By Matt Phillips
Special to the Review

How many people have experienced major computer problems? You know the kind that happen right in the middle of something really important. ‘Freeze.? Everything seizes up, or you get the dreaded ‘blue screen.?
Unfortunately for the crew of Space Shuttle Mission STS-125, which includes 1983 Lake Orion High School graduate Dr. Andrew J. Feustel, that same type of calamity struck the famed Hubble Telescope on Saturday, Sept. 27. However, in this case, the on-board computer is traveling 350 miles above earth at a speed of 17,500 miles per hour.
During normal data back-up procedures, the Hubble’s main computer, also referred to as the Science Instrument Command and Data Handling (SIC&DH) system, sent back a signal that it was going into ‘safe mode.? It was not expected and, as we all know, not good.
Since that time, NASA engineers have been scrambling to develop a solution as quickly as possible to ensure the scheduled mission to complete other repairs to the Hubble Telescope would continue as planned. According to Preston Burch, NASA’s Hubble manager at Goddard Space Flight Center, there are three initiatives going on to address this issue.
‘Number one is to further explore the failure and definitely prove that there are no viable work-arounds. Number two is to prepare to switch over to Side B (a redundant system designed as a ‘safety net? to Side A which failed). The third activity is to put together a plan to take the back-up spare SIC&DH system that we have here on the ground and put it through a qualification program to ready it for flight so that the STS-125 crew could change out the unit.?
So what does this mean for Atlantis and its seven-person crew? More patience, some additional training and putting their dream on hold for now.
While setbacks are never fun for anyone, Ed Weiler, associate administrator of the Science Mission Directorate, NASA takes the ‘glass half-full? approach.
‘In some sense, if this had to happen, it couldn’t have happened at a better time. What if this failure had occurred two weeks after the mission? We would have just put brand-new instruments in and thought we had extended [Hubble’s] life for five to ten years, and then if this thing failed, we could have lost the mission in six, 12, or 18 months.?
Those sentiments are echoed by Feustel.
‘While the entire STS-125 crew is disappointed, we understand the need for further planning to insure the highest probability of success with the mission.? Feustel said. ‘This mission has already dealt with setbacks due to equipment readiness, hurricanes and training schedules, so the crew is accustomed to delays and will be ready when the time is right. This hardware situation may enhance an already aggressive mission due to the fact that a back-up unit must be thoroughly tested before it can be space ready.?
Feustel, who was scheduled to conduct three of the five planned extravehicular activities (EVA or space walks) necessary for the previously planned repairs, added, ‘Since we have trained extensively to master the established docket of repairs, and since the schedule is so tightly synchronized, adding another task would now involve a complete reevaluation of the EVA timelines along with months of additional training in order to increase our proficiency with these new tasks.?
With the testing and preparations necessary, NASA officials have yet to establish a new tentative date for the launch of STS-125, however, it now appears likely to be pushed back until February 2009.
Please be sure to check out The Review in the coming months for updates on Dr. Drew Feustel and the status of Space Shuttle Mission STS-125.