| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 20.10.09 21:00l 926 Lines 35449 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB4554
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 554
Path: IZ3LSV<IK3GET<IW2OHX<IR2UBX<IW0QNL<OK4PEN<SR1BSZ<ON4HU<ON0BEL<CX2SA
Sent: 091019/1734Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:10729 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB4554
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (Bob McGwier)
2. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (Bob McGwier)
3. Re: THE DMSP launch (Rocky Jones)
4. Re: THE DMSP launch (Rocky Jones)
5. Quite an update about Sumbandilasat... (Andrew Glasbrenner)
6. Re: ITAR is interesting to me (Samudra Haque)
7. Re: Quite an update about Sumbandilasat... (Samudra Haque)
8. Re: Quite an update about Sumbandilasat... (Tim - N3TL)
9. Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF (David Wing)
10. Re: THE DMSP launch (Samudra Haque)
11. Re: Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF (David Wing)
12. I: Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF (Francesco Grappi)
13. Congrats to Sumbadilisat team! (Mark L. Hammond)
14. Re: THE DMSP launch (Robert Bruninga)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:15:50 -0400
From: Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4ADC6686.3070603@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Trevor . wrote:
> 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 ?
>
No. It is six figures in many cases. I know a tale. I will NOT attest
to its veracity since I was not there but I believe it. Somewhere in
the world associated with space and military we allowed (a) foreign
national(s) to use our facilities to monitor one of their launches as
they needed a world wide network for it and we were playing nice. One
of their nationals asked "May we put an antenna on that tower and cover
this location for our hand held communications for coordination of our
activities". The question was answered. The company that employed the
person answering the question was fined in excess of $100,000 for
answering the question as an ITAR violation because they aided the
ground station support for the launch and that was a DEEMED export and
not an approved one.
I was once told that it is simply impossible to follow ITAR to the
letter and achieve any purpose. What you do is negotiate a document of
exceptions and reporting and call it a technical assistance agreement.
Once that is approved you are allowed to communicate but heaven help you
even if you inadvertently exceed the authority of that document. I just
cannot afford personally to take such risks especially after making a
full mea culpa on those things which were done wrong before and being
told "do not do this again or it will be tougher".
> 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
>
>
>
One can only hope there is some sanity turned on amateur radio
spacecraft in particular some day since we are not-for-profit and have
education and international comity as our goals.
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
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:31:59 -0400
From: Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4ADC6A4F.8010004@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Bruce Robertson wrote:
> 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
>
>
Working with Candians and discussing satellites is a deemed export and
must be treated as a munition transfer even between Canadians and
Americans. We need a technical assistance agreement with our Canadian
brethren in amateur satellite service work. The tough part for this is
that we really need to work out the technical assistance agreement with
an umbrella organization for our Canadian colleagues to be legal or be
granted a specific exemption or work out the agreements with
individuals. Since Canadians are members of AMSAT-NA what organization
could easily serve this role? What individual would do this on their
own without an umbrella group over them? You have to agree to go to a
federal prison or pay a ridiculous fine if you violate this as an
individual. Who would expose themselves to this?
If I sound overly negative about ITAR that is simple. I am truly
negative about its application to amateur radio satellites with an open
door and publication policy on what we are doing in a not-for-profit
mode as a 501c3 educational organization. If I were to work on a DOD
satellite, I would expect to keep my mouth shut or go to prison. I have
no trouble at all distinguishing the difference. ITAR and the amateur
radio and amateur satellite services are confounded in paranoia built in
a time when the Soviet Union existed and thank goodness those days are
over. But what has resulted is a new set of boogie men to take their
place and it being even harder to see how amateur radio satellites
contribute to their evil insidious plots against us!
