NASA has announced that it's the new owner of two ready-made space telescopes, courtesy of a government intelligence agency. But like many gifts, they aren’t exactly free.

Charity isn’t dead in the cold, bureaucratic hallways of the federal government. Earlier this week, astronomers announced that the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) offered NASA a pair of declassified space telescopes last year, free of charge. They have the same aperture as Hubble. The NRO, which oversees U.S. spy satellites, had deemed the telescopes unsuitable for intelligence missions, and they have been sitting in a warehouse in Rochester, New York, ever since.

The Hubble Space Telescope

As astronomers contemplate the coming demise of the Hubble Space Telescope, two newly bequeathed scopes may be a needed boon — if the money to retrofit them can be found.


After taking a close look at the scopes, NASA accepted. The telescopes, unofficially dubbed NRO-1 and NRO-2, represent a unique opportunity to advance science with relatively modest impact on NASA’s beleaguered bottom line: they are high-quality instruments with state-of-the-art optics and the ability to house instruments supporting a wide variety of science missions. Each has a superb, 1/20th-wave 2.4-meter (7.9-foot) primary mirror. They are shorter and stubbier than Hubble, with f/1.2 primary mirrors compared to Hubble's f/2.3 primary. But that means they could potentially have a field of view up to a hundred times larger.

Though designed for looking down at the ground, they are “optically perfect,” says Alan Dressler (Carnegie Observatories), and could provide an excellent wide-field complement to Hubble and the oft-delayed James Webb Space Telescope.

One catch: they come with no instruments on the back end — no cameras, spectrographs, or anything.

Although getting the NRO telescopes equipped and into space anytime soon is unlikely at best, even one of them could help to fulfill some of the goals of the 2010 Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey, a list of astronomers' top priorities for the next ten years. At the top of this wish list was the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST) project, which would address several high-priority science programs such as investigating dark energy, performing infrared sky surveys, and hunting for exoplanets.

Astronomers had envisioned WFIRST as a 1.5-meter wide-field telescope, but the 2.4-meter NRO-1 could easily fill the role: depending on configuration, the telescope could have a field of view about the same as WFIRST’s but could see objects twice as faint.

That capability would make it a good partner for the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) in observing the infrared sky. With a larger field of view but lower sensitivity, NRO-1 could pick out interesting targets through surveys that JWST could then home in on with its narrower, deeper, sharper view.

But NRO-1 would be far from free. Just as a winning contestant on The Price is Right pays income tax and maintenance for her “free” Mustang convertible, a host of costs come with the new scope. Dressler, who briefed a National Academy of Sciences committee in Washington, D.C. on potential uses for the telescopes earlier this week, says there are three things necessary to get NRO-1 into space.

First is instrumentation. The telescope today consists mainly of optics and housing, having relinquished its secret spy components before leaving the NRO’s control. Engineers would need to install instruments such as cameras, spectrographs — possibly with further optics — to equip the scope for science missions.

The second is spacecraft capability. The telescope needs a body to house thrusters and communications, gather power via solar cells, and regulate temperature and perform other housekeeping tasks. Those functions are “the name of the game,” says Dressler. “The rest of the telescope just kind of sits there, and electrons move.”

Lastly, the scope needs to get into space, which with the Shuttle program terminated may be the largest hurdle to overcome. Working in its favor is that NRO-1 is a fraction the weight of Hubble, and therefore less expensive to launch. Dressler speculates that tests of NASA’s Space Launch System may provide a serendipitous way to get NRO-1 into orbit. Private-sector launch vehicles such as SpaceX’s Falcon 9 could work as well. Still, the telescope’s path to space remains unclear.

A NASA engineer examines the first six flight-ready JWST primary mirror segments. The JWST project's success might determine the course NASA takes in coming years.

NASA/MSFC/David Higginbotham

Each of these obstacles will cost $100 to $200 million to overcome by Dressler’s estimate. Still, the optics and housing—which NASA now already has — comprise the bulk of the cost of building a space telescope, and Dressler estimates that NRO-1 could be put into service for about $1 billion. That's roughly one third of Hubble’s pre-launch construction bill in 2012 dollars.

