Stop the relocation of the Emerson Cavitation Tunnel

stop the actual relocation plan

I fully support the petition. A research intensive university should prioritise research excellence. The current decision should be reviewed.

As a diesel engine manufacturer, research for noise reduction is quite important and Newcastle University should be encouraged to continue it efficiently.

The cavitation tunnel is a central element of advanced research in marine propulsion; for numerous reasons it should remain in a central location.

Extremely disappointed by the decision making process on a major research facility of both historical and current significance in marine technology!

This not only affects the research studies and funding of many current research students but also make the future research difficult due its relocation from the University.

Not good idea to try and manage something as complex and pivotal as the cavitation tunnel from Blyth.

The removal of this facility from the main campus would make it difficult for future users to access but also difficult for visitors to come and see. The reputation of the tunnel does draw some attention and I have before now taken visitors to see this unique facility on campus.

Dear Signers, My name is Chang Li, a first year PhD student of Emerson Cavitation Tunnel (ECT) and have started my research programme in October 2014. As one of the PhDs, I still keep my strongly attitude for against the relocation plan which will push my project into a critical risk. In this statement, I would like to share this issue from our PhD viewpoint regarding how the relocation plan affects PhD students. First of all, my project has been approved and estimated to be finished at the end of 2017, and the other academic projects and PhDs research activities would also be completed before or during 2017 as well. However, due to such a casual plan, my research will be irrupted during the half-way which cause the work at least one year delay. As for other PhDs, they both have to face 3 to 6 month delay. Secondly, when after the registration we were asked to give the research plan with timescale which was quite normal. But now, without any approved schedule files, we are just only being informed the ECT is going to be relocated and it will only take 6 to 9 month and run again in January 2017. We are officially requesting the evidence and details about how the relocating timescales was estimated and what its activities during each stage. As a number of ECT research team, everyone has right to be informed details instead of announced by using descriptive words. Thirdly, since 1950 till now, during the long term experiment, modification and calibration, all the facility’s setup have been done and every parts have high quality cooperation. If the cavitation tunnel is being relocated in 2016, this means we need spend another long-term to repeat the modification and calibration process and without any research work, such a time wasting work! During this period, all the research projects and PhD activities will be under an unpredictable delay, 6month or 1year, 2 year or even more! The potential risks hardly can be predicted, especially experiment facility and no

I think Blyth is very far from University and isolated place from reserach work if no other facilities will relocated together

11 years ago Featured

This rushed decision is fueled by high level management that simply have no regard for the fantastic work that has been done in the ECT past and present. It is one on the main reasons to which MAST owes its prestige.

Part of the prestige and pride of the school is the history that the Armstrong building brings to marine technology. By moving away from the facility undermines this close link with an esteemed history.

Dear Signers, I am the director of the Emerson Cavitation Tunnel (ECT) and fighting to stop the unjustified decision (i.e. re-location of the ECT to a remote satellite site in a precipitating manner) made by the high level management of the Newcastle University; Faculty of the Agriculture, Science and Engineering (SAgE); and School of Marine Science and Technology (MAST). I have been officially notified by this decision in February 2015 with the expectation that the ECT should cease its activities in early 2106 to be re-located. The estimated down time is 6-9 months which is rather unrealistic time scale with a high risk in my opinion since nothing has been planned prior to this notification. I am strongly opposing to this decision since this will have a catastrophic disruption and impact on the ongoing high-profile EU project, 4 PhD projects, an industry sponsored equipment development project as well as severing the relationships with 4 major stake holders. In addition 2 new PhD offers will be rejected. The cost of the re-location by the university management has been estimated as £1.5 (basically building a shed over the current tunnel to be re-located) and this budget has been approved in a great rush by the SAgE Faculty and University Executive Board without the knowledge of the subject PhD students, EU project co-ordinator and major stakeholders. There appears to be an expectation that the difficulties resulting from the relocation will be minimal, and can be mitigated by either postponing the work or undertaking it elsewhere. The PhD projects can be delayed further. In practice this is not the case. The inevitable and unavoidable disruption of these contracts would not only cause considerable reputational damage and have immediate and significant financial implications, but would also seriously undermine the School’s ability to attract such contracts in the future and PhD students. There is no need for this. The re-location can wait until these projects

The relocation of cavitation tunnel does cause many problems and long-term negative influences on Marine Technology team's undergoing and ongoing research activities. It also brings risk of losing part of our hydrodynamic team. I strongly suggest to stop the relocation plan and bring everything back to normal track.

The Emerson Cavitation Tunnel is badly needed for the completion of the EU SEAFRONT project (end of 2017). The Cavitation Tunnel has been a unique selling point for getting the EU grant and establish a large involvement of the University of Newcastle, School of Marine Science and Technology, in this project. Removal of the tunnel would jeopardise the success of the SEAFRONT project and severely delay the deliverables promised. The reputation of the School of Marine Science and Technology at the European Commission will be at thread. Dr. John van Haare, Coordinator EU SEAFRONT.

The proposed closure of the Cavitation tunnel on campus will weaken the ability of Newcastle University to deliver on its two core functions of Teaching and Research. At a time of increased international competition amongst Universities this is the last thing we should be doing. The alternative use of the site, as far as I can see, is for some kind of improved landscaped space. This will not enhance or strengthen Newcastle's ability to teach better or do better research but is a purely cosmetic change. For this reason the proposed closure of the Emerson Cavitation tunnel and its move to Blyth is wrong.

The long term reputation of the uni and its ability to attract high caliber students are dependent on the quality of its alumni and therefore the quality of its teaching. Moving the Emerson tunnel to Blyth will mean effectively losing the facility (maybe not immediately, but within a few years as the impracticalities of a remote site become apparent), seriously reducing the facilities available for the current world class level of training available at UNCLE in the marine disciplines. Even worse, it clearly demonstrates that the uni does not take such facilities seriously and rates a shallow, short term facelift over genuine research capacity. As a potential student, a decision like this would weigh heavily when choosing where to study. A terrible decision, seemingly taken for the shallowest of reasons and without regard for the impact on the students and research, who after all are supposed to be the raison détre of the whole institution. Perhaps I'm being naive these days, when commercial interests speak so loudly, but isn't a unique research facility such as this something to be proud of?

it would be practical for our projects next year if the tunnel was next to our lectures. Rather than out of campus, which will require transportation and time consumtion.

Because the study of students stops during a period transfer Emmerson cavitation tunnel ,I am against a transference

11 years ago Featured

To go Blyth Marine Station: Metro :No Train: No Bus: 1 hour (one way) from the city center (one way) plus 10 minutes if you are fast enough. return ticket cost 3.20£ Car: how many of staff and student have a car? let's say we have one then 30 minutes (one way) without traffic.