I am unconvinced that even trying to stop commercial companies from
discussing the technology used in their satellites for non-defense
purposes serves a serious security need for the U.S. since I believe all
of the serious potential adversaries on our radar have developed
rockets, spacecraft, weaponized warheads on the rockets, and more and
ITAR did NOTHING to prevent it except for a delaying action that allowed
the potential adversaries to build their own independent means but for
these purposes, getting the shackles off the ankles of amateur radio, I
don't care about this argument. My primary argument is that it makes
absolutely no sense to stop AMSAT-NA, AMSAT-UK, and AMSAT-DL and
AMSAT-ZL and AMSAT-VK ..... from talking things over to make rational
decisions.
More than one of these entities just mentioned is trapped in a dilemma
for their programs posed by ITAR because we cannot help them without an
onerous agreement they are unwilling to sign up to.
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
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:56:19 -0500
From: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
To: <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>, Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL106-W61B9EFEC211170B6C3C4E8D6C10@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Dan
Why would they fly ballast on their rocket when they could have flown a ham
satellite?...
I didnt ask why.
Your list sounds a lot like my 10 year olds explaining why something didnt
get done when they know that they should have done it. Their first
inclination (and that is a hallmark of childhood) is to try and blame
someone or something elses. .
Nothing in life is easy except inertia.
Robert WB5MZO
_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:38:22 -0500
From: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
To: <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>, Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL106-W59849F3C90D0668715E701D6C10@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Dan
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.
....
this is the one I always find amusing. Almost comical and certainly childish.
Are the people who are suppose to be the experts in building state of the
art satellites so thin skinned that a bulletin board
slows their progress? LOL
If so then I suggest that they channel The Former First lady Nancy Reagan and
"Just say no" either stop building satellites and move on to something that
wont be at all critical...or just tune out and stop reading.
It is the childhood equivalent of "he called me a name"
LOL
things are hard
Robert WB5MZO
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:59:07 -0400
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Quite an update about Sumbandilasat...
To: Amsat-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4ADC7EBB.1090800@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
posted at http://sumbandilamission.blogspot.com/ .
Congratulations to the SA-AMSAT team!
73, Drew KO4MA
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:24:12 -0400
From: Samudra Haque <samudra.haque@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me
To: Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<d8c724880910190824h56cf506duac30bde09496cd33@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Bob, Bruce et. al.,
This is probably a very reasonable thread of discussion to follow,
compared to other snippy comments/jibes/frivolous remarks that I have
seen on amsat-bb recently. I have started up a separate private thread
to allow us to discuss a managed bulletin board to supplement the open
mailing list to accomodate:
+ potential need to have a closed community of registered members
discussing itar-covered topics
+ a searchable archive of topics, posts that users can leave in the
archive on a permanent basis and stop repeating ad nauseum
+ optional open-forums and closed-forums depending upon the
affiliation of a particular member. An example of this is the IEEE,
which as an organization provides the IEEE scanner publication to all,
but only the referred journals/publications to members who are part of
a particular society. So, if you not a member of the AESS society,
you won't get the AESS Journal, but you may become a member (of your
choice) of any society that you wish. In my analog, amsat-bb will and
should be open for general users not involved in satops, satengg,
mission planning, but only using it as a hobby. Separately, if there
was an amsat-engineering or some other forum should in my opinion only
be open to those that have agreed to sign a volunteering agreement
with AMSAT agreeing to comply with a written policy, that is inclusive
of the ITAR regs for "U.S. Persons".
+ The key issue of course is that in the U.S.A, we must be in
compliance with all laws, and those "Federal" laws trump individual
association/non-profit laws that one may think of.
That said, I would like to submit to the amsat-bod through amsat-bb
(Hey, I don't have access, I am a newbie!)
Have you looked at:
http://www.research.ucla.edu/researchpol/memos/Memo_Ofac.htm and
considered the implications of adopting a restatement of our bye-laws
to reflect our current role as a fundamental research institution in
amateur space systems and potentially amateur rocketry as well ?
