| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 24.09.12 23:25l 949 Lines 43023 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB7315
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V7 315
Path: IZ3LSV<IW8PGT<ON0AR<DB0RES<WA7V<CX2SA
Sent: 120924/2120Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA #:2094 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB7315
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat (Gus 8P6SM)
2. Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7, Issue 312)
(Barry Baines)
3. Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7, Issue 312)
(Mark L. Hammond)
4. Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat (Andrew Glasbrenner)
5. Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7, Issue 312)
(John Becker)
6. Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat (Geoff)
7. Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat (John Spasojevich)
8. Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7, Issue 312)
(John Spasojevich)
9. Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7, Issue 312)
(Mark L. Hammond)
10. Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7, Issue 312)
(Trevor .)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:33:47 -0400
From: Gus 8P6SM <8p6sm@xxxx.xxx>
To: John Spasojevich <johnag9d@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat
Message-ID: <5060B59B.9080601@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
On 09/24/2012 02:56 PM, John Spasojevich wrote:
> I fail to see where your references prohibit such activity as long as
> hams are involved. Would a school ham radio club be prohibited ?
Of course. IF what they were doing was not ham-related. Just because
you have a ham license doesn't mean you can get on the air and use the
frequencies for whatever you like.
Would it be OK for NASA to use ham frequencies for their Mars Rover
project, just because someone at NASA went out and got themself a ham
ticket? After all, the Mars Rover programme is undoubtedly educational,
and also a technical investigation.
> I think the main issue is that these birds don't satisfy YOUR personal
> interest. Just as ragchewing and dx-ing don't satisfy the schools
> exerimental goals.
And neither should the schools assume that the amateur radio community
automatically stands ready to satisfy THEIR needs, no matter what those
needs are.
> So maybe helping them build a transponder would satisfy both.
Yes, I think it would, as a reasonable compromise. In fact, maybe we
should PROVIDE them with a working comms board that gives them the data
pathways they need to fulfill their experimental needs AND at the same
time provides US with something that provides OUR needs.
It seems the entire focus these days is upon leveraging educational
opportunities. The theory goes, as I understand it: Since we can't
afford to pay for a launch of our own, we COOPERATE with educational
institutions (who do seem able to get launches) to provide useable
frequencies -- and potentially a global network of groundstations -- IN
EXCHANGE for some sort of communications functionality that can be used
BY US.
Except it isn't happening. One satellite after another, they get what
we have to offer (bandwidth), and they offer us... NOTHING in return.
> But then its not HEO so maybe just let the freqs die until funding
> is there for the appropriate use. By then thiae freqs will have long
> since been reallocated
I used to enjoy working HEO, but I am not against LEO satellites, and
have worked quite a few myself. But low orbit or highly elliptical, the
more people that end up using our frequencies for non-amateur purposes,
the greater the case that is being made for the reallocation of those
frequencies.
> Its beating a dead horse. That want HEO dx-ing and ragchewing are free
> to build one. You don't need AMSAT anywhere do do that.
I thought that's exactly what AMSAT was created for. The construction,
launch, care and feeding of satellites for use by the community of
amateur radio operators. Guess not, eh?
> Channel your energy into such a constructive project. I seriously doubt
> the complaining will get anything done.
Neither, apparently, will AMSAT.
--
73, de Gus 8P6SM
The Easternmost Isle
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:47:36 -0400
From: Barry Baines <bbaines@xxx.xxx>
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7,
Issue 312)
Message-ID: <79164690-D5C3-4F4B-AB5A-A6295EE0DAA5@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 7, Issue 312
From: Mark Spencer <mspencer12345@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 13:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.ca;
s=s1024;t=1348432005;
bh=80uPIe5CmB8SGZ5MZxoULRcCEHpTMj/CnSBzOEshbmE=;h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Maile
r:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Conten
t-Transfer-Encoding;b=2XqW1uQOnVUxJ6VdnkvH2vSdsHvVxS0N6ibnK0WcxjQsYwAy1kZl9/g9
BcIjf18lHjHTX602nnlh9yI2ATubVWyTeGJoAUbCF6x87XHC6fUzr34EXU814LLgA1hzHDyF7qMfKu
TO8AgCf0eM7sUyGNkaG3XbGRGOyeQvIJ+okeE=
Just out of curiosity what would a reasonable estimate of the launch costs be
for a P3E class satellite ?
