4 ms·

This is not a matter of incompetence. They even had auxiliary cables installed some time ago, one of these was the first to fail. All well-known best practices

by bipson 6y ago

This is not a matter of incompetence. They even had auxiliary cables installed some time ago, one of these was the first to fail. All well-known best practices don't matter if structures cannot be maintained because the governing bodies deny the necessary funding for maintenance/repairs/operation. In a sense Arecibo was knowingly "given up".

dmurray 6y ago
Well, there was a bit of incompetence. The auxiliary cable was almost certainly installed incorrectly and the failure mode that occurred (cable slipped out of its socket) would not have happened if best practices were followed. But it was installed on the cheap: if they'd had more money they would likely have paid for more diligent engineers. After all, they built it pretty well the first time round. So at some level, yeah, the root cause is a lack of funds.
- olsonjeffery 6y ago
  >Well, there was a bit of incompetence. Where? What evidence do you have for such a claim? >The auxiliary cable was almost certainly installed incorrectly Are you almost certain? How do you know? What stopped you from being completely certain? >and the failure mode that occurred (cable slipped out of its socket) would not have happened if best practices were followed. Are you a radio observatory specialist? Please share! Looking at your submission and comment history, you don't appear to have any special expertise at all. Curious where your very specific and definite pronouncements arise from. >But it was installed on the cheap Again: What's your evidence for this claim? And inferring this from historical under-funding isn't a satisfactory answer. >So at some level, yeah, the root cause is a lack of funds. Kind of strange to make all of those claims above and then come out and just plainly state this at the conclusion. You've made lots of claims and I think you're just talking out of your ass. If that's the case, your comments are shameful and inappropriate.
  - bigbubba 6y ago
    When it comes to the matter of cables failing, you should look to a specialist in cables, not radio telescopes.
  - packetslave 6y ago
    why are you so angry?
- demygale 6y ago
  The incompetence is by design. Austerity programs starve government agencies, or in the case of the US postal service, install administrators who will operate with malicious intent. You see this in schools, municipal water, and in the CDC. Once failing, the money is diverted to more politically advantageous causes or privatized to the enrichment of the regulating politicians. Conservatives have been playing this game for decades in the US.
- z2 6y ago
  Not to defend incompetence, but could the design have made it a bit unwieldy with the 900 (US) ton receiver housing the array of focusing lenses/mirrors? Is it common enough to suspend something that massive from so few points? The only comparison I know is the FAST which opted to actively deform the dish itself for focusing rather than suspend such a heavy receiver.
  - ajford 6y ago
    The original platform didn't include the Gregorian dome. The auxiliary cables were added in the mid 90s during a major upgrade that included the dome, adding a considerable amount of weight. The choices were made based on funding and ability. The main platform, towers, and reflector was designed and constructed in 1960, long before our computing capabilities could have even conceived of being able to accurately deform the surface. Heck, the reason the dome is so massive is that it holds a secondary and tertiary reflector to convert the focal line (an artifact of the primary reflector being a spheroid instead of a parabola) into a focal point. Also, the 30-ton platform in FAST is the main limitation preventing FAST from being able to perform planetary radar science. It is too small and cannot support the weight necessary for a radar system of sufficient capacity.
    - knaq 6y ago
      In lots of telescope designs, the sensor is behind the dish. The part in front of the dish is only a reflector. Done that way, weight of a transmitter doesn't matter.
ars 6y ago
> cannot be maintained because the governing bodies deny the necessary funding for maintenance/repairs/operation. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_Observatory#Funding_reductions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_Observatory#Funding_re... funding was reduced 15 years ago. Around 5 years ago there was talk about shutting this facility down. So yah, it was knowingly given up, but it wasn't just a short term thought, this was decades of administrators all saying the same thing.

by bipson 6y ago

dmurray 6y ago

Well, there was a bit of incompetence. The auxiliary cable was almost certainly installed incorrectly and the failure mode that occurred (cable slipped out of its socket) would not have happened if best practices were followed. But it was installed on the cheap: if they'd had more money they would likely have paid for more diligent engineers. After all, they built it pretty well the first time round. So at some level, yeah, the root cause is a lack of funds.

olsonjeffery 6y ago
>Well, there was a bit of incompetence. Where? What evidence do you have for such a claim? >The auxiliary cable was almost certainly installed incorrectly Are you almost certain? How do you know? What stopped you from being completely certain? >and the failure mode that occurred (cable slipped out of its socket) would not have happened if best practices were followed. Are you a radio observatory specialist? Please share! Looking at your submission and comment history, you don't appear to have any special expertise at all. Curious where your very specific and definite pronouncements arise from. >But it was installed on the cheap Again: What's your evidence for this claim? And inferring this from historical under-funding isn't a satisfactory answer. >So at some level, yeah, the root cause is a lack of funds. Kind of strange to make all of those claims above and then come out and just plainly state this at the conclusion. You've made lots of claims and I think you're just talking out of your ass. If that's the case, your comments are shameful and inappropriate.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  When it comes to the matter of cables failing, you should look to a specialist in cables, not radio telescopes.
- packetslave 6y ago
  why are you so angry?
demygale 6y ago
The incompetence is by design. Austerity programs starve government agencies, or in the case of the US postal service, install administrators who will operate with malicious intent. You see this in schools, municipal water, and in the CDC. Once failing, the money is diverted to more politically advantageous causes or privatized to the enrichment of the regulating politicians. Conservatives have been playing this game for decades in the US.
z2 6y ago
Not to defend incompetence, but could the design have made it a bit unwieldy with the 900 (US) ton receiver housing the array of focusing lenses/mirrors? Is it common enough to suspend something that massive from so few points? The only comparison I know is the FAST which opted to actively deform the dish itself for focusing rather than suspend such a heavy receiver.
- ajford 6y ago
  The original platform didn't include the Gregorian dome. The auxiliary cables were added in the mid 90s during a major upgrade that included the dome, adding a considerable amount of weight. The choices were made based on funding and ability. The main platform, towers, and reflector was designed and constructed in 1960, long before our computing capabilities could have even conceived of being able to accurately deform the surface. Heck, the reason the dome is so massive is that it holds a secondary and tertiary reflector to convert the focal line (an artifact of the primary reflector being a spheroid instead of a parabola) into a focal point. Also, the 30-ton platform in FAST is the main limitation preventing FAST from being able to perform planetary radar science. It is too small and cannot support the weight necessary for a radar system of sufficient capacity.
  - knaq 6y ago
    In lots of telescope designs, the sensor is behind the dish. The part in front of the dish is only a reflector. Done that way, weight of a transmitter doesn't matter.

ars 6y ago

> cannot be maintained because the governing bodies deny the necessary funding for maintenance/repairs/operation. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_Observatory#Funding_reductions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_Observatory#Funding_re... funding was reduced 15 years ago. Around 5 years ago there was talk about shutting this facility down. So yah, it was knowingly given up, but it wasn't just a short term thought, this was decades of administrators all saying the same thing.