| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 22.08.09 07:46l 1133 Lines 41340 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 61677-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 417
Path: IZ3LSV<IK6ZDE<IK2XDE<DB0RES<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 090822/0537Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:61677 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:61677-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (Bob McGwier)
2. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (Rocky Jones)
3. Suitsat-2 costs (Andrew Glasbrenner)
4. FT897 (Randy)
5. AO-51 V/S (David - KG4ZLB)
6. Andre, ZS2ACP heard 7695 km via AO-7 Mode B (ps8rf ps8)
7. Re: FT897 (Tim Lilley)
8. Re: Suitsat-2 costs (Tim Lilley)
9. Re: Difference between Yaesu G5400, G5600 and G5500 (i8cvs)
10. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (Armando Mercado)
11. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal) (Bob Bruninga )
12. Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS, MM (MM)
13. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal) (Bruce Robertson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:18:29 -0400
From: Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A8F0F25.5060302@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Almost this entire treatise is based on ignorance of the facts in my
estimation so far as "AMSAT the satellite building" organization goes.
Much more informed people than I can comment on the ARISS projects. I
just enjoy what has been accomplished kin ARISS technically,
educationally, etc.
Suitsat 2, even in its Suitless Sat version is not really designed for
more than toss out the door kind of lifetime. You can take my word for
it or not, I don't care if you do or not. I just claim it is so.
Given that you take my word for it, I suggest that it is the PERFECT use
of the technology that is in the current design. It will accomplish
several things (besides getting me to put my antennas back on the
roof). We will have shown we can integrate a simple satellite and renew
our standing with NASA as a satellite building entity. We are not going
to get a suit in a timely fashion (they tossed them overboard before we
even knew it was happening almost).
We are building an almost completely new cadre of people who are working
on this with some help (but not a lot) from the OF's (I am including
myself in the OF category). We needed the kick in the pants by the team
putting this together.
We cannot buy a launch for love nor money and we either sit around and
watch our organization dwindle, accomplish nothing, or we do SOMETHING
with our time and talents. This thing cost a tiny amount of money, not
a lot more than flying a few people around.
This has provided a spark that was needed. That is more than enough to
justify it in my opinion.
I congratulate all involved for moving this forward and finding a way to
turn lemons into lemonade.
I am not the only person bemoaning the lack of ability to get a launch.
All involved are there. I have said here before we have a built P3
spacecraft with no ride. We do something with what we are given, or we
shrivel up and give up.
Thank you for allowing me my $0.02
73's
Bob
N4HY
MM wrote:
>
>
> Don?t Fly Suit-Sat to the
> International Space Station
>
>
>
>
>
> The International Space Station will be retired in 20015-2016.
> We do not have much time left, before NASA pulls the plug!
> We need your help to convince NASA, ESA and RSA to send more Long term
educational projects to ISS and to not send short term disposable Toss-
Satellites projects such as the Suit-Sat-2 to ISS.
>
>
--
(Co)Author: DttSP, Quiktrak, PowerSDR, GnuRadio
Member: ARRL, AMSAT, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC.
"You don't need to see the whole staircase, just
take the first step.", MLK.
Twitter:rwmcgwier
Active: Facebook,Myspace,LinkedIn
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:33:14 -0500
From: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS
To: <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>, Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL106-W16BEC3380A18630915711ED6FC0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Bob
>
> Suitsat 2, even in its Suitless Sat version is not really designed for
> more than toss out the door kind of lifetime. You can take my word for
> it or not, I don't care if you do or not. I just claim it is so.
It shouldnt be designed for much more then that...without propulsion the orbit
will decay like a bag of tools (grin). The (whatever it is costing question)
is however will it make it a few weeks?
>
We are not going
> to get a suit in a timely fashion (they tossed them overboard before we
> even knew it was happening almost).
The first part I agree with...no suit. The part in ()! Really? The flight
surgeon told the better half at her flight physical the other day that she was
"pregnant...almost"...not really. Pregnant is la binary solution set and we
had a pretty good idea about it since the coming home stopover in Greece.. So
the flight surgeon was quite definitive. Your words almost sound like a song
we sing in Church "Almost Persuaded".
.knowing is the same way as being pregnant, one either does or doesnt...
...are you saying that the fact that the suits were going to be tossed in the
Progress over July wasnt known to Amsat NA or the suitsat people in a timely
fashion?