I urge all to review THIRD (A, B, F, G) once again from
http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/AboutAmsat/documents/bylaws.php
But more importantly, Bob, or any other competent amsat member, we
must spend the time to read ourselves thoroughly
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2002/aprqtr/22cfr121.1.htm that
might offer the chance to request a WAIVER. The reason for this would
be based upon the following question:
Why should AMSAT Satellites with clearly defined specifications be
considered as SME (Significant Military Equipment) given that they
follow ARRL/IARU/ITU spec for frequency, and their systems are
composed of all non-military sourced components ? If there is an
opportunity to expand on this in a formal working group for AMSAT,
sign me up please !
I am not minimizing the effect of ITAR regs on foreign co-operation,
those will obviously have to be developed under a restricted TAA (Tech
Asst. Agreement) but perhaps this would be good in a way as it would
force AMSAT-NA to focus on increasing membership of domestic U.S.
persons and build satellites that are designed using local talent
(implying educating U.S. youth using mature workforce). Also, ITAR now
implies unrestricted publication of data/articles for ITAR covered
subjects are also restricted, even for a TAA:
http://portal.research.colostate.edu/itar/Export_Control_Brief.ppt
I quote: {please note, I am only copying, but do not know if this is
the current and valid version from congress ?}
Category XV--Spacecraft Systems and Associated Equipment
* (a) Spacecraft, including communications satellites, remote
sensing satellites, scientific satellites, research satellites,
navigation satellites, experimental and multi-mission satellites.
* Note to paragraph (a):
Commercial communications satellites, scientific satellites,
research satellites and experimental satellites are designated as SME
only when the equipment is intended for use by the armed forces of any
foreign country.
(b) Ground control stations for telemetry, tracking and control of
spacecraft or satellites, or employing any of the cryptographic items
controlled under category XIII of this subchapter.
(c) Global Positioning System (GPS) receiving equipment specifically
designed, modified or configured for military use; or GPS receiving
equipment with any of the following characteristics:
(1) Designed for encryption or decryption (e.g., Y-Code) of GPS
precise positioning service (PPS) signals;
(2) Designed for producing navigation results above 60,000 feet
altitude and at 1,000 knots velocity or greater;
(3) Specifically designed or modified for use with a null steering
antenna or including a null steering antenna designed to reduce or avoid
jamming signals;
(4) Designed or modified for use with unmanned air vehicle systems
capable of delivering at least a 500 kg payload to a range of at least
300 km.
Note: GPS receivers designed or modified for use with military
unmanned air vehicle systems with less capability are considered to be
specifically designed, modified or configured for military use and
therefore covered under this paragraph (d)(4).)
Any GPS equipment not meeting this definition is subject to the
jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce (DOC). Manufacturers or
exporters of equipment under DOC jurisdiction are advised that the U.S.
Government does not assure the availability of the GPS P-Code for civil
navigation. It is the policy of the Department of Defense (DOD) that GPS
receivers using P-Code without clarification as to whether or not those
receivers were designed or modified to use Y-Code will be presumed to be
Y-Code capable and covered under this paragraph. The DOD policy further
requires that a notice be attached to all P-Code receivers presented for
export. The notice must state the following: ``ADVISORY NOTICE: This
receiver uses the GPS P-Code signal, which by U.S. policy, may be
switched off without notice.''
(d) Radiation-hardened microelectronic circuits that meet or exceed
all five of the following characteristics:
(1) A total dose of 5x105 Rads (SI);
(2) A dose rate upset of 5x108 Rads (SI)/Sec;
(3) A neutron dose of 1x1014 N/cm2;
(4) A single event upset of 1x10-7 or less error/bit/day;
(5) Single event latch-up free and having a dose rate latch-up of
5x108 Rads(SI)/sec or greater.
[[Page 433]]
(e) All specifically designed or modified systems, components,
parts, accessories, attachments, and associated equipment for the
articles in this category, including the articles identified in
Sec. 1516 of Public Law 105-261: satellite fuel, ground support
equipment, test equipment, payload adapter or interface hardware,
replacement parts, and non-embedded solid propellant orbit transfer
engines (see also categories IV and V).
