Charlie in Dayton
Rabid radioactive stargazer and JREF kid
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 1,086
A digest of recent space legislative happenings
Relayed from Monica Simmons of The Mars Society
(relayed verbatim - the opinions stated are not necessarily those of the poster)
Save Hubble Bill Now Has 34 Co-Sponsors
March 18, 2004
The bipartisan bill, H. Res 550, introduced by Congressman Mark Udall (D-CO) to save the Hubble Space Telescope on March 4 now has 34 cosponsors.
Thirty-four cosponsors is a great start, but we need still more if we are to win this fight for science, civilization, and the pioneer spirit. The Mars Society urges everyone to contact their congressman and call for them to become a co-sponsor of this bill. You can reach your congressman's office through the congressional switchboard at 202-224-3121. Ask to speak to their legislative aide in charge of space policy, then politely explain to that person that you want the congressman to become a cosponsor of H. Resolution 550.
Talking points:
1. Hubble is the most powerful scientific instrument in human history. Abandoning it is a crime against science.
2. Hubble is a $4 billion piece of property paid for and owned by the American taxpayers. Deserting it is the largest single act of destruction of American public property since the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor, Dec. 7, 1941. This reckless irresponsible waste of our property cannot be tolerated.
3. Hubble is the only example to date where NASA's human spaceflight program has produced, and continues to produce, more science per dollar than the robotic spaceflight program. In abandoning Hubble,
NASA is throwing away success.
4. Abandoning Hubble to avoid mission risk precludes any future for America's human spaceflight program. It is impossible, with any hardware set, to design human Moon or Mars missions with lower overall risk than a Shuttle mission to Hubble. If we cut and run on Hubble, we give up human planetary exploration, in which case the Space Station loses its purpose as well.
5. Abandoning Hubble out of fear represents a betrayal of fundamental American values - the pioneer spirit and the willingness to accept risk to do what must be done. If we had embraced the risk-adverse values of the Hubble deserters in the past, we could not have launched Hubble, or Apollo, or Lewis and Clark. We could not have gone west, or fought at Lexington and Concord, or landed on Plymouth Rock. We would not have a country today at all if we had acted in the past the way Mr. O'Keefe is insisting that we act now. If are to continue to be a great nation, we must continue to act on the basis of the
values that made us great, and the first and foremost of those values is courage.
The current list of cosponsors is given below:
Mark Udall (D-CO), Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Bart Gordon (D-TN), Nick Lampson (D-TX), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Todd Akin (R-MO), C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger (D-MD), Vernon Ehlers (R-MI), Jay Inslee (D-WA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Elijah Cummings (D-MD), James Moran (D-VA), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Martin Frost (D-TX), Adam Schiff (D- CA), Rush Holt (D-NJ), Barney Frank (D-MA), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Michael McNulty (R-NY), Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), John Olver (D-MA), John Abney Culberson (R-TX), Brian Baird (D-WA), Benjamin Cardin (D-MD), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Lamar Smith (R-TX), Sam Farr (D-CA), Michael Honda (D-CA), James McGovern (D-MA),Michael Michaud (D-ME), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ).
The text of the resolution is available at http://www.house.gov/science_democrats/releases/udall_hubble_resolution_04mar03.pdf
If your congressional representative is not yet on the honor roll of cosponsors above,he or she needs to be. This is a fight for science and for America's pioneer spirit. If we are too risk adverse and too uncaring about the value of science to go to Hubble, we are not going to Mars.
Call your representative today -- 202-224-3121.
Astronauts Denounce O'Keefe Decision to Desert Hubble
March 23, 2004
For further information about the Mars Society, visit our website at www.marssociety.org.
In an article circulated internationally by the Associated Press, a group of leading astronauts have denounced NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe decision to desert the Hubble space Telescope.
