If radio astronomers have their say, a replacement (unfortunately) will not be built. The fashion is to eschew 'single dish apertures' in favor of flat arrays that can be re-configured and self powered. We MUST self-power to be, oh, so, good to mother earth! Believe me, mother earth never had it as good as when people went from barbarians to technologists. I disagree with that 'green' approach as all inclusive, and I hold the patent on flat arrays that are self powered (see, for example, USP's 10483649 (especially claims 1,2, and 7); 10854987 issuing Dec 1. ) If someone champions 'aperture engines' as the way to go instead of singles dishes--a gross conclusion--they will find themselves not eligible for any form of license (particularly a 'free' one). I believe there are already people at Caltech trying to get money for that 'new' (hahah!) approach. Rude awakening ahead methinks. So how about that-- an inventor saying there is plenty of room, in this case , for classic and synthetic aperture optics. I fully support re-building AO as a single-science radio astronomical dish. Get rid of the add-on doo-dads that add cost and add weight!
What about several , like 100 or more, 30-50' dishes or larger scattered around the planet? The computer power to use them in a constantly changing diversity system didnt exist not that long ago
Carl, That the idea behind the SKA, and VLBI. Oftentimes its sheer collecting area that's needed, and single dishes--large ones-- are the most efficient in that case.
I imagine that could be the case as all-in, with a fair amount of over engineering built into that To take it to level 2 instead of level 8 is, in part, the differential between about 100M to 320 M. Also, you are looking at all-in costs (including radar), not single-science use. Not building a pyramid In any case, get rid of cm radar. Too expensive. Too limited a declination range for AO. GBO focused on single-science. Right approach. 73 Chip W1YW
I always thought it would be a neat place to visit. First time I remember seeing it referenced was in an episode of the X-Files, way back in the 90s when I was but a wee lad.
Hubble is 30 years old, the ISS is 20 years old and a research facility that I do work for is 52 years old and just went through a $40M upgrade and and a $57M upgrade will be completed over the next 5 years. In all cases there is a champion who markets existing and new research opportunities, evolves the equipment and data gathering capabilities, attracts key talent and grant writers, advertises the research successes and passes the leadership and visionary torch to another highly talented and well-connected person when the time comes. For whatever reason, AO hasn't been able to attract and keep a champion for the facility.
Sure wish they have plans to replace it. Just imagine plugging your SDR into that baby! Before it crashed that is.
I dont comment on here much but it is a sad day for our world,our country and man when we let this happen.Let's all try to not let it happen again we all benefit
"certainly seems like the NSF hasnt been doing periodic maintenance." No doubt that is the case, and from the quotes of various people that were interviewed for the recent articles by a number of reporting agencies they have no clue. Cables are machines that require periodic inspection and maintenance, and they do not last forever, even stagnant ones like the cables used here, the individual strands within the cable are always moving in relation to each other. If you see one strand has broken; as was reported in one recent article; it's time to get it replaced ASAP, not wait for the second or third wire to break. Given the age of Arrecibo they should have had a emergency repair plan in place long ago and been able to implement it right away, not months later after some engineers have studied the problem and then published a report that says in essence "yup, it's broke, you need to fix it" and then entered into another few months of coffer draining engineering studies at expedited rates because time is critical now. If it does have to be demolished then why not build a new one in the same location? That spot was perceivably chosen because it was better than any other available at the time. if that holds true today build a new one. FAST is only 50% of what is needed to be able to monitor the skies. Without a second facility on the other side of the globe you can only 'listen' for about half the time to any specific point in the heavens. Imagine how much would slip by if you're only monitoring for 12 hours a day not 24. Hey we missed seeing a NEO that slipped by at less than 300 miles just a few days ago [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_VT4 ] . Luckily it was not a biggie and would have most likely burnt up if it entered our atmosphere but we need to be tracking the thousands of known NEOs and looking for new ones 24/7 not part time. So a replacement for Arrecibo is needed now. And that will still leave a gap of years since it will take times to design and build a new Arrecibo. So to everyone who is always pushing for lower taxes, this is where some of your tax money goes (or was going before it was cut). When Congress gets pressured into trimming taxes to the bare minimum, programs like this lose funding, and we all suffer in the long run. Probably took a few years for the budget cuts to do their dirty work in this case but when your budget is shrinking where is the first place you look to cut expenses...maintenance is first on the chopping block because it does not affect people (aka employees) or projects, at least not directly or as many. The older your equipment is the more maintenance will be required, not less, it's a simple fact.
Not quite, and it turns out that contrary to rumor the plans do exist. It is just nobody has the period hardware to build it again. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/20302/were-the-saturn-v-construction-plans-destroyed Anyway, I see this as another example of the national turn from science to fantasy, or at least away from hard learning. I've been substitute teaching in what is said to be an excellent school district and found that maybe 1 student in 20 was serious about learning (thanks to their parents). Everybody knew how to use their iPads though, for fun and games when the teachers weren't looking, for finding (but not thinking about) facts when they were. The low numbers of young people entering our hobby or general aviation may in part be fallout from living in such an instantaneous and very distractable world. The lack of historical knowledge, of much science or geography that seems prevalent today could be others. Arthur C. Clarke was right when he said any modern country that did not educated its citizens to their fullest potential was committing suicide. I doubt if we're even remotely doing that.
" I doubt if we're even remotely doing that." Oh no, we're doing that alright, we (the USA) are committing suicide for sure. Between that and the political infighting, we are doomed.
I see I stirred up some chatter off-line. Well, about time! I am not dependent on NSF funding so I can express my educated opinion BTW, don't blame the tech staff at AO for any of this--they did what they could with the cards they were dealt. OK, here's how you re-build AO....these ideas have origins with many (BTW). Get rid of the 'consensus funding' requirement and build a dedicated dish , as has happened at least three times at AO.. Instead of a superstructure platform at the focal line, use a tethered drone-- with a line feed or a less ambitious Gregorian reflector. Accept the fact that there are aperture efficiency losses, real-time beam corrections, and so on. Planetary radar goes to other facilities. Ionospheric heating, such as the dish-based design by WA3FET fit well with this re-build. No towers. No support cables. No platform.
'ARECIBO' please...c'mon guys, spell it correctly Your point on small asteroid detection is well taken, The problem is that AO had only a limited ability to 'see' NEO's, selecting for NEO's that had orbits with declinations that fit within its sky coverage. IOW AO missed quite a bit as a 'planetary protection' platform. AO was never able to 'see' the whole sky, nor was it designed for that.
