Hubble Space Telescope: Repair or Replace (1993)
by Anonymous
After Hubble launched with a flawed mirror, NASA had to decide between an expensive space shuttle repair mission or building a replacement. The daring repair mission succeeded and Hubble became the most productive scientific instrument ever.
Repair in Orbit (STS-61)
1993
year
~$700 million for repair mission
cost
Complex spacewalks, never done at this scale
risk
Chosen — fixed, Hubble operated for 30+ years
outcome
Build Replacement Telescope
1993
year
Billions, years of delay
cost
Low technical risk, high political risk
risk
Not chosen — too slow and expensive
outcome
Abandon Hubble
1993
year
None additional
cost
Massive PR disaster for NASA
risk
Not chosen — would have ended public support for space science
outcome
Like this comparison? Make it your own.
Sign up to use as templateMore in History
Turing: Breaking Enigma Methodology (1939)
Electromechanical Machine (Bombe) vs Mathematical Analysis Alone vs Rely on Captured Codebooks
Roosevelt: New Deal or Austerity (1933)
New Deal (Government Intervention) vs Austerity (Hoover's Approach)
Google: PageRank vs Directory Model (1998)
PageRank (Algorithmic) vs Human-Curated Directory (Yahoo) vs Keyword Matching (AltaVista)
Tokugawa Shogunate: Close Japan (Sakoku) (1633)
Closed Country (Sakoku) vs Continue Open Trade
Sydney Opera House: Utzon's Design (1957)
Utzon's Sail Design vs Conventional Concert Hall
Truman: Drop the Atomic Bomb or Invade Japan (1945)
Drop the Atomic Bomb vs Operation Downfall (Invasion) vs Continued Blockade and Bombing