Those cited in opposition to O'Keefe's faint-hearted decision include venerable heroes such as John Glenn, who flew the first American orbital flight, as well as many of those responsible for the launch, repair, and successive upgrades of the Hubble Space Telescope itself.
Excepts of the article, "Astronauts Try to Save Hubble," by the Associated Press's top space reporter Marcia Dunn, follow.
*** *** ***
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) - They risked their lives for the Hubble Space Telescope and did so gladly. Now, many of the astronauts who worked on Hubble hundreds of miles above Earth are dismayed, bewildered or both by NASA's decision to pull the plug on the mighty observatory.
"I just think it's a huge, huge mistake," says Greg Harbaugh, who performed Hubble repairs during a pair of spacewalks in 1997. "It is probably the greatest instrument or tool for astronomical and astrophysical research since Galileo invented the telescope, and I think it is a tragedy that we would consider not keeping the Hubble alive and operational as long as possible."
Though the decision is not absolute, there appears to be little chance NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe will change his mind about a Hubble servicing mission, deeming it too risky to astronauts in the wake of Columbia. That would mean a premature death for the 14-year-old observatory whose latest snapshot - revealed last week - showed the deepest-ever view of the universe, a mishmash of galaxies dating almost all the way back to creation.
Tom Akers, part of the spacewalking team that restored Hubble's eyesight in 1993, also favors another mission. "I definitely think that's an asset that we shouldn't throw away," says Akers, who teaches college math in Missouri. "That's my position and they know it."
NASA has been fending off heavy criticism ever since O'Keefe decided in January to cancel the last servicing, set for 2006.
Even John Glenn has weighed in, telling President Bush's commission on moon and Mars travel that another servicing mission is necessary "to get every year's value out of that thing."
The canceled servicing mission would have been the Hubble's fifth and would have equipped it with two state-of-the-art science instruments already built and worth a combined $176 million, as well as fresh batteries and gyroscopes. The work by spacewalkers would have kept Hubble humming until 2011 or 2012.
Regardless of Hubble's merit, O'Keefe says he cannot let astronauts fly to the telescope and risk being stuck there if their shuttle is damaged by foam or other launch debris.
Glenn worries the Columbia accident may be making NASA gun-shy. Harbaugh, now director of the Florida Air Museum, says he felt no more danger flying to Hubble than anywhere else in space. There is
little difference, he says, "in risk between launching to Hubble and launching to station and just launching period."
Astronomers would be at a loss if Hubble is abandoned and its powerful replacement, the James Webb Space Telescope, is lost in a rocket explosion or has crippling design flaws. That's why so many
would rather wait to decommission Hubble until Webb is launched, now set for 2011.
While NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and Spitzer Space Telescope see the universe in X-ray and infrared, respectively, Hubble observes visible light and peeks into the ultraviolet and near-infrared. Webb will focus on the infrared and outdo Hubble with a mirror more than double its size.
Astronauts - Hubble repairmen included, who say they would do it again - like to point out that a ship is safe in the harbor, but that's not what ships are built for.
Says Bruce McCandless, who helped deliver Hubble to orbit and now works in industry: "John Paul Jones is also reported to have said, 'Give me a fast ship for I intend to sail in harm's way.' He
wasn't going to sit in the harbor, either."
**** ****
The complete article may be found at http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040320/D81E6S381.html
The Hubble desertion decision threatens much more than astronomy. If the risk level involved in flying a Shuttle mission to Hubble is ruled unacceptable, human mission to the Moon or Mars become
impossible. And if we are not going to Mars, the International Space Station loses its reason for existence as well. Thus the flight from Hubble presages the collapse and cancellation of NASA's entire human
spaceflight program.
If humans are to explore space, cowardice is not an option.
An in-depth discussion and strategy session on the fight to save Hubble and the American manned spaceflight program will be held at the 7th International Mars Society Convention, Palmer House Hilton,
Chicago, IL, August 19-22, 2004. Registration is now open at www.marssociety.org.
