NASA again delays James Webb Space Telescope, but finally sets a specific launch date

[Shawn Knight]

What just happened? The highest priority project for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate and the largest international space science project in US history has been delayed for the umpteenth time.

NASA in March said the James Webb Space Telescope, the long-awaited successor to the Hubble Space Telescope, would miss its planned 2019 launch window. The setback wasn’t entirely surprising considering the project has been bumped on multiple occasions. At the time, we were told the next-gen telescope wouldn’t depart from Earth until May 2020 at the earliest.

On Wednesday, NASA published a 69-page report from an independent review board highlighting technical issues, including human errors, that have contributed to the spacecraft’s delayed launch.

The revised launch date of March 30, 2021, also pushes the project’s total lifecycle cost to a staggering $9.66 billion. The initial concept was estimated to cost just $500 million.

For those who prefer to see the good in things, the fact that NASA hasn’t cancelled the project (it nearly happened once before) is worth clinging to. We also have a specific launch date to look forward to, not just a rough window of time.

Named after a former NASA administrator, the James Webb Space Telescope is expected to help astronomers shed light on the many mysteries of the universe and answer question we didn’t even know how to ask when it was first designed. It's a breathtaking feat of engineering that'll hopefully, one day, make it safely to space to carry out some very important work.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/75274-nasa-again-delays-james-webb-space-telescope-but.html

 

[TomSEA]

Sure would be nice if they could get this telescope up BEFORE I'M DEAD.

As an amateur astronomer, I'm really looking forward to seeing what results this telescope will come up with.

 

[texasrattler]

So the launch date is May 2020 or March 2021?

Also how does a project go from a projected $500M to $9B? That right there would be some red flags going up. One could assume at that price that their would be a fleet of these Telescopes. Somehow I highly doubt there was a miscalculation of funds that could be that huge.
Im sure the public will never ever be told what is going on, at least not the truth.

 

[JaredTheDragon]

Further evidence of "black holes". NASA is a money pit.

 

[hood6558]

Further evidence of "black holes". NASA is a money pit.

Historically, these "useless" research projects have repaid us a thousandfold. Just the medical breakthroughs engendered by space exploration have saved thousands of lives, and made millions of lives better. The technical advancements are uncountable, and every little bit of knowledge gained eventually saves a lot of time and money somewhere down the road. Read more here -
https://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/benefits.html
And don't be so negative. Without people like this, we'd still be in the dark ages.

 

[JaredTheDragon]

Historically, these "useless" research projects have repaid us a thousandfold. Just the medical breakthroughs engendered by space exploration have saved thousands of lives, and made millions of lives better. The technical advancements are uncountable, and every little bit of knowledge gained eventually saves a lot of time and money somewhere down the road. Read more here -
https://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/benefits.html
And don't be so negative. Without people like this, we'd still be in the dark ages.

Well that's some fantastic propaganda. It's nice to meet people who don't care what happens to their money! A care-free, easy living.

Yet you didn't address all the various vast money-pits that NASA and the NSF promote and "sell" to the taxpayers, for obscene profits to the investors and the "workers" and technicians involved. Think of LIGO, BICEP2, the LHC, and hundreds of smaller direct projects under NASA's control. It's basically just like war profiteering, only without the war.

 

[Skjorn]

I can't wait. Blow these sheep minds away, NASA.

Considering what the telescope does, I don't see how they ever thought it would only cost $500mil.
They did the same with Hubble, estimated $400mil but by launch its $4.7bil.

LOL at the cynics here

 

[wiyosaya]

Sure would be nice if they could get this telescope up BEFORE I'M DEAD.

As an amateur astronomer, I'm really looking forward to seeing what results this telescope will come up with.

I know how you feel. Personally, I hope I am still alive when this thing sees first light - https://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/eelt/

Well that's some fantastic propaganda. It's nice to meet people who don't care what happens to their money! A care-free, easy living.

Yet you didn't address all the various vast money-pits that NASA and the NSF promote and "sell" to the taxpayers, for obscene profits to the investors and the "workers" and technicians involved. Think of LIGO, BICEP2, the LHC, and hundreds of smaller direct projects under NASA's control. It's basically just like war profiteering, only without the war.