Regards
Mark Spencer
VE7AFZ (long lapsed former AMSAT member (: )
Mark:
Back in 2008 when we last seriously looked at this, the cost of launching a
satellite into a Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO) of the size/weight of
Eagle or P3-E was $8 million. Today that figure is more like $10 million,
though Peter, DB2OS (President of AMSAT-DL) probably has a more accurate
figure than this. Even so, the cost to launch is what makes things
prohibitively expensive. Raising that kind of money (plus the cost of the
spacecraft itself) is not viewed as viable given the results of our past
fund raising efforts.
The last HEO launch was for P3-D/AO-40. Please keep in mind that the money
that was passed through AMSAT-NA totaled over $2 Million for P3-D/AO-40,
from 1993-2000 (seven years) with considerable help from individual donors,
ARRL matching donor program, AMSAT-UK, etc. Other organizations, such as
AMSAT-DL and JAMSAT also had their own fundraising efforts as well in
support of those aspects of the program that they were handling. AMSAT
also developed the SBS (Specific Bearing Structure) as part of P3-D program
that became the "frame" that housed P3-D on the launch vehicle. At that
time, we believe we had pretty much "maxed out" what might be raised from
within the amateur radio community in North America. Unfortunately, that
considerable fundraising effort wouldn't get us 20% of the current launch
costs. Clearly, we must expand beyond the amateur radio community to
raise funds of this magnitude, but to do so requires both a non-amateur
radio "vision" to what a HEO sat!
ellite would provide (e.g. excite non-amateurs) as well as a "Case for
Support" that would attract major donors, such as foundations. To date, we
have not been able to put together a plan that would meet these expectations.
Needless-to-say, given today's costs, the launch economics is the major
inhibitor, and not necessarily the cost of building the satellite itself
(though that also costs "real money" depending upon size and features and
whether major systems, such as propulsion are donated as was the case with
P3-D).
So, let's look deeper into the launch cost environment to determine what
AMSAT might be able to "afford" under current circumstances:
The cost to launch a "microsat" (e.g. a 9" x 9" x 9" structure such as
AO-51) was estimated in 2008 to be around $350,000.00. That is why we opted
for a 1u cubesat (4" x 4" x 4") back in 2008 as replacement satellite for
AO-51-- we couldn't afford the launch of a microsat given our finances at
the time and the concern about being able to raise the funds to pay for a
launch that would likely increase in cost of time.
To put this further in perspective, as I recall, back in 2008 the cost to
launch a 1u cubesat was around $60-80K to place a cubesat in LEO. The
current cost is about $120K for 1 Kg of mass to LEO (a cubesat is 1.1 Kg).
The doubling of launch cost is due in part to the significant interest in
cubesats by the US Government, aerospace firms (Boeing, for example), and
others who have "real money" to place cubesat payloads in LEO. Clearly, as
Tony, AA2TX (AMSAT's VP-Engineering) pointed out to me, the cubesat has
evolved from a university "novelty" to a standard spacecraft specification.
This cost increase is the reason why AMSAT applied for an ELaNA grant in
2011 (we were selected in 2012) and where we will continue to apply for
ELaNA grants in order to be able to "afford" launches. Clearly, it make
much more sense to focus on dollars donated to AMSAT for spacecraft
development rather than launches if we can get "others" to support our
launch costs.
BTW, "Aviation Week & Space Technology Magazine" had a series of articles in
the 30 JUL 12 issue ("Small Satellites: Doing More with Less") which
highlights this evolution, including cubesats, such as TechEdSat that will
be the first US cubesat to be deployed from the ISS using the same
deployment scheme (JEM-SSOD or Small Satellite Orbital Deployer) as the
Vietnamese student F-1 cubesat that will be deployed this week.
Information about TechEdSat may be found here:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/TechEdSat.html
Coupled with the launch costs is the "justification" for launches. NASA and
others (such as the National Science Foundation) will support launch
opportunities if the proposal meets THEIR strategic goals. Consequently,
the most effective way to "hitch a ride" is to put something in an amateur
radio space frame that meets their expectations, such as a
scientific/educational payload and/or provide "educational outreach." For
example:
1. ARISSat-1/Kedr deployed by RSC/Energia from the ISS in August 2011 with
a student scientific payload developed by Kursk State University. AMSAT
developed ground based software to capture telemetry from both the satellite
and the payload, with amateurs forwarding captured data to a central server.
