Nasa Hst

In STS-125, NASA will attach a hook so that in future it will be easier to send a robotic spacecraft to orbit a lock on the Hubble Space Telescope.

Given the cost a lot to build and launch, would not it be better to increase a few hundred miles in an orbit high enough (long term) so far in the future it could be revived without leaving zero? Yes, in the distant future it will probably be exceeded, but unlikely to be useless.

Having a useless object the size of Earth orbiting the HST is unnecessary and complicates other orbital missions. The longer it stays up there, the less likely it will be revived, because it will be obsolete. It's not like a normal land based telescope, which can last hundreds of years, because it is no longer a tube with a mirror in it. He has some very sophisiticated systems on board which, with time and advances in technology, less and less interchangeably. If Electornic gyrostabilisers and does not work, the telescope is useless.

It is far cheaper to Chuck and start from scratch than trying to manufacture specialized components to revive an outdated piece of equipment (which, incidentally, is why new programs are building landing Ares rockets rather than revive the Saturn V used on Apollo). It needs a specific control of the orbit, because some of its parts to survive re-entry, therefore should be directed to places where they do not cause damage.

For the final orbit at the end of the life of HST. This is to make a safe re-entry into the atmosphere so as not to land in the middle of New York or something.

There are updated much more into the HST on this mission.

It would be far more expensive to "whip" and run out of orbit.