If this ever happens it will be an amazing mission. I hope NASA and SpaceX and Jared will come to some sort of agreement and will make this mission happen.
OK, this will involve run-a-way costs; but take your mini service module idea a wee bit further: Upscale that module, and launch it by its' self to Hubble and dock it. Then send a Dragon capsule afterwards to do the parts replacement and such. This way the new service module will not be constrained by the volume of the Dragon and it can fold out railings, perhaps a fold out patio to simulate the robot arm that the astronauts could stand on. Along with a proper docking ring on the back that Dragon could use. Now if there is a way to plug into the computer bus on Hubble you could have extra computers in the service module that could replace failing ones on Hubble. But splitting the hardware into two launches gives NASA some flexibility.
It needs a moped/tugboat in the trunk. something that could move astronauts or manipulate the telescope itself very slowly to assist in docking, or perhaps act as a small anchor for astonauts working direcly on the telescope components.
For anyone wondering if the EVA could be through the side hatch: Jared tweeted "forward hatch only appropriate option for opening in space" when he gave us some hints on Twitter. He'd also indicated the docking would have to be with a trunk-mounted adapter.
Whats this adapter you talk of? My wife always makes me use the forward hatch and says that trunk mounthing isn't an option except on my birthday. She never told me there was an adapter?
@@Kineth1 she doesnt plan on going up the sewage lines does she? Because that could cause a blow out of the airlock. That would be a very unwise move on International Taco Day
@@drunkpaulocosta you need to explain to your wife that her front docking ring isnt compatible with your docking probe, because her nose cone will get in the way. Refer her to Scott Manly if she doesn't believe you.
One wonders if they could attach an ion thruster pack with solar panels to that docking ring to provide both the ability to stay in high orbit as well as provide precise orientation.
Good idea, no need to also boost dragon to 620km . Replace computers, gyros, add ion thrusters + solar to mounting ring and head home. Ion thusters can raise Hubble's orbit over several months and would also be more fuel efficient than chemical ones.
That is probably the most likely thing that they'll do. Instead of trying to do surgery on Hubble in less than ideal conditions, attach an ion propulsion module to the soft capture system that can maintain the higher orbit (boosted by the Dragon spacecraft) for another decade plus, as well as act as backup orientation for Hubble. If you can get it into a higher, longer lasting orbit you could then wait on a vehicle like Starship to provide more serious servicing in the future, or maybe even gobble it up in its massive fairing and bring it back down to Earth so it can go into a museum. That would be the minimum for a mission like this. Simply reboost Hubble so there is no risk of atmospheric entry. Do instrument and equipment upgrades if you can, but if not simply preserve the vehicle. Hubble is such an iconic spacecraft that even if the expense of saving it becomes more than the cost of sending up a new spacecraft with similar (but modern) capabilities, it is still worth. The Hubble Space Telescope has name recognition with the general public, and its gets headlines in the mainstream media that other spacecraft don't. If they can save it, then they should.
If it just came down to a reboost I don't see why SpaceX or someone else could not just launch a dedicated mission extension vehicle built on a large commercial satellite bus. We have remote docking down pretty well so provided it had the modified interface it would be fairly pedestrian to perform. Heck you could even add a little manipulator arm to said mission extension vehicle and then send a Dragon with an EVA crew up to run jumper cables from Hubble's internal electronics to new computers and Gyros in the extension vehicle. With the lack of Shuttle like capability 2 missions seems like a safer bet to me.
If you made your MEV capable enough do you even need a crewed mission? Dock it to Hubble and completely take over stabilisation, maneuvering and computer functions. But I guess you need to use Hubble's solar panels for power.
I think a lot of it also comes down to replacing parts as well because there's also failed parts on the telescope that should probably be replaced if the mission is getting extended.
@@MattSitton Yep. I say lets fucking do it. I love the Hubble, and while JWST is cool and all, it doesn't have Visual light or Ultraviolet vision like the Hubble.
This is exciting. I want to see the computers getting upgraded even if it's an external module. Would be interesting to know how they'll handle the connection between the old computers and the new one.
Once they have a skilled astronaut flying around Hubble, it should be little or no problem to replace modular elements such as the computers or radio systems.
@@reasonerenlightened2456 Hubble being a spy satellite origin maybe it's not do common to build optical space telescopes. I believe the building of such a telescope and the adjustments to have it optional could be a lot of work (money). Just updating the existing, with dragon or if starship was available soon, would get faster results.
I am of an age that footage (real or computer game) of objects gently floating in orbit instantly bring up Strauss' Blue Danube. Thank you for that Kubrick!
My vote is for a launch separate from Dragon. Build a service module with all the hardware upgrades needed including a crew airlock and boosting thrusters that Dragon can then rendezvous with at a later time when you need “boots on the ground” to perform manual upgrades. The new module can house all of the life limited items like gyros and solar panels plus include supplies needed for the EVA when Dragon comes later.
I like the Idea of a tiny airlock only space station + service module being slapped on the Hubble to facilitate maintenance missions. If the added on gyros and such were accessible from inside the "service station" you wouldn't even need EVA for predictable maintenance items.
@@AdmiralBob exactly. Would be a major upgrade to Hubble. Send a service mission up every few years for preventative maintenance, computer upgrades, and a little fuel for the onboard thrusters. Hubble would last until technology makes it completely irrelevant.
This brings up so much possibilities, I’m so happy Jared brought this ball to the table. The price of service has dropped and there are actually ways to solve this with Scott’s suggestion to clamp on with something magic in the trunk and keep the opening in the frunk. I think this already been answered, but is it possible to develop an airlock for the frunk as a third option so the rest of the crew won’t need to be in vacuum during the long repair? If they choose to go with mission extender addon hardware, this could be sent in another launch in a faring and include an arm. All this is probably much cheaper than the last space shuttle service mission?
So many ways our spaceflight technology and capabilities can be improved just by studying this one mission! I hope this happens for so very many reasons more than just improving Hubble.
A Dragon rigged with a small version of the Canada Arm would be incredibly handy! Or just wait and use Spaceship when that is ready to fly in a couple years.
Agreed. To allow Hubble to burn during deorbiting is not only neglect & wasteful by NASA, but I consider it sacrilege. If we're lucky, SpaceX will be ready to perform a rescue mission to return Hubble back to Earth and either upgrade the inner workings with 21st Century technology and launch it back into L.E.O. or put it on display in the Air & Space Museum.
@@baxtermullins1842 Agreed, this will be a challenge for sure. I wonder if this could be done as an unmanned mission with remote controlled arms? If we could make that work it opens up a LOT of options for servicing existing space hardware. Possibly even attaching de-orbiting units to derelicts or even putting them in a "storage bin" with station keeping thrusters so the materials could be used later. Lots of very expensive stuff up there. It seems a shame to just have it burn up.
so glad to see!!! Scott if you ever want to hear the story about how the Hubble was originally going to be powered by 8051 type MCU's and ASICs and how I saved it with not only a 32bit rad had CPU but also a real-time kernel contact me. I'd love to fully tell the story of how I put Intel inside all the Hubble modules...
a 80's story about a company in boulder Colorado that invented the vacuum canning jar, Ball Aerospace, Intel Corp and the Reagan SDS Space station that never happened and this applications engineer that I think you might enjoy hearing?
I wonder if they are gonna replace the computers / parts on Hubble are there going to be any of the period OG parts or it's gonna be a 1 off modern replacement.
To me, the simplest thing would be to make this a two part deal. First, you send a service module that has the legacy connector on one end and the modern one on the other. It could integrate a small airlock where the space suits would be stored for the servicing missions. Something simple. And then it would be just a matter of sending a regular crew dragon up there, doing the rendez-vous and proceeding to upgrade it once more.
I had this very idea the other day when they announced they were talking, make a service platform that fits in Falcon Heavy with integrated airlock, Hubble docking ring, maybe even a robotic arm.
@@reasonerenlightened2456 As it happens, NASA do have a couple of Hubble sized mirrors that came from un-flown spy satellites, so they have some of the parts already.
Dragon XL better suited to the hardware delivery? Depending on how far along the design is, perhaps the pressurized section could have an EVA suit 'changing room' with an appropriately sized hatch?
Dragon XL is a cargo only, one-way trip to the Lunar Gateway. It can not re-enter the Earth's atmosphere, even if it somehow got back, as it is blocky in shape, since it is a one way trip to Lunar Gateway.
Dragon XL would be the perfect module to serve as a workshop/airlock for the Hubble. It stays there, providing a platform for Dragon Crew operations. It doesn’t need to come home.
Maybe there is a market for SpaceX,and Isaacman to build a space tug or mission extension vehicle for this kind of thing to launch on a Falcon 9. One end wouldl be a mission specific docking module. For servicing Hubble you would need two launches though, one with a tug and one some time later with the Dragon carrying the astronauts and their tools.
could a special vehicle be made that is sent unmanned, attach itself and become a permanent part of hubble? this vehicle should have its own second docking system. outfit this thing to act as an engine and also supply it with scaffolding parts. a second manned dragon could later go up, install the scaffolding and you'd end up with a serviceable hubble. As an aside, is hubble worth the expense of saving? that might be a dumb question. i only ask because of how much better WEBB is.
