5 ms·

If they can't find $8M to extend this ones life for 10 years then I highly doubt they are going to get a new one. Unfortunately.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago
Given how much money is thrown around by rich people, I find it so hard to believe that $8M for something like this is nowhere to be found.
- hgomersall 3y ago
  The free market in action! As everyone knows, if nobody is willing to pay, then nobody values it.
  - blamazon 3y ago
    More like the free market inaction.
- Ekaros 3y ago
  I think there are probably dozens of things like this(not exactly but random things) that could use also millions. Like that observatory. And there is only so much willingness to spend money.
- gedy 3y ago
  or maybe California or the federal government's budget?
- kjs3 3y ago
  Doesn't generate enough clicks.
OldGuyInTheClub 3y ago
A sad commentary no doubt. But, it is always tough to get donors to cough up sustainment funds. The glamor is in the new. Might be easier to get more if the naming rights are offered up. Newer isn't always better but one can hope the same foresight and build quality can be brought to a future design.
phire 3y ago
I suspect there is very little justification for a manned platform anymore. It requires are crew of five (not including the up-to 11 scientists). Much of the science would probably be better off without noise introduced by crew and the generators. Scientists might be better off with an unmanned battery powered platform. Or unmanned ROVs. And if you do need a manned platform, the deep sea oil industry now operates hundreds of them. It might be cheaper for scientists to simply piggy-back on those.
- Certified 3y ago
  >And if you do need a manned platform, the deep sea oil industry now operates hundreds of them. It might be cheaper for scientists to simply piggy-back on those. Not that much cheaper. At least in the US based oil companies I have worked with, the cost of sending even one person to an offshore platform can easily exceed 20k USD. Everyone on the platform has to have extensive safety training. Only a few training facilities are setup to do things like Helicopter Underwater Escape Training [1] so the cost is pretty high. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHTk3JNtMlw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHTk3JNtMlw
  - zirgs 3y ago
    20k sounds like peanuts compared to the cost of maintaining their own platform.
gregoriol 3y ago
Is it only about money or could it also be about its usefulness? I have no information on this, but like when Arecibo collapsed, there were discussions about how much it would cost to fix it and how useful it could be. Maybe it has made a lot of research, and some new research directions would better make use of another kind of tool?
yreg 3y ago
It apparently cost 600k to build[0] (6M in 2023 USD), much less than I would expect. [0] https://scripps.ucsd.edu/ships/flip/history https://scripps.ucsd.edu/ships/flip/history
- spoonjim 3y ago
  It would cost $600m minimum today

Cthulhu_ 3y ago

Given how much money is thrown around by rich people, I find it so hard to believe that $8M for something like this is nowhere to be found.

hgomersall 3y ago
The free market in action! As everyone knows, if nobody is willing to pay, then nobody values it.
- blamazon 3y ago
  More like the free market inaction.
Ekaros 3y ago
I think there are probably dozens of things like this(not exactly but random things) that could use also millions. Like that observatory. And there is only so much willingness to spend money.
gedy 3y ago
or maybe California or the federal government's budget?
kjs3 3y ago
Doesn't generate enough clicks.

OldGuyInTheClub 3y ago

A sad commentary no doubt. But, it is always tough to get donors to cough up sustainment funds. The glamor is in the new. Might be easier to get more if the naming rights are offered up. Newer isn't always better but one can hope the same foresight and build quality can be brought to a future design.

phire 3y ago

I suspect there is very little justification for a manned platform anymore. It requires are crew of five (not including the up-to 11 scientists). Much of the science would probably be better off without noise introduced by crew and the generators. Scientists might be better off with an unmanned battery powered platform. Or unmanned ROVs. And if you do need a manned platform, the deep sea oil industry now operates hundreds of them. It might be cheaper for scientists to simply piggy-back on those.

Certified 3y ago
>And if you do need a manned platform, the deep sea oil industry now operates hundreds of them. It might be cheaper for scientists to simply piggy-back on those. Not that much cheaper. At least in the US based oil companies I have worked with, the cost of sending even one person to an offshore platform can easily exceed 20k USD. Everyone on the platform has to have extensive safety training. Only a few training facilities are setup to do things like Helicopter Underwater Escape Training [1] so the cost is pretty high. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHTk3JNtMlw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHTk3JNtMlw
- zirgs 3y ago
  20k sounds like peanuts compared to the cost of maintaining their own platform.

gregoriol 3y ago

Is it only about money or could it also be about its usefulness? I have no information on this, but like when Arecibo collapsed, there were discussions about how much it would cost to fix it and how useful it could be. Maybe it has made a lot of research, and some new research directions would better make use of another kind of tool?

yreg 3y ago

It apparently cost 600k to build[0] (6M in 2023 USD), much less than I would expect. [0] https://scripps.ucsd.edu/ships/flip/history https://scripps.ucsd.edu/ships/flip/history

spoonjim 3y ago
It would cost $600m minimum today