Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!bellcore!att!cbnewsh!mjb
From: mjb@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (michael.j.burns)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Misc. Shuttle questions (combined)
Summary: Hubble Orbit
Message-ID: <7870@cbnewsh.ATT.COM>
Date: 2 Feb 90 04:32:08 GMT
References: <33348@cci632.UUCP> <1990Jan28.012650.19697@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 18

In article <1990Jan28.012650.19697@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <33348@cci632.UUCP> djw@cci632.UUCP (David Wright) writes:
> >    2)  I'm curious about the upcoming Hubble Space Telescope  mission.  
> >        I would assume that it is due to be placed in a geosynchronous orbit.
> 
> Nope.  The astronomers would probably prefer it, but HST is going to be in
> low Earth orbit like most other major science missions.  The reason is
> economic:  a low orbit maximizes payload with a given launcher.  HST is
> just too big for the boost up to Clarke (geostationary) orbit.

The low orbit also makes it possible for astronauts to perform maintenance
on HST as needed later.  When I worked at Lockheed at NASA JSC back in 1985
and 1986 some of my co-workers were evaluating EVS scenarios for such
maintenance missions.

Mike Burns
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Holmdel, NJ