-
#20
by
Frogstar_Robot
on 02 Nov, 2020 16:44
-
Arecibo Observatory seeks $10.5M for cable repairs after accidentORLANDO, Fla., Nov. 2 (UPI) -- The Arecibo Observatory, the world's most powerful radio space telescope, is seeking $10.5 million to begin repairs after a disastrous cable break in August that damaged the facility in the mountains of Puerto Rico.
Observatory managers, based at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, Fla., made the funding request recently to the National Science Foundation, which owns the observatory.
The $10.5 million is only the first stage of funding that will be needed, and the request could be more than double that amount to make the facility fully functional again, said Ray Lugo, director of the university's Florida Space Institute.
-
#21
by
Swedish chef
on 08 Nov, 2020 16:18
-
-
#22
by
Zed_Noir
on 08 Nov, 2020 21:17
-
With the failure of a main support cable. It appears that all the remaining support cables are suspected. It is more of a rebuild rather than just repairs.
-
#23
by
Sam Ho
on 09 Nov, 2020 03:38
-
-
#24
by
Star One
on 10 Nov, 2020 11:13
-
-
#25
by
Blackstar
on 13 Nov, 2020 17:30
-
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/11/arecibo-observatory-in-puerto-rico-at-risk-of-collapsing/Iconic radio telescope in Puerto Rico is at risk of collapsingArecibo Observatory, which has discovered planets, searched for alien life, and appeared in classic films, is in critical danger after two cables supporting the telescope failed.
PUBLISHED November 12, 2020
One of the world’s most venerable radio telescopes is on the brink of catastrophe, triggering a frantic race by engineers at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico to save it after two critical cables supporting a 900-ton equipment platform broke.
The platform, held aloft over a massive dish by cables strung to towers, must be quickly stabilized, or it could crash to the ground and destroy the telescope. With the loss of these two cables, the remaining cables are under increased strain, and it’s uncertain whether rescue efforts will be successful.
-
#26
by
Blackstar
on 13 Nov, 2020 23:48
-
I just got independent confirmation of the above story. Apparently, it could collapse in the next two weeks, and if it does so, it could take the visitor's center with it.
-
#27
by
Blackstar
on 14 Nov, 2020 16:02
-
Photo taken by drone.
Apparently there are replacement cables heading there by ship. But I'm not optimistic. How can they make the repairs without putting people in great danger?
-
#28
by
Star One
on 14 Nov, 2020 19:02
-
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/11/arecibo-observatory-in-puerto-rico-at-risk-of-collapsing/
Iconic radio telescope in Puerto Rico is at risk of collapsing
Arecibo Observatory, which has discovered planets, searched for alien life, and appeared in classic films, is in critical danger after two cables supporting the telescope failed.
PUBLISHED November 12, 2020
One of the world’s most venerable radio telescopes is on the brink of catastrophe, triggering a frantic race by engineers at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico to save it after two critical cables supporting a 900-ton equipment platform broke.
The platform, held aloft over a massive dish by cables strung to towers, must be quickly stabilized, or it could crash to the ground and destroy the telescope. With the loss of these two cables, the remaining cables are under increased strain, and it’s uncertain whether rescue efforts will be successful.
2020 strikes again.
-
#29
by
Orbiter
on 14 Nov, 2020 19:07
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
-
#30
by
Blackstar
on 14 Nov, 2020 20:49
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
What I have heard is that they thought they were doing proper maintenance. The first cable break was apparently a big surprise, and they were trying to figure out why it happened given the fact that they had done inspections. I know somebody in the materials field who was being asked to look into this, because the metal in the cable had not behaved as expected. Now maybe they were not doing proper inspections, or maybe there was a hidden flaw, but I don't think they were aware of deferred maintenance that put them at risk.
-
#31
by
Star One
on 15 Nov, 2020 10:10
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
What I have heard is that they thought they were doing proper maintenance. The first cable break was apparently a big surprise, and they were trying to figure out why it happened given the fact that they had done inspections. I know somebody in the materials field who was being asked to look into this, because the metal in the cable had not behaved as expected. Now maybe they were not doing proper inspections, or maybe there was a hidden flaw, but I don't think they were aware of deferred maintenance that put them at risk.
I point the finger at the NSF over this as had they been more willing to fund the maintenance of the observatory over the years, they wouldn’t be looking at a more substantial bill now. That’s of course if they don’t just wash their hands of it deciding that it’s to costly a repair.
