminating the Hubble)
NASA does not like the revenue cost of supporting the Hubble. It's the same with the IIS. As with most government institutions they love capital spend but hate revenue, it's a millstone around their neck. They will close any project down which drifts into a revenue cost. While a boost mission will not cost NASA anything they will still be responsible for supporting Hubble and that's a revenue cost which they will hate.
Nasa could simply turn over Hubble to a group outside Nasa.
By the time it falls big bird Will have been flying and the falcon will have been retired for years
Nasa is going going gone!
Hold on. You guys seem to think Hubble is expensive.
No. Expensive is getting there. Hubble is fully depreciated. We should put up a new, better, telescope.
we're just trying to save a legacy
Why is there no discussion or analysis as to perhaps doing it 3 to 5 years from now ? since you say that Hubble is expected to perform a full course of activities in the next 10 years ? With the quick launch/quick fail iteration rate adopted by SpaceX, many of the 'Against' elements may have been overcome at that time ..
They should just sell it for a buck if it is going to burn up, what a waste
It's too old but they don't want to remove it
It's simple! SpaceX will develope an airlock that they could launch separately, meet up with Dragon and do the job!
I thought too many gyros have failed,
So, you replace them. It's analogous to junking a car rather than replace the fuel pump.
@@ghost307 The telescope is getting pretty brittle up there. I for one would love to see them change out some gyro's. They can run on 1 if it came to it using other sensor data for pointing. If they dont at least try, then someone wants Hubble dead.
@@EdWeibe That's what NASA's statement tells me. They would consider it if the mission was properly "planned". That's doublespeak for the astronauts are to be totally under NASA control and act as nothing more than worker drones.
NASA would rather let Hubble be destroyed rather than admit someone other than them succeed and damage their fragile egos.
what happend to the spirit of the USA Less than 300 years ago people arrived over in wooden sailing ships , were droped off and left to find their own way in the new world. Many died both others surived and thrived. What happend ?
NASA is letting its galactic-sized ego get in the way again.
😢😢😢😢
👍👍👍❤❤❤🚀🚀🚀
It is likely to old and needs so much work that it's not worth repairing everything. Likely far less money and zero risk to human lives to put up a new one.
Wait for president poopoo pants to get out of office
The problem is that the Hubble telescope does not exist at all. There is no proof of its existence.
Really???.
NASA is a dinosaur and no longer has the spirit that made it great.
Using private space tourists to repair one of the worlds most expensive science experiments..? It was a nice dream
Why?
ok just wait till the yr before it's going to die. then go fix it
😂😂😂
They should push Hubble to the moon and park it there and then we'll have a bloody big telescope on the moon waiting for the first moon base to use it.
Lol 😂😂😂
Even the Mars 😂
@@techmap9 or even just park it further out for spare parts for other projects. It's hard to find a parts shop in space.
With a starship payload sized upgrade to the Hubble, they could turn it into another voyager type probe, passing near Mars and at least two more outer planets. If scientists & astronomers had a Hubble telescope a billion mile# from earth,then new discoveries would follow for several reasons (a very long baseline allows over 20 times improvement in parallax distance measurements, zodiac haze could be better understood and compensated for, observations of interstellar occulting planets from a 2nd perspective, Kuiper belt objects, etc). The starship allows upgrades of solar panels, high gain antennas, huge fuel reserves, multiple backup systems for reliability. The high gain antenna for high bandwidth transmissions to earth could also be used as a radio telescope combined with earth based Radio telescope array imaging for creating ultra precise low noise measurements of stars orbiting the Milky way galactic center.
I’d rather private industry to finance and launch a second Webb telescope.
Sure. Who do you think will come up with the $10+ BILLION to do it?
Long story. Ask Richard Hoagland. The mirror wasnt defective. It was a ploy but long story. They dont want to have to explain it.
I will find more about this, thanks
Bill nelson just delays thats it
They should tell NASA it would cost $500 million. They’d jump on it. Doing it for free? No thanks.
