mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Astronomy (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=142)
-   -   James Webb Space Telescope (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=27092)

kriesel 2021-10-13 14:22

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;590403]This is new technology. There were bound to be unforeseen problems along the way. Of course the development costs were high.

Now that we've worked those things out, what we need to do is produce a [I]fleet[/I] of space telescopes, in order to get the unit cost down.[/QUOTE]Or do 20 such development projects, just skip treating cancer for a year. [url]https://www.progressreport.cancer.gov/after/economic_burden[/url]
All those unemployed doctors, nurses, radiology technicians etc may not be very effective engineers, machinists, etc. though without a lot of retraining that would take more than a year.

xilman 2021-10-13 14:38

[QUOTE=kriesel;590417]Or do 20 such development projects, just skip treating cancer for a year. [url]https://www.progressreport.cancer.gov/after/economic_burden[/url]
All those unemployed doctors, nurses, radiology technicians etc may not be very effective engineers, machinists, etc. though without a lot of retraining that would take more than a year.[/QUOTE]I believe the technical term is "opportunity cost".

kriesel 2021-10-13 15:37

[QUOTE=xilman;590424]I believe the technical term is "opportunity cost".[/QUOTE]Opportunity cost is a primarily economics term. [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost[/URL] An opportunity cost analysis informed by college placement office data is why I did not go for a PhD, although strongly encouraged by certain faculty, and employment interviewers seemed quite satisfied with that answer.

It's a multiyear project for an individual to become adequately trained in a technical field as distinct from medical care as optics, aerospace engineering or manufacturing.

Time lags in responding to choices motivated by shifting economic parameters contribute toward irreversibility. [URL]http://perrings.faculty.asu.edu/pdf_papers_Perrings/Perrings_and_Brock_ARRE_(2009).pdf[/URL]

frmky 2021-10-13 19:56

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;590403]Now that we've worked those things out, what we need to do is produce a [i]fleet[/i] of space telescopes, in order to get the unit cost down.[/QUOTE]
There most assuredly will be, or perhaps are, reconnaissance satellites that share some of the technology of the JWST.

Uncwilly 2021-10-13 20:06

[QUOTE=frmky;590482]There most assuredly will be, or perhaps are, reconnaissance satellites that share some of the technology of the JWST.[/QUOTE]Optical recon sats don't really need to. The seeing will become an issue once one goes beyond the KeyHole sats with mirrors the size of Hubble. How much resolution do you want? Just 2 mirrors the size of Hubble can be deployed in a simpler way than JWST and create and effective diameter 3x that of Hubble. Electronic eavesdropping on the other hand.... there are some with antennae reflectors about the size of JWST's sun shield. I wish that had picked up or saved the button for the cover mission that I saw at JPL for that.

frmky 2021-10-13 20:29

Yes, Orion-class satellites are thought to have reflectors larger than JWST's sun shield. But it's not just the large mirrors. The steering system for JWST's secondary mirror seems closely guarded.

Lariliss 2021-10-20 13:13

We are in the era when the finest cutting edge technology is mature enough to be bald with missions.
Numerous tests, engineering refinements and tests again, all the precautions to eliminate any failure.
The projects are confident enough to state the time lines and costs.

And as [B]@Dr Sardonicus[/B] mentions right, there are too many uncertainties for the plans be very precise.
There is uncertainty on any new uncertainties to come across even.

The technology is on rail to go despite the hindrances. It is kind of careful Occam's razor, and I believe it will work.
As it does for the rest.

greenskull 2021-10-20 20:29

NASA plans to launch the James Webb Space Telescope into orbit Dec. 18, 2021:
[url]https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-readies-james-webb-space-telescope-for-december-launch[/url]

The countdown:
[url]https://www.webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/countdown.html[/url]

greenskull 2021-10-20 22:38

I kindly ask the moderators please return back the original name of this thread -- James Webb Space Telescope.
And I ask those who distort the name of my themes beyond recognition to refrain from such a destructiveness.
Thank you.

retina 2021-10-21 02:33

We have a conflict.[QUOTE=kriesel;590360]Shouldn't that thread title be James Webb Sinkhole for Tax dollars?[/QUOTE][QUOTE=greenskull;591172]I kindly ask the moderators please return back the original name of this thread -- James Webb Space Telescope.[/QUOTE]There are a lot of currency symbols in the title. Maybe some people can learn something new from those, while also learning about the ₸€₺€$¢¤₱€?

Dr Sardonicus 2021-10-21 03:06

I wasn't being entirely serious in proposing a fleet of space telescopes. I was responding to a previous post which opined that JWST was a waste of taxpayer money.

It occurred to me that cost overruns were a not-unheard-of phenomenon WRT DOD contracts for weapons systems, whose costs over their lifetimes can dwarf those of JWST. And a not-unheard-of justification has been unforeseen technical problems, with an also not-unheard-of argument that, with the design and production problems resolved, the unit price would be lower.

The notion of a "fleet" of space telescopes seemed absurd to me. I failed to consider that the idea might be taken seriously.


All times are UTC. The time now is 08:54.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.