If a two flight option is done, the first flight with appropriate equipment could be much larger with no need for heat shield or even the restrictions of size. Consider it more like a servicing satellite with equipment that could provide repair stabilising infra structure like an origami exoskeleton, emergency supplies, tools, adapter, Optimus sub prime (for ongoing modifications), etc. Since no need to return to Earth, Fairings can be used and the structure could be that much bigger.
Well, given that they are already having issues with an important part on Webb, plus it's already down at least one mirror segment, I think keeping Hubble going for as long at possible is a worthwhile plan.
@@leesargent5947 sound like a good use for Starship. Have it deploy a package to dock with Hubble that gives the service mission everything they need plus boost capability. (No need to human rate it, or worry about recovery) Then send a modified dragon to dock with the new module and make repairs. Bonus option on that extra platform is if it has a robotic arm that can be remotely operated, they can (slowly) visual inspect a lot of Hubble before the crewed mission ever launches.
@@markbarta2369 I was thinking about existing functional craft but if Starship is available via testing stage 5hat would be a good option and further testing the features of that massive ship-might be too big though with all that mass. Robotic arm might be a good process except that SpaceX is connected to Tesla and the Optimus subprime is being developed for human replacement at dangerous tasks autonomously-a good test environment with human tools and don’t breath. (I would guess this might be encouraging Elon to think of Mars and the Moon which SpaceX needs to build structures and repair them.)
The mention of the dragon's fuel capacity makes me wonder if it's feasible to use the capsule as an orbital tugboat, to drag Hubble down to the ISS, where components and an appropriate docking ring adapter would have been stored before it arrives, leave it there for service and repair with the superior hardware and equipment of the ISS, then send up another capsule at a later date to push the telescope back up to its intended orbit.
Question: Camera sensors have seen major improvements since hubble was built. Especially in low light. Could the entire sensor be replaced and updated so that we can gain better signal to noise ratio at higher ISOs?
It could but would mean replacing al the electronics and computers that handle the data as there is bound to be a few orders of magnitude more data. That said, it might be feasible and affordable.
The cameras have been replaced multiple times on the Hubble. The sensors in WFPC3 are pretty good even by today's standards. The way you make a telescope more light sensitive is to use a bigger mirror.
Another crazy idea to go along with everyone elses. With the number of Falcon Heavy launches happening in the near future it should be enough launches to "human certify" FH. (yes I know there is more that goes into it than that.) It should provide enough delta v to yeet a dragon capsule to Hubble while using as little prop from Dragon as possible. Prop that can be then used to boost Hubble and deorbit Dragon at the end of the mission. Crazy/cool times we are living in.
Here's a crazy thought... Multiple cargo Dragons to bring all the parts up to the ISS. Use the ISS's robot arm and EVAs to assemble the docking port extension so Dragon can mate with this extension & Hubble. Send a few Cargo Dragons up with extra fuel. Send up a few Crew Dragons which will have the personal needed to work on hubble. If the docking extension cannot be left attached to Hubble, park it near or attached to the ISS. Or wait until StarShip is ready and go up in one(1) or two(2) flights or maybe just replace Hubble from a cargo StarShip.
There is a significant inclination difference between the ISS and the Hubble, an inclination change burn would be prohibitively expensive, on the order of 3-ish kilometers per second according to my back of the envelope math.
@@illustriouschin Sounds like an applicant for the NASA proposal and budget committee. Hence why SpaceX is succeeding where NASA is failing. NASA's philosophy, make it complicated and expensive, Elon's; eliminate any unnecessary hardware and processes.
@@ultimatesteve9647I'm 62yo, I watched Apollo 11 while in Elementary School, my science class days are way behind me. I did say it was a crazy idea. But so is landing a spacecraft like a parachute jumper. I just posted my idea and left it to the much younger crowd to see if it could be done.
I am always stunned by how many want the HST in a museum!!!! It's still working, as we saw just recently with DART. As far as museums, it's not the hardware that matters - it's the images. In museums, display the images from HST in hi-res in theaters. Planetariums even.
Scott that phone call made me bawl my eyes out. After just living through Hurricane Ian it was exactly the feel good story I needed. I remember Hubble launching and how it changed the textbooks almost overnight after it was serviced.
I worked as an Attitude Control engineer on Hubble in 1995 after the refurbishment. I'm surprised Hubble is still running considering the gyros were not as reliable as hoped
Some people in comments are like "just use starship" or "make a service module with an airlock". Both of those ideas require stuff that is not here yet, while "simply" overcoming the problems with sealing the side hatch in cold might be easier, and would mean singular mission.
From what ive heard, there is a problem with putting stuff in trunk for crewed dragon flights beacuse apparently it compromises safety during abort Maybe sending separate tug, something like dragon XL for reboosts would be better suiting? And then crew would only fly up to entire stack to do fixes on the telescope without compromising abort capabilities
@@_mikolaj_ As far as I know, the empty trunk is already discarded in a basic dragon abort. So fitting extra stuff to the discarded trunk should not make much difference to the crew.
@@johndododoe1411 trunk is not discarded until dragon reaches apogee. It provides aerodynamic stability during abort, otherwise capsule would flip backwards, which is not desired when your motors are firing Putting payload in trunk may offset the center of mass in such way that vehicle becomes aerodynamically unstable. If there would be anything inside during abort, it would have to be separated exact moment dragon aborts
@@_mikolaj_ Extra weight below normal center of mass should add stability on the upward trajectory. At least naively, but maybe the real effect includes a variation of the pendulum problem.
I was 5 when Neil walked on the moon. 20 years ago I never imagined such questions even being seriously asked. As a life time fan of the space program, it's really neat to see it actually happen in my life time.
One possibility is to send a new hubble telescope up and bring the old one back down to study it, imagine the amount of information that an object that has been that long in space would provide
so glad im living in a time that people are willing to do these things if it takes a passionate billionaire thats fine by me truely exciting times nice work with kerbal.
@@tomservo5007 I understand what your saying but it’s not what I mean I’m actually happy to see great things happening and enthusiasm for space flight. It’s always going to be expensive and if private wealthy and passionate people can fund it then best of luck to them. There’s so many more self indulgent destructive things they could be doing instead
@@mcatech05 " private wealthy and passionate people can fund it", SpaceX relies on the US taxpayer, the myth of SpaceX being funded by 'a passionate billionaire' needs to be laid to rest.
edit: the whole comment section already mentioned a dual mission, but here's another idea: If you really need manual docking or shy the cost of an autonomous vehicle, rendezvous with the aux module first and use dragon as a space forklift, guiding the module in place, maybe rearranging the dragon to the side of it later. Also it sounds like it's time for a private company to start offering not only refueling, but also recapturing of older vehicles with a standardized platform. rest: 6:42 You wouldn't need a dragon to rendezvous with hubble and dock the axiliary module to it. Send an autonomous vehicle, along with a lot of fuel, engines and gyros, maybe even spare parts for the computer. Switch to the aux module for control, to ensure everything is working. Later, send a dragon, which can dock to the auxiliary module sideways, which would place it right infront of hubbles main body. The reboost with the aux module could be done before or after the dragon mission.
Someone in another web site suggested that Hubble servicing by Crew Dragon might be better done in multiple steps: Step 1 is to boost Hubble to a higher orbit to "buy time" Step 2 is to perform replacement of the gyroscopes (also reaction wheels?) Step 3 and so on will be to change other things.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom I'd say the suggestion makes sense because at the moment SpaceX might not yet have an untethered EVA suit to perform hands-on servicing of Hubble. So Step 1 "buys time".
8:07 would it though? Couldn't they launch the mission extender thing separately and controlled via computer, and then send up dragon with crew to install? Or is that too complex? or even dragon could dock to the extender, then pilot it onto the telescope.
I wonder if it would be possible, or of any benefit, to utilize another trunk to handle some of the additional logistics- -basically two trunks stacked on top of each other. Maybe the additional trunk is outfitted with the necessary upgrades, and boosting capabilities, docks with the Hubble, then the Dragon and it’s trunk separate. Boost could then be done autonomously. Just a thought.
Solution for the extra required mass would be pretty obvious: fly an expendable booster. SpaceX calculates that would give the Falcon 9 an extra six tons to LEO, and flying an expendable Falcon 9 would be a heck of a lot cheaper than trying to human-rate the Falcon Heavy.
I’d kind of like it to be returned to earth and put in the smithsonian. With the space shuttle being retired it always seemed impossible. (I’m not even sure it could manuver to re-entry and fly in the atmosphere with such a heavy weight). But a cargo starship might be just the thing carrying a special harness for it.
Starship is essentially a Peterbilt for space. They're already planning crew, cargo, lander, and tanker versions, why not make a "wrecker" version with a shuttle style cargo bay, manipulator arm and other equipment for on-orbit satellite repair and salvage? Seems like that would something very much needed in the near future.
As much as I'd like to see this happen, I wonder what the difference in price would be for SpaceX to launch a copy of Hubble, with all the improvements/repairs completed.
Wasn't there a proposal for a Starship based telescope? One that has a big door to unveil the primary mirror. Would seem the way to go, especially if it had a heatshield so it could return for regular servicing.