What strikes me as more likely is that the project "grew" until it couldnt
meet its deadlines...just guessing here.
>
. This thing cost a tiny amount of money, not
> a lot more than flying a few people around.
as I said I am curious what the final number is...the effort will be a "plus"
if it works... Suitsat the original would have been good had it worked.
Strikes me that having failed at something as simple as "Suiitsat" it might
have been a good effort to succeed at something as simple as Suitsat before
moving on ...
anyway I am sure AMSAT NA is going forward with this, although in the
literature one can now start to detect a note of caution...I read a lot of
"its been worth it even if it doesnt fly" sort of stuff.
One just wonders why the Chinese and Indians can redo Oscar 7 and .....
you are one of the bright lights in the business
Robert WB6MZO
_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToS
chool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 18:58:28 -0400
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Suitsat-2 costs
To: "Amsat BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BAF81C7B3F7E49D5B84408E254E3956C@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
According to Martha, in 2009 we have spent a grand total of $12,361 on
Suitsat-2. The 2008 files are not right at hand, but the expense was even
less. In comparison we've spent more on ITAR legal help trying to free our
volunteers to resume work on P3E.
The launch cost for Suitsat-2 will be zero for AMSAT. Nothing paid by AMSAT
to Russia, nothing paid by AMSAT to NASA. Nothing.
Launch cost for cubesats to LEO (600-800 km) is ~$70,000/kg. Suitsat-2 is
over 20kg.
I'll let each individual decide whether they think that's a deal or not.
It's painfully obvious to me.
73, Drew KO4MA
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:02:46 -0400
From: "Randy" <RSwart1@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FT897
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <006c01ca22b3$7f869fe0$0301a8c0@xxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
What do you all think of using a Yaesu FT-897 for satellite work?
Randy - N2CUA
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:07:48 -0400
From: David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 V/S
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A8F28C4.20803@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Great pass at 22:43, thanks to John (K8YSE) and Al (W8KHP) for the
contacts - its been a while since I worked mode V/S.
Thanks to the team for scheduling these modes.
73
David
--
David
KG4ZLB
www.kg4zlb.com
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 02:12:22 +0300
From: ps8rf ps8 <ps8rf@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Andre, ZS2ACP heard 7695 km via AO-7 Mode B
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <SNT121-W3F9AAB49E09869C2705E9E0FC0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello,
Today in the orbit of number 59094 of AO-7 ( MODE B - 20:14:21 UTC -
21/08/2009). Could hear the Andre, ZS2ACP calling CQ and reporting signal to
another station here in Brazil (PY5LF). Unfortunately I could not find the
uplink, was prepared, but I missed the time to call it. Despite the weather
have been enough I could not hear me. That's it friends, the AO-7 in spite of
35 years continues to bring surprises to the Community of users of satellite.
I Posted the video/audio in two links:
see here: http://spacesat.blogspot.com/2009/08/zs2acp-escutado-7695-km-via-ao-
7.html
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meMa0zz5v4k
73
Piraja, PS8RF
_________________________________________________________________
Deixe suas conversas mais divertidas. Baixe agora mesmo novos emoticons. ?
gr?tis!
http://specials.br.msn.com/ilovemessenger/pacotes.aspx
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tim Lilley <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FT897
To: RSwart1@xxxxx.xx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <536900.48643.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hey Randy,
I use an FT-857 here, which is - for the most part - the same radio without
the provision of an internal battery pack. It is not full-duplex-capable, so
you'll need a separate receive radio. here, I use an FT-817ND. In terms of
computer control, the programs I've tried (Ham Radio Deluxe and its satellite
tracker module, SatPC 32 and Orbitron with the WISP DDE plugin) treat the 817
and the 857 the same. I suspect that the CAT design is identical for the
817/857/897, or close enough that software "sees" the same thing with each
radio.
I like the 857 a lot, and there were 4-5 897s at the combined Field Day effort
I provided the satellite station for this year. Those radios' owners had
nothing but good things to say about them, but none of them had tried
satellite work. As I said, it's not full-fuplex-capable, so a separate receive
radio will be necessary for full-duplex operation. I hope that helps.