For further information about the Mars Society, visit our website at www.marssociety.org.
Relayed from Monica Simmons of The Mars Society
(relayed verbatim - the opinions stated are not necessarily those of the poster)
Save Hubble Bill Now Has 34 Co-Sponsors
March 18, 2004
The bipartisan bill, H. Res 550, introduced by Congressman Mark Udall (D-CO) to save the Hubble Space Telescope on March 4 now has 34 cosponsors.
Thirty-four cosponsors is a great start, but we need still more if we are to win this fight for science, civilization, and the pioneer spirit. The Mars Society urges everyone to contact their congressman and call for them to become a co-sponsor of this bill. You can reach your congressman's office through the congressional switchboard at 202-224-3121. Ask to speak to their legislative aide in charge of space policy, then politely explain to that person that you want the congressman to become a cosponsor of H. Resolution 550.
Talking points:
1. Hubble is the most powerful scientific instrument in human history. Abandoning it is a crime against science.
2. Hubble is a $4 billion piece of property paid for and owned by the American taxpayers. Deserting it is the largest single act of destruction of American public property since the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor, Dec. 7, 1941. This reckless irresponsible waste of our property cannot be tolerated.
3. Hubble is the only example to date where NASA's human spaceflight program has produced, and continues to produce, more science per dollar than the robotic spaceflight program. In abandoning Hubble,
NASA is throwing away success.
4. Abandoning Hubble to avoid mission risk precludes any future for America's human spaceflight program. It is impossible, with any hardware set, to design human Moon or Mars missions with lower overall risk than a Shuttle mission to Hubble. If we cut and run on Hubble, we give up human planetary exploration, in which case the Space Station loses its purpose as well.
5. Abandoning Hubble out of fear represents a betrayal of fundamental American values - the pioneer spirit and the willingness to accept risk to do what must be done. If we had embraced the risk-adverse values of the Hubble deserters in the past, we could not have launched Hubble, or Apollo, or Lewis and Clark. We could not have gone west, or fought at Lexington and Concord, or landed on Plymouth Rock. We would not have a country today at all if we had acted in the past the way Mr. O'Keefe is insisting that we act now. If are to continue to be a great nation, we must continue to act on the basis of the
values that made us great, and the first and foremost of those values is courage.
The current list of cosponsors is given below:
Mark Udall (D-CO), Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Bart Gordon (D-TN), Nick Lampson (D-TX), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Todd Akin (R-MO), C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger (D-MD), Vernon Ehlers (R-MI), Jay Inslee (D-WA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Elijah Cummings (D-MD), James Moran (D-VA), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Martin Frost (D-TX), Adam Schiff (D- CA), Rush Holt (D-NJ), Barney Frank (D-MA), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Michael McNulty (R-NY), Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), John Olver (D-MA), John Abney Culberson (R-TX), Brian Baird (D-WA), Benjamin Cardin (D-MD), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Lamar Smith (R-TX), Sam Farr (D-CA), Michael Honda (D-CA), James McGovern (D-MA),Michael Michaud (D-ME), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ).
The text of the resolution is available at http://www.house.gov/science_democrats/releases/udall_hubble_resolution_04mar03.pdf
If your congressional representative is not yet on the honor roll of cosponsors above,he or she needs to be. This is a fight for science and for America's pioneer spirit. If we are too risk adverse and too uncaring about the value of science to go to Hubble, we are not going to Mars.
Call your representative today -- 202-224-3121.
Astronauts Denounce O'Keefe Decision to Desert Hubble
March 23, 2004
For further information about the Mars Society, visit our website at www.marssociety.org.
In an article circulated internationally by the Associated Press, a group of leading astronauts have denounced NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe decision to desert the Hubble space Telescope.
Those cited in opposition to O'Keefe's faint-hearted decision include venerable heroes such as John Glenn, who flew the first American orbital flight, as well as many of those responsible for the launch, repair, and successive upgrades of the Hubble Space Telescope itself.