ARISSat-1/Kedr was considered to be a "prototype" for deploying student
payloads. Education outreach was also part of our efforts with ARISSat-1,
where, for example, telemetry data is available for student analysis.
Whether there are future opportunities for more ARISSat deployments remains
to be seen.
2. AMSAT-UK developed FunCube (funcube.org.uk) under the model where
educational outreach is the justification (to be launched in 2013). The
satellite has received financial support from the Radio Communications
Foundation and is being developed in collaboration with ISIS-Innovative
Solutions in Space BV (a Dutch small satellite company that is a spin-off
from Delft University of Technology). AMSAT-UK is developing ground-based
software with an easy-to-use receiver (FunCube Dongle developed by Howard
Long, G6LVB) to encourage use of the satellite in the classroom.
3. FOX-1 will have a student scientific payload (MEMS Gyro originally
developed by Penn State-Erie students) as justification for NASA to pay for
our launch under the ELaNA grant. Ground-based software for capture of
satellite telemetry and payload data is also being developed using a central
server for data to be forwarded. AMSAT is also focused on creating
education outreach materials focused on Fox-1 that will be appropriate for
future missions as well.
4. The appointment of Mark Hammond, N8MH as AMSAT's VP-Educational
Relations and the subsequent work that he is doing to develop relationships
with outside organizations (including ARRL and NASA Education), develop an
"educational outreach" capability in support of AMSAT's scientific and
education mission, and work to foster support of "STEM" (Science,
Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) as part of more traditional
engineering work on space craft is in recognition of the fact that we are
dependent upon the support of other organizations to be able to afford to
fly. "Education outreach" is the new "cost" (one that AMSAT can hopefully
"afford") that we must bear to keep amateur radio in space.
Clearly, it is launch costs that is driving much of what AMSAT can afford to
accomplish. In addition, we must recognize that those that pay for the
launch will only do so if the satellite provides a benefit that meets their
goals/expectations. Clearly, future opportunities for placing amateur
radio transponders in HEO will be dependent upon finding partners who have a
need to place THEIR payload(s) in those orbits AND have the major funding to
support the launch. In essence, that is what AMSAT-DL attempted to do by
persuading the German government to fund P3-E as part of a larger mission to
Mars. Unfortunately, their attempts did not pan out.
BTW, we'd be happy to accept your $44.00 to renew your AMSAT membership;
you can renew online at www.amsat.org... ;-)
Regards,
Barry Baines, WD4ASW
President-AMSAT
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:04:28 -0400
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Barry Baines <bbaines@xxx.xxx>, Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7,
Issue 312)
Message-ID:
<CAPRXzyrj+QMSMUiv_dR61oTaGsTv-BoSzSzYDD5N0K7WpYLgCA@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
At AMSAT-UK Colloquium last week, Peter said the current cost to HEO
for P3E or something like it is curently $10 Million (and the joke
was, pick your currency--it's about the same no matter what--US
dollar, Euros, GBP, etc.--BIG money)
So the number holds.
Mark N8MH
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Barry Baines <bbaines@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 7, Issue 312
> From: Mark Spencer <mspencer12345@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 13:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
> Just out of curiosity what would a reasonable estimate of the launch costs
be
> for a P3E class satellite ?
>
> Regards
> Mark Spencer
> VE7AFZ (long lapsed former AMSAT member (: )
> Mark:
>
> Back in 2008 when we last seriously looked at this, the cost of launching
a satellite into a Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO) of the size/weight
of Eagle or P3-E was $8 million. Today that figure is more like $10
million, though Peter, DB2OS (President of AMSAT-DL) probably has a more
accurate figure than this. Even so, the cost to launch is what makes things
prohibitively expensive. Raising that kind of money (plus the cost of the
spacecraft itself) is not viewed as viable given the results of our past
fund raising efforts.
>
> The last HEO launch was for P3-D/AO-40. Please keep in mind that the
money that was passed through AMSAT-NA totaled over $2 Million for
P3-D/AO-40, from 1993-2000 (seven years) with considerable help from
individual donors, ARRL matching donor program, AMSAT-UK, etc. Other
organizations, such as AMSAT-DL and JAMSAT also had their own fundraising
efforts as well in support of those aspects of the program that they were
handling. AMSAT also developed the SBS (Specific Bearing Structure) as
part of P3-D program that became the "frame" that housed P3-D on the launch
vehicle. At that time, we believe we had pretty much "maxed out" what might
be raised from within the amateur radio community in North America.