73,
Tim - N3TL
________________________________
From: Randy <RSwart1@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 7:02:46 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] FT897
What do you all think of using a Yaesu FT-897 for satellite work?
Randy - N2CUA
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:51:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tim Lilley <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Suitsat-2 costs
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Amsat BB
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <980355.27993.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Drew,
Thanks to you and Martha for the information. Sounds like a great bargain to
me.
73,
Tim - N3TL
________________________________
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 6:58:28 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Suitsat-2 costs
According to Martha, in 2009 we have spent a grand total of $12,361 on
Suitsat-2. The 2008 files are not right at hand, but the expense was even
less. In comparison we've spent more on ITAR legal help trying to free our
volunteers to resume work on P3E.
The launch cost for Suitsat-2 will be zero for AMSAT. Nothing paid by AMSAT
to Russia, nothing paid by AMSAT to NASA. Nothing.
Launch cost for cubesats to LEO (600-800 km) is ~$70,000/kg. Suitsat-2 is
over 20kg.
I'll let each individual decide whether they think that's a deal or not.
It's painfully obvious to me.
73, Drew KO4MA
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 01:52:44 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Difference between Yaesu G5400, G5600 and
G5500
To: "PE0SAT" <pe0sat@xxxxx.xx>, "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <005e01ca22ba$7af330e0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "PE0SAT" <pe0sat@xxxxx.xx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 6:46 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Difference between Yaesu G5400, G5600 and G5500
>
>
> I looked at Google but couldn't find the answer to this question.
>
> The reason for asking is?
>
> I have a 5600 controller and a G-400 rotor and this isn't working because
> I think of the fact that there is no C between the two AC lines within the
> 5600 controller that supply the rotor with AC, and within the G-600
> controller there is.
>
> The elevation rotor is a KR-500 and KR-500 controller is the same
> situation.
>
> Are there special rotors for the 5600 controller? I can't imagine that
> yaesu made special one's for this controller.
>
>
> So my question, what are the differences between 5400/5600, 5500, 400 and
> 500. And is there a way to connect them to the 5600 controller so I can
> finaly use my LVB tracker :-)
>
> Any help is appreciated.
>
>
> 73's Jan - PE0SAT
Hi Jan, PE0SAT
The G-5400 has the starting AC capacitor C installed into the control box
only for the azimuth motor wich is a KR-400 and obviously there is not limit
switch into the azimuth rotator KR-400
Instead for the Elevation motor the starting capacitor C is located inside
the rotator and there are limit switches.
The G-5500 has the capacitors C installed into the rotators one C for the
azimuth and one C for the elevation.
In addition there are limit switches both for azimuth and elevation.
The G-5600 is like the G-5500 with capacitors C installed into the rotators
and there are limit switches both for azimuth and elevation.
If you want to use the G-5600 controller with an old KR-400 for azimuth and
a KR-500 for the elevation you must connect an AC capacitor of 100 uF 70
volt across terminals A4 and A5 of the controller for the azimuth and
another 100 uF 70 volt capacitor across terminals E4 and E5 for the
elevation.
A capacity for C of 50 uF and 70 volt insulation will work equally well.
Since the above capacitors are relatively big in size I suspect that there
is no room to put them into the controller and if so they should be
connected outside the controller across the above mentioned terminals.
The rest of the controller don't need modifications.
In a separate email I will send to you the original schematic diagrams of
the above rotators.
Have fun and 73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:54:53 -0400
From: "Armando Mercado" <am25544@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <70ED3C8174EC4F0FB5C23B1F4978CC6B@xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
reply-type=original
Greetings,
Two things to keep in mind. NASA (USA) is one
of 20 plus countries that have a direct interest in the
ISS.
Second, the MIR space station was orginally intended
to have a 5 year life span. It ended up flying for 15 years.
73 Armando N8IGJ
>Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
>From: MM <ka1rrw@xxxxx.xxx>
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS
>To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>Message-ID: <273358.20471.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>The International Space Station will be retired in 20015-2016.
>We do not have much time left, before NASA pulls the plug!
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:28:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bob Bruninga " <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20090821212834.AAQ17878@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Don?t Fly Suit-Sat to the
> International Space Station
Nothing in amateur radio has ever been accomplished by the naysayers and
armchair lawyers and wannabee's and dreamers that spend their time trying to
tear down and stop what others are trying to accomplish. Amateur radio and
ANY volunteer organization simply doesn't work that way. The only thing that
accomplishes anything are individuals that are individually motivated and work
on things to their own motivation and make forward progress.
