E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
NASA
This artwork shows one of the concepts for the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope, also known as WFIRST. NASA officials say that the telescopes being made available by the National Reconnaissance Office could address some of the questions to be resolved by the WFIRST mission, including the nature of dark energy and characteristics of extrasolar planets.
A gift of space telescope hardware from America's spy agency could knock $250 million off the billion-dollar-plus cost of a mission to study dark energy and extrasolar planets, NASA says. But scientists and space agency officials say the super-Hubble telescope won't replace the multibillion-dollar James Webb Space Telescope.
After more than a year of deliberation, NASA today revealed that it's taken possession of two optical mirror assemblies that had been built for the National Reconnaissance Office but were rendered surplus when the NRO decided they were unneeded. Although the spy agency has declined to say what the hardware would have been used for, it almost certainly was designed for next-generation spy satellites.
The assemblies fit inside a barrel that's about half the length of the Hubble Space Telescope, sparking the nickname "Stubby Hubble." The size of each primary mirror is the same as Hubble's: 94 inches or 2.4 meters in diameter. But the focal length is shorter, which would give the telescopes "about 100 times bigger area that you can image well," said Alan Dressler, an astronomer at the Carnegie Institution for Science.
That would make the mirrors perfectly suited for a wide-field telescope that could survey the cosmos to gauge the effect of dark energy, a mysterious factor that is speeding up the acceleration of the universe, Dressler and NASA officials told journalists today. Such a telescope could also detect Earthlike planets beyond the solar system by looking for an effect known as microlensing, and study supernovae and other astronomical phenomena as well.
"It's perfectly useful for astronomy in the infrared," Dressler said.
Such a telescope was rated as one of the highest priorities for astronomical research over the next decade in a report prepared for the National Academy of Science, titled "New Worlds, New Horizons." In the report, the mission concept was known as the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope, or WFIRST. Mission cost was estimated at $1.6 billion.
"Depending on the instruments chosen to go with the new telescopes, NASA could address many of the science goals of the WFIRST mission," said Paul Hertz, NASA Headquarters' director of astrophysics.
Hertz's acting deputy director, Michael Moore, declined to put a price tag on the telescope that could be built using the NRO's surplus hardware. But Moore told me that building the kind of mirror assembly that the NRO has now provided would cost somewhere along the lines of $250 million. He said the optical hardware was space-qualified and "completely ready to be integrated into a spacecraft."
However, the transferred hardware doesn't include camera equipment or other key components that are needed to turn the optical assembly into a true space telescope. "There's still a lot of investment work and coordination that's required," Moore said.
Right now, the assemblies look like "cylinders with shiny foil wrapped around them," he said. Moore, an engineer, said he thought they were "gorgeous" pieces of hardware. But a non-technical person might not be as impressed, he said: "I gotta admit, they're not all that glamorous."
Moore said the project began in January 2011, when he took the phone call from NRO officials who were offering the surplus hardware. For months, NASA officials have been considering whether it'd be worth trying to use the equipment. After discussions with Dressler and other astronomers, they finally decided to go ahead with the transfer.
The hardware is currently in storage at ITT Exelis' manufacturing facility in Rochester, N.Y., Moore said. He estimated that it was costing about $75,000 to $100,000 a year for "care and feeding" of the equipment.
Hertz emphasized that NASA did not yet have the funding to go ahead with space telescope assembly. For now, NASA and outside astronomers are merely assessing what it would take to build a complete telescope, and contemplating exactly what the telescope could do. He said the super-Hubble could conceivably be launched in 2024 "with a plausible budget."
The telescope could be finished even earlier, in the 2019-2020 time frame, "if money is no object," Hertz said. However, he added, "We have no reason to believe that that would happen."
He made clear that there was no thought of using the theoretical super-Hubble as a cheaper substitute for the controversial James Webb Space Telescope, which is now slated to launch in 2018 with a mission cost of $8.8 billion. The JWST, which has been portrayed as Hubble's successor, is a much larger telescope with a much narrower field of view than the super-Hubble would have. Hertz said he could imagine an eventual scenario in which the super-Hubble spots something in a wide-field image that would merit follow-up with observations using the narrow-field, deep-viewing JWST'.
