| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 20.10.09 21:00l 947 Lines 32389 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB4553
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 553
Path: IZ3LSV<IK3GET<IW2OHX<OE6XPE<DB0RES<IK2XDE<ON4HU<ON0BEL<CX2SA
Sent: 091019/1308Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:10692 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB4553
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (k0vty@xxxx.xxxx
2. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (k0vty@xxxx.xxxx
3. someone is launching cubesats! (Rocky Jones)
4. Re: THE DMSP launch (Daniel Schultz)
5. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (Daniel Kekez)
6. Re: Why do hamsats? (Or anything else...) (George Henry)
7. Tucson Hamfest (Tom)
8. Re: Cheap CP 2.4 ghz antenna? (John Melton)
9. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (Trevor .)
10. Re: ao7 hand held ants//amsat listening (paul robinson)
11. Re: THE DMSP launch (Ken Ernandes)
12. Re: THE DMSP launch (Ken Ernandes)
13. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (Bruce Robertson)
14. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (Bob McGwier)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:47:00 CDT
From: k0vty@xxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: samudra.haque@xxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20091018.204701.948.3.k0vty@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Thanks Samudra
All knowledge about the issues effecting Amateur Satellites and ITAR
rules / laws
for the membership are appreciated.
Thanks
Joe Murray K0VTY
===================
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:16:54 -0400 Samudra Haque
<samudra.haque@xxxxx.xxx> writes:
> Hi,
>
> if anyone is interested to investigate ITAR regulations further,
> they
> will have to dig into the published documents at various Dept of
> Commerce and other websites. However, here is a blank template in
> line
> with http://pmddtc.state.gov/regulations_laws/itar_official.html,
> just
> in case, a US Lawful Permanent Resident wants to claim ITAR
> self-certification in the field of amateur satellites:
>
> {disclaimer, please check with the organization that you are asking
> ITAR specific permission for, for any required supplementary
> documentation}
>
> {Warning: the penalty for mis-stating is quite severe}
>
> TEMPLATE
>
> Pursuant to the ITAR?s (International Traffic in Arms Regulations:
> 22
> CFR 120-130) definition of a U.S. Person, 22 CFR 120.15, I {insert
> name here} hereby certify that I am a U.S. Person.
>
> Printed Name: ______________________ {be sure this is official and
> matches your records as well}
>
> Address: ______________________
>
> Phone: ___________________________________
>
> Alien Registration: ______________________ {required if you are a
> US
> LPR, not required if US Citizen}
>
> Date: ____________________
>
> Signature:
>
>
> __________________________________________
>
> Affiliation: Member
>
> ABC Corp
>
> Full Address
>
>
> (Fax signed copy to: _____________________)
>
> Definitions
>
> U.S. Person (22 CFR 120.15) U.S. person means a person (as defined
> in
> section 120.14) who is lawful permanent resident as defined by 8
> U.S.C. 1101(a)(20) or who is a protected individual as defined by 8
> U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3). It also means any corporation, business
> association, partnership, society, trust, or any other entity,
> organization or group that is incorporated to do business in the
> United States. It also includes any governmental (federal, state or
> local) entity.
>
> 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20) The term ''lawfully admitted for permanent
> residence'' means the status of having been lawfully accorded the
> privilege of residing permanently in the United States as an
> immigrant
> in accordance with the immigration laws, such status not having
> changed.
>
> 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3) ''Protected individual'' defined As used in
> paragraph (1), the term ''protected individual'' means an
> individual
> who - (A) is a citizen or national of the United States, or (B) is
> an
> alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence, is granted
> the
> status of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence under
> section 1160(a) or 1255a(a)(1) of this title, is admitted as a
> refugee
> under section 1157 of this title, or is granted asylum under
> section
> 1158 of this title; but does not include (i) an alien who fails to
> apply for naturalization within six months of the date the alien
> first
> becomes eligible (by virtue of period of lawful permanent
> residence)
> to apply for naturalization or, if later, within six months after
> November 6, 1986, and (ii) an alien who has applied on a timely
> basis,
> but has not been naturalized as a citizen within 2 years after the
> date of the application, unless the alien can establish that the
> alien
> is actively pursuing naturalization, except that time consumed in
> the
> Service's processing the application shall not be counted toward
> the
> 2-year period.