(f) Technical data (as defined in Sec. 120.10 of this subchapter)
and defense services (as defined in Sec. 120.9 of this subchapter)
directly related to the articles enumerated in paragraphs (a) through
(e) of this category, as well as detailed design, development,
manufacturing or production data for all spacecraft and specifically
designed or modified components for all spacecraft systems. This
paragraph includes all technical data, without exception, for all launch
support activities (e.g., technical data provided to the launch provider
on form, fit, function, mass, electrical, mechanical, dynamic,
environmental, telemetry, safety, facility, launch pad access, and
launch parameters, as well as interfaces for mating and parameters for
launch.) (See Sec. 124.1 for the requirements for technical assistance
agreements before defense services may be furnished even when all the
information relied upon by the U.S. person in performing the defense
service is in the public domain or is otherwise exempt from the
licensing requirements of this subchapter.) Technical data directly
related to the manufacture or production of any article enumerated
elsewhere in this category that is designated as Significant Military
Equipment (SME) shall itself be designated SME. Further, technical data
directly related to the manufacture or production of all spacecraft,
notwithstanding the nature of the intended end use (e.g., even where the
hardware is not SME), is designated SME.
Note to paragraph (f): The special export controls contained in
Sec. 124.15 of this subchapter are always required before a U.S. person
may participate in a launch failure investigation or analysis and before
the export of any article or defense service in this category for launch
in, or by nationals of, a country that is not a member of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization or a major non-NATO ally of the United
States. Such special export controls also may be imposed with respect to
any destination as deemed appropriate in furtherance of the security and
foreign policy of the United States.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Bob McGwier <rwmcgwier@xxxxx.xxx> wro
> Bruce Robertson wrote:ha
>> 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
>>
>>
> Working with Candians and discussing satellites is a deemed export and
> must be treated as a munition transfer even between Canadians and
> Americans. ?We need a technical assistance agreement with our Canadian
> brethren in amateur satellite service work. ?The tough part for this is
> that we really need to work out the technical assistance agreement with
> an umbrella organization for our Canadian colleagues to be legal or be
> granted a specific exemption or work out the agreements with
> individuals. ?Since Canadians are members of AMSAT-NA what organization
> could easily serve this role? ?What individual would do this on their
> own without an umbrella group over them? ?You have to agree to go to a
> federal prison or pay a ridiculous fine if you violate this as an
> individual. ?Who would expose themselves to this?
>
> If I sound overly negative about ITAR that is simple. ?I am truly
> negative about its application to amateur radio satellites with an open
> door and publication policy on what we are doing in a not-for-profit
> mode as a 501c3 educational organization. ?If I were to work on a DOD
> satellite, I would expect to keep my mouth shut or go to prison. ?I have
> no trouble at all distinguishing the difference. ?ITAR and the amateur
> radio and amateur satellite services are confounded in paranoia built in
> a time when the Soviet Union existed and thank goodness those days are
> over. ?But what has resulted is a new set of boogie men to take their
> place and it being even harder to see how amateur radio satellites
> contribute to their evil insidious plots against us!
>
> I am unconvinced that even trying to stop commercial companies from
> discussing the technology used in their satellites for non-defense
> purposes serves a serious security need for the U.S. since I believe all
> of the serious potential adversaries on our radar have developed
> rockets, spacecraft, weaponized warheads on the rockets, and more and
> ITAR did NOTHING to prevent it except for a delaying action that allowed
> the potential adversaries to build their own independent means but for
> these purposes, getting the shackles off the ankles of amateur radio, ?I
> don't care about this argument. ?My primary argument is that it makes
> absolutely no sense to stop AMSAT-NA, AMSAT-UK, ?and AMSAT-DL and
> AMSAT-ZL and AMSAT-VK ..... from talking things over to make rational
> decisions.
>
> More than one of these entities just mentioned is trapped in a dilemma
> for their programs posed by ITAR because we cannot help them without an
> onerous agreement they are unwilling to sign up to.
