105 pointsby JumpCrisscross7 hours ago10 comments
  • Reason0776 hours ago
    Roman is scheduled to launch tomorrow (Aug 30) on a Falcon Heavy rocket:

    https://www.space.com/news/live/nancy-grace-roman-telescope-...

  • marze6 hours ago
    For some tasks, surveys in particular, field of view is critical. You would need many Hubble telescopes to do what Roman can do mapping everything out there.

    "What really makes Roman stand out is that it is designed for wide-field imaging. The cameras on telescopes can often only detect objects in a very small patch of sky. If we use the size that the full moon appears in the sky as our guide, Hubble’s field of view is often smaller than that —meaning each picture it takes is of a patch of sky smaller than the full moon. Webb’s instruments often are even smaller than Hubble’s. Each picture taken by Roman, however, will be larger than the full moon, allowing it to survey more of the sky much faster than Hubble or Webb."

    https://science.psu.edu/news/ask-expert-will-roman-help-reve...

    • SoftTalker5 hours ago
      And yet the narrow-field Hubble produced this famous image

      https://science.nasa.gov/mission/hubble/science/universe-unc...

      Those are galaxies. In a field of view "about 1/13th the diameter of the full Moon."

      • drfloyd515 hours ago
        Your point being?

        Hubble in certain circumstances can see narrow and far. If you express this as a cone, you can extrapolate a volume.

        It might be very useful to have something that can search wide and maybe not as far; nearer Earth dangers perhaps. Express that as a wider cone and extrapolate volume.

        • mrkpdl4 hours ago
          I think their point is that it’s amazing.
  • willis9365 hours ago
    Part of the story is everyone being shocked at being under budget and ahead of schedule. I don't know everything, but I think this is reasonably attributable to the fact that this is a retrofit of an obsolete spy satellite. The leftovers of the security sector will be the most advanced scientific space surveyor. I have to wonder what things would look like with different priorities.
    • ChocolateGod5 hours ago
      IIRC the mirror is from a spy satellite, but the chassis and electronics are all NASA.
    • dylan6043 hours ago
      Isn't that also how Hubble started? I'd assume there's a lot of lessons learned to avoid costly research on conversion of the platform.
      • _djo_an hour ago
        No, Hubble didn't reuse any components from spy satellites. However, the chosen mirror diameter was decided by the size of the mirrors being produced for the Keyhole programme, as it meant NASA would be able to reuse Perkin-Elmer's existing fabrication facility.
    • Mawr3 hours ago
      > I have to wonder what things would look like with different priorities.

      Things aren't as simple as more money = more good.

      Rapid progress requires adversity, the kind you'll find when nations compete for military power, for example.

    • 4 hours ago
      undefined
    • dfxm124 hours ago
      People shouldn't be shocked that employees of the US government can deliver things ahead of schedule and under budget.

      The problems are that anyone gave Musk/doge the time of day and that we're too used to the president giving no bid contacts to incompetent donors.

      • ChocolateGod3 hours ago
        Musks company provides not only the most cost effective but also the most reliable access to space that is currently unparalleled by any other company.

        We should thank the government for spending tax money efficiently.

        You should blame the legacy aerospace companies whom purposely inflate contracts and take forever to do things for there being a lack of competition, not Musk.

        • Morromistan hour ago
          As I see it Musk is lobbying the goverment to give him money to do useless stuff & expensive in space like land on the moon again - basically redirecting funds away from useful stuff like the James Webb Telescope for publicity stunts. Not any different from the legacy aerospace companies, who also lobbied like crazy, except on a bigger, dumber scale.
          • ChocolateGodan hour ago
            Starship is mostly funded by Starlink.

            Yes, Musk is a crappy character, but that's not a reason to make things up. This isn't Reddit.

            • Morromist25 minutes ago
              Starship isn't actually operational. I'll let you look at their plans for it and you can tell me if they involve doing things the goverment would pay for like landing on the moon and building space stations or not.
          • dotancohen24 minutes ago
            Then you see it wrong. Plans for returning humans to the surface of the moon have been being developed for longer than you've known Musk's name.