The Nancy Grace Roman Telescope (which is basically a modern copy of Hubble that is looking at a different spectrum of light and has a wider FOV) is expected to cost no more than ~$4 Billion. A servicing mission for hubble would likely cost no more than ~$250 Million-$500 Million depending on the complexity of the servicing mission. So obviously a servicing mission would be vastly cheaper than building and launching a new telescope (although NASA does have an extra mirror laying around they could use to build a brand new telescope).
I’ve always suspected that they can’t carry payload inside the trunk on a crewed mission, because the extra weight would interfere with crewed abort modes.
@@u1zha , no. The trunk is an important part of the abort system. It gives the Dragon increased arrow dynamics, and the trunk fins help stabilize the Dragon capsule nose-forward prior to its apogee, and parachuted descent to the ground.,
I believe that building a service module with all new computers, gyros and other needed upgrades that plugs in to Hubble WITH a booster capability included would be better. It might need to be a dual mission with a Dragon also arriving so astronauts can string the cables and plug into Hubble as necessary.
boost..just put in trunk ,modular engine,best suited and its fuel in trunk with ring attachment ..release at latter date..would hold full suit of control thrusters..and could hold additional resources the Hubble needs. But would take docking ring up.
Two launches: 1 - Cargo Dragon takes up a docking adapter which has an airlock compatible with the EMUs, and performs the reboost. 2 - Crew Dragon takes up the EMUs and performs repairs.
If it's gonna re-enter in late 2030s why not wait for Starship I think Starship will be ready to this after 2026 + they can replace/add lots of newer instruments with like 10 available spacewalking astronauts
It’s gonna be a long time before starship is human rated. Don’t hold your breath. There are simply to many unknowns/dangers. Not to mention a launch escape system for starship is practically impossible. After challenger and the shuttle program NASA will be extremely reluctant to launch humans on another rocket without a launch escape system.
Honestly I think this is more of an exercise than anything. They most likely chose Hubble for the publicity, but this is more of a test to see if SpaceX can independently take on challenging, unique docking and EVA stuff independently with their own astronauts and engineering solutions.
With Starship working, it would be more financially and technically easier to send a new modern telescope up, capture Hubble, return to earth safely and sell it to a space museum. 😄
Hubble has less than half the diameter of Starship. At that point, you can convert a Starship into a new and better Hubble and just launch that. By then, I'd prefer they'd pick up hubble and bring it down for the Smithsonian.
Isaacson has a very good attitude, I understand him, because I get upset everytime the journalists (and bloggers and TH-camrs) say that the Jim Webb telescope is the replacement for the Hubble; there is nothing furthest from the truth, as they are two distinctly different instruments. The Hubble, working into the visible, is not cooled and it is much more robust; it can accept a repair mission, while the JWST doesn't; even the smallest thruster fired in the proximity of the Sun shield, would ruin it. JWST is a miracle of advanced engineering, but it is a totally different beast. This said, I would like to see the Hubble properly maintained. Mr. Isaacson is a very dedicated Space enthusiast, but the repair mission really pertain to NASA; SpaceX can use their incredible fast design skills and design and build a rig to hold the astronaut in place, based on the input from NASA. Thank you Mr. Manley for this video. Regards...
Two launches. One is a custom service module to dock and stay with Hubble(HSM). The HSM docks directly to Hubble. It contains a tool locker, replacement and upgrade parts, a short Canadarm( perhaps recycled or “upcycled”), Work platform, Maneuvering and future power system. Two is a crew Dragon outfitted for the necessary stay. Initially captured by HSM arm to allow any further parts/consumables for Hubble to be unloaded to HSM locker. Then it docks tail first to opposite side of HSM freeing up arm. Arm is used to attached safety/working lines from nose of Dragon to work area. Yes it is a more expensive plan but if we use as much established hardware as possible and get the launches at “cost”. It is a solution that gives us probably a couple decades of amazing optics updated with current electronics and sensors maybe.
Hubble deserved to be replaced. Continuing to use hardware that should be deorbited is nonsensical... it would take 1 a single falcon launch to get a Hubble replacement into orbit (maybe even turn the expendable upper stage itself into a telescope). Most of the cost of hubble was from relying on the shuttle program to get it there, and to work on it... it would have been 10x cheaper to just deorbit it and rebuild it correct instead they serviced it on orbit due to sunk cost fallacies and here were are 32 years later... talking about reboosting an antique!
I actually think this is a major project that Space X really needs to peruse and get right for future work. If they can make this happen for Hubble they become another first, a private company that can service and maintain complex satellites and space infrastructure. I could see, at the very least the US and allies, using them to send space craft out to fix or adjust other satellites and space craft on other missions. Plus this gets their space craft further and further out away from Earth, which has to be great data for future Moon/Mars missions.
I feel like this would be a multi-trip service mission. First mission, spacewalk for repair and upgrades; new gyros, upgraded computers, retrofit for mission 2. Second flight is a modified dragon, possibly an older ISS service dragon. This one is fitted with extra fuel tanks. This dragon docks itself to Hubble and becomes a mission extension vehicle supplying added solar panel capacity, fuel and maneuvering thrusters. When the capsule is spent, it unlocks and returns home for refueling and is returned to hubble for continued service. This would be a demonstration model for SpaceX to create the MEV business that other companies have hoped to achieve and justifies the cost of this charity work.
it is a good call for SpaceX to do this gratis. Not only does it help them with their future Mars plans (e.g. EVA practise), but also, if the reboost works, could then be used to reboost the ISS (or future orbital stations), which, of course, they could charge for.
As a retire NASA contractor that once supported Hubble, I will say SpaceX can save Hubble. After raising it to a proper orbit, discussions will have to come up to agree with how they can give it a much needed service mission. Upgrade all/most of its tech. I hope so I really hope so.
Why? Building a Hubble II using the hull of Starship would be a better idea. Hubble was 4.2m in diameter with a 2.4 meter mirror. Imagine what you could do with the 8m cargo section of a Starship. The only way I see Hubble coming back to Earth on a Starship, is to study the effects of space on the hardware up close.
Hi Scott, I think you forgot to mention one interesting thing, and it is that if it works the first time, it could be reserviced several more times in the future, which will make the initial investment even more worth.
Some wise guy wanted to use a Falcon Heavy and dock with Hubble with the second stage still attached and give it a mega boost. You know, some ideas are kind of bad.
It would be nice if those things are designed with one (or few) outside connectors/interfaces (mechanical and electrical) where an external module could be plugged, replacing failed internal components. E.g. a robotic mission could be used to plug a package with some gyroscopes and a better computer. After the installation, the telescope or whatever is configured to use an external component instead of a failed internal.
I can't help but think that this is a relatively low cost extension. Bang for buck, NASA could get a real steal and buy another decade of life if they work it right. For SpaceX, adding this capability, either in the form of a control module in the trunk, or (better yet) a manipulator arm for Dragon that can carry out complex missions would be a massive boon in the long term.
I think the most interesting option would be to use the Starship. It is certainly small enough in diameter to fit into the Starship payload bay and light enough for the Starship but the length is questionable. The numbers I have seen are that the Starship is 9m in diameter and is targeted to have a 1000 cu-m cargo capacity - if it were a 9m diameter cylinder (which it is not) then that would be 15.7m long and the Hubble is 13.2m long - so, maybe. So, maybe they could bring it into the bay to work in it and maybe even bring it home BUT, creating a crazy SpaceX landing profile with all that mass (that could be moving a bit) would not be something I would want to sign up for.
I have been wondering about using Starship with the Hubble. I’m actually hoping once Hubble needs to be replaced that Starship can return the HST to Earth so it can go into the Smithsonian.
@@christianvalentin5344 I do think it would be cool to get the Hubble back and if someone could figure out how to do that, it would be SpaceX. That said, I wonder if he Hubble (or a Starship carrying it) could really survive a landing attempt. My thought is that there would be s LOT of risk attempting it and the risk probably outweigh the benefits (at least for the next 10 years or so).
Service module idea, replacement parts in cargo hold, a built in Canadarm + tool changer, and the controls to it in a crew capsule. Like robotic surgery but in space.
If Hubble has until 2030 before it’s demise, the rescue mission should probably be focused on using Starship. NASA could buy one and outfit it to perform similarly to the Shuttle, with a whole lot more capability. Will be interesting to see where these studies go. Anything to keep Hubble fully functional and in orbit would be a good thing. Nice presentation.
I thought they were talking about Starship carrying out this mission, not the Capsule. Anyway, Spaceship is still quite a ways and would probably be more expensive? IDK, Dragon Capsule still seems like it would perform some of the tasks just fine, but it make take several trips to accomplish all the tasks required to pimp the Hubble up. A totally worthwhile endeavor IMO, it HAS to be done. Hubble is such a legacy, a piece of history, we can't let it die yet!. Hopefully by the time it can't go any further many years from now, we will be able to go and recover it instead of letting it burn to slag.
I think it will be better off pushing Hubble out with dragon than do another mission when star ship is ready and do a major service mission. Or build a new module to attach to the front of dragon (similar position to the Apollo module) and use that as a airlock or storage for the equipment needed
9:14 or perhaps they could put a separate vehicle in the trunk that's only a booster. This could also contain the docking clamp and continue boosting the telescope after Dragon detaches. If properly designed, this could allow for refueling in the future.
