Hubble will transition to single-gyro mode to gain a few more years of operational life

NASA has confirmed that the time has come: the venerable Hubble Space Telescope (HST) is to run in one-gyro mode from now on. The observatory has six gyroscopes, installed during the final Space Shuttle servicing mission in 2009, but over the years, three have failed. A fourth began showing signs of wear, resulting in the …

[SnailFerrous]

"A 2005 study estimated that more than 2,000 kg of debris could survive reentry, meaning targeting will be essential. ®"

That's targeting to where there isn't any one in the area right? ... Right?

[Catkin]

Might be worth sending an apology card to NASA if you have a reason to be concerned.

[Throatwarbler Mangrove]

For maximum irony, they should target the debris near the homes of prominent Flat Earthers.

[Gene Cash]

Why? I would love a piece of Hubble to land in my yard!

[Jedit]

"I would love a piece of Hubble to land in my yard!"

The problem with that idea is that the re-entering debris would not be coming straight down. It would be more likely to land in your yard after first passing through your house.

[Neil Barnes]

Unable to focus on objects closer than Mars...

Welcome to my world - even with glasses.

It must be the old age.

[SnailFerrous]

Re: Unable to focus on objects closer than Mars...

So what is the maximum size of the flying saucers in the invasion fleet, so they can now avoid detection, till they are in orbit, or strafing the White House with death rays?

[Excused Boots]

It’ll come down to a couple of questions.

1) If we do nothing, can HST still give useful data? And if so for how long?

2) What replacements need to be made; can these be done with an automated mission?

3) If no, and it needs a manned mission to replace ‘xyz’ does NASA have the ability to do this?

4) If yes, hypothetically can either Space-X or Boeing, technically or be willing could get a crew to rendezvous with the ISS and have the ability to replace the faulty components.

5) It is very, very unlikely, but what are the abort modes? As I understand it HST is not in the same orbital place as the ISS, so if there was a major issue with the flight, can they get there?

6) Considering all of this, might it not be better or more cost effective* to launch an unmanned mission to dock with and de-orbit the HST safely?

* and I’d be OK with this, if there was somne definite and funded plan to replace the HST with something better. Otherwise it isn’t impossible to send a mission to attach to it and lift its orbit by 50-100 Km. It’ll be good for the next 100 years. Except, we still have the gyro issue. No point extending its life it it can't perform good science.

Ultimately it’s going to come down to ‘can we sent people to replace the failing components, and take the risk that this entails’? Or not?

[John Brown (no body)]

1 to 5 are out for various reasons and 6 is the option they going to use, as per the penultimate paragraph of the article :-)

[Ian Johnston]

6) Considering all of this, might it not be better or more cost effective* to launch an unmanned mission to dock with and de-orbit the HST safely?

Could a system like that bring it down to an orbit where humans could repair it, then send it back up again?

[John Robson]

We can already get there... Just needs the funding/permission.

Of course it also needs the ability to do a spacewalk, which should be demonstrated on Polaris Dawn.

Given the energy involved it would be a real shame not to go and boost it into a parking orbit rather than deorbit

[Jason Bloomberg]

NASA Operational Procedure 119a: Keep your fingers crossed

"NASA hopes that switching to a single gyro mode will extend the observatory's operational life for many years to come"

They can hope for "many years", but what is a realistic prediction when 5 of 6 have already failed?

[Spoobistle]

Re: NASA Operational Procedure 119a: Keep your fingers crossed

From a previous Reg article. apparently 3 gyros have failed; the single gyro mode lets them keep 2 in reserve presumably extending the total lifetime of observations. The single gyro mode uses other instruments to make up for the lacking two, so I suppose must reduce the versatility and response time of the telescope. Best of a bad job.

[John Robson]

Re: NASA Operational Procedure 119a: Keep your fingers crossed

Main thing it slows down is slew rate to get to different observation positions. I suspect it spends more time making observations than moving between them.