Hertz said NASA was considering the development of only one space mission using the transferred hardware, even though the NRO gave the space agency two virtually identical sets of space telescope parts.
"We don't, at this point in time, anticipate ever being rich enough to use both of them," he told reporters. "But it sure would be fun to think about, wouldn't it?"
Correction for 4 p.m. ET June 5: And speaking of "fun," Dressler included a joke picture in his presentation that purported to show a "heavily redacted" view of the NRO telescope assemblies. You could tell from the image that the object was a "cylinder with shiny foil wrapped around it," but that's about it. The picture was actually a mostly blacked-out file photograph of the Hubble Space Telescope, taken during preparation for launch, but I totally fell for the joke and passed it along as a picture of the real thing. NASA's Bob Jacobs set me straight today. I should have double-checked the circumstances surrounding the photo — and I'm sorry for leading folks astray.
Just for fun, here's the picture again:
A. Dressler via National Academies
As a joke, astronomer Alan Dressler included what he called a "heavily redacted" picture of the NRO-1 telescope in his presentation to the National Academies' Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics. It's actually a heavily doctored picture of the Hubble Space Telescope from before its launch.
More about future space telescopes:
- NASA plans to 'repurpose' unused spy telescopes
- $1.6 billion telescope would seek out alien planets
- Nobel laureates say we must fund dark energy research
- Webb Space Telescope needs 'big science' support to succeed
Dressler discussed what he called the "NRO-1 2.4-meter telescope" today during a meeting of the National Academies' Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics. Here are the PDF slides that he presented during his talk.
Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
WTF! Did you see that redacted photo? LMFAO! That is SOOOOO like the spooks to do that kind of thing.
But, at least NASA and we will benefit. Thank you NRO for taking one for the team, . . . whatever that team is. :-)
Well Bill..... you can Blame President Obama for the NASA under funding... and they are about to take another hit if no budget is agreed on... It is a positive that NASA got this "free" equipment ...(a government agency giving to another) But I hope they can capitalize on it. I don't see any help for the space program from this administration.... Private ventures similar to the one that launched the Dragon will become the norm and possible future commercial "civilian" space flight.... George Jetson.... make room for me.....
Exactly why would he blame Obama? Doesn't the US Congress pass the federal budget?
Seems to me it was Congress that couldn't come to an agreement. Does anyone remember a real budget actually getting to the President to sign? I sure don't remember any veto...
What big satellites you have grandma.... The better to spy on you with sweety. ; )
This is good news for NASA, and I'm a space buff...but something bothers me here.
The mirror assemblies cost half a billion dollars for both...and they were rendered "surplus"?!
That's code for: "The NRO bought 'em, but later realized it didn't need 'em".
I think it's great that NASA will get to use them. But if NASA wouldn't or couldn't, I'm assuming these assemblies would represent a great deal of taxpayer dollars sitting in a warehouse.
We need more oversight to determine why we're spending this kind of money for something that might have ended up as crate-filler.
I stand corrected...the assemblies are *worth* a quarter-billion dollars, not a half-billion.
And that's what the hardware is worth to NASA. Lord only knows how much they actually cost.
It is amazing how much defense money is actually wasted on stuff that at best is turned into 'surplus' items... we piss away almost a trillion dollars a year on the so called defense... that is totally insane...
More political spin trolls on here I see.
Congress would pass a budget it A BUDGET EXISTED.
Or, code for "Congress cut our budget mid-way through the project."
Instead of assuming that these assemblies were "wasted money," is it plausable that they were spares in the event of some sort of failure during launch? I can only imagine what it would take to manufacture new optical assemblies at the same spec as those that could be potentially lost at launch. Sounds like a little bit of insurance to me.
Heh, it turns out that "heavily redacted" photo was a joke picture of Hubble, thrown into the National Academies presentation as a joke. And I fell for it. Another lesson learned about double-checking info and images. I've posted an apologetic note ... Sorry about that.
Shartorius, Max, check out the boneyard at Davis-Monthan AFB sometime. Sooner or later, even the most advanced technology becomes 'surplus,' (are you on your first computer?) and yes, sometimes before it's even used...Moore's Law applies to government, too.
