After three decades in space, the Hubble telescope is slowly and irreversibly losing altitude. Without propulsion to maintain its orbit, the telescope will fall back to Earth between 2033 and 2034 — and this time, there is no Space Shuttle to rescue it. But NASA has changed its mind.
On October 29, the space agency published a Request for Information (RFI) inviting private companies to propose concepts for three types of mission: boost Hubble to a higher orbit (at least 600 km altitude), perform maintenance services to enhance its scientific capabilities, or conduct a safe controlled reentry into Earth's atmosphere. Any mission would need to occur by 2032 — leaving roughly five years to plan, fund, and execute an operation never attempted in this format.
The pivot is significant. In 2022, Jared Isaacman — then a billionaire space tourist — offered to fund most of a crewed mission to reboost Hubble aboard a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft. NASA also solicited industry ideas that year and received eight proposals. In 2024, however, it decided not to pursue any of them. Now, under Isaacman's administration as NASA administrator, the landscape has changed dramatically.
"Hubble still has important science ahead of it, and we should be looking at every reasonable opportunity to keep it delivering for as long as possible," Isaacman said in a statement. "If there are innovative and cost-effective ways to extend the life of an asset already on orbit, we owe it to the American taxpayer and the scientific community to explore them."
The decaying orbit problem
Hubble orbits at approximately 470 km altitude. At that level, residual atmospheric drag from Earth gradually degrades the orbit. Unlike larger satellites, the telescope has no thrusters to perform reboost maneuvers. The last orbital raise was conducted during the Space Shuttle Columbia's 2002 flight, which elevated Hubble to approximately 583 km. The final 2009 visit — the fifth and last shuttle mission — did not include reboost.
Following its current trajectory, the probability of uncontrolled reentry is 10% by September 2032, rises to 50% by December 2033, and Hubble is massive enough to pose a small but real risk to ground populations if it decomposes without control.
The Swift observatory, smaller and already in rapid decay, is about to burn up in the atmosphere — a reminder of what happens when space technology evolves and aging assets are abandoned. But Hubble is not an ordinary satellite: it is 11 metric tons of scientific instrumentation that revolutionized astronomy since its 1990 launch.
Three paths, none easy
NASA's RFI opens three avenues, each with distinct technical challenges:
1. Orbital reboost: a spacecraft would need to dock with Hubble, raise its orbit to at least 600 km, and ensure the maneuver does not damage the telescope. The challenge includes the fragility of internal mirrors and instruments — Hubble was designed for astronaut maintenance, not robotic capture.
2. Upgrades and servicing: beyond keeping Hubble operational, the mission could install new instruments or replace degraded components, extending both altitude and scientific lifespan. This would require developing hardware compatible with 1990s design — decades of technological incompatibility to overcome.
3. Controlled reentry: if no extension mission is viable, the alternative is to guide Hubble into a safe atmospheric burn, minimizing risks to populations. This would be the cheapest option, but also the one representing the definitive end of 36 years of continuous scientific discovery.
The political and financial context
What makes this story particularly interesting is the timing. Isaacman has not only changed NASA's approach to Hubble — he is positioning the agency as a vector for commercial space business. The difference between 2024 and 2026 is vast: instead of evaluating proposals and rejecting them for cost, the administration now actively seeks private investment to maintain orbital assets.
The RFI commits no budget. NASA has not guaranteed funding for a mission. This places the burden on companies: whoever wants to save Hubble must structure their own investment, hoping for future return in contracts or credibility for commercial operations.
SpaceX has already demonstrated interest in orbital refueling — startup DeltaView raised funding for orbital refueling hardware, and Katalyst Space received $30 million from NASA for orbital servicing development. The commercial space services ecosystem is taking shape, and Hubble would be the first large-scale test.
Isaacman expects responses from robotics companies rather than astronauts. A crewed visit is increasingly unlikely: SpaceX plans to discontinue the Crew Dragon by 2030, and NASA has already transferred its crewed flights to Boeing. The future of Hubble, if there is one, will be robotic.
The response deadline is November 30. The question remains whether the commercial space industry truly has the technical maturity and financial appetite to take on such an iconic asset — or whether Hubble will meet the same fate as other telescopes humanity left in space, quietly consumed by decaying orbit.
Sources: NASA Science, SatelliteProme, The Next Web
✓ Independent sources cross-checked and verified before publishing
