tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post3663429337358355442..comments2024-03-28T08:06:43.198-04:00Comments on The Silicon Graybeard: Space News RoundupSiGraybeardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00280583031339062059noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-39533383593328649822021-12-25T03:10:58.710-05:002021-12-25T03:10:58.710-05:00Beans wrote: As to the Hubble, well, it was a disu...<i>Beans wrote: As to the Hubble, well, it was a disused spy satellite that was designed to be carried to space in the Shuttle</i><br /><br />Oops, I misquoted/edited the comment. The NRO comment was about, 'what if the Hubble had been pointed down at Earth'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-63560740049228653842021-12-24T16:23:21.276-05:002021-12-24T16:23:21.276-05:00Excellent point. Move final test to orbit, before...Excellent point. Move final test to orbit, before packaging the satellite on an upper stage to go out into the solar system. <br /><br />One word: Galileo. No, not the 16th century scientist, the probe to Jupiter named after him. <br /><br />In a scenario eerily reminiscent of the problems with the just-launched Lucy (satellite to Jupiter's Trojan asteroids), which had its solar arrays fail to open properly, Galileo's antenna failed to fully deploy. In Galileo's case it handicapped the mission. Since the antenna couldn't work at its designed antenna gain, the signals back to earth were much weaker and data rates had to be slowed down to be decipherable here on Earth. I suspect we got less science out of the mission than we could have. <br /><br />In both of those cases, if the satellites could have been tested in a hard vacuum in their real thermal environment I'd bet those faults could have been found. <br /><br /> SiGraybeardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280583031339062059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-18333862913118066792021-12-24T16:11:25.908-05:002021-12-24T16:11:25.908-05:00If anon 9/9/21 at 1055 would like to answer, I'...If anon 9/9/21 at 1055 would like to answer, I'd love to see a response. As I always say, "In God we trust; everyone else bring data and keep your hands where I can see them."<br /><br />I don't buy it. <br /><br />First off, <i>it's an infrared telescope</i> that means it reads heat sources. It's not going to resolve license plate numbers - unless they are a different temperature than the plate they're on, and it's a sharp temperature differential. It's blind to anything displayed on a phone because the temperatures will be the same. <br /><br />Second off, optical resolution questions all come down to some well known equations that depend on wavelength. Infrared is longer than visible light so the resolution in infrared is less than the resolution in visible light. I don't know what the shortest wavelength JWST can work at, but it is intended for far infrared (to see objects with the most red-shift (farther away)). <br /><br />Third off, JWST is going to be almost a million miles from Earth (932,000 miles). That makes the angular size of anything being looked at much, much smaller than a spy telescope would see from low Earth's orbit. <br /><br />That's why I don't think it would be very useful to look for anything on Earth. Use an Earth-orbiting satellite for that. <br /><br />Let me add that I'm human like everyone else and I might be missing important facts, which is why I want to see data showing me if I'm wrong. <br /> SiGraybeardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280583031339062059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-51274679361301446452021-12-24T14:55:48.070-05:002021-12-24T14:55:48.070-05:00The Webb mission's complexity indicates the ne...The Webb mission's complexity indicates the need for a manned space station. Complex designs that must deploy in zero G are hard to test in one G. A permanently manned space station factory could allow the parts to be assembled and tested in zero G, and sent on the mission only after the design is proven. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-12088124597383615712021-12-24T14:34:02.580-05:002021-12-24T14:34:02.580-05:00Anonymous at September 9, 2021 at 10:55 PM comment...Anonymous at September 9, 2021 at 10:55 PM commented on the "overview of the program in early September" post with:<br /><br /><i>A friend from the NRO, after [Webb's] existence could be admitted publicly, said some of his co-workers were very nervous when stories cropped up in the news asking how well the lens would have worked if it had pointed down at the earth.</i><br /><br />How good was it? Read our license tags or read our phone screens?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-63565810796263172902021-12-24T08:55:07.390-05:002021-12-24T08:55:07.390-05:00Yeah, it has been fun watching them - both Boca Ch...Yeah, it has been fun watching them - both Boca Chica and from the yard. I don't think any government or company has put up 31 orbital launches in a year, and they're saying, "hold my beer." <br /><br />All I ever worked on were a few payloads. Very different in that there are always schedule pressures, but the closer you get to launch day the more pressure there is. <br /><br />SiGraybeardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280583031339062059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-23537693649424546752021-12-24T08:45:08.114-05:002021-12-24T08:45:08.114-05:00Next year as in a week from now or as in months an...Next year as in a week from now or as in months and months? <br /><br />My own guess is that postponing a long time isn't very likely. At this point, having worked on the system for nearly 20 years, they either had to say they're ready for launch and ship the thing or keep screwing with it. Time to go for broke. If they did something to it and broke it badly, such that "it has to go back to the shop," that's one thing, but I think we're past that possibility. <br /><br />I think it's going to launch tomorrow or within a few days. <br /><br />Whether or not it gets to L2 and operates successfully is a bigger question. I'd like to see it, but I sure wouldn't bet more than a cup of coffee on it. <br /><br />SiGraybeardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280583031339062059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-92039367446386199332021-12-24T02:02:26.693-05:002021-12-24T02:02:26.693-05:00We'll see about Webb. I bet it's postpone...We'll see about Webb. I bet it's postponed until next year.<br /><br />As to SpaceX, glad to see they're charging along. Can't wait to see what's next in store for all of us space watchers.Beanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15293778848879361153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1592992209402300549.post-14273752570229266772021-12-23T23:36:07.648-05:002021-12-23T23:36:07.648-05:00Watching SpaceX charge forward at this rate has be...Watching SpaceX charge forward at this rate has been one of the major highlights of the last two years for me. I'm not in the biz any longer, but I have a pretty good idea of what their test crews are going through, and my hat's off to them!drjimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05647484115197408897noreply@blogger.com