The James Webb

[CraigS]

It just keeps getting sadder ...

NASA Estimates $8.7 Billion To Fly Webb (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awx/2011/08/22/awx_08_22_2011_p0-362179.xml)


:(

[Ric]

I have a bad feeling about where this is heading.

I just hope I'm wrong.

[TrevorW]

$9 biilion for something that will only operate for 5 years, a waste IMO

[renormalised]

It's going to get canned, for sure. So they can fund 6 months worth of airconditioning for their troops in Afghanistan. It most certainly won't go back to NASA.

In any case, the costs of these projects is ridiculous. It's most likely more a case of bad management and government-industry ripoffs than anything else. Someone is making a lot of money on it.

[riklaunim]

Or it's hard to send big scope into space... They could do some other missions for that money like probes to Uranus and Neptune (Cassini-like), or Europa orbiter and/or lander with a drill :D

[renormalised]

They'd end up costing more than the JWST. In any case, they have an Europa mission already earmarked for later in the decade. Missions to Uranus and Neptune are a long way off at present and given the way these companies work, it'll cost NASA about $50-$100 billion for each of them. The whole system has gone completely bonkers.

[GeoffW1]

Hi,

I placed a powerful hex on it early :mad2:, because they named it for a NASA bureaucrat, instead of for Tycho Brahe or some other of his ilk.

Now I know who Webb was, and of his claims, but I just can't wear bureaucrats in space.

I'd sooner name it the Spock Scope. :mad2:

Cheers

[CraigS]

Seems like a combination of political and funding mismanagement (http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/71607/title/Star_Cents) (April 2011) on what was always forecasted to be an expensive project ...


I've heard this same story many times, myself.

[renormalised]

Well, Craig, I wasn't far wrong:)

[Jules76]

Designed to operate for 5 years, but they are hoping to get 10 years of service. If they learned from the mistakes they made with Hubble and get things right, who's to say 10 years is not achievable?

And if everything I've heard about it is correct in it's ability to see further and gather more data than Hubble, it could possibly do more in it's 5-10 years of operation than Hubble has in 21 years.

That's worth it IMO.

[Waxing_Gibbous]

Ditto!!
Heck, I tought 2015 was the launch date. :(
Given the potential returns, penny-pinching (and we are talking effectively pennies here) seems pointless.
NASA does however, need to get it's act together and produce a usable instrument.
Doesn't have to be perfect - just 'good enough.
The first time the public sees more-awesome-than-hubble images, all will be forgiven. :)

[TrevorW]

5 times cheaper and better

http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/eelt/owl/index_3.html