Is it worth to save Hubble
@@techmap9 Absolutely. It’s still doing good science and can be upgraded. De-orbiting it would be terrible. At a minimum, they could sell it.
First of all no official answer has been given. Video is a lie
I can understand NASA's position: Dragon can only provide a risky and suboptimal attempt to fix Hubble. Hubble has time and NASA wants to wait for a better solution to emerge, and that's a sound position.
SpaceX needs certifiable EVA capability as well as robotic arm. Otherwise they are just like some spoiled rich kid with zero experience shouting "Oooh daddy I want that! Now!"
Your summarization seems childish and wildly inaccurate. Who says that a robotic arm is needed? SpaceX is already working on EVA certification so why bring that up?
Maybe SpaceX should consider using one of the heavy Rockets 🚀 that way maybe they open a section of the heavy rocket like the Space shuttle. Yes they will have to modify one of the heavy rockets 🚀 but with a little work and engineering work I think it would work. And also it would be cheaper because NASA is using one of SpaceX rockets.
Thanks for sharing. Hopefully, nasa got it
I'm wondering if NASA could see there way clear to have SpaceX to move Hubble Telescope to mount it on a pole and make it as such to where the personnel othe international space station could out and do serving of the Hubble. Doing this could make it a 2 for 1.
They don't want to be embarrassed it's the other companys pulling a string because there embarrassed Boeing and others bitching
Exactly. Embarrassment means less congress money next year.
Spend multi-billions and downplay the loss.
Let SpaceX do your job at a huge savings...nahh...makes NASA look worse than it already is.
NASA has outlived it's usefulness.
Even without this mission, SpaceX make Nasa shameful
If SpaceX says they can do it, then let them. This is NASA problem all the time, afraid to take a chance.. this is why nasa needs a new young leader, not old man Nelson. I have faith that Dragon 🐉 can do it.
Nasa has a high ego
@@techmap9
Too high. Nelson needs to retire and get some younger blood in there.
@@techmap9 And Elon Musk doesn't?????? 😆
Just apologize to Elon and get on with it don't be childish NASA
Just do it...ask for forgiveness later. That is American Society....who going to stop you... They all don't have there own money anyway. Tax payer will pay for it anyway by taking away their jobs...
Haha, it’s impossible
@@techmap9 Look at the head guy probably has a fake STEM Degree claiming his relative were WW2 aviators while standing 6 foot +
Great Video ! Use the SpaceX Crew Dragon and/or the Boeing Starliner to dock with the Hubble Space Telescope and raise the orbit of the telescope ! Later the Blue Origin Blue Moon HLS with a Air Lock/Dust Lock, a Docking Port, a four person Crew Module, a Canadian Arm and support a 6.1 km/sec delta-V can support a mission to the Hubble Space Telescope ! Also later the SpaceX Cargo Starship can return with the Hubble Space Telescope to the KSC ! The Tech to return to the moon to stay, can take US and the world to Mars and beyond ! tjl
Great idea. Thanks
Free is to expensive… if I ask for help. Is it an American or NASA “EGOISTIC” way of life.✌️
Why English so poor on video? We no know why. AI video make money
I will try to change this. Hope that you will continue to follow us
Perhaps it would make it more palatable to NASA if SpaceX found a way to tie this mission to "Muslim Outreach".🤣
HAHA China must have offered NASA a good deal on the scrap. NASA is a lost cause. When was the last real thing that NASA did. Yer you got the first man on the moon. But hey guys. That was decades ago
Wimps
Hubble Relescope was fake. There is no Hubble Telescope. All images came from Sofia project.
oh stop it
I always forget how because one thing exists that means other things don't exist...
I bet , right.
@@stephensfarms7165 Nasa is doing anohter fake, James web. Nasa said they placed it in Lagrange point. But, Nasa has no technology to do so. They are failing to launch a small capsule rocket with Boeing. Nasa pays Boeing and SpaceX since they have no rocket that can do the job.