| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 24.08.09 04:35l 818 Lines 27454 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 62156-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 424
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<F8KFY<CX2SA
Sent: 090824/0232Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:62156 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:62156-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal) (Robert Bruninga)
2. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal) (Rocky Jones)
3. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal) (Rocky Jones)
4. Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio (Bob McGwier)
5. Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio (James Duffey)
6. Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio (Simon (HB9DRV))
7. AO-51 mode change (David - KG4ZLB)
8. Re: AO-51 mode change (Andrew Glasbrenner)
9. Re: HR1LW Grid ? (John W Lee)
10. Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio (Bruce Robertson)
11. Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio (w8iss)
12. 4 Lindenblads (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
13. Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio (Art McBride)
14. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal) (Bob Bruninga )
15. Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal) (John B. Stephensen)
16. AO-51 V/S activity (Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
17. Re: MFJ/Cushcraft (Scott Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:10:08 -0400
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
To: "'Luc Leblanc'" <lucleblanc6@xxxxxxxxx.xx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <390ECFE5556E4263B08BF5DCDC277D03@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> ... they had to go build a super sat ...
> ... Never forget the builders factor...
> Each one involved in the sat making have
> their own ideas about what THEY believe
> the satellite should be.
And since "they" are the ones spending 12-16 hours a day for
years to BUILD it, then it is only human nature that they will
build what THEY believe in, and not what a bunch of
keyboard-jocky shack-potato's waste everyone's time whinnning
about...
If you can build a satellite, build it.
If you believe in what others are doing, contribute...
If you can only whine, then get out of the way...
I can tell you for sure, that volunteers are fragile in any
organization. Let them do the best they can with what they are
able. Trying to re-direct them to do something else of no
interest to them and progress will DIE.
And the ankle-bitters and whinning shack-potatoes win and will
go on and on about how "they shoulda, coulda, woulda done
better"... BUT, nothing was accomplished...
Bob, Wb4APR
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:30:55 -0500
From: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
To: <ke9v@xxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx>, Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL106-W26F93FB1FC3EB94C312068D6FA0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Jeff...
>
> Clearly the kind of mistake that caused the catastrophic failure could
> have happened on any spacecraft assembled by any organization.
nope.
OK anyone has a statistical chance of dying or any project has a statistical
chance of failing but the more complex a project is the more likely it is to
fail...and AO-40 as it grew more complex needed larger size which then needed
a more powerful rocket engine...which ...
this is "mission creep" (or more correctly design creep) and as I noted it is
a common cause of failure among homebuilders. Unless you are "rolling your
own" (ie doing the aerodynamics yourself) most home builders build something
that professionals have at least deigned. Where they get into trouble is when
they start adding things and making the project outside the scope of what was
well understood.
had AO-40 not been "supersat" it would not have needed the larger engine...
>
> You can call it "simple" if you like but a) it remains firmly affixed to
> earth and b) it is being sold to the German government as an adjunct to
> a mission to Mars. If you want to call an interplanetary mission
> "simple" that's your call, but P3E was scheduled to be launched years
> ago to support the P5 mission that was supposed to launch in 2009 and
> I'll buy the first beer whenever either of those fly...
The one to Mars will never fly.Its a fantasy project..but 3E eventually will.
I think.
>
>
> For the last time (from me, I promise) we have been told in no uncertain
> terms that the cost for a launch to GTO that would carry a craft of the
> size required to provide a happy medium of solar panels and antennas
> will cost no less than $6 million US and maybe as much as $8 million.
If that is the case then we are, after 3E gets its launch done in HEO sats...a
reasonable hope is that with some new launch vehicles coming on IE Falcon9 etc
there might be some opportunities for "reduced rate" launches...but who knows.
What I wonder is if there is any reluctance on the part of launch vehicle
providers after the 40 incident to let "amateur propulsion" ride on their
vehicle. It is after all "rocket science".