>
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>
> wrote:
> > k0vty@xxxx.xxx wrote:
> >> Greetings All:
> >>
> >> The Amsat BB is a great source of information we all know:
> >> I have a few questions about ITAR that I thought might interest
> more than
> >> I.
> >> I tried to be careful of the words I used.
> >>
> >> 1.) Do all launched satellites that have US components or
> interests fall
> >> under ITAR?
> >>
> > Yes
> >> 2.) When does ITAR interest begin for a launchable Amateur
> satellite?
> >>
> > The minute you wish to discuss what is in it with someone who is
> not a
> > US national or want to ship the thing overseas for launch.
> >> 3.) Is software and firmware that is a part of a Amateur
> satellite at
> >> launch fall under ITAR?
> >>
> > Most definitely
> >> 4.) Who normally handles University Cube Sat ITAR issues when
> Amateur
> >> frequencies are used?
> >>
> > Depends on who is going to do the launch but Cal Poly has been
> involved
> > for sure.
> >> 5.) Who normally handles US Military school Cube-Sat ITAR issues
> when
> >> Amateur frequencies are use ?
> >>
> > U.S. government entities have a form of an exemption because they
> are a
> > component of the U.S. government (and not a for profit company
> which
> > might be tempted to sell intellectual property to the highest
> bidder)
> > and those equities are handled differently. Even then, ITAR only
> comes
> > into play if non-U.S. citizens are involved in the program and/or
> an
> > overseas launch is envisioned.
> >> 6.) When is there no ITAR interest in a Amateur satellite?
> >>
> > There is interest. That is what is causing us so much grief. It
> has
> > effectively ended the participation of AMSAT-NA in Phase 3E.
> >> 7.) Did Suitsat one or two (ARISSaT-1) have any ITAR problems
> since they
> >> are satellites
> >> using Amateur frequency?
> >>
> > NASA is able to work through different channels than AMSAT has to
> in
> > order to get things launched to the space station. AMSAT-NA will
> be
> > responsible for ALL transfer of components for ARISSat 1 to the
> launch
> > site. We might get assistance from some places in the government
> but it
> > will be handled as an export request and we will have to show how
> we
> > will protect the equities that need protecting under ITAR.
> >>
> >> I have more ITAR related questions.
> >>
> >> Best Regards
> >>
> >> Joe K0VTY
> >> ====================
> >>
> >
> > ANY aspect dealing with a satellite, software, hardware, ground
> stations
> > (hardware, software, protocols, etc.), ideas, random ejaculations
> from a
> > diseased mind or whatever that deals with spacecraft or ground
> stations
> > are DEEMED EXPORTS when they depart a U.S. citizen and are
> delivered to
> > a non-U.S. citizen. It is a nearly impossible task to abide by
> and one
> > that really makes me want to throw my hands up in despair and walk
> away.
> >
> > There are exceptions for classrooms and courses taught in U.S.
> > university's. A person, even a non-U.S. citizen, who can pay for
> taking
> > a course, may go and involve themselves in course work, even if it
> is
> > dealing with the design, construction, and control of spacecraft
> during
> > the course work. Some of this applies to your earlier questions
> but for
> > US service academies, there are very few non-U.S. citizens in
> them.
> >
> > Bob
> > N4HY
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > (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
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
>
>
____________________________________________________________
Weight Loss Program
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=z9S3o0CC_NydE77fMlMiaQAAJ1CmZcBa
4CCYwgQDaZ1FJwo1AAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEUgAAAAA=
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:49:16 CDT
From: k0vty@xxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20091018.204917.948.4.k0vty@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Thanks Bruce (VE9QRP)
All Amateur Satellite ITAR Questions are welcome Bruce.
Thanks
Joe K0VTY
==================
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:11:38 -0300 Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
writes:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 8:31 PM, <k0vty@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> > Hi Bob (N4HY)
> >
> > Thanks for taking the time to ponder for the BB and me some of the
> twists
> > and turns
> > of ITAR issues.
