It is absolutely, totally, completely, 110% NOT SERVICEABLE.....I could go on and on.
1-Well then, just be prepared for the backlash when JWST becomes a $9 billion piece of space junk because someone overtightened a wingnut or something.2-It's not smart for it to be absolutely, totally, completely, 110% NOT SERVICEABLE.
I read stuff like this and find it hard to disagree.A servicing mission costs less than a new telescope. Maybe?
Quote from: Mark S on 04/20/2012 05:09 pm1-Well then, just be prepared for the backlash when JWST becomes a $9 billion piece of space junk because someone overtightened a wingnut or something.2-It's not smart for it to be absolutely, totally, completely, 110% NOT SERVICEABLE.1-Why should I be prepared for backlash? I didn't build it.2-Tell us what it would cost if it was designed to be serviceable.
The possibility of commercial crew servicing is interesting.Dragon on Falcon Heavy? Instruments and robot arms in the trunk?Could be quite a bit cheaper than SLS/Orion.
1-Sorry if I worded that poorly. I didn't mean that you personally are risking backlash, unless of course you're the decision maker on JWST design. NASA should be prepared for potential backlash for making JWST unserviceable.
2-Would it cost less to design in some minimal level of serviceability than to build an entire new telescope in case of failure of any kind? Is it worth risking the entire mission by making it anti-serviceable? NASA got a pass on HST because they fixed it and it worked perfectly afterwards. Do you think Congress would have paid for a second HST if the first had been unserviceable and unfixable? I don't think so. I think they would have been laughed out of the room.Has that scenario been ran past the appropriate committees? "If JWST fails, there is no way for us to fix it. So this is just a heads-up so you can be ready for us to come back and ask for another $9 billion in that case. And oh by the way, even if everything works perfectly, JWST will only work for 5 or 10 years tops. Later dudes!"
Second, you can guard against having to service (to fix things) by doing better testing on the ground.
Okay guys, I was wrong. The JWST designers are obviously very smart, otherwise they wouldn't have been the ones chosen to build such an advanced piece of hardware.Forgive me for entertaining any doubts about JWST and the decisions behind it. Clearly things have gone swimmingly from the start, so there is no reason to concerned about anything.Mark S.