Unfortunately, that considerable fundraising effort wouldn't get us 20% of
the current launch costs. Clearly, we must expand beyond the amateur
radio community to raise funds of this magnitude, but to do so requires both
a non-amateur radio "vision" to what a HEO s!
at!
> ellite would provide (e.g. excite non-amateurs) as well as a "Case for
Support" that would attract major donors, such as foundations. To date, we
have not been able to put together a plan that would meet these expectations.
>
> Needless-to-say, given today's costs, the launch economics is the major
inhibitor, and not necessarily the cost of building the satellite itself
(though that also costs "real money" depending upon size and features and
whether major systems, such as propulsion are donated as was the case with
P3-D).
>
> So, let's look deeper into the launch cost environment to determine what
AMSAT might be able to "afford" under current circumstances:
>
> The cost to launch a "microsat" (e.g. a 9" x 9" x 9" structure such as
AO-51) was estimated in 2008 to be around $350,000.00. That is why we opted
for a 1u cubesat (4" x 4" x 4") back in 2008 as replacement satellite for
AO-51-- we couldn't afford the launch of a microsat given our finances at
the time and the concern about being able to raise the funds to pay for a
launch that would likely increase in cost of time.
>
> To put this further in perspective, as I recall, back in 2008 the cost to
launch a 1u cubesat was around $60-80K to place a cubesat in LEO. The
current cost is about $120K for 1 Kg of mass to LEO (a cubesat is 1.1 Kg).
The doubling of launch cost is due in part to the significant interest in
cubesats by the US Government, aerospace firms (Boeing, for example), and
others who have "real money" to place cubesat payloads in LEO. Clearly, as
Tony, AA2TX (AMSAT's VP-Engineering) pointed out to me, the cubesat has
evolved from a university "novelty" to a standard spacecraft specification.
This cost increase is the reason why AMSAT applied for an ELaNA grant in
2011 (we were selected in 2012) and where we will continue to apply for
ELaNA grants in order to be able to "afford" launches. Clearly, it make
much more sense to focus on dollars donated to AMSAT for spacecraft
development rather than launches if we can get "others" to support our
launch costs.
>
> BTW, "Aviation Week & Space Technology Magazine" had a series of articles
in the 30 JUL 12 issue ("Small Satellites: Doing More with Less") which
highlights this evolution, including cubesats, such as TechEdSat that will
be the first US cubesat to be deployed from the ISS using the same
deployment scheme (JEM-SSOD or Small Satellite Orbital Deployer) as the
Vietnamese student F-1 cubesat that will be deployed this week.
Information about TechEdSat may be found here:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/TechEdSat.html
>
> Coupled with the launch costs is the "justification" for launches. NASA
and others (such as the National Science Foundation) will support launch
opportunities if the proposal meets THEIR strategic goals. Consequently,
the most effective way to "hitch a ride" is to put something in an amateur
radio space frame that meets their expectations, such as a
scientific/educational payload and/or provide "educational outreach." For
example:
>
> 1. ARISSat-1/Kedr deployed by RSC/Energia from the ISS in August 2011
with a student scientific payload developed by Kursk State University.
AMSAT developed ground based software to capture telemetry from both the
satellite and the payload, with amateurs forwarding captured data to a
central server. ARISSat-1/Kedr was considered to be a "prototype" for
deploying student payloads. Education outreach was also part of our efforts
with ARISSat-1, where, for example, telemetry data is available for student
analysis. Whether there are future opportunities for more ARISSat
deployments remains to be seen.
>
> 2. AMSAT-UK developed FunCube (funcube.org.uk) under the model where
educational outreach is the justification (to be launched in 2013). The
satellite has received financial support from the Radio Communications
Foundation and is being developed in collaboration with ISIS-Innovative
Solutions in Space BV (a Dutch small satellite company that is a spin-off
from Delft University of Technology). AMSAT-UK is developing ground-based
software with an easy-to-use receiver (FunCube Dongle developed by Howard
Long, G6LVB) to encourage use of the satellite in the classroom.
>
> 3. FOX-1 will have a student scientific payload (MEMS Gyro originally
developed by Penn State-Erie students) as justification for NASA to pay for
our launch under the ELaNA grant. Ground-based software for capture of
satellite telemetry and payload data is also being developed using a central
server for data to be forwarded. AMSAT is also focused on creating
education outreach materials focused on Fox-1 that will be appropriate for
future missions as well.
