JWST

>Guess who profits from this.

Is this not why they have a space station? To accommodate this kind of shit that needs maintenance?

Yes, i'm sure they decided to put it there just for shits&giggles.

It's going to be four times further away from Earth than the Moon. If it malfunctions we won't be able to fix it

However most of the cost is in the research and development of it. If it malfunctions we will be able to make another and it will still be expensive but nearly the cost of the first

wait what?
do you think space stations are little repair stops for satellites?

What's even its potential? How much better is it than hubble?

The design called for at least 10 years of propellant, there is a significant margin there but no one is quite sure how long it will last. Propellant is unlikely to be the limiting factor.

Much. It can see through dust clouds and detect structures undetectable by Hubble.

They're not really comparable in any way that illustrates JWSTs capability. It's original goal was to study the first galaxies. HST can only get you so far because eventually the galaxies become so redshifted that they are invisible at HSTs shorter wavelengths. Hubble also tells us almost noting about these early galaxies. JWST is designed for longer wavelengths than HST, it doesn't do most of the visible or the UV. But at longer wavelengths Hubble would be swamped by it's own emission, it's practically room temperature so in the infrared it glows. JWST is passively cooled to 45 K so there is basically no thermal background in the near infrared. It is far, far more sensitive to early galaxies and will actually be able to get good information as it has very long wavlengths and spectroscopy to actually find out what is going on in these most distant objects. It will revolutionise many fields of astronomy.

They should have spent the money on a 100m diameter telescope on earth. Better pictures, easy to fix, doesn't run out of propellent in 10 years. Instead fucking NASA once again is ruining it for all of us. Fuck them. Can't wait until SpaceX kills them once and for all.

JEWST

so much salt

Does the spacex moon flyby mission has enough dv to get to it?

...

Yea sure
2 people + supplies for them is not a big payload

The dv to go to mars is a lot worse because their Red Dragon will need upwards of 1 km/s dv to land.

>What a stupid fucking design decision
>Hundreds of NASA engineers with degrees from MIT and Caltech didn't see this problem I just identified in ten seconds

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

>0.1 mm
>He doesn't know the tolerance that is acceptable

Even a 0.001mm error can jeopardize it.

You're right. Really, the coolant used to bring all the temps down will be the limiting factor.

You can't do IR imaging that precise on Earth you brainlet.

If you could do it on Earth, they would have.

those frenchies better not have left any croissant crumbs in the Ariane

>10 years
>Exabytes of data

Look at this idiot who knows better than NASA.

It won't be anywhere near that much data. JWST will downlink about 235 GB per day of science data, that's not even a petabyte over 10 years. JWST does not have huge focal plane arrays, it won't generate that much data.

You can with adaptive optics and enough aperture at least in the shorter near-infrared windows. The coming E-ELT will be more sensitive in imaging at shorter near-infrared wavelengths than JWST. When it comes to spectroscopy however the ground based telescopes dominate as they can resolve out the sky background.

there aren't idiot Hawaiian cultists who think that a boring hill is a sacred burial ground in space, though

You are a complete brainlet. Adaptive optics is for optical range telescopes. We need JWST in space because it's really easy to keep its temperature very low and very steady in space.

Trying keeping in IR telescope system under 50 K with almost no change in temperature in a building here on Earth.

The E-ELT is optical, and only near infrared. It is not an IR telescope. JWST is going to operatre 0.6-30 microns of wavelength.

OWL was planned for Chile, I don't think Mauna Kea has the space at the summit. TMT was forced to take a site just down from the actual summit to limit the visual impact and because of lack of space, the degradation in conditions was not insignificant. However in Chile E-ELT gets a mountain to itself and ~550 km^2 of land around it. It doesn't have to pay though the nose either.

I'm an actual astronomer. Adaptive optics works best in the infrared, visible light AO is rare and provides limited correction. Look up some diffraction limited AO instruments. SINFONI: near infrared, NACO: near infrared, CRIRES: near infrared, SPHERE: Near infrared + red visible, OSIRIS + NIRC2: near infrared.

