Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
The $4.5bn (£2.27bn) telescope will take up a position some 1.5 million km (930,000 miles) from Earth.

4.5 billion dollars?
well, thats one expensive telescope, but im sure it will be great for the astronomers to reveal some new and old things like Star dies in monstrous explosion
I can see the possibilities in this, wounder how the astronomers feels guess no less then happy.

1.5 million km away from earth?? but thats like VERY far away. So i guess, if it needs repair it wont get it then. And what about orbit, wheres it gonna stay?

But good news indeed
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
It will be a good day for science with this puppy is finally up and running. Money well spent to be sure. Now all they need to do is make five more of these and place them at the appropriate locations and astronomers will not miss anything!
Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
a thing that came to mind.. how are they gonna protect it against small asteroids?
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

a thing that came to mind.. how are they gonna protect it against small asteroids?


Hopefully they will see them coming and if necessary adjust the flight path accordingly.
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
4.5 billion dollars


I think for NASA that's small change compared the life expectancy of the telescope.

I stand by my opinion that, especially now, all spaceflight, manned and unmanned should be a joint venture between all space agencies. And not just in components etc, we should definitely have an IASA.
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
I think for NASA that's small change compared the life expectancy of the telescope.

I stand by my opinion that, especially now, all spaceflight, manned and unmanned should be a joint venture between all space agencies. And not just in components etc, we should definitely have an IASA.


Sorry to bust your bubble but 4.5 billion is a lot consider that other cost are also high. Here the reason Source:Wikipedia.org:NASA Budget
In a report published February 4, 2007 by Florida Today, if Congress clears a mid-year spending bill as planned, it will be the seventh time since 1994 that lawmakers have approved a cut for the nation's space agency, according to an analysis of NASA budget documents. In the past, Congress has approved these cuts to NASA's budget:

* $553.8 million in fiscal 1995
* $155.5 million in fiscal 1996
* $131.7 million in fiscal 1997
* $61 million in fiscal 1998
* $51.3 million in fiscal 2000
* $10.8 million in fiscal 2004
Grant millions is smaller than billion but at this rate we will run out of funds for 2 space probes/programs anything each decades or so.

One problem with having an IASA is mainly that if 2 or more nations on earth goes to war with each other IASA will be literally drowning with them. (Think Major power vs other Major power) Therefore as consequence all nation on earth will have to form a world wide major power to reduce the effect of multi-power on IASA. Not to mention how bad a Columbia-isque Accidents can hurt single organization, where many organizations can pick up the slacks.(Think private companies and/or Governments Agency)
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top
[
Grant millions is smaller than billion but at this rate we will run out of funds for 2 space probes/programs anything each decades or so.


Well all I can say is any government that cuts back on its space exploration like this is...for lack of a better word, dumb.

One problem with having an IASA is mainly that if 2 or more nations on earth goes to war with each other IASA will be literally drowning with them.


The thing about an IASA is that war is exactly what it should prevent, by underpinning greater cooperation between countries.

Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
I agree with you Mongoose especially since President Bush want us to go to Mars with less money=stupidest politician in history of history.

I read many Science Fiction that HAS IASA-esquie agency and yet it couldn't prevent skirmish and war. (List of Fiction:Pandora's Star, Fallen Dragon, Night Dawn Trilogy, and several other I can't recall right now)
Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
The only things Bush has been good for during his entire term of office has been religious organizations and other such ilk as well as very rich people at great determent to matters of real public concern and the general citizen at large. Any support for religion beyond the fundamental right to warship as you like as long as others are being hurt by such practices, is simply unwarranted and in my opinion in violation of the the founding principles of this great nation. The same applies to taking care a class of people that simply don't need help from the government.

Things that fall into the realm of a greater national consciousness as a collective endeavor for the betterment of society and by extension humanity simply don't register on the man's psyche. But I digress - again...
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
we should definitely have an IASA

and what? laugh at its disjointed decisions?

anything that starts with I-acronym is already laughworthy.
Sorry to bust your bubble but 4.5 billion is a lot consider that other cost are also high

not for something like this.
Grant millions is smaller than billion but at this rate we will run out of funds for 2 space probes/programs anything each decades or so.

exactly what have they done though... not much.

anyway I believe that this new telescope will be, for lack of a better word, the B****.
yes. I said it.

anyway about any IASA. keeping it in American pockets hasnt hurt anyone, and its not exactly like keeping it between countries would make it any more of the B****.
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top
a wedge, you might be interested to hear that its going to be positioned in the E-S L2 lagrange point.
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top
stupidest politician in history of history.


He would have made a great domestic president, sadly he got involved in foreign affairs and dabled a bit too much in the economy. So it ruined him, you cant say he didnt try.

anything that starts with I-acronym is already laughworthy.


You know Schem, you remind of a guy I met once wearing a shirt with a person that was throwing away the UN insignia into a garbage can.
Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top
well good for him. the UN is nothing but a bunch of small, whiny European countries trying to get their hands on the games of the big dogs.
toothless tiger, as it were.
Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
a wedge, you might be interested to hear that its going to be positioned in the E-S L2 lagrange point.


Uh, yea, that was in the article... why so interesting?
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
and where is this "E-S L2 lagrange point"

Sounds like the coordinates in the Alien movies "LV-426"
Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top
the UN is nothing but a bunch of small, whiny European countries


Isn't that the EU?   
Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
its both.
but when you add the qualification "trying to get their hands on the games of the big dogs" the definition changes
Uh, yea, that was in the article... why so interesting?

who here is the lagrange-point freak. I know someone here keeps bringing them up.
and where is this "E-S L2 lagrange point"

basically where the earth eclipses the sun.
Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
4.5 billion expensive?
You could buy a hundred of those telescopes for the cost of the Iraq war... Literally.

basically where the earth eclipses the sun.