>
> 4. The appointment of Mark Hammond, N8MH as AMSAT's VP-Educational
Relations and the subsequent work that he is doing to develop relationships
with outside organizations (including ARRL and NASA Education), develop an
"educational outreach" capability in support of AMSAT's scientific and
education mission, and work to foster support of "STEM" (Science,
Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) as part of more traditional
engineering work on space craft is in recognition of the fact that we are
dependent upon the support of other organizations to be able to afford to
fly. "Education outreach" is the new "cost" (one that AMSAT can hopefully
"afford") that we must bear to keep amateur radio in space.
>
> Clearly, it is launch costs that is driving much of what AMSAT can afford
to accomplish. In addition, we must recognize that those that pay for the
launch will only do so if the satellite provides a benefit that meets their
goals/expectations. Clearly, future opportunities for placing amateur
radio transponders in HEO will be dependent upon finding partners who have a
need to place THEIR payload(s) in those orbits AND have the major funding to
support the launch. In essence, that is what AMSAT-DL attempted to do by
persuading the German government to fund P3-E as part of a larger mission to
Mars. Unfortunately, their attempts did not pan out.
>
> BTW, we'd be happy to accept your $44.00 to renew your AMSAT membership;
you can renew online at www.amsat.org... ;-)
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Barry Baines, WD4ASW
> President-AMSAT
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
--
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:07:43 -0400
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Gus 8P6SM <8p6sm@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat
Message-ID: <D1D14C61-C83F-4E2E-956C-B5613E376370@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Yes, I think it would, as a reasonable compromise. In fact, maybe we
should PROVIDE them with a working comms board that gives them the data
pathways they need to fulfill their experimental needs AND at the same time
provides US with something that provides OUR needs.
>
> It seems the entire focus these days is upon leveraging educational
opportunities. The theory goes, as I understand it: Since we can't afford
to pay for a launch of our own, we COOPERATE with educational institutions
(who do seem able to get launches) to provide useable frequencies -- and
potentially a global network of groundstations -- IN EXCHANGE for some sort
of communications functionality that can be used BY US.
>
We could even call it AMSAT Fox! And take donations on the front page of the
website via PayPal! And use the same avionics on projects with other
entities, and apply for free educational launches!
73, Drew KO4MA
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:15:24 -0500
From: John Becker <w0jab@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7,
Issue 312)
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20120924151004.0317fe98@xxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 02:47 PM 9/24/2012, you wrote in part:
>BTW, we'd be happy to accept your $44.00 to renew your AMSAT membership;
you can renew online at www.amsat.org... ;-)
not in my lifetime as long as the only thing I see is the FM sats.
By the way how is that program going to replace AO 40 ??
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 06:18:40 +1000
From: Geoff <vk2tfg@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat
Message-ID: <201209250618.40580.vk2tfg@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:28:08 am Dave Webb KB1PVH wrote:
> Insult them, that's a great way to get groups to consider a repeater on
> board. Believe it or not, some people enjoy the peacefulness of receiving
> telemetry versus the the fight with inconsiderate operators.
>
> Dave-KB1PVH
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless Droid RAZR
> _______________________________________________
> 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
+1 de vk2tfg
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:22:48 -0500
From: John Spasojevich <johnag9d@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Gus 8P6SM <8p6sm@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Need your support to track F-1 CubeSat
Message-ID:
<CA+qbou6pW-hAtAgrapxevAgHT3BaPuDzcwSYdvdMOJMM-p1Bug@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Well Gus, I'm guessing you read Barry's comments regarding launch cost. So
write the check and we'll be ready. By the time $10M is raised, the cost
will have tripled. We are talking about hams, not sure how their wallets
are where you are but here in the states, if something is listed at 50
cents they'll try and screw you down to 5. So good luck raising that kind
of cash in the a reasonable amount of time. Until a school or someone else
needs a HEO bird, the path is pretty clear for now.
John, AG9D
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Gus 8P6SM <8p6sm@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> On 09/24/2012 02:56 PM, John Spasojevich wrote:
>
>> I fail to see where your references prohibit such activity as long as
>> hams are involved. Would a school ham radio club be prohibited ?
>>
>
> Of course. IF what they were doing was not ham-related. Just because you
> have a ham license doesn't mean you can get on the air and use the
> frequencies for whatever you like.
