| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 21.09.12 19:04l 1076 Lines 42240 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB7308
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V7 308
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<ON4HU<CX2SA
Sent: 120921/1659Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA #:1948 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB7308
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: AC0RA/m (Wyatt Dirks)
2. Re: AC0RA/m (wyattdirks)
3. Re: AC0RA/m (wyattdirks)
4. FITSAT-1 (tanaka@xxx.xx.xxx
5. Re: Decoding Keps (David A. Rush)
6. Date Set For Next SpaceX Launch (B J)
7. The chicken and the egg.syndrome. (Tom Gentry)
8. Re: 22% votes (Daniel Schultz)
9. Re: Bill Tynsn, W3XO, Wins 2012 Barry Goldwater Award (Nick Pugh)
10. Re: 22% votes (pughkeithd@xx.xxxx
11. Re: 22% votes (John Spasojevich)
12. Re: 22% votes (Dale Hershberger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:24:48 -0500
From: Wyatt Dirks <wyattdirks@xxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AC0RA/m
Message-ID: <BAY151-W55A76A9E3C9F090CF5AE25CD9A0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Well it appears there are quite a few folks that need en23 and some that
need en33 so here is the plan.
Saturday September 22nd I will work these satellite passes.
AO-27
1806utc
1944utc
FO-29
1757utc
1843utc
Now these passes overlap a little so I will do my best to work both birds.
If you don't hear me right away on either I may switch back and forth.
Hope to work as many of you as I can.
73 Wyatt
AC0RA
> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 01:10:37 -0500
> From: wyattdirks@xxx.xxx
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] AC0RA/m
>
> Soon I will be going near the grids of en23 and en33 and was wondering how
much interest there is in those grids?
>
> Drop me an email if you need either of those so I know how much effort I
should put into from working those grids.
>
> Thanks
>
> Wyatt
> AC0RA
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 2
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:45:47 -0500
From: wyattdirks <wyattdirks@xxx.xxx>
To: <wyattdirks@xxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AC0RA/m
Message-ID: <COL401-EAS330426489FA13D58D066791CD9A0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sorry the second fo29 pass is at 1943 not 1843.
73 WyattWyatt Dirks <wyattdirks@xxx.xxx> wrote:
Well it appears there are quite a few folks that need en23 and some that
need en33 so here is the plan.
Saturday September 22nd I will work these satellite passes.
AO-27
1806utc
1944utc
FO-29
1757utc
1843utc
Now these passes overlap a little so I will do my best to work both birds.
If you don't hear me right away on either I may switch back and forth.
Hope to work as many of you as I can.
73 Wyatt
AC0RA
> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 01:10:37 -0500
> From: wyattdirks@xxx.xxx
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] AC0RA/m
>
> Soon I will be going near the grids of en23 and en33 and was wondering how
much interest there is in those grids?
>
> Drop me an email if you need either of those so I know how much effort I
should put into from working those grids.
>
> Thanks
>
> Wyatt
> AC0RA
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:51:59 -0500
From: wyattdirks <wyattdirks@xxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AC0RA/m
Message-ID: <COL401-EAS83046F3EEC23EA04989B9ECD9A0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
wyattdirks <wyattdirks@xxx.xxx> wrote:
Sorry the second fo29 pass is at 1943 not 1843.
73 WyattWyatt Dirks <wyattdirks@xxx.xxx> wrote:
Well it appears there are quite a few folks that need en23 and some that
need en33 so here is the plan.
Saturday September 22nd I will work these satellite passes.
AO-27
1806utc
1944utc
FO-29
1757utc
1843utc
Now these passes overlap a little so I will do my best to work both birds.
If you don't hear me right away on either I may switch back and forth.
Hope to work as many of you as I can.
73 Wyatt
AC0RA
> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 01:10:37 -0500
> From: wyattdirks@xxx.xxx
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] AC0RA/m
>
> Soon I will be going near the grids of en23 and en33 and was wondering how
much interest there is in those grids?
>
> Drop me an email if you need either of those so I know how much effort I
should put into from working those grids.
>
> Thanks
>
> Wyatt
> AC0RA
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:50:03 +0900
From: <tanaka@xxx.xx.xx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FITSAT-1
Message-ID: <20120920045003.00005DE5.0309@xxx.xx.xx>
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=UTF-8
JAXA plans to deploy five cubesats from ISS at the early
morning on 28th September. The first two satellites (RAIKO,
WE WISH) are deployed around 00:10 - 00:20 JST by manually.