Look my only argument is that reality should guide where the dollars are
spent, since as you point out, the dollars are not going as far as they use
to. I bet suitsat is going to run (after all cost are figured in) around
50,000 or so.
thanks for a pleasant discussion...can pick this up later tonight but am off
for a little "Mission creep" myself. Got the 51 foot tower up on the new
place at Santa Fe, but the XYL bought the tower of my dreams and we are going
to get it on its concrete stand today.
later
Robert WB5MZO
>
_________________________________________________________________
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: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:32:39 -0500
From: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
To: <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>, <lucleblanc6@xxxxxxxxx.xx>, Amsat BB
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL106-W44F12C93D554A0D13150CD6FA0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Bob
>
> And since "they" are the ones spending 12-16 hours a day for
> years to BUILD it, then it is only human nature that they will
> build what THEY believe in, and not what a bunch of
> keyboard-jocky shack-potato's waste everyone's time whinnning
> about...
>
OK, so they dont care about the membership that is supposedly the core of
Amsat?
Robert WB5MZO
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail? is up to 70% faster. Now good news travels really fast.
http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=PID23391::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-
US:WM_HYGN_faster:082009
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:34:47 -0400
From: Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio
To: k7dd@xxx.xxx
Cc: 'AMSAT-BB' <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4A9199D7.6080803@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
The Flex 5000 will have a V/U full duplex, etc. module available in the
late fall. WD0ACD will be talking details at AMSAT-NA annual meeting in
Baltimore.
Both of these rigs, K3 and Flex 5000 with their independent high
performance IF's will be very suitable for the job.
Bob
Michael Baker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was talking to the store manager at HRO Phoenix and he says he is
> hearing a price tag of about 3k for the rig.
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:22:16 -0600
From: James Duffey <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio
To: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: James Duffey <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>, 'AMSAT-BB'
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <8DE95513-D62D-402F-938B-056AF9F79FE5@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
As far as I am aware, the current firmware in the K3 does not allow
full duplex. If it did, you would still have to buy the KRX3
subreceiver at $600 and probably find transverters for 144 MHz ansd
432 MHz that do not share the same IF. As far as satellite operation
goes, the K3 is not quite ready for prime time. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 22:26:03 +0200
From: "Simon \(HB9DRV\)" <simon@xxxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio
To: "James Duffey" <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield"
<gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: James Duffey <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>, 'AMSAT-BB'
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <66680631404143C1A3E2C2D65834F5F0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Also I suggest that for satellite work a radio with such staggeringly good
RX figures is overkill.
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Duffey" <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> As far as I am aware, the current firmware in the K3 does not allow
> full duplex. If it did, you would still have to buy the KRX3
> subreceiver at $600 and probably find transverters for 144 MHz ansd
> 432 MHz that do not share the same IF. As far as satellite operation
> goes, the K3 is not quite ready for prime time. - Duffey
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 16:27:21 -0400
From: David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 mode change
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A91A629.50909@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
To any Command Team members:
I have a great pass at just after 7.00pm edt this evening, that's only
23:00 utc - so will AO-51 remain in its current config until 00:00utc
and be commanded by someone else on the planet?
I just don't want to set everything up for Mode S to find that its
stopped an hour earlier than scheduled!
Thanks
David
--
David
KG4ZLB
www.kg4zlb.com
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 16:34:56 -0400
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-51 mode change
To: <kg4zlb@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <AC6D52889832495C985326435B0E5CE4@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I'm doing the mode change on the 2300 UTC pass as it's the only high enough
pass for me tonight. Mode changes are always "about" 0000Z, but really just
depend on when and what command station is doing the change.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message -----
From: "David - KG4ZLB" <kg4zlb@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 mode change
> To any Command Team members:
>
> I have a great pass at just after 7.00pm edt this evening, that's only
> 23:00 utc - so will AO-51 remain in its current config until 00:00utc
> and be commanded by someone else on the planet?
>
> I just don't want to set everything up for Mode S to find that its
> stopped an hour earlier than scheduled!
