🚀 go-pugleaf

>>    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.

Yes, given a launch & *recovery* capability, we'd like geosynch 
orbit, but recovery for new instrumentation is an important 
feature. Yes, we'd like a higher orbit because of the problems 
of drag, but not necessarily too high because of radiation damage
to the solar panels. Unfortunately, the max altitude possible is
barely acceptable, assuming the current solar maximum behaves 
as now expected.

BTW, the figure I heard for the HST storage at Lockheed was
$7 million per month.

Bill Wyatt, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory  (Cambridge, MA, USA)
    UUCP :  {husc6,cmcl2,mit-eddie}!harvard!cfa!wyatt
 Internet:   wyatt@cfa.harvard.edu
     SPAN:   cfa::wyatt                 BITNET: wyatt@cfa