Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Another hitch with JWST

Swoop1

By Swoop1
in The Astro Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Tomatobro

Tomatobro

Posted
Posted

just watched an explanation on YouTube which looked to be a honest appraisal of the event and situation. The key issue is that all the monitoring sensors were disconnected when the mounting clamp band deployed so the engineers don't have any hard data on how severe the bang was to the telescope main bus area.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
callisto

callisto

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, tomato said:

Still aiming for a December launch, so I understand. A Christmas mission, just like Apollo 8.

Yeah, the 22nd I believe 🤞

Suppose they have to be 100% satisfied with it...once it's up they can't go and fix it 😬

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tomato

tomato

Posted
Posted

I guess the instrumentation on the receiving end of the scope is fairly tried and tested technology, as is putting it in the desired orbit, but having it all deploy and accurately align, that must be ground breaking stuff. Let's hope nothing get's stuck. 

I think on the website it is described as 30 days of terror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CCD-Freak

CCD-Freak

Posted
Posted (edited)

You never know about things like this......The kid in the middle of this 1970 image of our local astronomy club went on to become a project manager on the Webb telescope project.  Unfortunately he passed away from cancer before he got to see the WST get launched.  His name was William Whiddon.   Bill and I always had sort of a friendly competition for whoever had the largest and best telescope.......I guess Bill wins. (^8

DCAS-1.jpg

Edited by CCD-Freak
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AbsolutelyN

AbsolutelyN

Posted
Posted

I remember reading about this telescope back in secondary school, really looking forward to it actually being launched. However the thing I don't understand is why build a 13 billion dollar telescope that only has a 10 year lifespan? Surely some kind of automated mission to refuel it to keep it in position must be possible?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AbsolutelyN

AbsolutelyN

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, callisto said:

The Hubble was only give a 15 year lifespan...30 years later and still going 😃

I get that and expect it will last way longer but Hubble was serviced several times and why not just build it with maintenance for many decades to come factored in?   

Edited by AbsolutelyN
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UKDiver

UKDiver

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, AbsolutelyN said:

I get that and expect it will last way longer but Hubble was serviced several times and why not just build it with maintenance for many decades to come factored in?   

I recall the JWST will be in a very different location making getting there harder than the shuttle would ever manage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AbsolutelyN

AbsolutelyN

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, UKDiver said:

I recall the JWST will be in a very different location making getting there harder than the shuttle would ever manage.

Yes it’s about 1.5 million miles away. If it’s not possible to refuel via some kind of automated mission why not some kind of nuclear power source that will last multiple decades? I’m sure there is a good reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gfamily

Gfamily

Posted
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, AbsolutelyN said:

Yes it’s about 1.5 million miles away. If it’s not possible to refuel via some kind of automated mission why not some kind of nuclear power source that will last multiple decades? I’m sure there is a good reason.

 I understand it's the fuel and oxidant for the motors that's the issue, Hydrazine and N2O4 respectively. 

Yes, a A Nuclear power source  could have been fitted, but in its orbit around the Earth/Sun L2 point it would be easy to get a comparable amount of energy from Solar Panels, but it's the propellant that's the issue.

The key need is for something with enough momentum to provide adequate thrust, and although there are ion engines that don't need the same weight of propellant, I don't think we have ones yet that can provide the level of thrust needed to maintain station and control. 

Edited by Gfamily
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Stu

Stu

Posted
Posted

I do love how we think we know better than hundreds of professional scientists working for years on end, on something that’s never been done before, and is not exactly easy!

There are engineering compromises all over the place I’m sure; actually getting it in a rocket for a start which drove the complex folding design. The L2 position was driven by the need to be in the shadow of the Earth for cooling purposes, and that means orbiting the L2 position whilst orbiting the sun, not just orbiting the sun. So, that needs fuel, which means a certain lifetime.

When the project started, all sorts of things were not possible, and possibly not even conceived yet so it’s hard to blame them for where we are now. Decisions on rocket type had to be made way before SpaceX was a thing I’m sure.

10 years is enough time for a huge amount of science, so the most important thing is just that it gets up there safely, and works correctly for its rated life at least 🤞🤞

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Scarlet

Captain Scarlet

Posted
Posted (edited)

I’ve just read the Wikipedia article on JWST. A review in 2018 revealed 344 single-point failures, any one of which could doom the whole. Which means that if they are all independent, each one has to be reduced to an average 0.2% chance of failure (1 in 500) just to achieve a 50% chance of none of them failing.

Looked at another way, if each one has a 99% chance of success, 1 in 100 of failure, the chance of none of them failing reduces to a bit over 3%.

On that view, I have to say I’m more pessimistic 😟 . I sincerely hope they’ve mitigated them all 🤞.

Edited by Captain Magenta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.