Still, cash-strapped NASA doesn’t have the money: much of its astronomy budget is tied up in the costly, perennially delayed JWST. Any launch of NRO-1 is tied to the success of JWST, says Dressler. Assuming the (currently) $9 billion JWST is completed and deployed by 2018, as its latest schedule aims, Dressler thinks NRO-1 could be put into service by 2020 or 2022 — just in time for the next Decadal Survey.

If NASA can launch NRO-1 for $1 billion and do it on a tight schedule — a big if, given the agency’s record — it could open the way for astronomers to successfully pitch NRO-2 for use as more than a mothball collector. A lot of future science may be sitting in a warehouse in Rochester right now.


Image of Anthony Barreiro

Anthony Barreiro

June 8, 2012 at 5:51 pm

It's sad to think that NASA doesn't have enough money to outfit and launch a hand me down spy satellite, while the military industrial complex has money to build telescopes they don't even need. Sigh.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Graham W. Wolf

Graham W. Wolf

June 10, 2012 at 6:44 pm

Here we go again.... turning sword into plowshares (in the nicest possible way). It happened before, when the USAF "retired" a couple of SR-71 "Blackbirds" to NASA-AMES for high altutude research.
YEEHAAAAAAR...Now, we can do some "real" astrophysics!

Graham W. Wolf (Lower Hutt, New Zeraland

P.S. Kodak made a spare HST optical system.... let's see THAT finally put into use! And whilst we're on the subject, what's happend to the old 2.4m mirror that used to be on the INT at Hetsmonceaux, before it was "upgraded" to a 2.54m primary? Anyone out there got an unwanted 1m class Boller and Chivens R-C lying around that they don't want, and would like to donate to NZ? We could probably find a good home for it at Mt John!

"Never throw surplus stuff away... you just might need it later... much sooner than you think".

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Mike W. Herberich

Mike W. Herberich

June 13, 2012 at 6:03 am

A short word, a question actually, about double postings to the "Sky&Telescope" webmasters: how should one go about posting a comment if -as it has happened to me, too- a) after posting it does not appear immediately on the page? How long should one wait to make sure it has been posted already? b) what if it doesn't appear after, say, one full day at all?! That happened to me also, with no transgressing the 2000 word limit! Please comment/ answer. Thank you, guys.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Bruce Mayfield

Bruce Mayfield

June 14, 2012 at 6:46 am

I wholeheartedly second Mike's request. Everything he mentions has happened to me as well. After you carefully compose a comment, you carefully hit the Submit Comment button, and what at least you thought was a well reasoned post is instantly turned into what looks like a demented rant, as if you were pounding on the keyboard! Hey, I HOPE
this double posts to prove our point!

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Mike W. Herberich

Mike W. Herberich

June 14, 2012 at 4:31 pm

Hey, Bruce, I just love your good sense of humor ... especially the "demented rant" bit! Hilarious! OF COURSE, YOUR latest post did NOT show up doubly to make the point ... for once that we would have wished! Murphy struck once more! Let's see what happens to THIS one ...

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Bruce


June 14, 2012 at 5:31 pm

Wow Mike! You just scored a rare triple post. I've only seen a triple once before. How'd you pull it off? Occasionally one may wish to add repetion to his argument.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Mike W. Herberich

Mike W. Herberich

June 16, 2012 at 10:32 am

Yeah, embarrassing, isn't it? Of course, like always, it wasn't intentional. I still thought it was funny and much to the point of the topic! You know, I think the mistake is to watch for your comment posted immediately on either the upcoming or the posting window ... I just succeeded before, for one time, to single post by leaving my current windows and rather firing up a completely new window with Sky&Telescope news ... and there it was: my comment! Now watch out for this one ... trying the same once more ...

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Bruce


June 17, 2012 at 8:35 am

To Mike and all others who have experienced these S&T posting issues, I’ve found that the best way to verify that your post has been received if it doesn’t automatically show up is to simply click the refresh button on your web browser. It’s fast and you avoid the need to log in again.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Stephen Craft

Stephen Craft

June 18, 2012 at 12:08 pm

Hey, guys:

First, thanks for making me laugh -- the double- and triple-postings certainly help make your point more forcefully. We are looking into your question with the help of our hosting company; I'll let you know what comes out of it.

Thanks for reading!
-Stephen Craft

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Richard


June 24, 2012 at 12:49 pm

I can't help but wonder what else lies forgotten in "warehouse 13". Perhaps it is time for an inventory.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

You must be logged in to post a comment.