>
> 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
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:27:24 -0400
From: Samudra Haque <samudra.haque@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Quite an update about Sumbandilasat...
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<d8c724880910190827v3b5467dan448848423a770fb3@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Have they put in the request to be assigned a AMSAT callsign or has it
been approved already ?
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Andrew Glasbrenner
<glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> posted at http://sumbandilamission.blogspot.com/ .
>
> Congratulations to the SA-AMSAT team!
>
> 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: 8
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:58:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tim - N3TL <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Quite an update about Sumbandilasat...
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Amsat-BB
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <548764.69331.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I add my congraultions! Well-done, all!
________________________________
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Amsat-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 10:59:07 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Quite an update about Sumbandilasat...
posted at http://sumbandilamission.blogspot.com/ .
Congratulations to the SA-AMSAT team!
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: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:20:51 -0700
From: "David Wing" <david@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF
To: "'Amsat-BB'" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <8155A3D6076C4765A620CB2F32381F52@xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Not sure what I'm doing wrong but I can't seem to get SUMBDILA frequency
information added into SatPC32. The satellite recently showed up on my
satellite list the last time I updated my keps but there was no frequency
information.
I've updated the DOPPLER.SQF with the following:
SUMBDILA,435350,145880,FM,FM,NOR,0,0
I inserted this in the middle of the file (just after the AO-51 entries),
saved the file, restarted SatPC32 and still did not see the frequency info
when I selected the satellite and went to the CAT Tuning window.
I rebooted the PC and had the same results...no frequency info appears in
the CAT Tuning window
It seems pretty straightforward to add this to the file but I must be doing
something wrong.
Currently running a registered copy of v.12.8
73
David
K6CDW
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:21:04 -0400
From: Samudra Haque <samudra.haque@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
To: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, n8fgv@xxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<d8c724880910190921k3e7e806ckada6b0b087449cc5@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Robert WB5MZO
> Are the people who are suppose to be the experts in building state of the
art satellites so thin skinned that a bulletin board
> slows their progress? LOL
I want to remind you each and every time you write a message: AMSAT is
a volunteer run group of space-craft experimenters sharing a hobby and
a purpose: Ham Radio & Education. As you should know there is only one
paid employee of AMSAT at the headquarters and everyone else is just a
member.
With regard to the skill and qualification of the "experts" you refer
to in your e-mail, perhaps you have seem to have the expertise of
being a cynic and a critic - in addition to being right on everything
you say, according to yourself - meanwhile, others are lending their
varied expertise in the areas they feel most comfortable electrical,
mechanical, thermodynamics, Solar PV etc. etc. and in certain cases,
actual donations to fund further R&D at their own cost. I am not sure
where you have found any documentation from AMSAT-NA that we have any
portion of capability or indeed requirement to build "state of the art
satellites". All the bits of stuff that have been incorporated into
satellites so far are probably best described as hobby kits or more
exactly waste material from other projects.
Are you faulting AMSAT members for wanting to work for $0.00 and
pursuing a dream of being creative - and to have chance to tell their
children, look I built that and it is in Space ? Are you criticizing
the current activity and past activity and anything that they may come
up with in the future because, according to you, these AMSAT "experts"
don't have the right stuff ? Or are you just trying to get noticed ?
Ok then, assuming you want the spotlight and are correct in your
conviction that you know what you are doing, what is your
recommendation for steps going forward ? Put your thinking cap on
instead of and submit a development plan that will use the annual dues
from about 1900 paying members and organize a working group amongst
your friends in the amsat community -- and build -- a satellite -- and
launch it into space. Or, you could start a campaign to get votes from
the members to become the next President of AMSAT-NA... coming up
soon.
BTW, you can write off your donation to AMSAT on your taxes, but then
you already knew that.
Looking forward to reading about your development plans soon.
Samudra, N3RDX and S21X
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:47:28 -0700
From: "David Wing" <david@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF
To: "'Amsat-BB'" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <7C5DC185EDFD4D009AAF673EF31B5433@xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Never mind...figured it out. There are multiple DOPPLER.SQF files and I had
updated the wrong one.