>
> Thanks
>
> David
>
> --
> David
> KG4ZLB
> www.kg4zlb.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:31:40 -0800
From: John W Lee <k6yk@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: HR1LW Grid ?
To: xe2at@xxxxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20090823.123418.3356.0.k6yk@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi Al, !
He is in Tegucigalpa, my map shows EK64.
I have 3 QSL from him, none of them has the
grid on it.
73,
John
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:57:50 -0500 Alvaro de Leon Romo
<xe2at@xxxxxxx.xxx> writes:
>
>
>
> Who know the HR1LW grid ?
>
> In QRZ is not shown...
>
>
>
> Many thanks in advance , like always
>
> Al XE2AT
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Con Windows Live, puedes organizar, editar y compartir tus fotos.
>
http://www.microsoft.com/mexico/windows/windowslive/products/photo-galler
y-edit.aspx
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
____________________________________________________________
Medical Coding Degrees
Earn your medical billing & coding degree, 100% online. Enroll today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=M0vIk0vR6fW46Sa-
4LVM2AAAJ1CmZcBa4CCYwgQDaZ1FJwo1AAQAAAAFAAAAADEIbD4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABGeJAAAAAA
==
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:56:34 -0300
From: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio
To: "Simon (HB9DRV)" <simon@xxxxxx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<49657a760908231656o54195543j9ddac44bea29ff42@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Simon (HB9DRV)<simon@xxxxxx.xx> wrote:
> Also I suggest that for satellite work a radio with such staggeringly good
> RX figures is overkill.
>
> Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
Thanks to all for this interesting discussion. There are a couple of
points that haven't been noted yet.
I suppose if one used transverters intelligently, the duplex HF rigs
could operate as a HF and satellite station, something like the
TS-2000. However, it really does help to have multiple inputs all in
one box. I see five connectors on the Icom; persumably the two
N-connectors are for 1.2 and 435 MHz.
I note that the sign on the Icom says the 2m output is limited to 50w.
Not a problem for satellite work, but might be an issue if someone
wants to get their feet wet with EME. Perhaps more important for
satellite operators is the *minimum* power of the transmitter on UHF
and VHF. I find it annoying that the TS-2000 doesn't let me get below
5w, which is going to be quite a bit of power when I get my 11x11 2m
antenna installed.
One thing I very much do like about the TS-2000 is the digital
filters. The real cost of an Icom is considerably higher due to the
cost of filters.
Finally, it appears this rig has a USB port. It really would make
sense for manufacturers today to use the FTDI serial chip and avoid
all the silliness with serial/usb converters not working properly with
their protocols.
73, Bruce
VE9QRP
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:08:55 -0400
From: w8iss <w8iss@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio
To: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <1251072535.26523.2.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain
On Sun, 2009-08-23 at 20:56 -0300, Bruce Robertson wrote:
Finally, it appears this rig has a USB port. It really would make
> sense for manufacturers today to use the FTDI serial chip and avoid
> all the silliness with serial/usb converters not working properly with
> their protocols.
>
> 73, Bruce
> VE9QRP
Why not just go ethernet and assign an MAC address to it and be done
with it or is ethernet another one of those protocols that have gone
the route of the serial port?
James W8ISS
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:29:24 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] 4 Lindenblads
To: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4A91ECF4.8090808@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Just thinking about omni antennas and the shadow in one direction if the
antenna is mounted out from the side of the tower.
Has anyone investigated mounting 3 or 4 lindenblads around a tower and
determined the preferred feeding arrangement or
any beneficial gain from so doing?
--
Nigel A. Gunn, 1865 El Camino Drive, Xenia, OH 45385-1115, USA. tel +1 937
825 5032
Amateur Radio G8IFF W8IFF (was KC8NHF), e-mail nigel@xxxxx.xxx www
http://www.ngunn.net
Member of ARRL, GQRP #11396, QRPARCI #11644, SOC #548, Flying Pigs QRP Club
International #385,
Dayton ARA #2128, AMSAT-NA LM-1691, AMSAT-UK 0182, MKARS, ALC,
GCARES, XWARN.
