[] https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jNgqXUj6dDVWbSvkw5ngMk-970...
[] https://www.space.com/james-webb-space-telescope-micrometeor...
> Post-impact, however, the error increased to 258 nm rms, but realignments to the mirror segments as a whole reduced the overall impact to just 59 nm rms. For the time being, the team wrote Webb's alignment is well within performance limits, as the realigned mirror segments are "about 5-10 nm rms above the previous best wavefront error rms values."
There is no debating that that big strike was outside the model.
Yes it is. That means the model is wrong. Hopefully JWST doesn't devolve into a micrometeorite detector. That instrument could have been built and operated at far lower cost and one wonders if that shouldn't have been done beforehand.
The bigger concern would probably be how much sunshade damage the telescope can handle, although fortunately there's a good bit of redundancy on that too.
There's a future where we never do anything like it again because reusable rockets mean multiple launch orbital assembly is just plain cheaper.
At a guess: all such theories have been debated and rejected by the people that built then thing in the first place.
Speaking of telescope being shot with a gun.. There is a telescope in Texas (Harlan J. Smith Telescope at McDonald observatory) that was shot a few times by someone in the 1970s in the hopes of shattering the main mirror. The overall effect however was only a 1% reduction in the light gathering power and the telescope is still in regular use today. You can find a picture of the primary mirror here [1].
[1] https://astroanecdotes.com/2015/03/26/the-mcdonald-gun-shoot...
0: https://astroanecdotes.com/2015/03/26/the-mcdonald-gun-shoot...