I wonder: what conditions accompanied these parts that were "given" to NASA?
"No longer needed" and $75-100,000 a year for storage of $250 million dollars of taxpayer funded equipment? Who approved that purchase, and why did the National Reconnaissance Office waste so much money on this stuff? I've got nothing against spy purchases, as long as they are actually needed and used. This just seems like someone had their head up where a telescope wouldn't find anything.
Could have been supplanted by a better technical approach that saves money over the previous one; could be the threats morphed to something this technology would not be effective against; could have been an issue with another part of the system ... or a thousand other reasons that none of us have the security clearance to discuss. It's fun to speculate, but if you have a burning need to know and actually manage to find out; well, then - you probably have a new problem.
I would say it was more likely that someone was making a good profit under the table for the purchase. Or maybe the contract was going to someone's brother-in law..........
So the spooks were thinking of essentially turning Hubble around and pointing it at the Earth. Would that actually work with a scope relatively close to Earth? How good would the resolution be? Facial details level?
A wide mirror is great for collecting lots of image, but the short focal length means they weren't looking to get "HD" style imagery. Basically such a design would be excellent at capturing imagery in a wide view as oppose to extreme close-ups.
Oh, and I guess being the NSA we would assume they'd be looking at earth, but then again... Maybe not. (que the twilightzone music)
Check the history of Hubble; it has similarities to the KH-11 series reconnaissance satellites uses by the US - that could have been where this hardware came from.
Any help at this point is good help to the nearly gutted NASA ....
Space news has been a bit active lately ....
Nice to see ....
Use the 2 mirrors to make a 3D telescope.
A wide mirror with a short focal length meant it was build for wide viewing of closer areas (as oppose to deep space). Now what would the NSA need such a telescope for? Are they now looking for ET Terrorists?
nah, et tourists....
While I applaud the gift, I wonder, "they don't need that anymore... I assume they don't need it because it is obsolete. I can't think of any other reason they wouldn't use it. So..they have something better pointed at us? That scares me a little bit because from what I have seen the Hubble could basically see the fart vibrations of a hair on a gnat's arse.
I believe you are correct that the NRO has something much better now. Area 51 has not been idle. Otherwise they wouldn't surplus these 2 super Hubble spy satellites.
As for the money needed to make them into astronomical instruments, the $1.9 billion NASA is wasting paying SpaceX to regurgitate phylogeny by duplicating our early space capsules and kerosene burning rocket technology would easily pay for modification, prep, and launch of both super Hubble's. They could be launched using off the shelf Atlas or Delta rockets, or even good old surplus Titan IIIc rockets.
However, we have thrown away the only vehicles capable of servicing these satellites. So their working lives would be short. That's the real shame.
@JohnCarter: note that advances in space observatories and remote diagnostics have made regular servicing missions less of an issue; did not see any public missions by the STS to service NRO assets. Note also that one of final contendors for the last servicing mission to the Hubble was a robotic one. Considering the complexity of the task of servicing equipment never meant to accessed or repaired in space, it was impressive how far this technology has come. The JWST doesn't have any remove servicing planned, but if it's lifespan and value is high, we might see other robotic missions proposed for it's maintenance or improvement.
Regarding your premise that NASA is wasting $1.9B on SpaceX: NASA has many missions - mandated by Congress - and the support / development of COTS access to space is one of them. The DoD is currently competing systems to replace both Atlas and Delta because of high costs - they are also looking at SpaceX as well as other new systems. The upcoming test flight of the Falcon Heavy will be closely watched by many.
I never could understand the discomfort honest law-abiding citizens feel about surveillance. The people who are looking at the images transmitted by these devices have no interest whatsoever in your nude sunbathing or whatever it is that is causing you to be uncomfortable. Unless you are conducting subversive activities, then yeah, maybe you have a good reason to have those heebee jeebies.
According to SpaceX, they have only recieved 400 - 500 million from NASA:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/47207833
In the long run space activities are going to be funded by the private sector more and more which will not eliminate but transform NASA's function.
You serious?