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:47:43 -0700
From: "Art McBride" <kc6uqh@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio
To: "'w8iss'" <w8iss@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "'Bruce Robertson'"
<ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: 'AMSAT-BB' <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <AE4323DBB0264F6B9E5C0BBE27EC5743@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
ICOM trash software for the D800H is terrible, and the OPC-UP478C serial to
USB adapter that they sell as an accessory will not work on Vista. The FTDI
chips are the best solution, but ICOM doesn't make money selling an FTDI
solution.
After an IC-820 and the D800 I am looking for another brand of radio.
Will their new radio USB run on Vista?
Art
KC6UQH
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of w8iss
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 5:09 PM
To: Bruce Robertson
Cc: AMSAT-BB
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New ICOM VHF / UHF / SHF Radio
On Sun, 2009-08-23 at 20:56 -0300, Bruce Robertson wrote:
Finally, it appears this rig has a USB port. It really would make
> sense for manufacturers today to use the FTDI serial chip and avoid
> all the silliness with serial/usb converters not working properly with
> their protocols.
>
> 73, Bruce
> VE9QRP
Why not just go ethernet and assign an MAC address to it and be done
with it or is ethernet another one of those protocols that have gone
the route of the serial port?
James W8ISS
_______________________________________________
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
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4361 (20090823) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4361 (20090823) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:54:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bob Bruninga " <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
To: "Amsat BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <20090823205458.AAQ30306@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>> And since "they" are the ones spending
>> 12-16 hours a day for years to BUILD it,
>> then it is only human nature that they will
>> build what THEY believe in, and not what
>> a bunch of keyboard-jocky shack-potato's
>> waste everyone's time whinnning about...
>
> OK, so they dont care about the membership
> that is supposedly the core of Amsat?
I didn't say that. Read it again. I said they will work on and build what
they believe in. If the project gets diverted onto something else, or the
whinners and ankle-biters wear them down, then those individuals who do not
believe in the new direction indicated will often just give up in disgust.
Someone else who believes in the diverted direction will have to step up to
the plate.
Its human nature. Volunteers work on what they BELIEVE in, not what some
whinning kibitzer wishes from afar...
The broad membership believes in the AMSAT mission and contributes to help
these poor souls make progress and hopes for the best.
Bob, Wb4APR
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:30:31 -0000
From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
To: "Rocky Jones" <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <ke9v@xxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx>,
"Amsat BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <C2B4EEA88FA14CDFB71A711E4873D249@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
The engine used in AO-40 was the same model used in all previous P3 series
satellites.
AO-40's size was determined by the space donated by the ESA.
If the AMSAT-DL Mars mission is a fantasy then P3 may never fly as its
launch is to be funded by that mission.
Suitsat seems perfectly reasonable as it is a UV linear transponder with the
government paying for the launch. This is what most AMSAT members want.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rocky Jones" <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <ke9v@xxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx>; "Amsat BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 19:30 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Don't Fly SuitSat2 to ISS (rebuttal)
>
> Jeff...
>
>
>>
>> Clearly the kind of mistake that caused the catastrophic failure could
>> have happened on any spacecraft assembled by any organization.
>
> nope.
>
> OK anyone has a statistical chance of dying or any project has a
> statistical chance of failing but the more complex a project is the more
> likely it is to fail...and AO-40 as it grew more complex needed larger
> size which then needed a more powerful rocket engine...which ...
>
> this is "mission creep" (or more correctly design creep) and as I noted it
> is a common cause of failure among homebuilders. Unless you are "rolling
> your own" (ie doing the aerodynamics yourself) most home builders build
> something that professionals have at least deigned. Where they get into
> trouble is when they start adding things and making the project outside
> the scope of what was well understood.
>
> had AO-40 not been "supersat" it would not have needed the larger
> engine...