Excepts of the article, "Astronauts Try to Save Hubble," by the Associated Press's top space reporter Marcia Dunn, follow.
*** *** ***
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) - They risked their lives for the Hubble Space Telescope and did so gladly. Now, many of the astronauts who worked on Hubble hundreds of miles above Earth are dismayed, bewildered or both by NASA's decision to pull the plug on the mighty observatory.
"I just think it's a huge, huge mistake," says Greg Harbaugh, who performed Hubble repairs during a pair of spacewalks in 1997. "It is probably the greatest instrument or tool for astronomical and astrophysical research since Galileo invented the telescope, and I think it is a tragedy that we would consider not keeping the Hubble alive and operational as long as possible."
Though the decision is not absolute, there appears to be little chance NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe will change his mind about a Hubble servicing mission, deeming it too risky to astronauts in the wake of Columbia. That would mean a premature death for the 14-year-old observatory whose latest snapshot - revealed last week - showed the deepest-ever view of the universe, a mishmash of galaxies dating almost all the way back to creation.
Tom Akers, part of the spacewalking team that restored Hubble's eyesight in 1993, also favors another mission. "I definitely think that's an asset that we shouldn't throw away," says Akers, who teaches college math in Missouri. "That's my position and they know it."
NASA has been fending off heavy criticism ever since O'Keefe decided in January to cancel the last servicing, set for 2006.
Even John Glenn has weighed in, telling President Bush's commission on moon and Mars travel that another servicing mission is necessary "to get every year's value out of that thing."
The canceled servicing mission would have been the Hubble's fifth and would have equipped it with two state-of-the-art science instruments already built and worth a combined $176 million, as well as fresh batteries and gyroscopes. The work by spacewalkers would have kept Hubble humming until 2011 or 2012.
Regardless of Hubble's merit, O'Keefe says he cannot let astronauts fly to the telescope and risk being stuck there if their shuttle is damaged by foam or other launch debris.
Glenn worries the Columbia accident may be making NASA gun-shy. Harbaugh, now director of the Florida Air Museum, says he felt no more danger flying to Hubble than anywhere else in space. There is
little difference, he says, "in risk between launching to Hubble and launching to station and just launching period."
Astronomers would be at a loss if Hubble is abandoned and its powerful replacement, the James Webb Space Telescope, is lost in a rocket explosion or has crippling design flaws. That's why so many
would rather wait to decommission Hubble until Webb is launched, now set for 2011.
While NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and Spitzer Space Telescope see the universe in X-ray and infrared, respectively, Hubble observes visible light and peeks into the ultraviolet and near-infrared. Webb will focus on the infrared and outdo Hubble with a mirror more than double its size.
Astronauts - Hubble repairmen included, who say they would do it again - like to point out that a ship is safe in the harbor, but that's not what ships are built for.
Says Bruce McCandless, who helped deliver Hubble to orbit and now works in industry: "John Paul Jones is also reported to have said, 'Give me a fast ship for I intend to sail in harm's way.' He
wasn't going to sit in the harbor, either."
**** ****
The complete article may be found at http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040320/D81E6S381.html
The Hubble desertion decision threatens much more than astronomy. If the risk level involved in flying a Shuttle mission to Hubble is ruled unacceptable, human mission to the Moon or Mars become
impossible. And if we are not going to Mars, the International Space Station loses its reason for existence as well. Thus the flight from Hubble presages the collapse and cancellation of NASA's entire human
spaceflight program.
If humans are to explore space, cowardice is not an option.
An in-depth discussion and strategy session on the fight to save Hubble and the American manned spaceflight program will be held at the 7th International Mars Society Convention, Palmer House Hilton,
Chicago, IL, August 19-22, 2004. Registration is now open at www.marssociety.org.
For further information about the Mars Society, visit our website at www.marssociety.org.