Governments have a very broad definition of "subversive activities", and spying on all of us, with such powerful hardware whose costs could've instead funded NASA and other less-evil parts of government many times over, is a financial waste that inherently brands us "guilty until proven innocent".
When you can't be sure whether your private life is truly private, you're not free. When you can't be sure whether that private life will be used as blackmail against you by your own government, you're in a nationwide prison.
Sorry, I don't personally know anyone whose life has been affected by governmnet surveillance. Not one person. I have seen people get arrested and thrown in jail because they were caught on camera demanding money from a store keeper at gun point, if that's what you mean.
Wow, a real feel good story out of NASA. A new years resolution 5 months late, hey I'll take it with much enthusiasm and hope that nobody screws it up.
Every thing about this is just right, "the right thing to do" on all fronts. Take pieces of military hardware forced to be used to address humanities evils and turn it into hardware so that humanity can make better harmony with Nature.
Answering the questions about Nature should be the main purpose of NASA and these instruments are definitely the right way to go.
I congratulate every one involved in this project. I hope more and more of "black" hardware can be re-purpose in the future.
You want to cut spending. Start with this nonsense. We don't need more pretty pictures from space or musings on the origin of the universe. Whatever they were, it happened and we ended up here. We've got bigger fish to fry right here.
I often wonder if people that make disingenuous commments along these lines have any clue how much modern technology evolved from space technology and how much of our previous economic growth was tied to the transition of said technologies to consumer products. Beyond even that, the modern world we live in today requires a deep understanding of physics and the universe - that is what this kind of science provides. At this point, NASA's budget is chicken feed within the Federal budget (less than 0.5%).
We do have bigger fish to fry down here on Earth - like all of the silly pork for pet congressional districts. If you are going to complain about something complain about the kind of waste that produces nothing - not even expanded knowledge.
Dont bother with him... he probably has no idea how little the NASA budget is compared to other national agency budgets.
What a struggle it was to get hubble built and up, while the military put up no telling how many. This propaganda from our own gov. stiffles science and common sense. These hawks are so paranoid they can't see the good that could be achieved by their blocking and stonewalling. Now when do we get The other SHUTTLES that they have???
Interesting gift from the Spooks to the Geeks. And I'm all for it. If NASA cannot or will not convert these optical chassis to a worthwhile civilian astro instrument, then it is proof positive our national space effort has indeed foundered. Of course it needs to be done...adding at least one Hubble-class wide field infrared instrument as a 'spotter plane' for JWST is just too sweet. Now we put the onus on NASA ans Congress to git 'r done. I see no impediments to doing new science from old Cold War hardware. But here's the eyebrow raiser ---just how much have we heard said from ANY candidate for elected office on the goal of an adequately funded and operated national space effort ? The Space program is taking some hard hits and getting shackled just when it needs to be rebooted as a national priority. But as an issue in an election year it is almost a ghost. And that is sad.
In this case, spending say $ 300 million to build a working space telescope from the spy mirrors, and $ 150 million to launch it makes really good financial sense. Building a " new" Hubble replacement would cost over $ 2 billion. The James Webb may have been a mistake, financially but since it hasn't flown it is too early to pass a verdict on JWST. We're all in on Webb. We should hedge with Hubble II as well. Damn the nitpicking surplus mirrors were long ago paid for , by the Reagan-Bush folks, likely. These are good Republican space optic mirrors. It would be a greater shame to NOT use them.
Sidebar: Remember the problems with the Hubble main mirror being out of curvature? The NRO commissioned LOTS of these 94-inch mirrors for their fleet of Keyhole optical spysats. Since the Hubble spacecraft was never designed to look thru the turbulent atmosphere , its secondary mirror system did not have the special " adaptive optics" to compensate for seeing thru a dynamic fluid with sharpness. The NRO Keyholes had real-time optical compensation built into their operating capability. Had to, or they wouldn't be very useful . There are probably quite a few of these things lying about...mirror making ain't easy, and lots of test articles , failed castings, and engineering workups must exist ( or did). That at least two fulls sets of working 3-meter mirror units are deemed good enough for critical science imaging is a great gift. We should not look the NRO's gift horse in the mouth .