The LHC is CERN not NASA or the NSF which makes what you said even more fantastic propaganda.

Typically, research projects like this do not make "obscene profits to the investors". In fact, most research projects are typically under the gun for funding and often operate under challenging monetary conditions. There are no investors in the sense that people invest in companies like Haliburton or other for-profit corporations.

If it were not for research projects, vacuum tubes, transistors, and ultimately CPUs would never have been invented and you would not be on the internet.

I've read many of your posts and note a distinct dislike of technology. Is there any particular reason for this?

For me, I think more of the blame for what it sounds like you see as money not so well spent falls on the economic systems of the world, and I think that if the world found a better economic system, things would be better for everyone.

Personally, I am rather tired of having to, essentially, fight for every cent I make just so that I can survive. From that aspect, I can understand why you don't want the government taking tax dollars and spending it on what you think is wasted efforts. However, I do not see those research efforts as the problem. As I said, I see the economic systems of the world as the problem. In the confines of the current economic system, those research efforts create jobs and add to humanity's knowledge.

 

[Gmn17]

How awesome

 

[Puiu]

How do you go from 500mil to almost 10bil? O_o

 

[cliffordcooley]

Just the medical breakthroughs engendered by space exploration have saved thousands of lives, and made millions of lives better.

I doubt space exploration (at least not our limited capability) is a required condition for finding medical breakthroughs. We are not even capable of space exploration and here we are trying to give it credit. We are capable of space observation which doesn't tell us anything about our physiology.

 

[Bubbajim]

Well that's some fantastic propaganda. It's nice to meet people who don't care what happens to their money! A care-free, easy living.

Yet you didn't address all the various vast money-pits that NASA and the NSF promote and "sell" to the taxpayers, for obscene profits to the investors and the "workers" and technicians involved. Think of LIGO, BICEP2, the LHC, and hundreds of smaller direct projects under NASA's control. It's basically just like war profiteering, only without the war.

In a country that was last invaded in 1919 by Mexican revolutionaries, the Department of "Defense" budget is almost $600,000,000,000 a year, and you're quibbling over $10 billion spent between 1996 and 2021?

And the three experiments you named are nothing to do with NASA.

 

[sdms96825]

Further evidence of "black holes". NASA is a money pit.

Historically, these "useless" research projects have repaid us a thousandfold. Just the medical breakthroughs engendered by space exploration have saved thousands of lives, and made millions of lives better. .

What are some of those medical breakthroughs that have saved all those lives? I'm not being snarky -- I seriously would like to know.

 

[Vulcanproject]

You don't want another massive mistake like the Hubble mirror error. Get it right, first time.

Hubble was a disaster to start with then it was an absolute triumph. Hopefully this will end up just as significant when it's finally done.

 

[rubertus]

Its funny how people think this is a waste of money, when most of the tech we have today is fruit of our space exploration and work. But no one complains about the +25fold spending machine that is war, military, so, these folks are ok with death, but not ok with progress of a species...

NASA, simply take your time, we thank you for all of your contributions to mankind.

 

[wiyosaya]

In a country that was last invaded in 1919 by Mexican revolutionaries, the Department of "Defense" budget is almost $600,000,000,000 a year, and you're quibbling over $10 billion spent between 1996 and 2021?

And the three experiments you named are nothing to do with NASA.

JPL, a lab run by NASA, fabricated the detectors for BICEP2, and LIGO is a NSF project. The LHC is run by CERN and an item mentioned by our friend that is not run by NASA or the NSF, though there might be some sort of involvement by either or both since 100 or so countries participated in the LHC, although, it is hard to argue that fabrication of a detector constitutes running a project.

What our friend seems to not understand is that in these kinds of projects, items are developed in the labs that participate that would not have existed otherwise - such as the detectors fabricated by NASA's JPL for BICEP2, and that frequently, technology developed in such a manner is often brought into use in some fashion in the public sector. In fact, there are programs out there that license tech developed in government labs to private companies in the US who then make further advancements and create more jobs because the tech was licensed to them. US Government Science labs of all kinds have made significant contributions to technology and science. Those labs were the first to develop those advancements which subsequently found their way into the private sector.