-
#32
by
Frogstar_Robot
on 15 Nov, 2020 10:33
-
It is easy to assume lack of maintenance, but that is not always the case. The maintenance plan is based on expected behavior, if something fails which was not expected it's hard to plan for. I don't know of any evidence that lack of maintenance was an issue at Arecibo.
Obviously suspension cables are widely used, but Arecibo is a unique structure. It may come with unique problems. However, corrosion of cables can occur more quickly than expected. There is a trend to fit de-humidification systems to cables in suspension bridges. The Severn Bridge underwent a refit for his reason
Severn Bridge corrosion revealedI really hope this unique observatory is saved from disaster.
-
#33
by
trm14
on 15 Nov, 2020 11:28
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
What I have heard is that they thought they were doing proper maintenance. The first cable break was apparently a big surprise, and they were trying to figure out why it happened given the fact that they had done inspections. I know somebody in the materials field who was being asked to look into this, because the metal in the cable had not behaved as expected. Now maybe they were not doing proper inspections, or maybe there was a hidden flaw, but I don't think they were aware of deferred maintenance that put them at risk.
I point the finger at the NSF over this as had they been more willing to fund the maintenance of the observatory over the years, they wouldn’t be looking at a more substantial bill now. That’s of course if they don’t just wash their hands of it deciding that it’s to costly a repair.
It's not like they have money just laying around. NSF astrophysics has been struggling to fund all its observatories for many years and it has tried to offload many of them to other organizations (universities and such). New, expensive facilities (ALMA, Vera C. Rubin Observatory) are coming up and since effective NSF/Astro budget has been flat or decreasing, something has to go.
Also, Arecibo's science return hasn't been that great for an observatory as expensive as it is.
-
#34
by
Star One
on 15 Nov, 2020 14:11
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
What I have heard is that they thought they were doing proper maintenance. The first cable break was apparently a big surprise, and they were trying to figure out why it happened given the fact that they had done inspections. I know somebody in the materials field who was being asked to look into this, because the metal in the cable had not behaved as expected. Now maybe they were not doing proper inspections, or maybe there was a hidden flaw, but I don't think they were aware of deferred maintenance that put them at risk.
I point the finger at the NSF over this as had they been more willing to fund the maintenance of the observatory over the years, they wouldn’t be looking at a more substantial bill now. That’s of course if they don’t just wash their hands of it deciding that it’s to costly a repair.
It's not like they have money just laying around. NSF astrophysics has been struggling to fund all its observatories for many years and it has tried to offload many of them to other organizations (universities and such). New, expensive facilities (ALMA, Vera C. Rubin Observatory) are coming up and since effective NSF/Astro budget has been flat or decreasing, something has to go.
Also, Arecibo's science return hasn't been that great for an observatory as expensive as it is.
Looking on their website I am assuming the NSF are funded by the US federal government so that kind of tells me all I need to know as to why they are struggling for money.
-
#35
by
RonM
on 15 Nov, 2020 14:32
-
The National Science Foundation is part of the US government.
-
#36
by
meekGee
on 15 Nov, 2020 15:31
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
What I have heard is that they thought they were doing proper maintenance. The first cable break was apparently a big surprise, and they were trying to figure out why it happened given the fact that they had done inspections. I know somebody in the materials field who was being asked to look into this, because the metal in the cable had not behaved as expected. Now maybe they were not doing proper inspections, or maybe there was a hidden flaw, but I don't think they were aware of deferred maintenance that put them at risk.
I point the finger at the NSF over this as had they been more willing to fund the maintenance of the observatory over the years, they wouldn’t be looking at a more substantial bill now. That’s of course if they don’t just wash their hands of it deciding that it’s to costly a repair.
It's not like they have money just laying around. NSF astrophysics has been struggling to fund all its observatories for many years and it has tried to offload many of them to other organizations (universities and such). New, expensive facilities (ALMA, Vera C. Rubin Observatory) are coming up and since effective NSF/Astro budget has been flat or decreasing, something has to go.
Also, Arecibo's science return hasn't been that great for an observatory as expensive as it is.
Looking on their website I am assuming the NSF are funded by the US federal government so that kind of tells me all I need to know as to why they are struggling for money.
Blackstar's post implies it wasn't a "save money by deferring maintenance" situation.
They thought maintenance and inspections were adequate.
So either there was a design flaw, or something in the environment (including load environment) wasn't right.
Blaming the NSF and the USG is baseless right now.