The second three satellites (FITSAT-1, NanoRacks,and TechEdSat)
are deployed around 01:30 - 01:40 JST by remote. JST(Japan
Standard Time) advances 9 hours from GMT. JAXA will broadcast
the deployment:
http://iss.jaxa.jp/iss/jaxa_exp/hoshide/library/live/
FITSAT starts to send the beacon 30 min after deployment.
Please send the signal report and your postal address to
fitsat1@xxxxxxx.xx.xx and also cc to tanaka@xxx.xx.xx.
You will receive the verification card shown in:
http://www.fit.ac.jp/~tanaka/fitsat.shtml
The orbit is almost the same as ISS. FITSAT delays 200m
from ISS for one cycle around the world. As it goes around
16 times a day, it delays 3.2km per day. If 10 days passed,
FITSAT passes the same point of ISS after 4 sec (32km/8km=4).
The beacon frequency 437.250MHz of FITSAT-1 conflicts with
the satellite PRISM of Tokyo Univ. Please confirm that the
CW starts "HI DE NIWAKA JAPAN ..."
73 JA6AVG
Takushi Tanaka
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 20:51:36 -0400
From: "David A. Rush" <david@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Decoding Keps
Message-ID: <505BBA18.4000803@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Thanks, Domenico. Comparing the two-line keps with the AMSAT format has
been informative. Unfortunately the AMSAT data omits the two fields
that I'm looking for confirmation on.
David, ky7dr
On 2012-09-19 23:45, i8cvs wrote:
> Hi David, KY7DR
>
> I suggest you to compare the 2 line NASA orbital data with the AMSAT
> Keplerian elements for the same day and you will get the answere to your
> questions.
>
> Example for OSCAR-7
>
> DECODE 2-LINE ELSETS WITH THE FOLLOWING KEY:
> 1 AAAAAU 00 0 0 BBBBB.BBBBBBBB .CCCCCCCC 00000-0 00000-0 0 DDDZ
> 2 AAAAA EEE.EEEE FFF.FFFF GGGGGGG HHH.HHHH III.IIII JJ.JJJJJJJJKKKKKZ
> KEY: A-CATALOGNUM B-EPOCHTIME C-DECAY D-ELSETNUM E-INCLINATION F-RAAN
> G-ECCENTRICITY H-ARGPERIGEE I-MNANOM J-MNMOTION K-ORBITNUM Z-CHECKSUM
>
> Two line NASA orbital data for orbit KKKKK or i.e. numbar 73100
>
> AO-07
> 1 07530U 74089B 12256.61218065 -.00000027 00000-0 10000-3 0 4795
> 2 07530 101.4099 250.4681 0012001 109.6272 250.6089 12.53591141731001
>
> AMSAT orbital data for the same Epoch revolution i. e. the same orbit numbar
> 73100
>
> Satellite: AO-07
> Catalog number: 07530
> Epoch time: 12256.61218065
> Element set: 479
> Inclination: 101.4099 deg
> RA of node: 250.4681 deg
> Eccentricity: 0.0012001
> Arg of perigee: 109.6272 deg
> Mean anomaly: 250.6089 deg
> Mean motion: 12.53591141 rev/day
> Decay rate: -2.7e-07 rev/day^2
> Epoch rev: 73100
> Checksum: 262
>
> About your calculation:
>
> If the sign is plus like in +89689-4 your following calculation is correct:
>
> +89689-4 = 0.89689 * 10 ^-4 or 0.000089689
>
> 73" de
>
> i8CVS Domenico
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David A. Rush" <david@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 2:19 AM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Decoding Keps
>
>
>> I've been working on some code to decode the two-line Keplerian data
>> like the ARRL sends out weekly (with a thank-you to AMSAT-NA).
>>
>> A couple of the values are in a somewhat cryptic format, the "BSTAR" and
>> "second derivative of the mean motion". The strings tend to be either a
>> space or a + sign, five digits, usually a minus sign (but seen at least
>> once as a plus sign) and finally another digit, such as:
>>
>> +00000-0
>> +11682-3
>> 00000-0
>> 30767-3
>> 00000-0
>> 00000+0
>> +00000-0
>> +89689-4
>>
>> What I have found about this format is that it is "decimal assumed", and
>> examples suggest that +89689-4 = 0.89689 * 10 ^-4 or 0.000089689, if I
>> converted that correctly.
>> I'm guessing that the first character is the sign (+ or -) of the
>> number, where a space is assumed positive. I've only seen one example
>> of the 7th character being a plus (and all the digits were zero), so I
>> assume that + or - are valid values for the exponent. I guess the
>> format is fundamentally limited to an exponent between +9 and -9.
>>
>> Am I interpreting it correctly? Any other insight?