I do wonder if they will use an inflatable airlock under the nose cone. Seems like that would be a pretty neat thing for SpaceX to have under their sleeve
6:48 could the Dragon Trunk itself be modified with extra computer / gyros and such and left attached as a Hubble enhancement. How long does the dragon need the truck before de-orbiting?
By the time you do any of that... you should have deorbited the hubble and replaced it with hubble 2... simpler faster better. Even an 8.4m mirror used in the GMT telescope only cost $20 million, a mirror half the diameter probably cost less than a quater that.... there is no way you could (in any sane way) fail to build a hubble replacement that is better in every way... for cheaper than it would cost to service it on orbit. They spent at least 2.5billion just on shuttle launches to the hubble over the years... you could easily build 10 hubbles and launch them today for the same money that was spent in servicing mission launch costs alone.
Idea: Dragon XL could be the vehicle that does the first reboost and takes over attitude control. It could simply remain docked. A subsequent crewed mission could then be equipped with any additional equipment required to do service to Hubble's computers and reaction wheels. Perhaps a small robotic arm inside the trunk could have a grapple point on the side of the Dragon XL that it can latch to and the astronauts doing service could more or less "lean" out of the hatch.
One Falcon mission to mate-up the new module with a current docking ring. One second mission from falcon heavy to mate to current docking ring and push Hubble into higher orbit. Falcon heavy launch allowing unmanned dragon capsule to carry more fuel.
They could launch a larger extension module to dock to Hubble on a regular Falcon 9.. With independent gyros, an ion thruster, maybe even extra solar or RTG.. If the module had computers as well, that could all be connected with a space-walk from another launch.. A power up package could be sent up and docked on the first launch, and the space-walk fix could be with a second launch.. :)
Here's an idea: why not fly 2 dragons? One would have new hardware for the hubble (interfacing might be an issue...), would dock from the cargo bay (as shown in the video), and boost the telescope - meaning this one would stay permanatly attached. The other would dock nose to nose and take the astronauts back to earth. Of course, this is only an option if spacex can spare/sell one dragon capsule permanently - but that is something billionaires should be able to afford ;)
Just wait for Starship. NASA themselves are already investing and literally working on it due to HLS for Artemis, so the old argument of "not officially acknowledging a paper rocket" does not work anymore.
So do the mission, change all the hardware, and then dock nose to nose to bring back the astronauts. So have 2 each on board? Where are you getting the hardware from, if you dock the Trunk to Hubble? Running two missions back to back that quickly is not an easy proposition. Especially, since Crew Dragon only launches from LC-39A right now. If you are going to leave a Dragon attached to Hubble, why not use a cargo Dragon, so you don't have to bring back people at all?
@@steveaustin2686 Yes, have only two astronauts per dragon plus EVA Suits. First dragon could be pilot and engineer, second dragon pilot and maybe space tourist (I do not think you need a whole crew of 4 for the task but maybe I am wrong). The hardware/extra computers could stay in the first dragon. As I mentioned, the issue would be interfacing it with the hubble computer bus. I do not know enough to say if this is electronically feasible. Another advantage of this idea is that it would make for easier repairs of hubble in the future. And also the increasing orbit maneuver could be done after all the astronaust already left by remote controlling the attached dragon.
@@jarekbejm Ok, so one Crew Dragon docked to the back of Hubble and one free flying? That is going to be very tricky. Even the Shuttle didn't do that. Because the Shuttle grabbed Hubble with the Canadarm and berthed it in the Shuttle bay. Then the astronauts used the Canadarm as a work platform to be able to work on Hubble. Crew Dragon can't berth Hubble and has no Canadarm to use as a work platfrom. Servicing Hubble with Crew Dragon, as opposed to boosting it with Crew Dragon, is easier said than done.
Throw shuttle style doors on starship. Slap on a Canada arm and a hab/airlock module and a dragon docking port and you can go at it like the shuttle days.
Elon is quite literally building the first civilian astronaut corps. Doing this mission is a good practice mission for them, and they'd probably get a few million from NASA for the job. I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find out SpaceX has been quietly developing their own deep space suits. His line to NASA about being able to build the lunar exploration suits smacks of his having already done a lot of the development. We're truly living in an amazing time.
how about going another route: the trunk contains engines, the tank, and the new guidance. it directly docks with hubble together with the dragon capsule. they boost it up as much as they can. and when it's time, they leave the trunk connected to hubble to land safely. the trunk then tries to keep position, provide RCS, etc. I don't know how long dragon2 can operate independently of its trunk but it must be at least a few hours. they can't ditch the trunk after they committed to deorbiting. the even funnier option would be to cooperate with northrop grumman. a cygnus-based service module that docks first, stays, and doubles as workbench and airlock. and then dragon docks to that.
Since the trunk separates with Crew Dragon in case of a launch escape system abort (where it acts to aerodynamically stabilize the spacecraft) I don't think anything of significant mass can be carried in the trunk. That would seem to rule out carrying cargo in the trunk on a Crew Dragon mission.
Put a docking adapter directly on top of the second stage of a Falcon 9; the stage then attaches itself to Hubble, fires up the engine and lifts the telescope to an orbit higher than Snoop Dogg.
An idea I've long had is to send up a robotic mission to match nodes and inclination with the ISS and then de-orbit it TO the ISS where one of the arms can catch it. At that point it could be fully serviced and sent back out to a higher orbit again. Perhaps with an integrated de-orbiter this time. A robotic mission would be less expensive than a new telescope and safer than sending people that far up. An incredible amount of time and resources went into Hubble, from design and building and testing to launching and servicing .. That's an awful lot to just toss away by burning it up in the atmosphere. And it's not like the optics will ever "go bad" or become not useful.
If this ever happens it will be an amazing mission. I hope NASA and SpaceX and Jared will come to some sort of agreement and will make this mission happen.
OK, this will involve run-a-way costs; but take your mini service module idea a wee bit further: Upscale that module, and launch it by its' self to Hubble and dock it. Then send a Dragon capsule afterwards to do the parts replacement and such. This way the new service module will not be constrained by the volume of the Dragon and it can fold out railings, perhaps a fold out patio to simulate the robot arm that the astronauts could stand on. Along with a proper docking ring on the back that Dragon could use.
Now if there is a way to plug into the computer bus on Hubble you could have extra computers in the service module that could replace failing ones on Hubble. But splitting the hardware into two launches gives NASA some flexibility.
It would greatly improve your safety margins by keeping crew separated from the mass of the cargo.
Hey that's also a good idea!
It needs a moped/tugboat in the trunk. something that could move astronauts or manipulate the telescope itself very slowly to assist in docking, or perhaps act as a small anchor for astonauts working direcly on the telescope components.
Definitely run-a-away costs. Once you have a patio, you're going to need patio furniture, bbq grill, etc.
"Its' self". 🤭
For anyone wondering if the EVA could be through the side hatch: Jared tweeted "forward hatch only appropriate option for opening in space" when he gave us some hints on Twitter. He'd also indicated the docking would have to be with a trunk-mounted adapter.
Whats this adapter you talk of?
My wife always makes me use the forward hatch and says that trunk mounthing isn't an option except on my birthday. She never told me there was an adapter?
@@drunkpaulocosta That trunk adapter is one that she puts on for reversed docking. Not advised for the inexperienced.
@@Kineth1 she doesnt plan on going up the sewage lines does she? Because that could cause a blow out of the airlock. That would be a very unwise move on International Taco Day
@@drunkpaulocosta you need to explain to your wife that her front docking ring isnt compatible with your docking probe, because her nose cone will get in the way.
Refer her to Scott Manly if she doesn't believe you.
@@drunkpaulocosta Butter.
One wonders if they could attach an ion thruster pack with solar panels to that docking ring to provide both the ability to stay in high orbit as well as provide precise orientation.
Good idea, no need to also boost dragon to 620km . Replace computers, gyros, add ion thrusters + solar to mounting ring and head home. Ion thusters can raise Hubble's orbit over several months and would also be more fuel efficient than chemical ones.
Or xenon thrusters I guess because it's SpaceX and they have that on starlink so it's familiar technology
That is probably the most likely thing that they'll do. Instead of trying to do surgery on Hubble in less than ideal conditions, attach an ion propulsion module to the soft capture system that can maintain the higher orbit (boosted by the Dragon spacecraft) for another decade plus, as well as act as backup orientation for Hubble. If you can get it into a higher, longer lasting orbit you could then wait on a vehicle like Starship to provide more serious servicing in the future, or maybe even gobble it up in its massive fairing and bring it back down to Earth so it can go into a museum.
That would be the minimum for a mission like this. Simply reboost Hubble so there is no risk of atmospheric entry. Do instrument and equipment upgrades if you can, but if not simply preserve the vehicle.
Hubble is such an iconic spacecraft that even if the expense of saving it becomes more than the cost of sending up a new spacecraft with similar (but modern) capabilities, it is still worth. The Hubble Space Telescope has name recognition with the general public, and its gets headlines in the mainstream media that other spacecraft don't. If they can save it, then they should.
But why? It will be way better just to create a completely new and modern telescope than upgrading that piece of historical apparatus.
Aint hubble bit too heavy for those thrusters?