            The Artemis program was developed out of the Constellation program, which was initiated sometime around 2005 or 6.

            • Morromist13 minutes ago
              How is landing on the moon not a publicity stunt? What can the humans do that massively cheaper robots couldn't - besides take some awesome photos and bring back some more moon rocks?

              Of course there have long been plans to go back to the moon because its a cool fun thing to do and whoever happens to be president would likely be well remembered for taking credit for it. That doesn't give it credibility as a useful endeavor.

      • jryle704 hours ago
        > the president giving no bid contacts to incompetent donors

        Are you talking about SLS?

        Oh maybe you'd say that is "Senate Launch System", it's complicated, job program, 50 states sharing, and so on?

  • dylan6043 hours ago
    I'm really excited about observations we're about to see over the next decade. Bringing NGR online and combining with Rubin, Hubble, and JWST will give us imagery and hopefully new discoveries and understanding.

    I had the fortune of letting some of my neighbors through a telescope for the first time for the partial lunar eclipse. I say fortune, because it is amazing to be a part of someone having that experience that never disappoints. Even if they've seen images from NASA/ESA, putting your eyeball directly to the 'scope is much more meaningful.

  • stuart784 hours ago
    This video linked from the site is quite good at adding a sense of scale to the undertaking. I also love that Roman will be supported by Hubble and Webb.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDwemQH2zDU

  • 5 hours ago
    undefined
  • danilor4 hours ago
    I'm wondering what are the considerations for having multiple detectors instead of a single large one! Does anybody have an idea? is it just because it's easier?
    • Starman_Jonesan hour ago
      The primary detector is the wide-field instrument, which, believe it or not, takes pictures with a wide field of view. The secondary detector is the coronagraph instrument, which uses a bunch of funky filters to block out the light from the star to see the halo around it.

      Edit: These are the detectors, which are the cameras. There is only one mirror assembly (with two mirrors) that focuses light into these instruments.

  • BoredomIsFun5 hours ago
    Thankfully, it is not Nancy Ann Grace.
    • y-curious5 hours ago
      The telescope will be used to film sensationalist TV about missing kids
      • hyperhello3 hours ago
        It watches the stars for evidence of guilt.
  • ck26 hours ago
    I'm still holding my breath on this one, will be most amazing telescope in my lifetime

    parked in L2 a million miles away with 500mbps data transfer rate (1.5TB per DAY)

    we've made it past DOGE destroying it

    we've made it past him renaming it after himself and putting his mugshot on it

    but Musk still needs to send it out of orbit without explosions, so here's hoping

    (Falcon Heavy, don't tell me the odds)

    * https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/6983/

    * JWST vs Roman comparison https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/14942/

    * https://www.wired.com/story/nasas-nancy-grace-roman-space-te...

    * https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nasas-roman-space...

    * https://www.npr.org/2026/08/28/nx-s1-5905370/nasa-nancy-grac...

    did not know and it's horrific Roman started as a billion dollar spy satellite sitting in a warehouse unused, but okay we got the crumbs from $20 Trillion in military spending I guess

    oh and while the smallest planet Roman can image will be Jupiter-sized, Roman's successor would be able to image earth-like planets

    except The Habitale Worlds Observatory Space Telescope HWO was scheduled for 2040 and now will not happen in my lifetime because DOGE got that one, Congress awarded it $150 Million and DOGE changed it to $5 Million

    * https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/programs/habitable-wor...

    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitable_Worlds_Observatory

    • dylan6042 hours ago
      > * https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/6983/

      06:25 AM Window Open

      06:26 AM Window Close

      Is it really just a 1 minute launch window? That seems incredibly tight. If there's any hitch in the countdown, that would pretty much mean a scrubbed launch. Not being well versed in orbital mechanics, why would the window be so short?