> >
> > I hope the BB apprecaites your time and effort.
> > Here are a few more questions?
>
> I have a further question, if I may, and Bob needn't feel obliged to
> answer it.
>
> Given that AMSAT-NA is by definition a collaboration between
> amateurs
> on both sides of the US/Canada border, do we have a clear idea
> where
> ITAR stands with respect to Canadian collaborators? I know that in
> 1999 the previous exemption was revoked, but that in 2001 there
> were
> some changes again.
>
> 73, Bruce
> VE9QRP
>
>
____________________________________________________________
Click now for great information on the latest in cancer treatment!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTMhcS6UBOAzuAy7o1Or5C6rv2vde
XbjSWj4zDdx8C5BNTKDYawvBm/
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:24:03 -0500
From: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] someone is launching cubesats!
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL106-W75851EA3E89C31873C2508D6C10@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0910/18iran/
Robert WB5MZO
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:51:12 -0400
From: "Daniel Schultz" <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <387NJsDYm9286S18.1255924272@xxxxxxxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Someone wrote:
>as I recall there were 50 some odd pounds of ballast launched with the
bird...to
>bad it wasnt an amateur repeater.
>to bad we didnt have something to use that excess performance...they flew
>ballast on the flight
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Why would they fly ballast on their rocket when they could have flown a ham
satellite?
1. Ballast does not need to be tested for Electromagnetic Compatibility or
contamination of the primary payload. The Interface Control Document for a
block of concrete can be exceedingly simple, with no need to pay a room full
of engineers to review it for completeness and accuracy.
2. Ballast does not need to have a separation interface tested and qualified,
there is no chance of it coming loose inside the payload shroud during
liftoff.
3. Ballast is certain to be ready in time for the launch date, without
bringing another organization into the mix. There is no need to conduct a
crash engineering program to design a satellite structure that will fit on the
Atlas and then test and certify the satellite for compliance with the Atlas
vibration and acoustic specifications.
4. Ballast does not have an e-mail group full of whining little people who
think they could have designed it better or that it operates on the wrong band
or mode, and complaining loudly when the mission falls months or years behind
its original launch date.
If you were the Colonel in charge of the mission, you could not make a safer
choice than launching a block of concrete ballast. A ham satellite is just a
lot of additional risk and headache with no possible gain for you or your
future career.
Somewhere in the world there may be an officer who is willing to take that
risk. That is how Oscar-1 was launched in 1961. The challenge is to find that
person and nurture a relationship with him or her. If they are reading the
comments on Amsat-BB they are probably thinking "there is no way I would ever
want to have a relationship with that wacky organization"
Dan Schultz N8FGV
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:11:14 +0000
From: Daniel Kekez <va3kkz@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4ADBE6E2.2010407@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Bruce Robertson wrote:
> Given that AMSAT-NA is by definition a collaboration between amateurs
> on both sides of the US/Canada border, do we have a clear idea where
> ITAR stands with respect to Canadian collaborators? I know that in
> 1999 the previous exemption was revoked, but that in 2001 there were
> some changes again.
To the best of my knowledge, Canada holds no special status with regard
to ITAR.
Consider ITAR to be a "goods and information diode": Canada can sell
space technology to an American company and can provide information.
However, the American company cannot describe their application in
detail or send any information North of the border without a Technical
Assistance Agreement in place between the particular organizations. And
US export permits are needed to send space technology to Canada.
Furthermore, if a Canadian company wishes to use US technology on a
Canadian satellite and then launch with foreign launcher, the country
from which the launch takes place must also be specified (and approved)
on the US Export Permit. The US State department must be satisfied that
all precautions are being taken to protect the technology when it is in
a foreign country.
Canada does have its own restrictions for space technology under the
Controlled Goods Program legislated by the Defence Production Act. And
export permits are needed when sending space technology outside of the
country. The process, however, is far less onerous than ITAR. Details on
the Canadian system can be found at
http://www.ssi-iss.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/dmc-cgd/apropos-about/apercu-overview-eng
.html
73,
-Daniel, VA3KKZ
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:28:47 -0500
From: "George Henry" <ka3hsw@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Why do hamsats? (Or anything else...)