>
> Would it be OK for NASA to use ham frequencies for their Mars Rover
> project, just because someone at NASA went out and got themself a ham
> ticket? After all, the Mars Rover programme is undoubtedly educational,
> and also a technical investigation.
>
>
> I think the main issue is that these birds don't satisfy YOUR personal
>> interest. Just as ragchewing and dx-ing don't satisfy the schools
>> exerimental goals.
>>
>
> And neither should the schools assume that the amateur radio community
> automatically stands ready to satisfy THEIR needs, no matter what those
> needs are.
>
>
> So maybe helping them build a transponder would satisfy both.
>>
>
> Yes, I think it would, as a reasonable compromise. In fact, maybe we
> should PROVIDE them with a working comms board that gives them the data
> pathways they need to fulfill their experimental needs AND at the same time
> provides US with something that provides OUR needs.
>
> It seems the entire focus these days is upon leveraging educational
> opportunities. The theory goes, as I understand it: Since we can't afford
> to pay for a launch of our own, we COOPERATE with educational institutions
> (who do seem able to get launches) to provide useable frequencies -- and
> potentially a global network of groundstations -- IN EXCHANGE for some sort
> of communications functionality that can be used BY US.
>
> Except it isn't happening. One satellite after another, they get what we
> have to offer (bandwidth), and they offer us... NOTHING in return.
>
>
> But then its not HEO so maybe just let the freqs die until funding
>> is there for the appropriate use. By then thiae freqs will have long
>> since been reallocated
>>
>
> I used to enjoy working HEO, but I am not against LEO satellites, and have
> worked quite a few myself. But low orbit or highly elliptical, the more
> people that end up using our frequencies for non-amateur purposes, the
> greater the case that is being made for the reallocation of those
> frequencies.
>
>
> Its beating a dead horse. That want HEO dx-ing and ragchewing are free
>> to build one. You don't need AMSAT anywhere do do that.
>>
>
> I thought that's exactly what AMSAT was created for. The construction,
> launch, care and feeding of satellites for use by the community of amateur
> radio operators. Guess not, eh?
>
>
> Channel your energy into such a constructive project. I seriously doubt
>> the complaining will get anything done.
>>
>
> Neither, apparently, will AMSAT.
>
>
> --
> 73, de Gus 8P6SM
> The Easternmost Isle
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:26:00 -0500
From: John Spasojevich <johnag9d@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Barry Baines <bbaines@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7,
Issue 312)
Message-ID:
<CA+qbou57e770hbO0pnBBW8k6UKUcj58G+JXYyuBenk7FK9PBow@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Thanks Barry and Mark for posting this number, I know it's been published
in various Symposium Proceedings. I don't think some of the people who
regularly post here and bemoan the good old days realize how much the
launch cost really is or what the effort is to get that kind of money. If
I ever win the PowerBall or Mega Millions, I'll cut AMSAT a check for the
launch, but until then.....
John, AG9D
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Mark L. Hammond
<marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>wrote:
> At AMSAT-UK Colloquium last week, Peter said the current cost to HEO
> for P3E or something like it is curently $10 Million (and the joke
> was, pick your currency--it's about the same no matter what--US
> dollar, Euros, GBP, etc.--BIG money)
>
> So the number holds.
>
> Mark N8MH
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Barry Baines <bbaines@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 7, Issue 312
> > From: Mark Spencer <mspencer12345@xxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 13:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
> > Just out of curiosity what would a reasonable estimate of the launch
> costs be
> > for a P3E class satellite ?
> >
> > Regards
> > Mark Spencer
> > VE7AFZ (long lapsed former AMSAT member (: )
> > Mark:
> >
> > Back in 2008 when we last seriously looked at this, the cost of
> launching a satellite into a Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO) of the
> size/weight of Eagle or P3-E was $8 million. Today that figure is more
> like $10 million, though Peter, DB2OS (President of AMSAT-DL) probably has
> a more accurate figure than this. Even so, the cost to launch is what
> makes things prohibitively expensive. Raising that kind of money (plus the
> cost of the spacecraft itself) is not viewed as viable given the results of
> our past fund raising efforts.
> >
> > The last HEO launch was for P3-D/AO-40. Please keep in mind that the
> money that was passed through AMSAT-NA totaled over $2 Million for
> P3-D/AO-40, from 1993-2000 (seven years) with considerable help from
> individual donors, ARRL matching donor program, AMSAT-UK, etc. Other
> organizations, such as AMSAT-DL and JAMSAT also had their own fundraising
> efforts as well in support of those aspects of the program that they were
> handling. AMSAT also developed the SBS (Specific Bearing Structure) as
> part of P3-D program that became the "frame" that housed P3-D on the launch
> vehicle. At that time, we believe we had pretty much "maxed out" what
> might be raised from within the amateur radio community in North America.
