3 ms·
I mean, it's location is still surely ideal. But it's clear the construction that's there isn't safe. I wonder if, provided they're able to dismantle the remain
by ocdtrekkie 6y ago
I mean, it's location is still surely ideal. But it's clear the construction that's there isn't safe. I wonder if, provided they're able to dismantle the remaining facility without complete collapse, if it'd be reasonable to "rebuild" on the same site.
It sounds like the towers should be rebuilt, all of the cables replaced, etc. And obviously the dish at minimum needs repair. I can't imagine anything would be salvageable from a complete collapse, but if they can bring down the observatory safely, it might not be crazy to think they could erect a new one over the dish at a later date.
- tomatotomato37 6y agoIs it an ideal location though? From an astrophysics perspective I bet it's ideal, but from a structural perspective it's still a large steel structure in the tropics that's also simultaneously in both a hurricane and earthquake zone, which to me seems closer to a worst case scenario than a perfect spot to build. Ignoring geopolitical matters I wonder if an installation on the same latitude in the mexican mountains would be better spot to build such a thing.
- bobthepanda 6y agoI mean the geopolitical status of Puerto Rico is not necessarily better, given that even today PR has terrible power infrastructure and no clear plan to fix it.
- JetSpiegel 6y agoMaybe if it was the 51st state instead of a colony, the political will would magically appear?
- notabee 6y agoYou have a good point, but we also have many decades' worth of engineering improvements that could likely be used to mitigate some of the risks.