To: "amsat bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <B1C6A4AFE3A84D7BB33C09D1DFE9E041@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Please stop feeding the troll....
----- Original Message -----
From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Rocky Jones" <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>; <k6hx@xxxx.xxx>; "Amsat BB"
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 5:44 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Why do hamsats? (Or anything else...)
[snip]
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rocky Jones" <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: <k6hx@xxxx.xxx>; "Amsat BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 15:32 UTC
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Why do hamsats? (Or anything else...)
[BS deleted]
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:05:27 -0700
From: "Tom" <k0tw@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Tucson Hamfest
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <5E58EADEFBB64C55A98054E6C16EF272@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
It was my pleasure to meet both Patrick, WD9EWK, and Ed, N7EDK, at the
Tucson Hamfest yesterday. My first eye-to-eye meeting with those whom I'd
worked on the satellites.
Tom, K?TW
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:07:08 +0100
From: John Melton <John.Melton@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Cheap CP 2.4 ghz antenna?
To: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4ADC101C.4050300@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Greg,
I have used a quad patch Wi-Fi antenna, hand pointed, with great results
on AO-51 mode S.
-- John g0orx/n6lyt
On 10/18/09 23:12, Greg D. wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> So I have a pair of 14 dbi flat panel "Wi-Fi" antennas, complete with
pigtail and N connector. I assume they're linearly polarized. Satellite
downlinks really ought to be circular, if possible.
>
> For satellite use, could I simply mount the two on my Az/El rotor boom,
with one rotated 90-degrees from the other, and with a 1.23 inch shim behind
it (for the 1/4 wave offset, if I did the math right), then combine the two
antennas with a simple "T" connector? The impedance would be wrong, but for
Rx only, probably irrelevant. I'd be feeding it into a Kuhne preamp, and
from there to the Drake downconverter.
>
> As a receive setup for the likes of AO-40, this probably wouldn't be all
that good. My 30" screened BBQ Grill with helix feed, after all, was barely
up to the job. But for AO-51's V/US mode, I'd think it would be fine, offer
a whole lot less wind resistance, and weigh a whole lot less too.
>
> Since AO-51's 2.4 ghz antenna is linearly polarized, it probably doesn't
matter whether the result is left-hand or right-hand polarized, so it
doesn't matter that I forget which "hand" rule to use for figuring it out...
>
> I've also heard that these panel antennas may have great numerical gain,
but also have a lot of loss (cheap PC board materials), so maybe this isn't
too good of an idea. What do you think?
>
> Greg KO6TH
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:50:23 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <140180.9434.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
As was commented earlier ITAR certainly does makes it tricky when try to
sell something to an American customer who isn't allowed to tell you what
they want.
Am I right in thinking the penalty for a US citizen who incorrectly
interprets ITAR and inadvertantly breaches it can be a 4 figure fine or jail
term ?
I infer from previous comments on this list that ITAR also prevents detailed
discussion of an amateur satellite via an email list that is open to non-US
citizens and might also impact on a Wiki or articles written by US Nationals
in publications such as the AMSAT Journal.
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:04:14 +0000 (GMT)
From: paul robinson <pushbiker2004@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ao7 hand held ants//amsat listening
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <369289.7630.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hi guys thanks for responding and i fully understand whats involved....but
from a sat opp point of view it would be nice if we could manage one bird
like a07 ...that is its hight? and transponder ever 25 years? or so...?? and
not have to rely on 25 year old tech...that works and works well...im a big
beleaver ...keep it simple it works and lasts
Thanks for all ur hard work and im sure im not alone in saying keep up the
good work and lets hope a ride comes along to for fill?our needs..so we can
keep this great part of the hobby on going! de paul ......raining in scotland
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:37:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
From: Ken Ernandes <n2wwd@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
To: Daniel Schultz <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<15553913.1255952237885.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Dan -
Great points - especially #4 !!!
73, Ken Ernandes N2WWD
-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Schultz <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
>Sent: Oct 18, 2009 11:51 PM
>To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
>
>Someone wrote:
>
>>as I recall there were 50 some odd pounds of ballast launched with the
>bird...to
>>bad it wasnt an amateur repeater.
