4 ms·

I am confused as to why "repair the thing before it catastrophically fails" is not the best of the available options. Decommissioning a facility like this is a

by mmoche 6y ago

I am confused as to why "repair the thing before it catastrophically fails" is not the best of the available options. Decommissioning a facility like this is a loss for science globally, even if there are alternatives available. Telescope time is precious.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
You would have to dig into who is providing funding and how the funds are being spent by UCF, Universidad Ana G. Méndez, and Yang Enterprises Inc (the loose consortium tasked with O&M of the facility). See the latest update on https://www.ucf.edu/news/update-on-arecibo-observatory-facility-after-telescope-damage/# https://www.ucf.edu/news/update-on-arecibo-observatory-facil.... Just a month ago, cable sag surveys and safety assessments were done, and a structural monitoring instrumentation system was installed. I'd be curious what those reports show, and if this most recent failure was anticipated. If it wasn't expected, what was the value of the work last month?
- gambiting 6y ago
  I'm not saying that he should, everyone can spend their money as they wish, but just as a fun thought exercise, could a private, extremely wealthy entity do it? Say, could Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk just say "yep, I'll pay for all the repairs from my own pocket"?
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    Absolutely, but then they should assume control of operations to ensure a tight ship is run. If efficient use of funds is demonstrated, further funding (whether private, public, or crowdsourced) should follow. You don't want to encourage mismanagement of limited funds. Edit: Upon further thought, I think it's an exceptional idea that SpaceX submit itself as an O&M vendor for NSF (and perhaps even NASA) RF/observatory facilities. Between launches and StarLink, they have demonstrated lean execution. @ISL: Your point is noted, but SpaceX has a $50-100 billion valuation, access to capital markets, and StarLink is likely to be very profitable. I don't think it's fair to paint them to be in financial peril as they were during their earlier years. UCF's entire budget is $2 billion, and they can't scrap together a few millions dollars to properly care for Arecibo. UCF and SpaceX have each demonstrated their level of capability.
    - ISL 6y ago
      SpaceX has been so lean that they have been one launch away from bankruptcy. That isn't the right model for a scientific user-facility with a half-century expected lifetime.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - njarboe 6y ago
        Are you talking about back in 2008 when the third launch of the Falcon 1 failed to reach orbit? That was a long time ago. They are not near that situation now. The main goal of SpaceX is creating a human civilization on Mars. Seems to me like they do have the right combination of getting things done and the long view.
    - thro1 6y ago
      Couldn't it be receivers on Starlink satellites plus some computing power instead?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - thro1 6y ago
        It's serious question, from the future.. (but no answer and downvoting - what's wrong ? I know Arecibo is very important) ..about radio telescope arrays, computer power and feasibility. Astronomers complain that they lost the sight of the stars because of Starlink. Could it be somehow compensated by an array of moving, smaller radio telescopes in orbit? Britannica: 'The world’s most powerful radio telescope, in its combination of sensitivity, resolution, and versatility, is the Very Large Array (VLA) located on the plains of San Agustin near Socorro, in central New Mexico, U.S. The VLA consists of 27 parabolic antennas, each measuring 25 metres (82 feet) in diameter. The total collecting area is equivalent to a single 130-metre (430-foot) antenna.' https://www.scientific-computing.com/analysis-opinion/harvesting-data-large-radio-telescope-arrays https://www.scientific-computing.com/analysis-opinion/harves...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
rasz 6y ago
>Telescope time is precious. Clearly not precious enough to fix the observatory.

by mmoche 6y ago

toomuchtodo 6y ago

You would have to dig into who is providing funding and how the funds are being spent by UCF, Universidad Ana G. Méndez, and Yang Enterprises Inc (the loose consortium tasked with O&M of the facility). See the latest update on https://www.ucf.edu/news/update-on-arecibo-observatory-facility-after-telescope-damage/# https://www.ucf.edu/news/update-on-arecibo-observatory-facil.... Just a month ago, cable sag surveys and safety assessments were done, and a structural monitoring instrumentation system was installed. I'd be curious what those reports show, and if this most recent failure was anticipated. If it wasn't expected, what was the value of the work last month?

gambiting 6y ago
I'm not saying that he should, everyone can spend their money as they wish, but just as a fun thought exercise, could a private, extremely wealthy entity do it? Say, could Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk just say "yep, I'll pay for all the repairs from my own pocket"?
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  Absolutely, but then they should assume control of operations to ensure a tight ship is run. If efficient use of funds is demonstrated, further funding (whether private, public, or crowdsourced) should follow. You don't want to encourage mismanagement of limited funds. Edit: Upon further thought, I think it's an exceptional idea that SpaceX submit itself as an O&M vendor for NSF (and perhaps even NASA) RF/observatory facilities. Between launches and StarLink, they have demonstrated lean execution. @ISL: Your point is noted, but SpaceX has a $50-100 billion valuation, access to capital markets, and StarLink is likely to be very profitable. I don't think it's fair to paint them to be in financial peril as they were during their earlier years. UCF's entire budget is $2 billion, and they can't scrap together a few millions dollars to properly care for Arecibo. UCF and SpaceX have each demonstrated their level of capability.
  - ISL 6y ago
    SpaceX has been so lean that they have been one launch away from bankruptcy. That isn't the right model for a scientific user-facility with a half-century expected lifetime.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - njarboe 6y ago
      Are you talking about back in 2008 when the third launch of the Falcon 1 failed to reach orbit? That was a long time ago. They are not near that situation now. The main goal of SpaceX is creating a human civilization on Mars. Seems to me like they do have the right combination of getting things done and the long view.
  - thro1 6y ago
    Couldn't it be receivers on Starlink satellites plus some computing power instead?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - thro1 6y ago
      It's serious question, from the future.. (but no answer and downvoting - what's wrong ? I know Arecibo is very important) ..about radio telescope arrays, computer power and feasibility. Astronomers complain that they lost the sight of the stars because of Starlink. Could it be somehow compensated by an array of moving, smaller radio telescopes in orbit? Britannica: 'The world’s most powerful radio telescope, in its combination of sensitivity, resolution, and versatility, is the Very Large Array (VLA) located on the plains of San Agustin near Socorro, in central New Mexico, U.S. The VLA consists of 27 parabolic antennas, each measuring 25 metres (82 feet) in diameter. The total collecting area is equivalent to a single 130-metre (430-foot) antenna.' https://www.scientific-computing.com/analysis-opinion/harvesting-data-large-radio-telescope-arrays https://www.scientific-computing.com/analysis-opinion/harves...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

rasz 6y ago

>Telescope time is precious. Clearly not precious enough to fix the observatory.