>>
>> David, ky7dr
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 6
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 01:57:24 +0000
From: B J <va6bmj@xxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Date Set For Next SpaceX Launch
Message-ID:
<CAP7QzkMNO0LJaZF0mX5cs8R7zJfAdOZAgyrKpfqZFSw4unN-Sg@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
http://www.onorbit.com/node/4968
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/09/20/first-spacex-cargo-resupply-flight-targ
eted-for-oct-7/
73s
Bernhard VA6BMJ @ DO33FL
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 00:08:46 -0500
From: Tom Gentry <t.gentry@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] The chicken and the egg.syndrome.
Message-ID: <505BF65E.60806@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
My name is Tom and my call is K5VOU. I am a life-member of AMSAT and the
ARRL as well as an Extra Class license holder. I have observed both
organizations at work from the inside both as a volunteer and a vendor.
My satellite ground station is an old Yaesu FT-726 and the antennas are
circularly polarized versions of Kent Britain's 'controlled impedance'
VHF and UHF on a back yard tripod with the original KR-5400 prototype
AZ-El rotor and the AMSAT tracker box connected to an X machine. I am
adding an SDR receiver/panadpter asap.
BTW: The opinions expressed in this email are mine alone and you are not
required to agree with them or condemn them. They are just my opinions
and observations.
Here are a few observations in brief;
1) AMSAT is a meaningful organization filled with talented and well
intentioned people interested in building, operating and communicating
through space based radio systems via amateur radio.
2) AMSAT is composed of two special interest groups, the creators of the
radio/satellites and the communicators using the satellites.
3) The creators depend on funding from the communicators.
4) The communicators depend on the creators for space based radios
through which to communicate.
5) There is 'no free ride' to HEO and the communicators can not raise
enough money to purchase a launch at market price.
6) There is no government funding available to AMSAT.
7) The regulatory climate is hostile to amateur radio satellites (ITAR).
Opinion;
The AMSAT paradigm needs to change to allow the creators to get more
radios into space for the communicators. Well funded organizations are
building satellites with radios for telemetry and perhaps communication.
One possible solution to the observations is to get out of the launch
business completely and for the creators to build radios for other
organizations creating satellites. These radios would include the
capabilities desired by the organization and also include the desired
functionality for the communicators in order to get a ride to space. In
essence trade radios for rides. This would allow AMSAT to use their
knowledge and resources for building space based radios.
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 01:48:22 -0400
From: "Daniel Schultz" <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Message-ID: <799qiuFvw8880S03.1348206502@xxxxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized
and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm
shift or we will cease to exist.
Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force
general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of his
launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological
ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling before
the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it.
In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides for
free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100 kg
in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that price
is to expand the supply of launches.
This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire small
satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts
laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small satellites
are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company called
Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors.
AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram ride
on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons
for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not
add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40
had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We gambled
and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch opportunity.
The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more
modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis
so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This
effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single
university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch
opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for
Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million.
Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox
program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by making
Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard
compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen.
The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data
downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of
amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but
many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications aspects
of space flight.
I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching proper
engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal
vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off the
shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in the
satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt that
the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will
need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing or
Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial financial
support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and
inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public image
of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse
code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams can
use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely to
be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we had
better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building
well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission in
mind.
We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in
space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or are
now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the HEO
missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a
higher orbit instead of helplessly watch it reenter a mere six months after
deployment from the ISS? What if we had been able to nudge AO-13 away from its
destructive resonance and prevent it from reentering far too early?
Another area where Amsat has failed has been in the news media. When Amsat
does not receive credit for its accomplishments, others are free to rewrite
history and claim that they were the first to accomplish every new thing,
sometimes claiming credit for things that Amsat first did three decades ago.
The universities have professional public relations staff who know how to
plant favorable news stories in the media. When Amsat launched AO-40 some of
us tried to get the mainstream news media interested in the story, but not
having professional contacts in the media, our efforts fell flat on the floor.
The funding follows the publicity, and when Amsat misses out on the publicity,
the money goes elsewhere. How is it that we launched AO-40 with barely a
mention in the popular press or in space industry publications?
Those of you who are lapsed Amsat members and will not rejoin until a HEO is
launched really should reconsider. The membership dues are not that high, and
we still need your active participation if any of this is to come to fruition.
Giving up on Amsat by lapsing your membership pretty well insures that we will
never again have a HEO satellite.