>
>>to bad we didnt have something to use that excess performance...they flew
>>ballast on the flight
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Why would they fly ballast on their rocket when they could have flown a ham
>satellite?
>
>1. Ballast does not need to be tested for Electromagnetic Compatibility or
>contamination of the primary payload. The Interface Control Document for a
>block of concrete can be exceedingly simple, with no need to pay a room full
>of engineers to review it for completeness and accuracy.
>
>2. Ballast does not need to have a separation interface tested and qualified,
>there is no chance of it coming loose inside the payload shroud during
>liftoff.
>
>3. Ballast is certain to be ready in time for the launch date, without
>bringing another organization into the mix. There is no need to conduct a
>crash engineering program to design a satellite structure that will fit on
the
>Atlas and then test and certify the satellite for compliance with the Atlas
>vibration and acoustic specifications.
>
>4. Ballast does not have an e-mail group full of whining little people who
>think they could have designed it better or that it operates on the wrong
band
>or mode, and complaining loudly when the mission falls months or years behind
>its original launch date.
>
>If you were the Colonel in charge of the mission, you could not make a safer
>choice than launching a block of concrete ballast. A ham satellite is just a
>lot of additional risk and headache with no possible gain for you or your
>future career.
>
>Somewhere in the world there may be an officer who is willing to take that
>risk. That is how Oscar-1 was launched in 1961. The challenge is to find that
>person and nurture a relationship with him or her. If they are reading the
>comments on Amsat-BB they are probably thinking "there is no way I would ever
>want to have a relationship with that wacky organization"
>
>Dan Schultz N8FGV
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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: 12
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:37:18 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
From: Ken Ernandes <n2wwd@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
To: Daniel Schultz <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<5468604.1255952238354.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Dan -
Great points - especially #4 !!!
73, Ken Ernandes N2WWD
-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Schultz <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
>Sent: Oct 18, 2009 11:51 PM
>To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
>
>Someone wrote:
>
>>as I recall there were 50 some odd pounds of ballast launched with the
>bird...to
>>bad it wasnt an amateur repeater.
>
>>to bad we didnt have something to use that excess performance...they flew
>>ballast on the flight
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Why would they fly ballast on their rocket when they could have flown a ham
>satellite?
>
>1. Ballast does not need to be tested for Electromagnetic Compatibility or
>contamination of the primary payload. The Interface Control Document for a
>block of concrete can be exceedingly simple, with no need to pay a room full
>of engineers to review it for completeness and accuracy.
>
>2. Ballast does not need to have a separation interface tested and qualified,
>there is no chance of it coming loose inside the payload shroud during
>liftoff.
>
>3. Ballast is certain to be ready in time for the launch date, without
>bringing another organization into the mix. There is no need to conduct a
>crash engineering program to design a satellite structure that will fit on
the
>Atlas and then test and certify the satellite for compliance with the Atlas
>vibration and acoustic specifications.
>
>4. Ballast does not have an e-mail group full of whining little people who
>think they could have designed it better or that it operates on the wrong
band
>or mode, and complaining loudly when the mission falls months or years behind
>its original launch date.
>
>If you were the Colonel in charge of the mission, you could not make a safer
>choice than launching a block of concrete ballast. A ham satellite is just a
>lot of additional risk and headache with no possible gain for you or your
>future career.
>
>Somewhere in the world there may be an officer who is willing to take that
>risk. That is how Oscar-1 was launched in 1961. The challenge is to find that
>person and nurture a relationship with him or her. If they are reading the
>comments on Amsat-BB they are probably thinking "there is no way I would ever
>want to have a relationship with that wacky organization"
>
>Dan Schultz N8FGV
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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: 13
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:38:57 -0300
From: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: Daniel Kekez <va3kkz@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<49657a760910190438i792abcd8n7a2c9b0e3864539a@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Thank-you, Daniel for this helpful reply. Your 'diode' analogy was excellent.