I am sure if our friend was willing to research the subject instead of relying on what he has heard form others who have likely also not done their research, he might be amazed at the technology that simply did not exist before research programs like this, and among them, all the manned space programs to mention only one research branch that has made significant contributions to modern day technology.

 

[hood6558]

What are some of those medical breakthroughs that have saved all those lives? I'm not being snarky -- I seriously would like to know.

Follow the link in my first post (#5).

 

[wiyosaya]

You don't want another massive mistake like the Hubble mirror error. Get it right, first time.

Hubble was a disaster to start with then it was an absolute triumph. Hopefully this will end up just as significant when it's finally done.

It is not likely this time, but not out of the realm of possibility. Unlike other entities, NASA tends to learn from their mistakes. In fact, the delays are likely because NASA is doing their best to get it right this time. While things are likely better, there is still a probability that something might be missed. These are cutting edge projects often employing technology that did not exist before the project and as such, there is still the chance something might go wrong. But that is the very nature of experimental science. Yes, it would be a large amount of money down the drain, but NASA learns from its mistakes.

The fact that Hubble was a disaster turned to a triumph is a testament to the ingenuity of dedicated scientists and engineers.

 

[wiyosaya]

I doubt space exploration (at least not our limited capability) is a required condition for finding medical breakthroughs. We are not even capable of space exploration and here we are trying to give it credit. We are capable of space observation which doesn't tell us anything about our physiology.

There is a significant amount of medical research that is done in the space program. Such research may give insights into human medical conditions. Just because it was done in space does not mean that it does not apply in some fashion to humans on Earth. If you research the subject, my bet is you would find some connections that apply to medicine on Earth.

The space medical research is done to understand how the space environment effects human physiology. Physiology is a very broad subject, and research done in space might lead to insights otherwise overlooked.

 

[cliffordcooley]

There is a significant amount of medical research that is done in the space program.

That's not exploration either is it? That's like saying you went camping while packing all your gear getting ready to go.

Leaving exploration aside, all those medical breakthroughs could have been done under any project. If only we had been motivated in that project to do medical research. The zero G research is a different matter. However most of that research I can only see being applied while in zero G.

 

[texasrattler]

I can't wait. Blow these sheep minds away, NASA.

Considering what the telescope does, I don't see how they ever thought it would only cost $500mil.
They did the same with Hubble, estimated $400mil but by launch its $4.7bil.

LOL at the cynics here

And you believe that was what the Hubble cost, over $4B? You'd have to be a ***** to believe all that money was simply on a Telescope. No matter how good something is, it doesnt cost quad triple the cost. More than likely the money was/is used for other projects.

 

[JB3543]

Give it to Elon Musk.

NAPA = National Aeronautics and Pork Administration.

 

[Skjorn]

And you believe that was what the Hubble cost, over $4B? You'd have to be a ***** to believe all that money was simply on a Telescope. No matter how good something is, it doesnt cost quad triple the cost. More than likely the money was/is used for other projects.

Or more people were needed than initially estimated to complete the design and build the thing..whats a "quad triple" ?

 

[BobHome]

I can't wait. Blow these sheep minds away, NASA.

Considering what the telescope does, I don't see how they ever thought it would only cost $500mil.
They did the same with Hubble, estimated $400mil but by launch its $4.7bil.

LOL at the cynics here

And you believe that was what the Hubble cost, over $4B? You'd have to be a ***** to believe all that money was simply on a Telescope. No matter how good something is, it doesnt cost quad triple the cost. More than likely the money was/is used for other projects.

One thing many people here may not realize is NASA is mainly a contractor on these large projects. Several pieces of those projects are developed by (farmed out to) other companies like Boeing, TRW, GE, etc. To many times those companies 'underbid' to win the contract. (And yes, I am aware that they have been trying to reel in these overruns via clauses in the contracts. But....)
Someone who may be able to disclose 'where does the money all go' could be Dr. S. Greer.