3 ms·

To be fair, nearly all ground-based observatories in the US are privately owned and operated. (Actually, they're almost all owned and operated by those evil co

by splat 15y ago

To be fair, nearly all ground-based observatories in the US are privately owned and operated. (Actually, they're almost all owned and operated by those evil corporations!) Most of the money that funds these observatories ultimately comes from the federal government, of course, but the fact that they're privately run gives them a great deal more flexibility than NASA-run observatories get. Although space-based observatories are generally more expensive than ground-based observatories, there are privately owned ground-based observatories being built of comparable size to Kepler.

InclinedPlane 15y ago
Keep in mind that the cost to design and build a telescope like, say, Keck is roughly on par with the cost to merely launch a spacecraft like Kepler. In total the Kepler mission will end up costing nearly twice what it took to build the flagship ESO VLT observatory which includes 4x 8.2m diameter world-class telescopes. Space is expensive.
lutorm 15y ago
Those evil corporations, though, are basically non-profits whose sole purpose is to manage the facilities. For example: http://www.aura-astronomy.org/about.asp http://www.aura-astronomy.org/about.asp "AURA is a consortium of universities, and educational and other non-profit institutions, that operates world-class astronomical observatories." and http://www.keckobservatory.org/ http://www.keckobservatory.org/: "The Keck Observatory is managed by the California Association for Research in Astronomy, a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization whose board of directors includes representatives from Caltech and the University of California."
lutorm 15y ago
of comparable size to Kepler. Well, Kepler is a <1m telescope, so as far as ground-based astronomy goes, that's something a reasonably well-funded liberal arts college can afford. Space makes all the difference.

by splat 15y ago

InclinedPlane 15y ago

Keep in mind that the cost to design and build a telescope like, say, Keck is roughly on par with the cost to merely launch a spacecraft like Kepler. In total the Kepler mission will end up costing nearly twice what it took to build the flagship ESO VLT observatory which includes 4x 8.2m diameter world-class telescopes. Space is expensive.

lutorm 15y ago

Those evil corporations, though, are basically non-profits whose sole purpose is to manage the facilities. For example: http://www.aura-astronomy.org/about.asp http://www.aura-astronomy.org/about.asp "AURA is a consortium of universities, and educational and other non-profit institutions, that operates world-class astronomical observatories." and http://www.keckobservatory.org/ http://www.keckobservatory.org/: "The Keck Observatory is managed by the California Association for Research in Astronomy, a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization whose board of directors includes representatives from Caltech and the University of California."

lutorm 15y ago

of comparable size to Kepler. Well, Kepler is a <1m telescope, so as far as ground-based astronomy goes, that's something a reasonably well-funded liberal arts college can afford. Space makes all the difference.