Using the links provided by Samudra above, I was able to find some
parts of ITAR that exempt Canada. Specifically, 126.5(b), which in
turn has restrictions on *it* in the following passages. One of these
restrictions is on "all spacecraft in category XV(a) except commercial
satellites". This is a bit frustrating, since it seems likely that the
regulation means by 'commercial satellites' 'satellites with no
national security implications'; but for we amateurs, if we read the
letter of the law, 'commercial' excludes us as an apparent
side-effect.
I fully admit that I might have misunderstood the regulations, since
they are, quite appropriately, written in a particular sub-dialect of
legal language. Obviously any speculation on this list is no
substitution for the professional opinion of a lawyer.
Finally, let me say that I really appreciate the board tackling this
issue so directly. It must seem pretty tangential to the corp's larger
project, and I know if I were in their shoes I'd find it rather
frustrating work.
73, Bruce
VE9QRP
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 1:11 AM, Daniel Kekez <va3kkz@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Bruce Robertson wrote:
>> ?Given that AMSAT-NA is by definition a collaboration between amateurs
>> on both sides of the US/Canada border, do we have a clear idea where
>> ITAR stands with respect to Canadian collaborators? I know that in
>> 1999 the previous exemption was revoked, but that in 2001 there were
>> some changes again.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, Canada holds no special status with regard
> to ITAR.
>
> Consider ITAR to be a "goods and information diode": Canada can sell
> space technology to an American company and can provide information.
> However, the American company cannot describe their application in
> detail or send any information North of the border without a Technical
> Assistance Agreement in place between the particular organizations. And
> US export permits are needed to send space technology to Canada.
>
> Furthermore, if a Canadian company wishes to use US technology on a
> Canadian satellite and then launch with foreign launcher, the country
> from which the launch takes place must also be specified (and approved)
> on the US Export Permit. The US State department must be satisfied that
> all precautions are being taken to protect the technology when it is in
> a foreign country.
>
> Canada does have its own restrictions for space technology under the
> Controlled Goods Program legislated by the Defence Production Act. And
> export permits are needed when sending space technology outside of the
> country. The process, however, is far less onerous than ITAR. Details on
> the Canadian system can be found at
>
http://www.ssi-iss.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/dmc-cgd/apropos-about/apercu-overview-eng
.html
>
> 73,
> -Daniel, VA3KKZ
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:04:53 -0400
From: Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: k0vty@xxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4ADC63F5.1060704@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
k0vty@xxxx.xxx wrote:
> Hi Bob (N4HY)
>
> Thanks for taking the time to ponder for the BB and me some of the twists
> and turns
> of ITAR issues.
>
> I hope the BB apprecaites your time and effort.
> Here are a few more questions?
>
> 8.) How do exclusionary zones with in the US work as in the AO-40
> integration and shipping
> zone, as it relates to ITAR?
>
These deal only with tariffs, taxation, etc. As soon as you move a
piece of electronics from outside any such zone into that zone with the
purpose being to do any export or even a DEEMED export, it is covered.
> 9.) How does Amsat-NA insure ITAR security among it's own engineering
> staff?
>
After our MEA CULPA to the state department, we are being instructed on
how to comply and every person working with us will be subjected to the
treatment, err uhh, training.
> 10.) Does the German Government have ITAR like laws for the AMSAT-DL
> folks to follow?
>
They have export control laws as do all governments. Germans are by
their nature (from my experience) rule abiding law followers and do not
want to sign documents exposing themselves to onerous restrictions. So
far as I know, they do not force foreign citizens (non-Germans) to sign
a document that says for the purposes of the satellite exercise, it
doesn't matter where in the world you are, or even if it is illegal for
you to sign such a document in your own country, you will agree you are
subject to German law. The chutzpah involved in such a set of rules on
our part is almost too much to wrap your mind around, especially applied
to amateur radio satellites since these rules interfere with the purpose
of amateur radio world wide.
> 11.) Are there any ITAR shipping limitation involved as to methods and
> ports?
>
I do not understand what this means.
> Global is getting to mean many things it would appear.
>
> Thanks you sir, when you get more spare time .
>
> Regards
>
> Joe Murray K0VTY
>
>
--
(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
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 553
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