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of David Wing
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 9:21 AM
To: 'Amsat-BB'
Subject: [amsat-bb] Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF
Not sure what I'm doing wrong but I can't seem to get SUMBDILA frequency
information added into SatPC32. The satellite recently showed up on my
satellite list the last time I updated my keps but there was no frequency
information.
I've updated the DOPPLER.SQF with the following:
SUMBDILA,435350,145880,FM,FM,NOR,0,0
I inserted this in the middle of the file (just after the AO-51 entries),
saved the file, restarted SatPC32 and still did not see the frequency info
when I selected the satellite and went to the CAT Tuning window.
I rebooted the PC and had the same results...no frequency info appears in
the CAT Tuning window
It seems pretty straightforward to add this to the file but I must be doing
something wrong.
Currently running a registered copy of v.12.8
73
David
K6CDW
_______________________________________________
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 19:04:06 +0200
From: "Francesco Grappi" <f.grappi@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] I: Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000301ca50de$2ad90d30$808b2790$@xxxxxx@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi David,
you must have the same "satellite name" on file DOPPLER.SQF and kepler file
(amateur.txt)
73
Frank IW4DVZ
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx Per
> conto di David Wing
> Inviato: luned? 19 ottobre 2009 18.21
> A: 'Amsat-BB'
> Oggetto: [amsat-bb] Trouble Adding Satellite to DOPPLER.SQF
>
> Not sure what I'm doing wrong but I can't seem to get SUMBDILA
> frequency
> information added into SatPC32. The satellite recently showed up on my
> satellite list the last time I updated my keps but there was no
> frequency
> information.
>
> I've updated the DOPPLER.SQF with the following:
>
> SUMBDILA,435350,145880,FM,FM,NOR,0,0
>
> I inserted this in the middle of the file (just after the AO-51
> entries),
> saved the file, restarted SatPC32 and still did not see the frequency
> info
> when I selected the satellite and went to the CAT Tuning window.
>
> I rebooted the PC and had the same results...no frequency info appears
> in
> the CAT Tuning window
>
> It seems pretty straightforward to add this to the file but I must be
> doing
> something wrong.
>
> Currently running a registered copy of v.12.8
>
> 73
> David
> K6CDW
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 13:22:36 -0400
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Congrats to Sumbadilisat team!
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<5d8cecfe0910191022n684a894ata46f4daf00de48ff@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Wow, glad to learn of the first QSOs on Sumbadilisat!
It must be hugely rewarding to make those first contacts. Bravo to AMSAT-SA!
73,
--
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:34:23 -0400
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE DMSP launch
To: "'Rocky Jones'" <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "'Amsat BB'"
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <798E078648AE4050B30B7C4C28828214@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Rocky,
I think you miss the point...
>> 4. Ballast does not have an e-mail group
>> full of whining little people who think
>> they could have designed it better or...
> this is the one I always find amusing.
> Almost comical and certainly childish.
Yes, I think he was referring to you and your incessant
fruitless posts...
> Are the people who are suppose to be the
> experts in building state of the art satellites
> so thin skinned that a bulletin board
> slows their progress? LOL
Yes, they probably are... On the one hand, small mind kibitzers
lambast all the "dooers" in the AMSAT organization for not
maintaining a presence here and responding to every little bite
and jab and complaint, while you then want to lambast them for
trying to respond to your childish and uninformed incessant
opinions...
> "Just say no" either stop building satellites
> and move on to something that wont be at all
> critical...or just tune out and stop reading.
In fact some of them have. And I don't blame them one bit. The
damage done by so many trolls and kibitzers such as yourself is
real and hurts the organization.
> It is the childhood equivalent of "he called me a name"
Yes, he did, and it seems he was talking directly to you.
As am I.
> LOL
> things are hard
> Robert WB5MZO
And you are the one that really makes them that way.
Bob
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 554
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