>Trying keeping in IR telescope system under 50 K with almost no change in temperature in a building here on Earth.

You don't need to. Yes the telescope dominates the backgorund in the K band but the telescope can be 6 times larger. With diffraction limited AO imaging while background imaging imaging sensitivity goes with mirror diameter to the 4th power! If you knew shit about telescopes you would know that. Yes ground based telescopes have much larger backgrounds but they are much larger and this can compensate. Similarly when you go to spectroscopy at modest resolving power you can resolve out the sky and telescopes can be read noise limited.

>The E-ELT is optical, and only near infrared.

What is METIS? As I said, E-ELT will be more sensitive " in the shorter near-infrared windows". Read.

If you were an astronomer you would know using AO greatly limits your field of view, and JWST is designed for a very large field of view over an IR range in which Earth's atmosphere glows very brightly, making AO even harder to use.

friendly reminder, hubble is a re-purposed KH-11 spy sattelite. the yanks chucked 16 of them up there since the 80's, including one in 2003

how much of JWST's cost is because of the extra 10 they will make to look in instead of out

one in 2013!

AO does limit your field of view, I never said anything different. Sensitivity is not the same as grasp or survey speed. However JWST doesn't have a very large field of view either. With MCAO fields can be quite large.

And yes i already mentioned the sky background. It doesn't make AO harder it just limits imaging sensitivity. Most of the sky emission however is in the forest of lines created by OH molecules. This is why when you go to spectroscopy and resolve the OH lines there is a leap in sensitivity. E-ELT is working on fancy filters to reject most of the lines which would further improve sensitivity.

HST wasn't repurposed. It was built with experience and equipment used for NRO payloads but it was designed independently.

JWST isn't suitable for Earth observation because the quality of the optics isn't good enough to be diffraction limited at short wavelengths. It has basically the same resolution as Hubble because of this.

>There's an intentional "typo" in one of the codes where a decimal place is off by 1.
It probably wouldn't matter much, and would be corrected with a remote code update. There's not a lot of time-sensitive orbital maneuvering on this mission.

>It's going to be four times further away from Earth than the Moon. If it malfunctions we won't be able to fix it
Some guys are scheduled to do a moon flyby next year. Surely coasting a little farther can be done. In fact, that would be the first good excuse to take a manned craft to an intermediate distance between the moon and Mars.

Post you're face when it gets fixed faster than Hubble was because SpaceX.

I don't see why you don't like it. There are clear advantages to the mission and it can do better IR imagining in the ranges and field of view than we can do on Earth. Not to mention that basically every time we put a telescope in space we find something new. Perhaps we will observe something a ground based IR system with AO would have missed. I also don't see any negatives from having more data from more telescopes.

I never said I don't like it. I'm actually involved in 2 ERS proposals for JWST. I would love some time. There are huge advantages and it is fucking miles better than anything we have today.

However it doesn't change the fact that at shorter wavelengths E-ELT will be more sensitive. That doesn't mean JWST will become irrelevant, far from it.

I am not the person who claimed OWL should have been built over JWST. OWL could well have been a disaster and AO is really better for follow-up that discovery. OWL's science case was written assuming JWST (then NGST) would fly. Not the least NASA doesn't pay for big ground based astronomy so the question of OWL or JWST is moot.

or that the launch is delayed due to social unrest in French Guiana

arianespace.com/press-release/arianespace-va236-launch-rescheduling/

It's not social unrest, it's french people striking.

They'll be rolling out the guillotines soon enough. Have you looked at Paris lately? Their elites have sold the people out, abandoned their duty to guard the borders.

We know. We've heard all about it over the last 27 years. They fixed it and it's kush. Move on, this is about the future boi.

IKR? Wouldn't a second similar design but using near infra, etc. be more useful in calculating distance, mass and all that jazz?

Praise the great Atheismo!

JWST does use near infrared.

NASA almost certainly wouldn't re-fly it, they don't have the money and congress wouldn't give them more given how close JWST came to cancellation.