If it just came down to a reboost I don't see why SpaceX or someone else could not just launch a dedicated mission extension vehicle built on a large commercial satellite bus. We have remote docking down pretty well so provided it had the modified interface it would be fairly pedestrian to perform. Heck you could even add a little manipulator arm to said mission extension vehicle and then send a Dragon with an EVA crew up to run jumper cables from Hubble's internal electronics to new computers and Gyros in the extension vehicle. With the lack of Shuttle like capability 2 missions seems like a safer bet to me.
If you made your MEV capable enough do you even need a crewed mission? Dock it to Hubble and completely take over stabilisation, maneuvering and computer functions. But I guess you need to use Hubble's solar panels for power.
I think a lot of it also comes down to replacing parts as well because there's also failed parts on the telescope that should probably be replaced if the mission is getting extended.
@@MattSitton Yep. I say lets fucking do it. I love the Hubble, and while JWST is cool and all, it doesn't have Visual light or Ultraviolet vision like the Hubble.
@@Julius_Hardware Well put your own Panels i guess
Using the trunk is a really clever idea, Scott!
that was announced by nasa and spaceX that the plan is to use the trunk lmao
This is exciting. I want to see the computers getting upgraded even if it's an external module. Would be interesting to know how they'll handle the connection between the old computers and the new one.
They wouldn’t. External computer and giros would handle orientation, internal - imaging.
why do I have a feeling nasa and jared are going to see this video and use this idea.
Once they have a skilled astronaut flying around Hubble, it should be little or no problem to replace modular elements such as the computers or radio systems.
would it not be easier to put a copy of the Hubble inside a StarShip and send it to where they want it to be?
@@reasonerenlightened2456 Hubble being a spy satellite origin maybe it's not do common to build optical space telescopes. I believe the building of such a telescope and the adjustments to have it optional could be a lot of work (money). Just updating the existing, with dragon or if starship was available soon, would get faster results.
Can't wait for Kebal Space Program 2
4K Kerbal Manley textures too
Don't hold your breath
For what? Low res planets and small system? What we have now with real solar system and all the other mods is far superior
Yes you can
@@bronson2585 less kraken tantrums
I am of an age that footage (real or computer game) of objects gently floating in orbit instantly bring up Strauss' Blue Danube.
Thank you for that Kubrick!
My vote is for a launch separate from Dragon. Build a service module with all the hardware upgrades needed including a crew airlock and boosting thrusters that Dragon can then rendezvous with at a later time when you need “boots on the ground” to perform manual upgrades. The new module can house all of the life limited items like gyros and solar panels plus include supplies needed for the EVA when Dragon comes later.
Comments here seem to be full of similar "two part mission" suggestions. Maybe there is something to that
I like the Idea of a tiny airlock only space station + service module being slapped on the Hubble to facilitate maintenance missions. If the added on gyros and such were accessible from inside the "service station" you wouldn't even need EVA for predictable maintenance items.
@@AdmiralBob exactly. Would be a major upgrade to Hubble. Send a service mission up every few years for preventative maintenance, computer upgrades, and a little fuel for the onboard thrusters. Hubble would last until technology makes it completely irrelevant.
This brings up so much possibilities, I’m so happy Jared brought this ball to the table. The price of service has dropped and there are actually ways to solve this with Scott’s suggestion to clamp on with something magic in the trunk and keep the opening in the frunk. I think this already been answered, but is it possible to develop an airlock for the frunk as a third option so the rest of the crew won’t need to be in vacuum during the long repair?
If they choose to go with mission extender addon hardware, this could be sent in another launch in a faring and include an arm.
All this is probably much cheaper than the last space shuttle service mission?
So many ways our spaceflight technology and capabilities can be improved just by studying this one mission!
I hope this happens for so very many reasons more than just improving Hubble.
A Dragon rigged with a small version of the Canada Arm would be incredibly handy! Or just wait and use Spaceship when that is ready to fly in a couple years.
Agreed.
To allow Hubble to burn during deorbiting is not only neglect & wasteful by NASA, but I consider it sacrilege.
If we're lucky, SpaceX will be ready to perform a rescue mission to return Hubble back to Earth and either upgrade the inner workings with 21st Century technology and launch it back into L.E.O. or put it on display in the Air & Space Museum.
@@baxtermullins1842 Agreed, this will be a challenge for sure. I wonder if this could be done as an unmanned mission with remote controlled arms? If we could make that work it opens up a LOT of options for servicing existing space hardware. Possibly even attaching de-orbiting units to derelicts or even putting them in a "storage bin" with station keeping thrusters so the materials could be used later. Lots of very expensive stuff up there. It seems a shame to just have it burn up.
One word. Mass.
It's a cool idea but one that probably can't be done with one mission.
If it works, it might just be a con trick.
Spaceship :)
so glad to see!!! Scott if you ever want to hear the story about how the Hubble was originally going to be powered by 8051 type MCU's and ASICs and how I saved it with not only a 32bit rad had CPU but also a real-time kernel contact me. I'd love to fully tell the story of how I put Intel inside all the Hubble modules...
a 80's story about a company in boulder Colorado that invented the vacuum canning jar, Ball Aerospace, Intel Corp and the Reagan SDS Space station that never happened and this applications engineer that I think you might enjoy hearing?
I wonder if they are gonna replace the computers / parts on Hubble are there going to be any of the period OG parts or it's gonna be a 1 off modern replacement.
Umm, the 8051 was an Intel chip.
To me, the simplest thing would be to make this a two part deal. First, you send a service module that has the legacy connector on one end and the modern one on the other. It could integrate a small airlock where the space suits would be stored for the servicing missions. Something simple. And then it would be just a matter of sending a regular crew dragon up there, doing the rendez-vous and proceeding to upgrade it once more.
Great idea. Once the repairs are done, leave your space shed docked, and send up a thrust module to latch on to its modern docking ring.
I had this very idea the other day when they announced they were talking, make a service platform that fits in Falcon Heavy with integrated airlock, Hubble docking ring, maybe even a robotic arm.
would it not be easier to put a copy of the Hubble inside a Star ship and send it to where they want it to be?
Technically making it the Hubble Space Station.
@@reasonerenlightened2456 As it happens, NASA do have a couple of Hubble sized mirrors that came from un-flown spy satellites, so they have some of the parts already.
Dragon XL better suited to the hardware delivery? Depending on how far along the design is, perhaps the pressurized section could have an EVA suit 'changing room' with an appropriately sized hatch?
Dragon XL is a cargo only, one-way trip to the Lunar Gateway. It can not re-enter the Earth's atmosphere, even if it somehow got back, as it is blocky in shape, since it is a one way trip to Lunar Gateway.
Dragon XL would be the perfect module to serve as a workshop/airlock for the Hubble. It stays there, providing a platform for Dragon Crew operations. It doesn’t need to come home.
@@michaeldemarco9950 might even work as a good test on NASA's dime 😉
Maybe there is a market for SpaceX,and Isaacman to build a space tug or mission extension vehicle for this kind of thing to launch on a Falcon 9. One end wouldl be a mission specific docking module. For servicing Hubble you would need two launches though, one with a tug and one some time later with the Dragon carrying the astronauts and their tools.
could a special vehicle be made that is sent unmanned, attach itself and become a permanent part of hubble? this vehicle should have its own second docking system. outfit this thing to act as an engine and also supply it with scaffolding parts. a second manned dragon could later go up, install the scaffolding and you'd end up with a serviceable hubble. As an aside, is hubble worth the expense of saving? that might be a dumb question. i only ask because of how much better WEBB is.
If a two flight option is done, the first flight with appropriate equipment could be much larger with no need for heat shield or even the restrictions of size. Consider it more like a servicing satellite with equipment that could provide repair stabilising infra structure like an origami exoskeleton, emergency supplies, tools, adapter, Optimus sub prime (for ongoing modifications), etc. Since no need to return to Earth, Fairings can be used and the structure could be that much bigger.
Well, given that they are already having issues with an important part on Webb, plus it's already down at least one mirror segment, I think keeping Hubble going for as long at possible is a worthwhile plan.
@@leesargent5947 sound like a good use for Starship. Have it deploy a package to dock with Hubble that gives the service mission everything they need plus boost capability. (No need to human rate it, or worry about recovery) Then send a modified dragon to dock with the new module and make repairs.
Bonus option on that extra platform is if it has a robotic arm that can be remotely operated, they can (slowly) visual inspect a lot of Hubble before the crewed mission ever launches.
@@markbarta2369 I was thinking about existing functional craft but if Starship is available via testing stage 5hat would be a good option and further testing the features of that massive ship-might be too big though with all that mass. Robotic arm might be a good process except that SpaceX is connected to Tesla and the Optimus subprime is being developed for human replacement at dangerous tasks autonomously-a good test environment with human tools and don’t breath. (I would guess this might be encouraging Elon to think of Mars and the Moon which SpaceX needs to build structures and repair them.)
The mention of the dragon's fuel capacity makes me wonder if it's feasible to use the capsule as an orbital tugboat, to drag Hubble down to the ISS, where components and an appropriate docking ring adapter would have been stored before it arrives, leave it there for service and repair with the superior hardware and equipment of the ISS, then send up another capsule at a later date to push the telescope back up to its intended orbit.