No amount of criciicm, or alternates, or complaining every accomplishes
anything forward. The only effective thing it accomplishes often is the
"dooers" just give up in frustration at all the ankle biters, and move on to
other things.
Paul Rinaldo, W4RI in leading the AMRAD group in the development of AX.25 in
the USA said it simply... Either help with those that are making progress, or
GET OUT OF THE WAY!
He viewed his job as president to make sure all the bright minds and able-
bodied workers had everything they needed to make progress and also he worked
to fight off the naysayers, and kibitzers and keep them from discouraging and
holding things back or trying to redirect the effort to naught.
When all the work is being done by VOLUNTEERS who are self motivated, there is
usually no amount of kibitzing or re-directing or complaining that will make
ANY FORWARD progress. The only possible outcome is that those DOERS just quit
out of frustration.
I say again, either build it yourself, or give support to those that do, or
just shut up and get out of the way. No volunteer is motivated by all the
whining and "why dont you do it my way" kind of kibitzing. If you want it
done another way, then start from scratch and do it yourself your way, and we
wish you every success. ANY ACCOMPLISHMENT in Amateur Radio (an all volunter
service) should be praised.
Any ideas on how to do it differently should only serve as a self motivator to
get out and do it that way yourself. Then others should praise you for your
accomplishment. But NEVER do it at the EXPENSE OF OTHERS!
I have never seen such a distracting, self-serving and destructive proposal as
this...
> We need your help to convince NASA,
> ESA and RSA to send more Long term
> educational projects to ISS and to
> not send short term disposable Toss-
> Satellites projects such as the
> Suit-Sat-2 to ISS.
Now let me see. It shouldnt be hard at all to "convince" any bureaucrat who
is working 12 hour days and has all the stress of the space business to NOT
fly something! He will be more than happy to NOT fly something, just so he
has one less thing to worry about. But it is about 100 times harder to
"convince" that same bureaucrat to then re-direct hi energies to some new
wannabee idea...
What was accomplished? Simply nonthing, but the waste of a large number of
AMSAT Volunteers efforts over the last year to feed the ego of a few...
> In this document I will go over several
> reasons why Suit-Sat-2 is the wrong
> project for the ISS...
Nothing that is making progress is the wrong project, just because it might,
be, or shoulda, or coulda been done diffrently with 20/20 hindsight.
> This is an open letter to representatives
> of the organizations and technical communities,
> including: NASA, European Space Agency,
> Russian Space Agency, AMSAT, ARISS, ARRL,
> Amateur Radio community and the Short Wave
> Listener community.
And is a flagrant display of a loose cannon on deck dstroying the work, effort
and progress of dedicated volunteers.
> The Orbit of the ISS is approximately
> 250 miles (350 kilometers)... and
> Suit-Sat-2... will burn up in 6-12 months.
Yes, but you take what is avaialble. The Naval Academy has taken such low
orbits for 5 of its 6 satellites and the amateur radio community has
BENEFITTED from these short missions...
> Suit-Sat-2 needs to be in a high orbit
> such as the common 700-800 km orbit,
Duh... of course, every ham satellite would love to be in that orbit, but it
is not WISHES that get one to space, it is LAUNCH OPPORTUNITIES... and the
ISS has NONE, zip-squat-sero launches there! And you are talking to the ISS
team! An absolute waste of time, other than your negativism that only
destroys our existing opportunities to 350 km!
> Reason #4: Suit-Sat-2 needs a new container:
Well, duh... when you lose the spacesuit, then yes, you have to build a new
enclosure...
> The Ariss Hardware team now needs to ...
> redesign.... This will not be a simple task.
So GET OUT OF THE WAY!
> Reason #5: Launch Date January 2010:
So GET OUT OF THE WAY! FOr those not in the space business that think you
just walk in with a payload and hand it over, That is an extemely hard
deadline to meet.
> We need more "Longer" term projects on
> ISS that reach a greater audience.
Yes, and I need more money, more time, more radios, a new car, and a nice new
house... but I dont see ANYTHING in this proposal that accomplishes ANYTHING
towards a viable project...