73
Dan Schultz N8FGV
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 04:49:38 -0500
From: "Nick Pugh" <quadpugh@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <Rsoifer@xxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: ans-editor@xxxxx.xxxx k1sfa@xxxx.xxxx w3xo@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Bill Tynsn, W3XO, Wins 2012 Barry Goldwater
Award
Message-ID: <046201cd97de$6b3ff560$41bfe020$@xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Fantastic
At a boy Bill
Thanks
nick ars k5qxj EM30xa 30.1 n 90.1 w
cell 337 2582527
office 337 593 8700
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Rsoifer@xxx.xxx
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:30 AM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Cc: ans-editor@xxxxx.xxxx k1sfa@xxxx.xxxx w3xo@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Bill Tynsn, W3XO, Wins 2012 Barry Goldwater Award
The Radio Club of America announced this week that William A. Tynan, W3XO,
is the recipient of its 2012 Barry Goldwater Amateur Radio Award. The award
recognizes Bill's lifelong service to the public through amateur radio. It
will be presented at the club's annual awards banquet in New York on
November 16th. ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, like Bill a club Fellow, will
be the
keynote speaker.
Bill, one of AMSAT's charter members, is a past President and Chairman of
the Board. For many years, he conducted QST's monthly column, "The World
Above 50 MHz." He is also a past President of the Central States VHF
Society.
Bill played a key role in the origination of amateur radio from the Space
Shuttle and the International Space Station.
The Radio Club of America, founded in 1909, is the world''s oldest radio
comunications association. For more information, see
www.radioclubofamerica.org.
Congratulations, Bill!
73 Ray W2RS
(Fellow, RCA)
_______________________________________________
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: 10
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 12:06:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: pughkeithd@xx.xxx
To: n8fgv@xxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Message-ID: <8CF662A3C36DAF5-1B24-3EDC@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Amen, Dan!
Keith, W5IU
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Schultz <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Fri, Sep 21, 2012 1:05 am
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized
and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm
shift or we will cease to exist.
Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force
general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of his
launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological
ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling before
the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it.
In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides for
free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100 kg
in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that price
is to expand the supply of launches.
This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire small
satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts
laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small satellites
are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company called
Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors.
AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram ride
on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons
for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not
add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40
had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We gambled
and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch opportunity.
The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more
modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis
so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This
effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single
university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch
opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for
Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million.
Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox
program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by making
Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard
compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen.
The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data
downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of
amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but
many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications aspects
of space flight.
I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching proper
engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal
vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off the
shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in the
satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt that
the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will
need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing or
Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial financial
support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and
inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public image
of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse
code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams can
use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely to
be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we had
better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building
well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission in
mind.
We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in
space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or are
now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the HEO
missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a
higher orbit instead of helplessly watch it reenter a mere six months after
deployment from the ISS? What if we had been able to nudge AO-13 away from its
destructive resonance and prevent it from reentering far too early?
Another area where Amsat has failed has been in the news media. When Amsat
does not receive credit for its accomplishments, others are free to rewrite
history and claim that they were the first to accomplish every new thing,
sometimes claiming credit for things that Amsat first did three decades ago.
The universities have professional public relations staff who know how to
plant favorable news stories in the media. When Amsat launched AO-40 some of
us tried to get the mainstream news media interested in the story, but not
having professional contacts in the media, our efforts fell flat on the floor.
The funding follows the publicity, and when Amsat misses out on the publicity,
the money goes elsewhere. How is it that we launched AO-40 with barely a
mention in the popular press or in space industry publications?
Those of you who are lapsed Amsat members and will not rejoin until a HEO is
launched really should reconsider. The membership dues are not that high, and
we still need your active participation if any of this is to come to fruition.
Giving up on Amsat by lapsing your membership pretty well insures that we will
never again have a HEO satellite.
73
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: 11
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:36:30 -0500
From: John Spasojevich <johnag9d@xxxxx.xxx>
To: pughkeithd@xx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx n8fgv@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Message-ID:
<CA+qbou5z9OU9BBRWN27iL5LMDyudpUoxeC=EVR-8+hcABt9iCw@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Thanks Dan very well put. Exactly what I was trying to say.
John AG9D
On Sep 21, 2012 11:23 AM, <pughkeithd@xx.xxx> wrote:
>
> Amen, Dan!
>
> Keith, W5IU
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Schultz <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
> To: amsat-bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Fri, Sep 21, 2012 1:05 am
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
>
>
> Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully
> commercialized
> and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm
> shift or we will cease to exist.
>
> Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force
> general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of
> his
> launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological
> ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling
> before
> the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it.
>
> In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides
> for
> free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100
> kg
> in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that
> price
> is to expand the supply of launches.
>
> This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire
> small
> satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts
> laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small
> satellites
> are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company
> called
> Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors.