Question: Camera sensors have seen major improvements since hubble was built. Especially in low light. Could the entire sensor be replaced and updated so that we can gain better signal to noise ratio at higher ISOs?
It could but would mean replacing al the electronics and computers that handle the data as there is bound to be a few orders of magnitude more data. That said, it might be feasible and affordable.
The cameras have been replaced multiple times on the Hubble. The sensors in WFPC3 are pretty good even by today's standards. The way you make a telescope more light sensitive is to use a bigger mirror.
Another crazy idea to go along with everyone elses. With the number of Falcon Heavy launches happening in the near future it should be enough launches to "human certify" FH. (yes I know there is more that goes into it than that.) It should provide enough delta v to yeet a dragon capsule to Hubble while using as little prop from Dragon as possible. Prop that can be then used to boost Hubble and deorbit Dragon at the end of the mission.
Crazy/cool times we are living in.
If they expend the Falcon 9 booster, instead of recovering it, that would likely give them all the dV they needed without having to use Falcon Heavy.
Here's a crazy thought...
Multiple cargo Dragons to bring all the parts up to the ISS.
Use the ISS's robot arm and EVAs to assemble the docking port extension so Dragon can mate with this extension & Hubble.
Send a few Cargo Dragons up with extra fuel.
Send up a few Crew Dragons which will have the personal needed to work on hubble.
If the docking extension cannot be left attached to Hubble, park it near or attached to the ISS.
Or wait until StarShip is ready and go up in one(1) or two(2) flights or maybe just replace Hubble from a cargo StarShip.
A much more cost effective idea would be to use a bulldozer to push a few billion dollars of cash and materials into a furnace.
There is a significant inclination difference between the ISS and the Hubble, an inclination change burn would be prohibitively expensive, on the order of 3-ish kilometers per second according to my back of the envelope math.
@@illustriouschin Sounds like an applicant for the NASA proposal and budget committee. Hence why SpaceX is succeeding where NASA is failing. NASA's philosophy, make it complicated and expensive, Elon's; eliminate any unnecessary hardware and processes.
Hubbell has a sister. Lots of old spi satolights. Send one up the the old way. On CIA PLAN.
@@ultimatesteve9647I'm 62yo, I watched Apollo 11 while in Elementary School, my science class days are way behind me.
I did say it was a crazy idea.
But so is landing a spacecraft like a parachute jumper.
I just posted my idea and left it to the much younger crowd to see if it could be done.
Seeing you in KSP gave me some major nostalgic feeling. Good to watch.
I am always stunned by how many want the HST in a museum!!!! It's still working, as we saw just recently with DART. As far as museums, it's not the hardware that matters - it's the images. In museums, display the images from HST in hi-res in theaters. Planetariums even.
Scott that phone call made me bawl my eyes out. After just living through Hurricane Ian it was exactly the feel good story I needed. I remember Hubble launching and how it changed the textbooks almost overnight after it was serviced.
I worked as an Attitude Control engineer on Hubble in 1995 after the refurbishment. I'm surprised Hubble is still running considering the gyros were not as reliable as hoped
Dejavu...
Can Space Shuttle be ready in time to save Skylab.
The proposed mission would have the shuttle deliver a space tug to attach to Skylab.
Some people in comments are like "just use starship" or "make a service module with an airlock".
Both of those ideas require stuff that is not here yet, while "simply" overcoming the problems with sealing the side hatch in cold might be easier, and would mean singular mission.
From what ive heard, there is a problem with putting stuff in trunk for crewed dragon flights beacuse apparently it compromises safety during abort
Maybe sending separate tug, something like dragon XL for reboosts would be better suiting? And then crew would only fly up to entire stack to do fixes on the telescope without compromising abort capabilities
If the trunk cargo isn't rigidly attached to the core capsule, that cargo would be discarded along with the trunk sides during any abort.
@@johndododoe1411 i gues that could be done, depends on how NASA would view risks with bonus staging event during abort
@@_mikolaj_ As far as I know, the empty trunk is already discarded in a basic dragon abort. So fitting extra stuff to the discarded trunk should not make much difference to the crew.
@@johndododoe1411 trunk is not discarded until dragon reaches apogee. It provides aerodynamic stability during abort, otherwise capsule would flip backwards, which is not desired when your motors are firing
Putting payload in trunk may offset the center of mass in such way that vehicle becomes aerodynamically unstable.
If there would be anything inside during abort, it would have to be separated exact moment dragon aborts
@@_mikolaj_ Extra weight below normal center of mass should add stability on the upward trajectory. At least naively, but maybe the real effect includes a variation of the pendulum problem.
It be cool if starship be ready in time and capture Hubble refurbish it and then relaunch it for cheap 😊
Can Starship land with heavy cargo on board?
Keep holding your breath. The thing hasn't even flown.
I was 5 when Neil walked on the moon. 20 years ago I never imagined such questions even being seriously asked. As a life time fan of the space program, it's really neat to see it actually happen in my life time.
One possibility is to send a new hubble telescope up and bring the old one back down to study it, imagine the amount of information that an object that has been that long in space would provide
I imagine it would provide zero information.
so glad im living in a time that people are willing to do these things if it takes a passionate billionaire thats fine by me truely exciting times nice work with kerbal.
" a passionate billionaire ", like buying twitter for 'free speech', which turned out to be another lie.
@@tomservo5007 I understand what your saying but it’s not what I mean I’m actually happy to see great things happening and enthusiasm for space flight. It’s always going to be expensive and if private wealthy and passionate people can fund it then best of luck to them. There’s so many more self indulgent destructive things they could be doing instead
@@mcatech05 " private wealthy and passionate people can fund it", SpaceX relies on the US taxpayer, the myth of SpaceX being funded by 'a passionate billionaire' needs to be laid to rest.
edit: the whole comment section already mentioned a dual mission, but here's another idea:
If you really need manual docking or shy the cost of an autonomous vehicle, rendezvous with the aux module first and use dragon as a space forklift, guiding the module in place, maybe rearranging the dragon to the side of it later. Also it sounds like it's time for a private company to start offering not only refueling, but also recapturing of older vehicles with a standardized platform.
rest:
6:42 You wouldn't need a dragon to rendezvous with hubble and dock the axiliary module to it. Send an autonomous vehicle, along with a lot of fuel, engines and gyros, maybe even spare parts for the computer. Switch to the aux module for control, to ensure everything is working. Later, send a dragon, which can dock to the auxiliary module sideways, which would place it right infront of hubbles main body. The reboost with the aux module could be done before or after the dragon mission.
Congratulations you were selected amongst the shortlisted winners 🏆 for the ongoing MacBook-M2/PC/Ps5 giveaway 🏆dm above☝️
Someone in another web site suggested that Hubble servicing by Crew Dragon might be better done in multiple steps:
Step 1 is to boost Hubble to a higher orbit to "buy time"
Step 2 is to perform replacement of the gyroscopes (also reaction wheels?)
Step 3 and so on will be to change other things.
They will not replace gyroscopes, just attach extra module with new gyroscopes, solar panels, and fuel.
People who make those suggestions tend to have no understanding of what's actually required to do that kind of servicing.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom I'd say the suggestion makes sense because at the moment SpaceX might not yet have an untethered EVA suit to perform hands-on servicing of Hubble. So Step 1 "buys time".
8:07 would it though? Couldn't they launch the mission extender thing separately and controlled via computer, and then send up dragon with crew to install? Or is that too complex? or even dragon could dock to the extender, then pilot it onto the telescope.
I wonder if it would be possible, or of any benefit, to utilize another trunk to handle some of the additional logistics- -basically two trunks stacked on top of each other. Maybe the additional trunk is outfitted with the necessary upgrades, and boosting capabilities, docks with the Hubble, then the Dragon and it’s trunk separate. Boost could then be done autonomously. Just a thought.
Ahh… please focus on give as a 8m mirror Telescope Starship. 😀
"Because you don't want some billionaire crashing into the Hubble Space Telescope and ruining everyone's day"
A timely parable for our troubled times.
Solution for the extra required mass would be pretty obvious: fly an expendable booster. SpaceX calculates that would give the Falcon 9 an extra six tons to LEO, and flying an expendable Falcon 9 would be a heck of a lot cheaper than trying to human-rate the Falcon Heavy.
I’d kind of like it to be returned to earth and put in the smithsonian. With the space shuttle being retired it always seemed impossible. (I’m not even sure it could manuver to re-entry and fly in the atmosphere with such a heavy weight). But a cargo starship might be just the thing carrying a special harness for it.
or we could by tickets on starship and visit Hubble for the most amazing museum experience ever
Would need either a shuttle or starship unfortunately
@@autismisfine4984 NASA gave up on the fantasy of bringing HST back after they realized what a brick the Shuttle really was.
Man Scott from all the space youtubers you are the best by really far
They might have to use a Falcon Heavy ?
How about having Falcon launch an adapter that will dock and then dock that way?
Starship is essentially a Peterbilt for space. They're already planning crew, cargo, lander, and tanker versions, why not make a "wrecker" version with a shuttle style cargo bay, manipulator arm and other equipment for on-orbit satellite repair and salvage? Seems like that would something very much needed in the near future.
As much as I'd like to see this happen, I wonder what the difference in price would be for SpaceX to launch a copy of Hubble, with all the improvements/repairs completed.