> Short term projects such as ... Suit-Sat-2
> are a waist of a very valuable ISS resource.
Ah, so your attempt at blocking progress on Suitsat with dreams is somehow
going to magically get you a launch of some imginary new pet project into a
dream orbit?
> Let?s go for the long term Plan.
> I believe that the Suit-Sat-2 project
> can be boxed up and made viable for
> launches in the 2013 time frame.
I have a better idea. Let the Suitsat volunteers proceed with 100% of your
full support and then start working on your own dream-box for the 2013 time
frame! Remember, its WHO does the work determines WHAT gets built. Not a
bunch of poison emails...
> The AMSAT Corporation and ARISS should
> start looking for higher altitude unmanned
> rockets in that time frame to place
> Suit-Sat-2 in a more functional orbit.
Duh! I cant blieve such a stupid and naive statement. What on earth do you
think the "AMSAT" and ARISS" guys do, but work and dig, and follow every
possible hint of a launch opportunity. They have been doing that for 20
years! Such opportunities are extemely rare, and you bet that if any are or
will come available, then volunteers will step forward to move out... just
GET OUT OF THE WAY...
> Long Term Project Suggestions:
We dont need suggestions, we need LAUNCHES.
Don't derail anything in progress. If you have better ideeas, then start
working on them. Just get out of the way of those that are currently working
on their own labors of love (that benefit us all)...
Bob, Wb4APR
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 18:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: MM <ka1rrw@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS, MM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx Tim Lilley <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <385267.80313.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hi Tim:
Thank you for your comments.
I am always open to new ideas and I welcome your questions and observations.
I plan on posting some suggestions on how to use the Existing Hardware on ISS
to try to please as many hams and SWL as possible.
We can?t make everyone happy.
I feel there has been a loss of interest in ISS amateur Radio. Our ham
projects over the past 10 years have not grabbed very much public or ham
interest (with the exception of School Schedules).
To restore interest in ISS we need to have more than 1 project running at a
time.
We also need projects that are exciting to a larger audience.
If we continue to use our valuable launches to ISS for Short-term projects,
then ISS will say a dull boring and wasted platform for amateur radio
experimentation.
The project that will generate the most positive press and public enthusiasm
is SSTV. Of course I am going to push this project, not just because it?s a
Marex project, but because of the great news stores we received during the Mir
version of SSTV.
SSTV will generate good Press and TV new clips.
SSTV will generate interests from the SWL (and they out number ham by at least
10 to1)
Mode Change to SSTV:
I do not believe that switching from packet to SSTV would reduce the number of
random public voice contacts. On the contrary, from my experience with
previous Mir and ISS crews running SSTV, the number random public voice
contacts increased.
Commander Pavel Vinogradov in July August 2006 would be on Voice, asking ?Did
you seem my SSTV pictures??
During Richard Garriott?s Mission in October 2008, he used both Voce and SSTV.
He was often interested in knowing how well people liked his images. He would
have sent more images, however he had technical difficulties with the Vox box
causing the TM-D700 too repeatedly get stuck transmitting. He also said there
was a shortage of AA batteries for the Kenwood Communicator VCH1.
In my experience with multiple SSTV crews, SSTV will increased your
opportunity to talk to the crews on Voice.
Ideally I would like to see SpaceCam1 SSTV activated for 3-4 consecutive
months in a row. I do not want to see SSTV turned on for 1-2 days per month.
We need a consecutive run to build up momentum. This would mean turning off
Packet for a few months. The reason for this mode change experiment would be
the following:
Build up a world wide following of SSTV users (both Amateur Radio and SWL)
Get more Schools involved to act as geography receiving stations.
Point future and existing User?s to an ARISS/AMSAT web page to learn how to
SSTV, etc.
Tell the News and Magazine about the project. We had great press coverage
with Mir SSTV.
ISS Crew Time: MM
The Station is currently manned with 3 people. That number will be increasing
in 2009 to a crew of 5-6 (in theory). At the present time the ISS crew has no
free time.. It will be hard to add more Public Voice Access to ISS with a 3
man crew..
We hope Public Voice activities will improve when the crew expands to 5-6
crewmembers.
My plan is to run SSTV and voice on the same world wide channel pair.
(Let?s not get into frequency politics at this time.)