    • walrus015 hours ago
      Is it really 500 Mbps of data headed to Earth 24x7? I'd be very interested to see any available public info about the earth station infrastructure being set up for that.
    • pjscott33 minutes ago
      > but Musk still needs to send it out of orbit without explosions, so here's hoping

      The Falcon Heavy has made 12 launches and all of them have been successful. It's built using the same engines as the Falcon 9, which has become the boringly reliable workhorse of space launch, and the rocket cores are very similar in design. I'd bet on a successful launch, and probably on a successful landing of the side boosters.

      (Do we really need to politicize launch vehicles, of all things?)

    • consumer4515 hours ago
      > except The Habitale Worlds Observatory Space Telescope HWO was scheduled for 2040 and now will not happen in my lifetime because DOGE got that one, Congress awarded it $150 Million and DOGE changed it to $5 Million

      I was so excited for this. It was the one thing I really wanted to see happen in my own lifetime.

      What a deeply moronic waste.

      • ourmandave4 hours ago
        That's like Hubble funding cuts back in the '70s.

        The NASA budget was $5M as a placeholder, but Noel Hinners cut it to zero to light a fire under the community, instead of a bogus pretend-its-still-happening number.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Space_Telescope#Quest_f...

        • ck23 hours ago
          yeah but we don't recover from this one like the 70s

          the illegal Iran War costs over $120 BILLION, has used over 1000 Tomahawks at $4 Million each (and 1250 patriot missiles)

          a BILLION was stolen from nuclear missile maintenance fund for QatarForceOne

          another BILLION was stolen for all the DC renovations so far that no-one asked for

          billion diverted to his fake "peace board"

          so there is money for war and drapes and gold statues but not science that benefits the world

          hell he spends $2 MILLION EVERY WEEKEND for GOLF, first term and this term, half billion before he is gone

          we could have had people on Mars for all that (not even a project I support but still would be worthy science)

    • ButlerianJihad5 hours ago
      It is not 500mbps but 500Mbps. https://science.nasa.gov/mission/roman-space-telescope/commu...

      "mbps" is a meaningless abbreviation. You need to consistently and correctly use capital letters when communicating technical terms. You cannot "e e cummings" your way into effective writing.

      500 megabits per second works out to 5.4 terabytes per day. No idea where you get 1.5, unless you were thinking of 500Mb/hour!

      60 × 60 × 24 × 500 × 1000000 ÷ 8

      • ck25 hours ago
        my brain is not what it used to be due to long-covid so it's very possible I made a mistake

        but 500 megabits per second to me is 500mbps?

        ie. my cablemodem is 100mbps which is 100 megabits per second?

        and that would [make Roman] 5.4 Terrabytes aka 5.4TB per day

        but the transmitter is not at full speed full power 24/7

        so it is 1.5TB per day in documentation that I do not have handy but vaguely remember

        to repeat the more amazing part is that is from a MILLION MILES away, wow

        (JWST "only" does 23mbps, 23 megabits per second)

        • Sharlin4 hours ago
          The GP is alluding to the fact that the prefix "m" means milli-, not mega-. But that's pointless pedantry. Nobody would ever think that you meant 0.5 bits per second, and bit isn't a SI unit anyway.
        • ButlerianJihad4 hours ago
          No, your cable modem would be 1.08 terabytes per day.

          Does it stop making sense when your calculations for the Roman telescope indicate slower speeds than your connection, which you say is 1/5th the speed?

          Now, since the Roman telescope will be at an L2 point, signal acquisition will always be subject to the Earth's rotation. So there will be multiple ground stations involved across the globe.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Deep_Space_Network

          If the quoted rate by NASA of 1.5 terabytes per day is accurate, then it will not be downlinking 24/7, but in bursts. 500Mbps is also the max, where the actual range will be 250-500. We'll need to account for RFI and packet loss, etc.

  • Mistletoe4 hours ago
    I was scared for a second that the current clown administration had named a space telescope after Nancy Grace the tv personality.
    • macintux4 hours ago
      I suppose we should be grateful he didn’t force his own name at the last minute. I suppose he still has time.
      • lokibumdoan hour ago
        Like Obamacare?
        • gjm11an hour ago
          Very unlike Obamacare, which so far as I can make out was mostly a name given to the thing by its (and Obama's) opponents.