Probably just as expensive as any other telescope. Particularly because SpaceX has no experience with telescopes
I don't think we would launch a copy of Hubble at this point. We would launch something bigger and more modern.
Wasn't there a proposal for a Starship based telescope? One that has a big door to unveil the primary mirror. Would seem the way to go, especially if it had a heatshield so it could return for regular servicing.
The Nancy Grace Roman Telescope (which is basically a modern copy of Hubble that is looking at a different spectrum of light and has a wider FOV) is expected to cost no more than ~$4 Billion. A servicing mission for hubble would likely cost no more than ~$250 Million-$500 Million depending on the complexity of the servicing mission. So obviously a servicing mission would be vastly cheaper than building and launching a new telescope (although NASA does have an extra mirror laying around they could use to build a brand new telescope).
@@Jtretta An elon tweet, so nothing concrete
As a fan of Edwardian and Victorian era exploration on Earth I'm excited to see the return of the gentleman explorer.
I’ve always suspected that they can’t carry payload inside the trunk on a crewed mission, because the extra weight would interfere with crewed abort modes.
They can, and regularly do.
I think when aborting Dragon leaves the trunk behind...
@@u1zha , the trunk is needed for stabilization during the initial part of the abort. There is a pad abort test video if you are interested.
@@u1zha , no. The trunk is an important part of the abort system. It gives the Dragon increased arrow dynamics, and the trunk fins help stabilize the Dragon capsule nose-forward prior to its apogee, and parachuted descent to the ground.,
@@holdenmarkymark33, I don’t think I’ve seen them lift cargo in the trunk of a crewed mission. Cargo Dragons, yes. Crewed missions, no.
I believe that building a service module with all new computers, gyros and other needed upgrades that plugs in to Hubble WITH a booster capability included would be better.
It might need to be a dual mission with a Dragon also arriving so astronauts can string the cables and plug into Hubble as necessary.
I'd love to see Hubble with more computational horse tourques!
boost..just put in trunk ,modular engine,best suited and its fuel in trunk with ring attachment ..release at latter date..would hold full suit of control thrusters..and could hold additional resources the Hubble needs. But would take docking ring up.
Two launches:
1 - Cargo Dragon takes up a docking adapter which has an airlock compatible with the EMUs, and performs the reboost.
2 - Crew Dragon takes up the EMUs and performs repairs.
If it's gonna re-enter in late 2030s why not wait for Starship
I think Starship will be ready to this after 2026 + they can replace/add lots of newer instruments with like 10 available spacewalking astronauts
It’s gonna be a long time before starship is human rated. Don’t hold your breath. There are simply to many unknowns/dangers. Not to mention a launch escape system for starship is practically impossible. After challenger and the shuttle program NASA will be extremely reluctant to launch humans on another rocket without a launch escape system.
Honestly I think this is more of an exercise than anything. They most likely chose Hubble for the publicity, but this is more of a test to see if SpaceX can independently take on challenging, unique docking and EVA stuff independently with their own astronauts and engineering solutions.
With Starship working, it would be more financially and technically easier to send a new modern telescope up, capture Hubble, return to earth safely and sell it to a space museum. 😄
Hubble has less than half the diameter of Starship. At that point, you can convert a Starship into a new and better Hubble and just launch that. By then, I'd prefer they'd pick up hubble and bring it down for the Smithsonian.
@@joshuaashton1929 They don't need to send people on Starship. NASA is already using Starship for Artemis and they are very happy with the progress.
Isaacson has a very good attitude, I understand him, because I get upset everytime the journalists (and bloggers and TH-camrs) say that the Jim Webb telescope is the replacement for the Hubble; there is nothing furthest from the truth, as they are two distinctly different instruments.
The Hubble, working into the visible, is not cooled and it is much more robust; it can accept a repair mission, while the JWST doesn't; even the smallest thruster fired in the proximity of the Sun shield, would ruin it. JWST is a miracle of advanced engineering, but it is a totally different beast.
This said, I would like to see the Hubble properly maintained. Mr. Isaacson is a very dedicated Space enthusiast, but the repair mission really pertain to NASA; SpaceX can use their incredible fast design skills and design and build a rig to hold the astronaut in place, based on the input from NASA.
Thank you Mr. Manley for this video.
Regards...
Two launches.
One is a custom service module to dock and stay with Hubble(HSM).
The HSM docks directly to Hubble.
It contains a tool locker, replacement and upgrade parts, a short Canadarm( perhaps recycled or “upcycled”), Work platform, Maneuvering and future power system.
Two is a crew Dragon outfitted for the necessary stay. Initially captured by HSM arm to allow any further parts/consumables for Hubble to be unloaded to HSM locker.
Then it docks tail first to opposite side of HSM freeing up arm. Arm is used to attached safety/working lines from nose of Dragon to work area.
Yes it is a more expensive plan but if we use as much established hardware as possible and get the launches at “cost”. It is a solution that gives us probably a couple decades of amazing optics updated with current electronics and sensors maybe.
Congratulations you were selected amongst the shortlisted winners 🏆 for the ongoing MacBook-M2/PC/Ps5 giveaway 🏆dm above☝️
Finally a useful use of manpower and skill to fix a fantastic instrument, do it as all we will learn something great and give hubble more life
this is great! Add the Dragon trunk to the bottom of the Hubble, and createe a Super Hubble! :D
Really hope this end up happening. Hubble deserves too be updated. It's done so much in it's life time.
Hubble deserved to be replaced. Continuing to use hardware that should be deorbited is nonsensical... it would take 1 a single falcon launch to get a Hubble replacement into orbit (maybe even turn the expendable upper stage itself into a telescope). Most of the cost of hubble was from relying on the shuttle program to get it there, and to work on it... it would have been 10x cheaper to just deorbit it and rebuild it correct instead they serviced it on orbit due to sunk cost fallacies and here were are 32 years later... talking about reboosting an antique!
I actually think this is a major project that Space X really needs to peruse and get right for future work. If they can make this happen for Hubble they become another first, a private company that can service and maintain complex satellites and space infrastructure. I could see, at the very least the US and allies, using them to send space craft out to fix or adjust other satellites and space craft on other missions.
Plus this gets their space craft further and further out away from Earth, which has to be great data for future Moon/Mars missions.
I feel like this would be a multi-trip service mission. First mission, spacewalk for repair and upgrades; new gyros, upgraded computers, retrofit for mission 2. Second flight is a modified dragon, possibly an older ISS service dragon. This one is fitted with extra fuel tanks. This dragon docks itself to Hubble and becomes a mission extension vehicle supplying added solar panel capacity, fuel and maneuvering thrusters. When the capsule is spent, it unlocks and returns home for refueling and is returned to hubble for continued service. This would be a demonstration model for SpaceX to create the MEV business that other companies have hoped to achieve and justifies the cost of this charity work.
There are only 4 Crew Dragon capsules and one is always on the ISS.
it is a good call for SpaceX to do this gratis. Not only does it help them with their future Mars plans (e.g. EVA practise), but also, if the reboost works, could then be used to reboost the ISS (or future orbital stations), which, of course, they could charge for.
As a retire NASA contractor that once supported Hubble, I will say SpaceX can save Hubble. After raising it to a proper orbit, discussions will have to come up to agree with how they can give it a much needed service mission. Upgrade all/most of its tech. I hope so I really hope so.
"iPod Archeology" is now my favorite phrase of the week 😆
I can't wait until starship is online. Grab Hubble, bring it home, patch it up, and send it back.
Why? Building a Hubble II using the hull of Starship would be a better idea. Hubble was 4.2m in diameter with a 2.4 meter mirror. Imagine what you could do with the 8m cargo section of a Starship.
The only way I see Hubble coming back to Earth on a Starship, is to study the effects of space on the hardware up close.
Hi Scott, I think you forgot to mention one interesting thing, and it is that if it works the first time, it could be reserviced several more times in the future, which will make the initial investment even more worth.
Excellent as always. One option they might consider is using multiple Dragons or multiple visits.
But it sounds incredibly difficult.
Some wise guy wanted to use a Falcon Heavy and dock with Hubble with the second stage still attached and give it a mega boost. You know, some ideas are kind of bad.
Cargo dragon could be made into a space tug.
Not the current dragon but the first version and it would be disposable.
It would be nice if those things are designed with one (or few) outside connectors/interfaces (mechanical and electrical) where an external module could be plugged, replacing failed internal components. E.g. a robotic mission could be used to plug a package with some gyroscopes and a better computer. After the installation, the telescope or whatever is configured to use an external component instead of a failed internal.
More KSP!!! Miss your episodes all those years ago!
This bucket is definitely worth saving.
Also the main port on dragon you may need to go on eva in the first place so ataching hubble to it wil be problamatick
I can't help but think that this is a relatively low cost extension. Bang for buck, NASA could get a real steal and buy another decade of life if they work it right. For SpaceX, adding this capability, either in the form of a control module in the trunk, or (better yet) a manipulator arm for Dragon that can carry out complex missions would be a massive boon in the long term.
