news.bbc.co.uk — The US space agency Nasa has unveiled a model of a space telescope that scientists say will be able to see to the farthest reaches of the universe.The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is intended to replace the ageing Hubble telescope.
May 11, 2007 View in Crawl 4
evolvedantMay 11, 2007
<a class="user" href="http://www.stsci.edu/jwst/images/JWST_version4.gif">http://www.stsci.edu/jwst/images/JWST_version4.gif</a>
bry0000000May 11, 2007
I want one.
thanakarMay 11, 2007
She only begs that because she knows you can't f**k worth a damn.
socaltimmayMay 11, 2007
For more info (background pics, animations, etc.), be sure to check out the public Northrop Grumman website about JWST (the prime builder for this program):<a class="user" href="http://www.st.northropgrumman.com/capabilities/space/science/jwst.html">http://www.st.northropgrumman.com/capabilities/space/science/jwst.html</a>Just a little FYI, the program used to be called NGST (for Next Generation Space Telescope). However, when TRW merged with Northrop Grumman, the sector building the telescope became NGST (for Northrop Grumman Space Technology), so they had to change the name of the program.
tuluseMay 11, 2007
I hope they recover the Hubble and put it in a Museum, it would be a real shame to leave in space with all the other junk.
eatingpieMay 11, 2007
@mcraigw: "I'm all for exploring space, I'd love to be personally involved in it (and I like the wallpaper too), but we have plenty of other problems to solve with those tax-payer dollars if this isn't really needed just yet."Once again, people comment who have no inkling of how things work in space.All satellites, probes, vehicles, stations, etc., have a specific targeted mission length. A great example is the Mars Pathfinder Mission. I believe it is two full years beyond its mission length. They still work (barely now), and we still use them, but we never planned on them lasting this long. Bonus. Awesome. But does that mean we scrap, postpone, or just forget planning a new mission? No. We take advantage of what we have, AND we continue new exploration.Hubble, too, is right at its end-of-mission. Its orbit is decaying, but it was supposed to croak well before the decay would have mattered. Well, it's still producing GREAT science, and because of that, it's going to be pulled into a higher orbit. But guess what, it could very well croak the day after it's "rescued" -- which is exactly why Nasa originally decided not to rescue it at first.When I submitted comment on Hubble to Nasa, I *demanded* that they save it. And in the very same breath, I encouraged them to go forward with Webb. Hubble will die eventually. We need a replacement, and Webb has been the planned replacement for years... and Webb will hopefully be better than Hubble. If we have both working together at the same time... Even better!It's insanely short sighted to make comments about scrapping Webb at this point. I only wish people would do more resarch before making statements like yours. Very disappointing.-Pie
scheissenMay 12, 2007
USAUSAUSAAmericaf**k yeah!
darph_boboMay 18, 2007
Uh, you do know you answered your own question?