>
>>
>> You can call it "simple" if you like but a) it remains firmly affixed to
>> earth and b) it is being sold to the German government as an adjunct to
>> a mission to Mars. If you want to call an interplanetary mission
>> "simple" that's your call, but P3E was scheduled to be launched years
>> ago to support the P5 mission that was supposed to launch in 2009 and
>> I'll buy the first beer whenever either of those fly...
>
> The one to Mars will never fly.Its a fantasy project..but 3E eventually
> will. I think.
>>
>
>>
>> For the last time (from me, I promise) we have been told in no uncertain
>> terms that the cost for a launch to GTO that would carry a craft of the
>> size required to provide a happy medium of solar panels and antennas
>> will cost no less than $6 million US and maybe as much as $8 million.
>
> If that is the case then we are, after 3E gets its launch done in HEO
> sats...a reasonable hope is that with some new launch vehicles coming on
> IE Falcon9 etc there might be some opportunities for "reduced rate"
> launches...but who knows. What I wonder is if there is any reluctance on
> the part of launch vehicle providers after the 40 incident to let "amateur
> propulsion" ride on their vehicle. It is after all "rocket science".
>
> Look my only argument is that reality should guide where the dollars are
> spent, since as you point out, the dollars are not going as far as they
> use to. I bet suitsat is going to run (after all cost are figured in)
> around 50,000 or so.
>
> thanks for a pleasant discussion...can pick this up later tonight but am
> off for a little "Mission creep" myself. Got the 51 foot tower up on the
> new place at Santa Fe, but the XYL bought the tower of my dreams and we
> are going to get it on its concrete stand today.
>
> later
>
> Robert WB5MZO
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 16
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Patrick STODDARD \(WD9EWK/VA7EWK\)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 V/S activity
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <368188.74623.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi!
Since it is summertime here, coupled with working extra time
during most of the last week, I didn't get out to work a lot
of AO-51 passes while the S-band downlink was on. I was able
to work two AO-51 V/S passes - a western pass Thursday evening,
and an eastern pass Saturday afternoon. Using the same basic
setup as I have done for V/S over the past 3 years, changing
only the transmit antenna (Elk log periodic, instead of my
Arrow Antennas Yagi) and receive radio (mobile radio, instead
of an HT), it was as I remember it. Unfortunately, there
weren't a lot of stations on those passes.
Thursday evening (early Friday, UTC time) had just 4 stations
on - XE2BHL, W7LRD, KC9ELU, and N0JY. I was operating from the
Phoenix city park where I do most of my satellite operating
when I am not on the road, at the DM33xp/DM43ap grid boundary.
I was in Tucson for most of Saturday, and stopped in Marana -
a northwest suburb of Tucson, just off the I-10 freeway in grid
DM42jl - for that pass on my way home from there. I worked 4
stations from down there (K8YSE, WA5KBH, XE2BHL, and KC9ELU),
and heard one other I was not able to make a QSO with (N5ZNL).
Thanks to all of you for showing up and putting some activity
on those passes!
There hasn't been a lot of chatter on the -BB about this week of
V/S activity. Did other operators hear more activity on other
passes? How did it go for those in other parts of the world?
I hope there were times with more activity than having only 5 or
6 stations on these passes during a week's time. I had my S-band
gear in my truck for the entire week, so I could get on whenever
I had free time to work AO-51 passes.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
P.S.: If anyone who worked me yesterday from DM42 wants my QSL
card for our QSO, please e-mail me with QSO details. If you're
in the log, I'll send out a card.
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 22:02:06 -0400
From: "Scott Richardson" <scott@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: MFJ/Cushcraft
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <F3C104F76DF94A8E83C4F5A1EDA58AA3@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
> The list of "problems" goes on.
FWIW the only Cushcraft item I ever purchased was built on the "MFJ model."
It wasn't till after a rig went up in smoke that I discovered that only one
half of the driven element was connected inside the factory-assembled feed
housing. From my unfortunate perspective, the Cushcraft move to MFJ seems
appropriate.
Scott N1AIA
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 424
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
