I'm working through some observatory design ideas and can't decide which approach makes the most sense.
Would you rather build:
Option A
One large roll-off roof with 20–30 smaller telescope positions.
Option B
Several smaller buildings with fewer telescopes in each.
My thoughts are:
larger building = lower cost per telescope
smaller buildings = less risk if one roof has a problem
easier future expansion
I'd be interested in hearing from people who have built or managed remote observatories.
One large structure will be cheaper than the same square footage made up of smaller buildings. There will also be just one system to manage instead of several. I’d have one roll off roof and make it as reliable as possable.
Thanks Tony, I appreciate the feedback.
That's very much the direction I'm leaning as well. The site I'm evaluating is in a fairly remote part of the South African Karoo, so logistics become part of the design equation. A single structure is definitely more cost-effective to build and maintain, but transporting and assembling very large roof sections that far from major fabrication centres is something I'm trying to think through carefully.
The attraction of the location is that it's extremely dark and has excellent access to Southern Hemisphere targets, so I'd like to get the infrastructure right from the beginning rather than redesign it later.
Have you found that roof reliability ends up being a bigger concern than the size of the structure itself?
That would be my number 1 concern. The idea of 30 rigs sitting out in the rain because the roof failed is the stuff of nightmares.
Regardless of which direction you decide on, both designs should include a manual way to close a building in the event your primary systems fails. Will your new facility be staffed and what coverage. Full-time, on-stie… If you are going large, I recommend that the entire building moves. For a smaller building I recommend a ROR or roll-off split wall. Limited man power at construction favors the smaller building. My 16’ x 20’ observatories have 8” floors anchoring the scope piers to a 40,000lb concrete pad. NOTHING MOVES. If you want large rigs (L-mounts on wedges…) then how high will the “hair cut” be when the structure moves… Most important decision is what system you choose to move your buildings. — Call Jeff or Rick at Dark Dragons.
Good luck on your venture! You have a lot of heavy lifting ahead.
CS - Tim Ray
Owner, Nicholas Remote Imaging Observatories (NRIO)
It probably does not apply to your location but one thing to think about is permitting. In many US locations you will not need a permit for under a certain size. For example, in Oregon that is 200 square feet and an average of less than 15 feet high.
You are going to make things much less of a hassle if you stay under that specification since building inspectors can freak out when they see anything unusual and then require engineering studies and all manner of bureaucratic crap. A roll-off roof will almost certainly set them off.
Thanks Tim, I really appreciate the advice, especially coming from someone with real-world experience running a remote observatory.
Reliability is probably the area I'm spending the most time thinking about. My background includes designing off-grid solar and automation systems, so my instinct is to eliminate as many single points of failure as possible rather than relying on one component to never fail.
The weather monitoring and roof control will run entirely locally rather than depending on cloud services or an internet connection. I'm also planning for manual operation and mechanical redundancy so that a single motor or controller failure doesn't leave the observatory exposed.
I'll be based on-site during the initial build and launch phase, which means I'll be handling setup, testing and the first wave of installations myself while refining the operating procedures. Once everything is proven, the plan is to train local staff for day-to-day operations while I continue overseeing expansion and new installations.
I'm still evaluating whether one larger roll-off roof or multiple modular buildings is the better long-term solution, which is exactly why I'm asking questions here. The experience from people who have already built these facilities is incredibly valuable.
Thanks Bill, that's a really good point.
One of the first things I looked into was the regulatory side before getting too attached to a particular design. Because the site I'm evaluating is in the Karoo, I've already been working through the planning requirements around the Astronomy Geographic Advantage Act and the SARAO consultation process for developments in the region. I'd much rather resolve those considerations before breaking ground than try to retrofit a design later.
From an engineering perspective, I'm also leaning towards a modular approach. It lets me validate the design and operating procedures on a manageable first build, while keeping future expansion straightforward if everything performs as expected.
I appreciate you bringing it up—it's very easy to focus on the observatory itself and underestimate the importance of the planning and regulatory work.