In August 1996 when we made ARISS, I asked Guest speaker Astronaut Linda
Godwin, what she wanted for ham projects. She said ?She wanted to see the
faces of the people she was talking with ?.
Based on Linda?s suggestion, with help of Farrell Winder, W8ZCF and Dr. Don
Miller, W9NTP, we delivered SSTV to Mir in 15 months. The Mir crew loved the
system and were frequently seen floating in front of the Camera sending
picture to Earth.
Here is how I envision SSTV operations on ISS.
The crew has SpaceCam1 running in automatic slide show mode. The volume on
the TM-D700 is turned OFF. The crew has a break and goes over to the radio,
turns up the volume and calls CQ and starts chatting.
If the person he is talking to has SSTV, then they can exchange two way
images.
All images set to ISS can be automatically stored to disk.
If the user has a SSTV program that supports ?SID?, then his call sign becomes
part of the file name automatically.
SpaceCam1 SSTV is a win win project for everyone.
Packet on ISS:
I am a big fan of Packet. I have been a strong supporter for packet on ISS
since we first began planning ISS in August 1996. The existing TM-700 is a
very good voice radio. The TM-D700 is a weak packet engine. The packet
engine in the TM-D700 is limited in its abilities. The TM-D700 can perform
the basic packet duties, but it?s just not as good as a dedicated packet
engine such as the KPC product lines. The TM-D700 does have a few operating
system packet bugs that we can not fix (Forces every packet mail line to be
acknowledged, etc).
To make matters worse, the TM-D700 User editable settings were setup wrong in
2003, which rendered Packet Mail unusable and slowed down the unproto link
(APRS).
Bob Bruninga did rewrite User editable settings for the TM-D700 in 2007, which
I tested and gave a thumbs up. As far as I know, the fixed software has still
not been installed on either of the two ISS TM-D700 systems.
So until the TM-D700 software is uploaded the packet mail will not work. And
even when it is enabled, due to other issues with the OS, the Packet Mail
Single-User throughput is only half that of an External TNC.
With an unusable mailbox the thrill of ISS Packet has been reduced. We did
have some fun with ISS PacCom / Ericsson Packet Mail system in 2002 for about
1 year. The Ericsson system was shutdown in December 2003.. The location of
the ISS Ericsson packet system is unknown.
http://www.marexmg.org/fileshtml/packetmail.html
How many APRS users are currently operating ISS?
I assume that Bob Bruninga maybe able to peruse his APRS logs for the past few
years and count how many different call signs use ISS APRs per year. That
information will be helpful in knowing just how many people actually use ISS
APRS. I will help us plan projects for the future.
Cross Band Repeater with the TM-D700:
The TMD700 is a basic dual band radio that also has a Cross band repeater
mode. It is not a heavy-duty high quality cross band repeater. Those of us
that have used the TM-D700 in cross band mode from ISS have been disappointed
in its performance.
The Audio is poor.
The receiver has capture issues.
Overall it is not as easy to use as Oscar-51 or Oscar-27
The very short duration contest style contacts are not very popular.
We have had overheating problems in the past with the TM-D700 on ISS while
running high duty unattended modes. All electronics run hotter in space.
Commander Pavel Vinogradov, moved the TM-D700 from its mounting tray to an
open ceiling panel to help keep the radio cooler.
Efficiencies of ARISS teams: MM
Your observation are correct, depending on which ARISS team manages the
project determines how fast a project will fly.
All ARISS project have to go through ARISS-Russia. The ARISS Russian team
actually works in the Russian space agencies.
If a project is designed by ARISS-Russian, that project can fly in less than 2
years.
Some of the reason are, the ARISS-Russian teams know the flight safety
requirements and can generate the tests and approvals faster than the other
ARISS teams.
The ARISS-Russian teams like to use Off-the-Shelf hardware for faster
delivery.
The other ARISS teams need to lean to be as efficient as the ARISS-Russian
team.
The Suit-Sat1 project is a good example of efficiency. I am not sure who had
the idea first, but it did proceed fast. ARISS-Russia liked the idea and had
the spacesuit and antenna all ready in stock, NO development time.
ARISS-North America, used an Off-the-Shelf radio and only had to build the
Turn-On safety timer and PIC controller board.
I do not know exactly how many moths, but it was quick and used several
existing components, Space Suit, Spare ARISS ham antenna, Off the shelf
Radio.