I think the most interesting option would be to use the Starship. It is certainly small enough in diameter to fit into the Starship payload bay and light enough for the Starship but the length is questionable. The numbers I have seen are that the Starship is 9m in diameter and is targeted to have a 1000 cu-m cargo capacity - if it were a 9m diameter cylinder (which it is not) then that would be 15.7m long and the Hubble is 13.2m long - so, maybe. So, maybe they could bring it into the bay to work in it and maybe even bring it home BUT, creating a crazy SpaceX landing profile with all that mass (that could be moving a bit) would not be something I would want to sign up for.
I have been wondering about using Starship with the Hubble. I’m actually hoping once Hubble needs to be replaced that Starship can return the HST to Earth so it can go into the Smithsonian.
@@christianvalentin5344 I do think it would be cool to get the Hubble back and if someone could figure out how to do that, it would be SpaceX. That said, I wonder if he Hubble (or a Starship carrying it) could really survive a landing attempt. My thought is that there would be s LOT of risk attempting it and the risk probably outweigh the benefits (at least for the next 10 years or so).
Service module idea, replacement parts in cargo hold, a built in Canadarm + tool changer, and the controls to it in a crew capsule. Like robotic surgery but in space.
If Hubble has until 2030 before it’s demise, the rescue mission should probably be focused on using Starship. NASA could buy one and outfit it to perform similarly to the Shuttle, with a whole lot more capability. Will be interesting to see where these studies go. Anything to keep Hubble fully functional and in orbit would be a good thing. Nice presentation.
I thought they were talking about Starship carrying out this mission, not the Capsule. Anyway, Spaceship is still quite a ways and would probably be more expensive? IDK, Dragon Capsule still seems like it would perform some of the tasks just fine, but it make take several trips to accomplish all the tasks required to pimp the Hubble up. A totally worthwhile endeavor IMO, it HAS to be done. Hubble is such a legacy, a piece of history, we can't let it die yet!. Hopefully by the time it can't go any further many years from now, we will be able to go and recover it instead of letting it burn to slag.
Congratulations you were selected amongst the shortlisted winners 🏆 for the ongoing MacBook-M2/PC/Ps5 giveaway 🏆dm above☝️
I think it will be better off pushing Hubble out with dragon than do another mission when star ship is ready and do a major service mission. Or build a new module to attach to the front of dragon (similar position to the Apollo module) and use that as a airlock or storage for the equipment needed
9:14 or perhaps they could put a separate vehicle in the trunk that's only a booster. This could also contain the docking clamp and continue boosting the telescope after Dragon detaches. If properly designed, this could allow for refueling in the future.
Congratulations you were selected amongst the shortlisted winners 🏆 for the ongoing MacBook-M2/PC/Ps5 giveaway 🏆dm above☝️
I do wonder if they will use an inflatable airlock under the nose cone. Seems like that would be a pretty neat thing for SpaceX to have under their sleeve
Clarity is the key to any project longevity
Congratulations you were selected amongst the shortlisted winners 🏆 for the ongoing MacBook-M2/PC/Ps5 giveaway 🏆dm above☝️.
6:48 could the Dragon Trunk itself be modified with extra computer / gyros and such and left attached as a Hubble enhancement. How long does the dragon need the truck before de-orbiting?
By the time you do any of that... you should have deorbited the hubble and replaced it with hubble 2... simpler faster better. Even an 8.4m mirror used in the GMT telescope only cost $20 million, a mirror half the diameter probably cost less than a quater that.... there is no way you could (in any sane way) fail to build a hubble replacement that is better in every way... for cheaper than it would cost to service it on orbit. They spent at least 2.5billion just on shuttle launches to the hubble over the years... you could easily build 10 hubbles and launch them today for the same money that was spent in servicing mission launch costs alone.
Idea: Dragon XL could be the vehicle that does the first reboost and takes over attitude control. It could simply remain docked. A subsequent crewed mission could then be equipped with any additional equipment required to do service to Hubble's computers and reaction wheels. Perhaps a small robotic arm inside the trunk could have a grapple point on the side of the Dragon XL that it can latch to and the astronauts doing service could more or less "lean" out of the hatch.
Add an extension to the trunk for the 1st stage engine, ditch this extension right after the 1st stage is dropped. Leaves lots of room in the trunk.
I just realize again how miraculous the shuttle was!
Congratulations you were selected amongst the shortlisted winners 🏆 for the ongoing MacBook-M2/PC/Ps5 giveaway 🏆dm above☝️
One Falcon mission to mate-up the new module with a current docking ring. One second mission from falcon heavy to mate to current docking ring and push Hubble into higher orbit. Falcon heavy launch allowing unmanned dragon capsule to carry more fuel.
Jared Isaacman is definitely kerbin name.
They could launch a larger extension module to dock to Hubble on a regular Falcon 9..
With independent gyros, an ion thruster, maybe even extra solar or RTG..
If the module had computers as well, that could all be connected with a space-walk from another launch..
A power up package could be sent up and docked on the first launch, and the space-walk fix could be with a second launch.. :)
Any plan is better than no plan
except that bad plans can destroy every thing.
SOME THINGS ARE WORTH SAVING AND HUBBLE IS ONE OF THEM!!!👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Here's an idea: why not fly 2 dragons? One would have new hardware for the hubble (interfacing might be an issue...), would dock from the cargo bay (as shown in the video), and boost the telescope - meaning this one would stay permanatly attached. The other would dock nose to nose and take the astronauts back to earth.
Of course, this is only an option if spacex can spare/sell one dragon capsule permanently - but that is something billionaires should be able to afford ;)
Just wait for Starship. NASA themselves are already investing and literally working on it due to HLS for Artemis, so the old argument of "not officially acknowledging a paper rocket" does not work anymore.
So do the mission, change all the hardware, and then dock nose to nose to bring back the astronauts. So have 2 each on board? Where are you getting the hardware from, if you dock the Trunk to Hubble? Running two missions back to back that quickly is not an easy proposition. Especially, since Crew Dragon only launches from LC-39A right now. If you are going to leave a Dragon attached to Hubble, why not use a cargo Dragon, so you don't have to bring back people at all?
@@steveaustin2686 Yes, have only two astronauts per dragon plus EVA Suits. First dragon could be pilot and engineer, second dragon pilot and maybe space tourist (I do not think you need a whole crew of 4 for the task but maybe I am wrong).
The hardware/extra computers could stay in the first dragon. As I mentioned, the issue would be interfacing it with the hubble computer bus. I do not know enough to say if this is electronically feasible.
Another advantage of this idea is that it would make for easier repairs of hubble in the future. And also the increasing orbit maneuver could be done after all the astronaust already left by remote controlling the attached dragon.
@@jarekbejm Ok, so one Crew Dragon docked to the back of Hubble and one free flying? That is going to be very tricky. Even the Shuttle didn't do that. Because the Shuttle grabbed Hubble with the Canadarm and berthed it in the Shuttle bay. Then the astronauts used the Canadarm as a work platform to be able to work on Hubble. Crew Dragon can't berth Hubble and has no Canadarm to use as a work platfrom. Servicing Hubble with Crew Dragon, as opposed to boosting it with Crew Dragon, is easier said than done.
Throw shuttle style doors on starship. Slap on a Canada arm and a hab/airlock module and a dragon docking port and you can go at it like the shuttle days.
Elon is quite literally building the first civilian astronaut corps. Doing this mission is a good practice mission for them, and they'd probably get a few million from NASA for the job. I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find out SpaceX has been quietly developing their own deep space suits. His line to NASA about being able to build the lunar exploration suits smacks of his having already done a lot of the development.
We're truly living in an amazing time.
The “study” is at no cost, not the actual mission (if there is one). Or at least that was my take on what was announced.
how about going another route: the trunk contains engines, the tank, and the new guidance. it directly docks with hubble together with the dragon capsule. they boost it up as much as they can. and when it's time, they leave the trunk connected to hubble to land safely. the trunk then tries to keep position, provide RCS, etc.
I don't know how long dragon2 can operate independently of its trunk but it must be at least a few hours. they can't ditch the trunk after they committed to deorbiting.
the even funnier option would be to cooperate with northrop grumman. a cygnus-based service module that docks first, stays, and doubles as workbench and airlock. and then dragon docks to that.
Since the trunk separates with Crew Dragon in case of a launch escape system abort (where it acts to aerodynamically stabilize the spacecraft) I don't think anything of significant mass can be carried in the trunk. That would seem to rule out carrying cargo in the trunk on a Crew Dragon mission.
Put a docking adapter directly on top of the second stage of a Falcon 9; the stage then attaches itself to Hubble, fires up the engine and lifts the telescope to an orbit higher than Snoop Dogg.
I was hoping something like that. The Hubble is still very useful
An idea I've long had is to send up a robotic mission to match nodes and inclination with the ISS and then de-orbit it TO the ISS where one of the arms can catch it. At that point it could be fully serviced and sent back out to a higher orbit again. Perhaps with an integrated de-orbiter this time. A robotic mission would be less expensive than a new telescope and safer than sending people that far up.
An incredible amount of time and resources went into Hubble, from design and building and testing to launching and servicing .. That's an awful lot to just toss away by burning it up in the atmosphere. And it's not like the optics will ever "go bad" or become not useful.
What mods is Scott using for such Incredible views. There is like a real earth, a real dragon etc ... Thanks
I want to know what the Manley Mods are on that KSP! Looks beautiful!