4 ms·

I wonder how hard it would be to make a scaled up version of JWST to take advantage of the extra space? Exact same design, but with an origami mirror 5x (?) the

I wonder how hard it would be to make a scaled up version of JWST to take advantage of the extra space? Exact same design, but with an origami mirror 5x (?) the size.

jvanderbot 3y ago
If we're still unfolding telescopes I'll be surprised. Seems a lot easier to send segments and just assemble them robotically. Just a bit of actuation in each mirror segment, a scaffold, and then you pick and place your way to a 250m telescope that can pick out continents on exoplanets. (I have not done the math to determine if that's the right scale, but clearly multi launch and assemble scales better than bigger rocket and origami.)
- junofan 3y ago
  Who do you think you are, some kinda JPL engineer ;) Downvoted /s
  - guraf 3y ago
    Maybe this kind of delusional thinking is why he's no longer at NASA...
    - jvanderbot 3y ago
      I picked up these ideas at NASA. Or rather, JPL. They tolerate some crazy talk if you have a decent value proposition.
- LargeTomato 3y ago
  Define easier :) if it really were easier I think it would have been done that way. We can't even assemble JWST robotically on earth in a lab at 1G. On orbit manufacturing is not mature enough yet to assemble something like JWST. There are too many problems that need to be solved.
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    There was never an era until now (well after JWST design was finalized) that multi-launch was an option. We're referring to the next launch. > We can't even assemble JWST robotically on earth in a lab at 1G. > On orbit manufacturing is not mature enough yet to assemble something like JWST. You may have missed the future-tense-ness of the post.
    - LargeTomato 3y ago
      Ahh I see. Not just an armchair rocket scientist but an armchair futurist rocket scientist to bat!
      - jvanderbot 3y ago
        Oh a straw man! Let's get it! I drew part of my salary from NASA helping define the roadmaps for in space assembly of telescopes, costs, benefits, and required technology. The pick and place concept is well described in NASA report outs. Thats the only reason I mention it. It's an interesting concept with well established merits. https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/science-enabling-technology/technology-highlights/in-space-telescope-assembly/ https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/science-enabling-t... I'm standing on the upper right of that photo. It was a fun study and I'm lucky to have been in the room at the time
- wrsh07 3y ago
  Are there good companies focused on robotic assembly in space? Would we expect this to be something space x develops?
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    Made in Space is working on in-space manufacturing. in-space servicing is the closest angle, and there's a few players I can't recall at the moment.
wlesieutre 3y ago
It won’t actually built but a larger folding mirror design was explored in the LUVOIR (Large Ultraviolet Optical Infrared Surveyor) mission concept. Scroll down the wiki article for a comparison of the JWST and LUVOIR-A mirror size. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Ultraviolet_Optical_Infrared_Surveyor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Ultraviolet_Optical_Infr... Parts of that research could end up incorporated into the Habitable Worlds Observatory project. https://www.keckobservatory.org/hwo/ https://www.keckobservatory.org/hwo/
- shagie 3y ago
  The unrolling of the mirrors is rather neat - https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/luvoir/design/ https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/luvoir/design/
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
LargeTomato 3y ago
You would need to increase the size of the sun shield, structures, mechanisms, etc. A scaling up would cascade into a massive amount of design changes. For all we know, if JWST had been allotted 5x the volume they might not have gone with the current design. If we wanted to naively scale it up and "patch" what needed patching we might end up with an incredibly heavy spacecraft that isn't as good as it could be.

I wonder how hard it would be to make a scaled up version of JWST to take advantage of the extra space? Exact same design, but with an origami mirror 5x (?) the size.

jvanderbot 3y ago

If we're still unfolding telescopes I'll be surprised. Seems a lot easier to send segments and just assemble them robotically. Just a bit of actuation in each mirror segment, a scaffold, and then you pick and place your way to a 250m telescope that can pick out continents on exoplanets. (I have not done the math to determine if that's the right scale, but clearly multi launch and assemble scales better than bigger rocket and origami.)

junofan 3y ago
Who do you think you are, some kinda JPL engineer ;) Downvoted /s
- guraf 3y ago
  Maybe this kind of delusional thinking is why he's no longer at NASA...
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    I picked up these ideas at NASA. Or rather, JPL. They tolerate some crazy talk if you have a decent value proposition.
LargeTomato 3y ago
Define easier :) if it really were easier I think it would have been done that way. We can't even assemble JWST robotically on earth in a lab at 1G. On orbit manufacturing is not mature enough yet to assemble something like JWST. There are too many problems that need to be solved.
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  There was never an era until now (well after JWST design was finalized) that multi-launch was an option. We're referring to the next launch. > We can't even assemble JWST robotically on earth in a lab at 1G. > On orbit manufacturing is not mature enough yet to assemble something like JWST. You may have missed the future-tense-ness of the post.
  - LargeTomato 3y ago
    Ahh I see. Not just an armchair rocket scientist but an armchair futurist rocket scientist to bat!
    - jvanderbot 3y ago
      Oh a straw man! Let's get it! I drew part of my salary from NASA helping define the roadmaps for in space assembly of telescopes, costs, benefits, and required technology. The pick and place concept is well described in NASA report outs. Thats the only reason I mention it. It's an interesting concept with well established merits. https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/science-enabling-technology/technology-highlights/in-space-telescope-assembly/ https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/science-enabling-t... I'm standing on the upper right of that photo. It was a fun study and I'm lucky to have been in the room at the time
wrsh07 3y ago
Are there good companies focused on robotic assembly in space? Would we expect this to be something space x develops?
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  Made in Space is working on in-space manufacturing. in-space servicing is the closest angle, and there's a few players I can't recall at the moment.

wlesieutre 3y ago

It won’t actually built but a larger folding mirror design was explored in the LUVOIR (Large Ultraviolet Optical Infrared Surveyor) mission concept. Scroll down the wiki article for a comparison of the JWST and LUVOIR-A mirror size. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Ultraviolet_Optical_Infrared_Surveyor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Ultraviolet_Optical_Infr... Parts of that research could end up incorporated into the Habitable Worlds Observatory project. https://www.keckobservatory.org/hwo/ https://www.keckobservatory.org/hwo/

shagie 3y ago
The unrolling of the mirrors is rather neat - https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/luvoir/design/ https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/luvoir/design/

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

LargeTomato 3y ago

You would need to increase the size of the sun shield, structures, mechanisms, etc. A scaling up would cascade into a massive amount of design changes. For all we know, if JWST had been allotted 5x the volume they might not have gone with the current design. If we wanted to naively scale it up and "patch" what needed patching we might end up with an incredibly heavy spacecraft that isn't as good as it could be.