>
> AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram
> ride
> on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The
> reasons
> for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not
> add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If
> AO-40
> had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We
> gambled
> and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch
> opportunity.
>
> The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a
> more
> modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular
> basis
> so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program.
> This
> effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single
> university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch
> opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for
> Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million.
>
> Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox
> program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by
> making
> Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard
> compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen.
>
> The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data
> downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of
> amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but
> many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications
> aspects
> of space flight.
>
> I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching
> proper
> engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal
> vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off
> the
> shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in
> the
> satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt
> that
> the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will
> need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing
> or
> Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial
> financial
> support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and
> inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public
> image
> of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse
> code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams
> can
> use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely
> to
> be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we
> had
> better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building
> well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission
> in
> mind.
>
> We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in
> space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or
> are
> now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the
> HEO
> missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a
> higher orbit instead of helplessly watch it reenter a mere six months after
> deployment from the ISS? What if we had been able to nudge AO-13 away from
> its
> destructive resonance and prevent it from reentering far too early?
>
> Another area where Amsat has failed has been in the news media. When Amsat
> does not receive credit for its accomplishments, others are free to rewrite
> history and claim that they were the first to accomplish every new thing,
> sometimes claiming credit for things that Amsat first did three decades
> ago.
> The universities have professional public relations staff who know how to
> plant favorable news stories in the media. When Amsat launched AO-40 some
> of
> us tried to get the mainstream news media interested in the story, but not
> having professional contacts in the media, our efforts fell flat on the
> floor.
> The funding follows the publicity, and when Amsat misses out on the
> publicity,
> the money goes elsewhere. How is it that we launched AO-40 with barely a
> mention in the popular press or in space industry publications?
>
> Those of you who are lapsed Amsat members and will not rejoin until a HEO
> is
> launched really should reconsider. The membership dues are not that high,
> and
> we still need your active participation if any of this is to come to
> fruition.
> Giving up on Amsat by lapsing your membership pretty well insures that we
> will
> never again have a HEO satellite.
>
> 73
>
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:55:57 -0800
From: Dale Hershberger <daleh@xxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Message-ID: <505C9C1D.1060200@xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Very well said.
Thanks Dan.
Dale-KL7XJ
On 9/20/2012 9:48 PM, Daniel Schultz wrote:
> Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized
> and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm
> shift or we will cease to exist.
>
> Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force
> general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of
his
> launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological
> ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling
before
> the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it.
>
> In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides for
> free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100
kg
> in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that
price
> is to expand the supply of launches.
>
> This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire small
> satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts
> laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small satellites
> are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company called
> Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors.
>
> AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram
ride
> on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons
> for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not
> add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40
> had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We
gambled
> and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch
opportunity.
>
> The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more
> modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis
> so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This
> effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single
> university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch
> opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for
> Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million.
>
> Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox
> program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by
making
> Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard
> compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen.
>
> The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data
> downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of
> amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but
> many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications
aspects
> of space flight.
>
> I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching
proper
> engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal
> vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off
the
> shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in the
> satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt
that
> the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will
> need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing
or
> Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial
financial
> support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and
> inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public
image
> of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse
> code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams
can
> use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely
to
> be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we had
> better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building
> well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission in
> mind.
>
> We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in
> space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or are
> now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the
HEO
> missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a
> higher orbit instead of helplessly watch it reenter a mere six months after
> deployment from the ISS? What if we had been able to nudge AO-13 away from
its
> destructive resonance and prevent it from reentering far too early?
>
> Another area where Amsat has failed has been in the news media. When Amsat
> does not receive credit for its accomplishments, others are free to rewrite
> history and claim that they were the first to accomplish every new thing,
> sometimes claiming credit for things that Amsat first did three decades ago.
> The universities have professional public relations staff who know how to
> plant favorable news stories in the media. When Amsat launched AO-40 some of
> us tried to get the mainstream news media interested in the story, but not
> having professional contacts in the media, our efforts fell flat on the
floor.
> The funding follows the publicity, and when Amsat misses out on the
publicity,
> the money goes elsewhere. How is it that we launched AO-40 with barely a
> mention in the popular press or in space industry publications?
>
> Those of you who are lapsed Amsat members and will not rejoin until a HEO is
> launched really should reconsider. The membership dues are not that high,
and
> we still need your active participation if any of this is to come to
fruition.
> Giving up on Amsat by lapsing your membership pretty well insures that we
will
> never again have a HEO satellite.
>
> 73
>
> 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
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2441/5281 - Release Date: 09/20/12
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 7, Issue 308
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