And oh by the way conservatives, Tea Partiers, and electioneer monkeys...shut up on this one. It's over your head.
An A+1 great post!
Agreed; good points. Perhaps some proposed design and mission scenarios could be floated out there, so academic institutions, foundations, and individuals could contribute resources to the project. Maybe even a "Scope-A-Thon" hosted by Colbert and Stewart to generate some donations.
That redacted photo just cracks me up. Absolutely worthless to just about everyone, from what I can tell. It is sad to think of all the crap our tax dollars get wasted on. What a joke! though not a very funny one....
No doubt... why even bother posting it if they're going to block most of it?!?
It turns out that was a little scientific humor. Sorry about passing that along as if it were fact.
It wasn't your fault Alan ....
But since I returned to your article an saw the flaw ....
It is kind of funny ....
And now only adds to the article ....
This is a perfect opportunity for a Falcon Heavy mission! Less expensive then Atlas or Delta. Future service missions to the mini-hubbles could be preformed by SpaceX equipment as well. Unless there are "political" constraints against such collaborations?
Hmmm.... send this up with a Bigelow "space lab" via SpaceX to a Lagrange point. Keep the 2nd stage fuel tanks from one of the missions as a "gas station" (that can be topped off by future trips). Eventually, it becomes an easy way to go to the moon or beyond with out a N1/Saturn sized lift vehicle.
BUT will it ever happen?
lol
I too see the irony of using the new commercial rocket for using for anything other than ferrying pilots and a couple of technicians to ISP of course it can be used to carry away the trash. Instead of cutting up the old ICBM's, couldn't they use them to build multistage rockets to take heavier payloads into earth orbit to construct launch vehicles for moon and near planet missions. Waste not want not. Just an idea that might work and most of the money is already spent.
Mark, did it occur to you that treaties may require 'cutting up old ICBMs' and that flooding the launch market with them will only delay bringing in new launch technology like Falcon and EELV upgrades?
Plus, something optimized to be an ICBM (they already are 'multistage rockets,' you know) isn't going to put serious payloads into LEO, even for assembly there. Again, that's what EELVs and Falcon are for.
The ICBM treaty was with a country that no longer exists. As far as lift capacity, these "super Hubble" satellites are just modified KH12 spy sats. The Air Force launched them using Titan IV rockets (commercially built by Lockheed Martin). So no development needed, an off the shelf commercial rocket is available to be used to launch these birds.
It is a real shame the the Dept. of Defense and NASA Haven't gotten together to figure out how to recycle hardware for a more peaceful use. People are asked to conserve, recycle, reuse. I believe that there could have been more than a few boosters been made by using equipment after missle reduction talks were successful. There are a lot of bright people that could have made it work. We could have gone back to the moon a couple of dozen times at least. Save a lot of money and do more exploration and we may have fould materials for use here on Earth what a concept. Reuse Repurpose.
See above. We already know how to recycle the stuff of which they're made, much of which is just aluminum...
DARK ENERGY IS THE MOST ridiculous farce ever in science- they have the redshift issue all wrong and therefore believe galaxies are "racing apart, some faster than light". When they finally realize redshift is all wrong there won't be a need for imaginary dark matter and energy to fix their broken theory.
(and yet, it moves....)
You guys talk like these things have just been paid for as they were handed over to NASA. Hubble was put into orbit in the late 80's. These spy satellites have most likely been up before Hubble was. I'm sure we have spent more than a 1/4 billion to put the new generation of spy satellites that replaced these relics.
Could both be sent up and used as a super binocular scope? Much like those that are earth based? Why are so many against spending in the scientific fields, yet if it's for defense they're all for it? Crazy and a little nutty.
HEy, THankS NRO!!!! yu da gweatest!!!!
If you want to feed the hungry then give them the tools, the education, and the work, maybe working on science projects.
I am certain that this will go to the survey project and that is great and all, but at such a short focal length this really would be a great tool for planetary study (not this one, it's intended purpose)...still, I am glad it finds a great use, and thanks again, NRO, and a big round of applause to the group that worked behind the scenes to make this a reality, as benny F used to say, a penny saved is a penny earned!!!, good things will come of this for all!!!!