The Suit-Sat-2 project is all custom built from scratch using all new
technology. It?s been almost 4 years and counting.
Efficiency is the key. ARISS needs to follow ARISS-Russians lead in
efficiency. And still maintain full flight safely requirements.
Better Home for SuitSat-2:
I never suggested Abandoning SuitSat-2, what I am recommending is that
SuitSat-2 be placed on a rocket for a higher orbit.
We only have a hand full of flight opportunities left to get projects on ISS.
Our opinions may differ and that?s fine. I just believe that with the few
launches to ISS remaining we should be devoted to longer-term project for the
Amateur Radio and SWL communities.
Thank you for your comments Tim.
I hope this helped
Sincerely
Miles WF1F
Wf1f@xxxxxxx.xxx
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:35:48 -0300
From: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
To: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<49657a760908211935w6c18a802m63b66537721b1567@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Bob has been cogent in his examiniation of several of the original
points. I would like to chime in regarding the educational value of
the SuitSat program, which has been denegrated by its opponents.
I offered three classes in a local Middle School after SS-1 was
launched. The details were posted in this letter:
http://128.54.16.15/amsat/archive/amsat-bb/200602/msg00877.html As I
noted then, it was a great success: the idea of communicating with an
object pushed out of humanity's current only outpost in space was not
lost to the students. I can honestly say that they found it
considerably more engaging than other classes I have given on
satellites in general.
This experience led me to anticipate that SS-2, in whatever
configuration, will equally be an excellent basis for classroom
experiences, especially since these might well include actual
communication through the satellite. None of the criticisms expressed
have altered my expectations.
Indeed, if there are those who believe that, for instance, the short
orbital life of SS-2 will impede its use in the classroom, we should
have a longer discussion here of curricula and the teaching
opportunities afforded by SS-2.
In short, I see no need to alter the mission, but a great need to
improve how we capitalize on missions like this to fulfill the
educational (among others) mandate of our hobby. Happily there are
many, like Bob, and like the FunSat team, who are dedicating their
talents to such an effort.
73, Bruce
VE9QRP
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Bob Bruninga<bruninga@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
>> Don?t Fly Suit-Sat to the
>> International Space Station
>
> Nothing in amateur radio has ever been accomplished by the naysayers and
armchair lawyers and wannabee's and dreamers that spend their time trying to
tear down and stop what others are trying to accomplish. ?Amateur radio and
ANY volunteer organization simply doesn't work that way. ?The only thing that
accomplishes anything are individuals that are individually motivated and work
on things to their own motivation and make forward progress.
>
> No amount of criciicm, or alternates, or complaining every accomplishes
anything forward. ?The only effective thing it accomplishes often is the
"dooers" just give up in frustration at all the ankle biters, and move on to
other things.
>
> Paul Rinaldo, W4RI in leading the AMRAD group in the development of AX.25 in
the USA said it simply... Either help with those that are making progress, or
GET OUT OF THE WAY!
>
> He viewed his job as president to make sure all the bright minds and able-
bodied workers had everything they needed to make progress and also he worked
to fight off the naysayers, and kibitzers and keep them from discouraging and
holding things back or trying to redirect the effort to naught.
>
> When all the work is being done by VOLUNTEERS who are self motivated, there
is usually no amount of kibitzing or re-directing or complaining that will
make ANY FORWARD progress. ?The only possible outcome is that those DOERS just
quit out of frustration.
>
> I say again, either build it yourself, or give support to those that do, or
just shut up and get out of the way. ?No volunteer is motivated by all the
whining and "why dont you do it my way" kind of kibitzing. ?If you want it
done another way, then start from scratch and do it yourself your way, and we
wish you every success. ?ANY ACCOMPLISHMENT in Amateur Radio (an all volunter
service) should be praised.
>
> Any ideas on how to do it differently should only serve as a self motivator
to get out and do it that way yourself. ?Then others should praise you for
your accomplishment. ?But NEVER do it at the EXPENSE OF OTHERS!
>
> I have never seen such a distracting, self-serving and destructive proposal
as this...
>
>> We need your help to convince NASA,
>> ESA and RSA to send more Long term
>> educational projects to ISS and to
>> not send short term disposable Toss-
>> Satellites projects such as the
>> Suit-Sat-2 to ISS.