Like other posters though I wonder how they'll approach repairs without risking lives. If the whole thing can go within weeks, and the cables are still not there, and they still don't understand how it happened - I'm not optimistic sadly.
-
#37
by
Star One
on 15 Nov, 2020 19:11
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
What I have heard is that they thought they were doing proper maintenance. The first cable break was apparently a big surprise, and they were trying to figure out why it happened given the fact that they had done inspections. I know somebody in the materials field who was being asked to look into this, because the metal in the cable had not behaved as expected. Now maybe they were not doing proper inspections, or maybe there was a hidden flaw, but I don't think they were aware of deferred maintenance that put them at risk.
I point the finger at the NSF over this as had they been more willing to fund the maintenance of the observatory over the years, they wouldn’t be looking at a more substantial bill now. That’s of course if they don’t just wash their hands of it deciding that it’s to costly a repair.
It's not like they have money just laying around. NSF astrophysics has been struggling to fund all its observatories for many years and it has tried to offload many of them to other organizations (universities and such). New, expensive facilities (ALMA, Vera C. Rubin Observatory) are coming up and since effective NSF/Astro budget has been flat or decreasing, something has to go.
Also, Arecibo's science return hasn't been that great for an observatory as expensive as it is.
Looking on their website I am assuming the NSF are funded by the US federal government so that kind of tells me all I need to know as to why they are struggling for money.
Blackstar's post implies it wasn't a "save money by deferring maintenance" situation.
They thought maintenance and inspections were adequate.
So either there was a design flaw, or something in the environment (including load environment) wasn't right.
Blaming the NSF and the USG is baseless right now.
Like other posters though I wonder how they'll approach repairs without risking lives. If the whole thing can go within weeks, and the cables are still not there, and they still don't understand how it happened - I'm not optimistic sadly.
Not the point I was making in that post. The point I was making is if they don’t have enough budget then that’s the fault of the politicians who set their budget. But then you have a history of repeatedly misinterpreting what I am saying.
I am sure it’s even more tiresome for other posters than it is for me to go down this path again with you.
-
#38
by
Blackstar
on 15 Nov, 2020 19:17
-
Blaming the NSF and the USG is baseless right now.
He has a lot of opinions. Feel free to ignore them.
-
#39
by
Frogstar_Robot
on 15 Nov, 2020 19:54
-
Losing Arecibo would be an incredibly sad loss. Disappointed more funds couldn't be allocated to the observatory to ensure proper maintenance over the years.
What I have heard is that they thought they were doing proper maintenance. The first cable break was apparently a big surprise, and they were trying to figure out why it happened given the fact that they had done inspections. I know somebody in the materials field who was being asked to look into this, because the metal in the cable had not behaved as expected. Now maybe they were not doing proper inspections, or maybe there was a hidden flaw, but I don't think they were aware of deferred maintenance that put them at risk.
I point the finger at the NSF over this as had they been more willing to fund the maintenance of the observatory over the years, they wouldn’t be looking at a more substantial bill now. That’s of course if they don’t just wash their hands of it deciding that it’s to costly a repair.
It's not like they have money just laying around. NSF astrophysics has been struggling to fund all its observatories for many years and it has tried to offload many of them to other organizations (universities and such). New, expensive facilities (ALMA, Vera C. Rubin Observatory) are coming up and since effective NSF/Astro budget has been flat or decreasing, something has to go.
Also, Arecibo's science return hasn't been that great for an observatory as expensive as it is.
Looking on their website I am assuming the NSF are funded by the US federal government so that kind of tells me all I need to know as to why they are struggling for money.
Blackstar's post implies it wasn't a "save money by deferring maintenance" situation.
They thought maintenance and inspections were adequate.
So either there was a design flaw, or something in the environment (including load environment) wasn't right.
Blaming the NSF and the USG is baseless right now.
Like other posters though I wonder how they'll approach repairs without risking lives. If the whole thing can go within weeks, and the cables are still not there, and they still don't understand how it happened - I'm not optimistic sadly.
Not the point I was making in that post. The point I was making is if they don’t have enough budget then that’s the fault of the politicians who set their budget. But then you have a history of repeatedly misinterpreting what I am saying.
I am sure it’s even more tiresome for other posters than it is for me to go down this path again with you.
If that is your point, it was not what you said, which may be why you think you were misinterpreted.
Regardless, there is no evidence that they didn't have enough money for maintenance, that remains your speculation.