> Unfortunately, that considerable fundraising effort wouldn't get us 20% of
> the current launch costs. Clearly, we must expand beyond the amateur
> radio community to raise funds of this magnitude, but to do so requires
> both a non-amateur radio "vision" to what a HEO s!
> at!
> > ellite would provide (e.g. excite non-amateurs) as well as a "Case for
> Support" that would attract major donors, such as foundations. To date, we
> have not been able to put together a plan that would meet these
> expectations.
> >
> > Needless-to-say, given today's costs, the launch economics is the major
> inhibitor, and not necessarily the cost of building the satellite itself
> (though that also costs "real money" depending upon size and features and
> whether major systems, such as propulsion are donated as was the case with
> P3-D).
> >
> > So, let's look deeper into the launch cost environment to determine what
> AMSAT might be able to "afford" under current circumstances:
> >
> > The cost to launch a "microsat" (e.g. a 9" x 9" x 9" structure such as
> AO-51) was estimated in 2008 to be around $350,000.00. That is why we
> opted for a 1u cubesat (4" x 4" x 4") back in 2008 as replacement satellite
> for AO-51-- we couldn't afford the launch of a microsat given our finances
> at the time and the concern about being able to raise the funds to pay for
> a launch that would likely increase in cost of time.
> >
> > To put this further in perspective, as I recall, back in 2008 the cost
> to launch a 1u cubesat was around $60-80K to place a cubesat in LEO. The
> current cost is about $120K for 1 Kg of mass to LEO (a cubesat is 1.1 Kg).
> The doubling of launch cost is due in part to the significant interest in
> cubesats by the US Government, aerospace firms (Boeing, for example), and
> others who have "real money" to place cubesat payloads in LEO. Clearly, as
> Tony, AA2TX (AMSAT's VP-Engineering) pointed out to me, the cubesat has
> evolved from a university "novelty" to a standard spacecraft specification.
> This cost increase is the reason why AMSAT applied for an ELaNA grant in
> 2011 (we were selected in 2012) and where we will continue to apply for
> ELaNA grants in order to be able to "afford" launches. Clearly, it make
> much more sense to focus on dollars donated to AMSAT for spacecraft
> development rather than launches if we can get "others" to support our
> launch costs.
> >
> > BTW, "Aviation Week & Space Technology Magazine" had a series of
> articles in the 30 JUL 12 issue ("Small Satellites: Doing More with Less")
> which highlights this evolution, including cubesats, such as TechEdSat that
> will be the first US cubesat to be deployed from the ISS using the same
> deployment scheme (JEM-SSOD or Small Satellite Orbital Deployer) as the
> Vietnamese student F-1 cubesat that will be deployed this week.
> Information about TechEdSat may be found here:
>
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/TechEdSat.html
> >
> > Coupled with the launch costs is the "justification" for launches. NASA
> and others (such as the National Science Foundation) will support launch
> opportunities if the proposal meets THEIR strategic goals. Consequently,
> the most effective way to "hitch a ride" is to put something in an amateur
> radio space frame that meets their expectations, such as a
> scientific/educational payload and/or provide "educational outreach."
> For example:
> >
> > 1. ARISSat-1/Kedr deployed by RSC/Energia from the ISS in August 2011
> with a student scientific payload developed by Kursk State University.
> AMSAT developed ground based software to capture telemetry from both the
> satellite and the payload, with amateurs forwarding captured data to a
> central server. ARISSat-1/Kedr was considered to be a "prototype" for
> deploying student payloads. Education outreach was also part of our
> efforts with ARISSat-1, where, for example, telemetry data is available
> for student analysis. Whether there are future opportunities for more
> ARISSat deployments remains to be seen.
> >
> > 2. AMSAT-UK developed FunCube (funcube.org.uk) under the model where
> educational outreach is the justification (to be launched in 2013). The
> satellite has received financial support from the Radio Communications
> Foundation and is being developed in collaboration with ISIS-Innovative
> Solutions in Space BV (a Dutch small satellite company that is a spin-off
> from Delft University of Technology). AMSAT-UK is developing ground-based
> software with an easy-to-use receiver (FunCube Dongle developed by Howard
> Long, G6LVB) to encourage use of the satellite in the classroom.