>
> Now let me see. ?It shouldnt be hard at all to "convince" any bureaucrat who
is working 12 hour days and has all the stress of the space business to NOT
fly something! ?He will be more than happy to NOT fly something, just so he
has one less thing to worry about. ?But it is about 100 times harder to
"convince" that same bureaucrat to then re-direct hi energies to some new
wannabee idea...
>
> What was accomplished? ?Simply nonthing, but the waste of a large number of
AMSAT Volunteers efforts over the last year to feed the ego of a few...
>
>> In this document I will go over several
>> reasons why Suit-Sat-2 is the wrong
>> project for the ISS...
>
> Nothing that is making progress is the wrong project, just because it might,
be, or shoulda, or coulda been done diffrently with 20/20 hindsight.
>
>> This is an open letter to representatives
>> of the organizations and technical communities,
>> including: NASA, European Space Agency,
>> Russian Space Agency, AMSAT, ARISS, ARRL,
>> Amateur Radio community and the Short Wave
>> Listener community.
>
> And is a flagrant display of a loose cannon on deck dstroying the work,
effort and progress of dedicated volunteers.
>
>> The Orbit of the ISS is approximately
>> 250 miles (350 kilometers)... and
>> Suit-Sat-2... will burn up in 6-12 months.
>
> Yes, but you take what is avaialble. ?The Naval Academy has taken such low
orbits for 5 of its 6 satellites and the amateur radio community has
BENEFITTED from these short missions...
>
>> Suit-Sat-2 needs to be in a high orbit
>> such as the common 700-800 km orbit,
>
> Duh... of course, every ham satellite would love to be in that orbit, but it
is not WISHES that get one to space, it is LAUNCH OPPORTUNITIES... ?and the
ISS has NONE, zip-squat-sero launches there! ?And ?you are talking to the ISS
team! ?An absolute waste of time, other than your negativism that only
destroys our existing opportunities to 350 km!
>
>> Reason #4: ?Suit-Sat-2 needs a new container:
>
> Well, duh... when you lose the spacesuit, then yes, you have to build a new
enclosure...
>
>> The Ariss Hardware team now needs to ...
>> redesign.... This will not be a simple task.
>
> So GET OUT OF THE WAY!
>
>> Reason #5: Launch Date January 2010:
>
> So GET OUT OF THE WAY! ?FOr those not in the space business that think you
just walk in with a payload and hand it over, ? That is an extemely hard
deadline to meet.
>
>> We need more "Longer" term projects on
>> ISS that reach a greater audience.
>
> Yes, and I need more money, more time, more radios, a new car, and a nice
new house... but I dont see ANYTHING in this proposal that accomplishes
ANYTHING towards a viable project...
>
>> Short term projects such as ... Suit-Sat-2
>> are a waist of a very valuable ISS resource.
>
> Ah, so your attempt at blocking progress on Suitsat with dreams is somehow
going to magically get you a launch of some imginary new pet project into a
dream orbit?
>
>> Let?s go for the long term Plan.
>> I believe that the Suit-Sat-2 project
>> can be boxed up and made viable for
>> launches in the 2013 time frame.
>
> I have a better idea. ?Let the Suitsat volunteers proceed with 100% of ?your
full support and then start working on your own dream-box for the 2013 time
frame! ?Remember, its WHO does the work determines WHAT gets built. ?Not a
bunch of poison emails...
>
>> The AMSAT Corporation and ARISS should
>> start looking for higher altitude unmanned
>> rockets in that time frame to place
>> Suit-Sat-2 in a more functional orbit.
>
> Duh! ?I cant blieve such a stupid and naive statement. ?What on earth do you
think the "AMSAT" and ARISS" guys do, but work and dig, and follow every
possible hint of a launch opportunity. ?They have been doing that for 20
years! ?Such opportunities are extemely rare, and you bet that if any are or
will come available, then volunteers will step forward to move out... ?just
GET OUT OF THE WAY...
>
>> Long Term Project Suggestions:
>
> We dont need suggestions, we need LAUNCHES.
>
> Don't derail anything in progress. ?If you have better ideeas, then start
working on them. ?Just get out of the way of those that are currently working
on their own labors of love (that benefit us all)...
>
> Bob, Wb4APR
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 417
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
