Catastrophic failure at Arecibo Observatory

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,021
Credit: 4,990,605,705
RAC: 3,041,272

The New York Times article

The New York Times article yesterday said they started studies on how to rebuild.  They did not get so far as the question of finding enough money for a plausible plan.  Instead, they concluded they could not conduct a safe rebuild/repair.  Thus they expect to dismantle it.

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 7,734
Credit: 621,900,487
RAC: 104,008

archae86 wrote: The New York

archae86 wrote:

The New York Times article yesterday said they started studies on how to rebuild.  They did not get so far as the question of finding enough money for a plausible plan.  Instead, they concluded they could not conduct a safe rebuild/repair.  Thus they expect to dismantle it. 

They had a commitment to spend 10 Million to rebuild it before the 2nd cable snapped and changed things, so maybe after they dismantle the thing they can have enough to build a small array of telescopes instead of a single big one. Maybe they can build 1 or 2 of them now and then next year or the year after add another couple etc.

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 7,734
Credit: 621,900,487
RAC: 104,008

It's over!! The gantry has

It's over!! The gantry has crashed into the disk below it destroying it!!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/arecibo-telescopes-900-ton-platform-154919473.html

robl
robl
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 1,686
Credit: 1,321,572,803
RAC: 469,043

mikey wrote: It's over!! The

mikey wrote:

It's over!! The gantry has crashed into the disk below it destroying it!!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/arecibo-telescopes-900-ton-platform-154919473.html

That is sad to look at.  What a piece of scientific marvel.  Also I am reminded that we too are here for a short time.  

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,021
Credit: 4,990,605,705
RAC: 3,041,272

The New York Times story on

The New York Times story on the collapse says that damage was observed atop all three towers.

I don't know whether the original design was deficient, or hugely imprudent additions to the load were made subsequently, or the thing was in a state of severe decay from maintenance neglect, but this sort of stuff is not supposed to happen.

Does anyone here have any clue why the suspended stuff adds up to so much mass?  Something like 800 or 900 tons!?!?   That is in the ballpark of a World War I destroyer.  It is right about the mass of the Type VII U-boat, the dominant WWII German class.  Seems a lot of stuff to hang up in the air for this mission.

A paper I found on FAST (the bigger Chinese one) mentions that the active focus cabin on that one is under a thirtieth as massive.

Warped
Warped
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 9
Credit: 448,587
RAC: 0

Goodbye Arecibo. Very

Goodbye Arecibo.

Very Sad.

NSF News

Warped

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 7,734
Credit: 621,900,487
RAC: 104,008

archae86 wrote: The New York

archae86 wrote:

The New York Times story on the collapse says that damage was observed atop all three towers.

I don't know whether the original design was deficient, or hugely imprudent additions to the load were made subsequently, or the thing was in a state of severe decay from maintenance neglect, but this sort of stuff is not supposed to happen.

Does anyone here have any clue why the suspended stuff adds up to so much mass?  Something like 800 or 900 tons!?!?   That is in the ballpark of a World War I destroyer.  It is right about the mass of the Type VII U-boat, the dominant WWII German class.  Seems a lot of stuff to hang up in the air for this mission.

A paper I found on FAST (the bigger Chinese one) mentions that the active focus cabin on that one is under a thirtieth as massive. 

One thing they showed during the Bond movie was ALOT of very large heavy gears and machinery and alot of steps so I'm sure it was built long before those things could be minaturizeed like now.

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,021
Credit: 4,990,605,705
RAC: 3,041,272

Warped wrote:Goodbye

Warped wrote:

Goodbye Arecibo.

Very Sad.

NSF News

The video of the actual collapse available at that link is stunning.  Don't stop watching at the 50 second mark thinking it is all over save a little dust movement.  About 55 seconds in the view switches to live video from a drone which is initially a tight shot in on cables at the very moment they start letting go.

Amazing.

robl
robl
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 1,686
Credit: 1,321,572,803
RAC: 469,043

archae86 wrote:Warped

archae86 wrote:

Warped wrote:

Goodbye Arecibo.

Very Sad.

NSF News

The video of the actual collapse available at that link is stunning.  Don't stop watching at the 50 second mark thinking it is all over save a little dust movement.  About 55 seconds in the view switches to live video from a drone which is initially a tight shot in on cables at the very moment they start letting go.

Amazing.

The "Video: Footage of Collapse Arecibo Observatory" clearly shows the cables on one affected tower snapping.  The tower in question (left side video image at about the 9 or 10 second mark generates a popping sound.  The cable bundle attached to that tower becomes blurred under the sudden release of weight and the receiver unit just drops.  It does seem that the weight was excessive.  Being where it is, i.e. surrounded by water I would suggest that it required constant maintenance to keep the "rust away". The question is "did the cable fail or did the tower fail?"

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 7,734
Credit: 621,900,487
RAC: 104,008

robl wrote: archae86

robl wrote:

archae86 wrote:

Warped wrote:

Goodbye Arecibo.

Very Sad.

NSF News

The video of the actual collapse available at that link is stunning.  Don't stop watching at the 50 second mark thinking it is all over save a little dust movement.  About 55 seconds in the view switches to live video from a drone which is initially a tight shot in on cables at the very moment they start letting go.

Amazing.

The "Video: Footage of Collapse Arecibo Observatory" clearly shows the cables on one affected tower snapping.  The tower in question (left side video image at about the 9 or 10 second mark generates a popping sound.  The cable bundle attached to that tower becomes blurred under the sudden release of weight and the receiver unit just drops.  It does seem that the weight was excessive.  Being where it is, i.e. surrounded by water I would suggest that it required constant maintenance to keep the "rust away". The question is "did the cable fail or did the tower fail?" 

I would guess alot of both, they have also had several hurricanes go thru Puerto Rico in 2020 alone and then add in the BIG one a couple years ago when Trump threw paper towels at people who had water inside their homes and there probably was a whole lot of deferred maintanance going on there.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.