> >
> > 3. FOX-1 will have a student scientific payload (MEMS Gyro originally
> developed by Penn State-Erie students) as justification for NASA to pay for
> our launch under the ELaNA grant. Ground-based software for capture of
> satellite telemetry and payload data is also being developed using a
> central server for data to be forwarded. AMSAT is also focused on creating
> education outreach materials focused on Fox-1 that will be appropriate for
> future missions as well.
> >
> > 4. The appointment of Mark Hammond, N8MH as AMSAT's VP-Educational
> Relations and the subsequent work that he is doing to develop relationships
> with outside organizations (including ARRL and NASA Education), develop an
> "educational outreach" capability in support of AMSAT's scientific and
> education mission, and work to foster support of "STEM" (Science,
> Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) as part of more traditional
> engineering work on space craft is in recognition of the fact that we are
> dependent upon the support of other organizations to be able to afford to
> fly. "Education outreach" is the new "cost" (one that AMSAT can hopefully
> "afford") that we must bear to keep amateur radio in space.
> >
> > Clearly, it is launch costs that is driving much of what AMSAT can
> afford to accomplish. In addition, we must recognize that those that pay
> for the launch will only do so if the satellite provides a benefit that
> meets their goals/expectations. Clearly, future opportunities for
> placing amateur radio transponders in HEO will be dependent upon finding
> partners who have a need to place THEIR payload(s) in those orbits AND have
> the major funding to support the launch. In essence, that is what AMSAT-DL
> attempted to do by persuading the German government to fund P3-E as part of
> a larger mission to Mars. Unfortunately, their attempts did not pan out.
> >
> > BTW, we'd be happy to accept your $44.00 to renew your AMSAT membership;
> you can renew online at www.amsat.org... ;-)
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Barry Baines, WD4ASW
> > President-AMSAT
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
>
> --
> Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 24 Sep 2012 16:46:52 -0400
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
To: John Becker <w0jab@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Amsat - BBs
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7,
Issue 312)
Message-ID:
<CAPRXzypZtS8cR5h4YjK1DOzi_KtsVy2cBH8Mayzxfv4kq78mrQ@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Actually, I hope folks understand and recall that AMSAT's mission and
vision statement was changed a few years ago.
http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/AboutAmsat/mission.php
So there isn't a program underway to replace AO-40.
That happened at an annual meeting and was voted on by paid members as
I recall. Or maybe it was done by Board members elected by paid
members. I honestly forget.
This list, obviously, remains open to members and non-members alike.
That too is a conscious decision by the organization.
Mark N8MH
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:15 PM, John Becker <w0jab@xxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> At 02:47 PM 9/24/2012, you wrote in part:
>
>>BTW, we'd be happy to accept your $44.00 to renew your AMSAT membership;
you can renew online at www.amsat.org... ;-)
>
> not in my lifetime as long as the only thing I see is the FM sats.
>
> By the way how is that program going to replace AO 40 ??
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
--
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 22:18:29 +0100 (BST)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Launch Costs (was-re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol. 7,
Issue 312)
Message-ID:
<1348521509.86320.YahooMailClassic@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Clearly, we must expand beyond the amateur radio community
> to raise funds of this magnitude, but to do so requires
> both a non-amateur radio "vision" to what a HEO satellite
> would provide (e.g. excite non-amateurs) as well as a
> "Case for Support" that would attract major donors,
> such as foundations.
Very well put Barry.
If we look at the Kickstarter site we can see satellite projects that
between them have raised almost $300,000 yet the online Fundraising by the
projects took just 30 days.
ArduSat - $106,330
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/575960623/ardusat-your-arduino-experiment-
in-space
KickSat - $74,587
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/zacinaction/kicksat-your-personal-spacecra
ft-in-space
SkyCube - $116,890
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/880837561/skycube-the-first-satellite-laun
ched-by-you
None of the individuals involved in those projects has any previous track
record in building and launching satellites, yet lots of people were happy
to back them with hard cash.
How is it people with no proven track record can so easily raise such sums
of money ?
It's down to communications, they actively sought to engage with people and
involve them in what they were doing.
I think there's something we can learn here.
Across the world millions of people are keen on space and would love to be
involved in a space project, even if it's just donating $25 to it - We need
to reach out to them.
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 315
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