In line with two masses, beyond the smaller mass. It's where the light from the sun doesn't bother your camera (as much)
Wikipedia is your friend

anything that starts with I-acronym is already laughworthy.

Just ask any american who has to do his taxes.

dabled a bit too much in the economy

A common trait for rulers worldwide it seems. Lets leave the economy to the economists, who actually know what's good, instead of following whatever lobbyist is in charge at the moment.

keeping it in American pockets hasnt hurt anyone, and its not exactly like keeping it between countries would make it any more of the B****

The first is up for debate, with string of huge ****-ups in the space programs. The second is probably true, which is why (IMHO) there should be more funding for private space programs. It's a sad fact that commercial rocket launches have better succes rates then any government program, be it NASA, ESA, RKA or whatever the chinese call it.


But I digress - again...

You're right though...
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
well good for him. the UN is nothing but a bunch of small, whiny European countries trying to get their hands on the games of the big dogs.
toothless tiger, as it were.


It has military rights, it is anything but toothless.

And as far as I know most any respected athropologist and political scientists will say that is the greatest thing for world stability since the defeat of Napoleon.
Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top
be it NASA, ESA, RKA or whatever the chinese call it.

Add to the list JAXA (Japan),CSA or ASC(Canada) and etc... (Some countries are development new rockets to put humans in space and the list don't reflect that fact.)
Source:List of Space Agency all over world
Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top
The two important ones is NASA and the Russian Space Program.

The only two that have actually had major succeses.
Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top
basically where the earth eclipses the sun.

In line with two masses, beyond the smaller mass. It's where the light from the sun doesn't bother your camera (as much)

you could just quote me, say "he's right", and move on.   
The first is up for debate, with string of huge ****-ups in the space programs

meh...
there arent that many.
a sad fact that commercial rocket launches have better succes rates then any government program

its not a sad fact. its capitalism at its best!
It has military rights, it is anything but toothless

...
yes, like their ability to keep us from going into Iraq? the only way they get anything going is if we (americans) are at the helm.
And as far as I know most any respected athropologist and political scientists will say that is the greatest thing for world stability since the defeat of Napoleon.

yes, north korea would agree.
The two important ones is NASA and the Russian Space Program.

The only two that have actually had major succeses.

the Russian one has really since collapsed. they've all but pulled out of the ISS program.

although the chinese are moving on up.
Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top
...
yes, like their ability to keep us from going into Iraq? the only way they get anything going is if we (americans) are at the helm.


Wrong again Schem, UN peace keeping missions have vastly higher success rate then any US military operations with a lot less of a death toll. And as far as I know the US has one of the lowest peace keeper ocunts in the UN. SO

the Russian one has really since collapsed. they've all but pulled out of the ISS program.


If it wasnt for the Russian program this nation would still be investing money in conventional bombers.
Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top
the Russian one has really since collapsed. they've all but pulled out of the ISS program.

although the chinese are moving on up.


FYI, The last time I checked they was still flying supply up to ISS.

Source:Wikipedia-RKA
The Russian Space Agency is one of the partners in the International Space Station (ISS) program, it contributed the core space modules Zarya and Zvezda, which were both launched by Proton rockets and later were joined by NASA's Unity Module. Roskosmos is furthermore responsible for expedition crew launches by Soyuz-TMA spacecrafts and resupplies the space station with Progress space transporters. After the initial ISS contract with NASA expired, RKA and NASA, with the approval of the US government, entered into a space contract running until 2011, according to which Roskosmos will sell NASA spots on Soyuz spacecrafts for approximately $21 million per person each way (thus $42 million to and back from the ISS per person) as well as provide Progress transport flights ($50 million per progress as oultined in the ESAS study [3]). RKA has announced that according to this arrangement, manned Soyuz flights will be doubled to 4 per year and Progress flights also doubled to 8 per year beginning in 2008.

RKA also provides space tourism for fare-paying passengers to ISS through the Space Adventures company. Currently three space tourists have contracted with Roskosmos and have flown into space, each for an announced fee of $20 million. Despite the price, the space tourism venture has proven to be very popular and all tourism flights are fully booked until 2009.

Roskosmos has committed itself to further provide two additional modules to the ISS, both scheduled to be launched by Proton rockets. The first one, the Multipurpose Laboratory Module is currently scheduled for launch in 2007 or 2008, with one Russian Research Module following in 2009.


That is an awfully lot of activities for RKA to be "pulling-out" wouldn't you say?
Reply #25 from Sins Forums Top
Wrong again Schem, UN peace keeping missions have vastly higher success rate then any US military operations with a lot less of a death toll. And as far as I know the US has one of the lowest peace keeper ocunts in the UN. SO

successful. like darfur?
can someone place a ROFL smily link for me? I seriously, desperately need one right now.
If it wasnt for the Russian program this nation would still be investing money in conventional bombers.

I doubt it. just because we didnt get there first, doesnt mean we would be trapped there long.
FYI, The last time I checked they was still flying supply up to ISS.

yes...
That is an awfully lot of activities for RKA to be "pulling-out" wouldn't you say?

no.
the russian program has fallen behind 9 months in the supply of various nescessary parts to the ISS.
being scheduled for something, and doing it (instead of, cough, handing it off to us) are two very different things.