Live data from Hacker News

Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

nsf.gov

81–90 of 248 posts

Re: Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

#81
post #11

Is the loss of Arecibo a big blow to the scientific community? I was of the impression that Arecibo was long past it's heyday and in general that large arrays of smaller receivers were now considered superior.

Allow me to gently contradict the previous responders. The community of radio astronomers is feeling the loss of Arecibo very keenly.

I've mentioned this in a previous comment [1] so I won't rehash it again, but here [2] is a statement from the NANOGrav collaboration - we have been using the Arecibo telescope on a weekly basis (along with the Green Bank telescope) to observe a large number of radio pulsars for over 15 years now, and when we announce the first detection of very low frequency gravitational waves, Arecibo data will play a critical role.

This loss really hurts. The US community is scrambling, and we are going to have to rely on the generosity of our international partners going forward - there's just not going to be enough telescope time to do all the science that we'd judged as very important through competitive review processes.

(And that's before we get into the unique radar capability, etc.)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25154898 [2] http://nanograv.org/announcement,/press/2020/12/02/Arecibo.h...

Re: Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

#84
post #46
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copy of video on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU6YYTp72To

It's your copy of the video

It is, but I don't get anything from hosting it, It's not monetised. I kept getting timeouts on the actual site, and the sharing URL was nasty long (I wanted to share it to friends). I did credit them in the video description.

I was only trying to help.

Re: Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

#85

So if they knew there is no money to even maintain it and this collapse was a likely outcome why not lower the platform in advance before any cable breaks? Just from a safety perspective omitting this seems to be somewhat negligent, no?

Lower it to where? It would crush the reflective dish.

Re: Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

#86

So if they knew there is no money to even maintain it and this collapse was a likely outcome why not lower the platform in advance before any cable breaks? Just from a safety perspective omitting this seems to be somewhat negligent, no?

They were about to. I'm pretty sure they were using the drone to get ahead of that problem. Seems like it happened to fast.

Re: Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

#87

So if they knew there is no money to even maintain it and this collapse was a likely outcome why not lower the platform in advance before any cable breaks? Just from a safety perspective omitting this seems to be somewhat negligent, no?

How do you safely lower a platform that might break at any point?

Re: Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

#88
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To aid in future investigations of the structural failures I would imagine? As I understand it from reading various news reports and a video from one Scott Manley, the damage from the recent earthquake had this collapse in the “when” column not “if”.

Just squeezing one last bit of science out of the place. Sure, it's not the science it was designed to for, but science none-the-less

You love to see it :) even in non-ideal situations such as this loss.

Re: Drone Footage of Arecibo Observatory Collapse

#90

Wow. As tragic as the collapse is, at least it has been filmed (i thought it had not when I saw the announcement tweet with its far-away photo). If nothing else it's about as spectacular as I had expected. Had I been in the area I'd have been tempted to set up my camera somewhere close (remember that the risk of collapse was known to be high).

346 people dying in 737 MAX crashes is tragic. This is a 50-year-old telescope; the word I'd use is "unfortunate."

Tragically, you’re not even really wrong.
Post reply on HN