| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 31.07.19 19:49l 847 Lines 35980 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB14292
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V14 292
Path: IZ3LSV<IR1UAW<IK1NHL<CX2SA
Sent: 190731/1843Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:11079 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB14292
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO) to
attract more interest and revenue] (John Kludt)
2. Re: HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO) to
attract more interest and revenue] (JoAnne Maenpaa)
3. Satellite APRS Packets (KE6BLR Robert)
4. ISS-SSTV Aug 1-4 (Amsat Argentina)
5. Re: ISS-SSTV Aug 1-4 (and PSAT2) (Robert Bruninga)
6. Re: HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO) to
attract more interest and revenue] (John Brier)
7. Re: HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO) to
attract more interest and revenue] (John Kludt)
8. Re: HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO) to
attract more interest and revenue] (John Brier)
9. HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO) to attract
more interest and revenue] (Nicholas Mahr KE8AKW)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 08:22:31 -0400
From: John Kludt <johnnykludt@?????.???>
To: Ev Tupis <w2ev@?????.???>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX
(HEO) to attract more interest and revenue]
Message-ID:
<CABsMmtTiGYMgvFjMD4nv_BNU+TqS2KwHsVZm7-WQkouFhdVPcA@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Ev,
The orbital debris regulations are a huge barrier. See Jerry's post on
this reflector. It is not the case that AMSAT is not looking very hard at
the issue. Everything has an opportunity cost associated with it. AMSAT
has limited resources both in terms of people and dollars. Are you
suggesting AMSAT drop everything they are working on and pursue your pet
option?
Bacon's Law was passed by the Virginia Legislature June 23, 1676, after
Nathaniel Bacon *invaded* Jamestown and *forced* the legislature to grant
him a charter to go fight Indians. *That* Bacon's Law? So you are
suggesting we *invade* AMSAT HQ and *force* the Board of Director's to
authorize this project?
Maybe you are referring to a different Bacon's Law. Sounds kind of over
the top to me.
Respectfully,
John
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:12 AM Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
wrote:
> Somewhere in AMSAT there is someone who has "Project Managed" long enough
> (or has access to process-flow diagrams) and can publish a generic work
> breakdown of both the steps and resources needed to put a highly elliptical
> (presumably less expensive) or Geostationary (presumably more expensive)
> bird into orbit and manage it.
>
> If that person (or people) could publish that along with a "checkmark"
> next to the items that are "already in place", "in active progress", and
> "needs sponsor/enthusiast" then we are more likely to fill-in the gaps.
>
> Remember the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" game (a.k.a. "Bacon's Law")?
> Let's play it out here!
> Ev, W2EV
>
> On Tuesday, July 30, 2019, 6:15:19 PM EDT, Jerry Buxton via AMSAT-BB <
> amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>
> On 7/28/2019 18:46, Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> > What are the top barriers to revisiting highly elliptical and AO-40 type
> goals?
> Actually, from my perspective right now the top barrier is orbital
> debris regulations. GOLF-1 isn't going where I wanted to go because the
> enforcement has become stringent and a hot topic worldwide. We can't
> license or launch anything that doesn't de-orbit within 25 years and a
> HEO orbit (GTO actually, keeping it simple for this point) is likely to
> last "too long" by itself. There are options available for deorbit BUT
> the kicker right now is that they have to be proven and approved by the
> FCC. In that we know of no such device(s) available at this time,
> keeping within the current expectations of 3U. A change in size (6U)
> might yield some possibilities but I know of none there either, right
> now. We have been discussing and working with both NASA and FCC for
> possibilities. If something is available whether drag or propulsion,
> then we get into the cost issue not to mention the price of a launch to
> a GTO which is currently around $900k MSRP. If we had a million bucks
> and approved device(s) were available right now that fit within a $1
> million budget then we would be pursuing that.
>
> Another option is to find a launch with a low enough perigee to
> naturally decay in 25 years, but whether earning an ELaNa launch or
> buying one, we will always be secondary payload and don't have a lot of
> say in specific orbit parameters.
>
> One more option is rideshare, and that is also in active discussion.
> The point there would be that the onus of orbital debris compliance is
> on the satellite we hitch a ride with, although that also goes into not
> having a lot of say on the final orbit not to mention satisfying a
> primary payload that everything will be just fine if they take us
> along. And then again, there's likely cost there too... We have some
> options that wouldn't necessarily require lots of money, they just won't
> be happening today.
>
> Other possibilities? As far as I know we are pursuing the current
> options available per NASA and FCC, but that doesn't mean that there
> aren't other possibilities. If you have any, keep in mind that building
> a good case for use of whatever the possibility might be is key to
> gaining any approval. And 90% probability that whatever will get you
> back in less than 25 years is a tough challenge.
>
> We are bucking a trend, general CubeSat missions are happy with going
> lower or from ISS, and bucking the trend not new with AMSAT but it is
> new in this world today because of the regulation and stakes as well as
> the fact that most everyone we deal with has no knowledge of AMSAT
> beyond the record the we have created and grown in the last 4 years of
> launches. We are not magically known just because we launched some
> pretty cool satellites in the past. Hopefully we will be known by more
> through our continued contact, cooperation, and "by the book" production
> and delivery of CubeSats with NASA, FCC, launch integrators, and others
> who we look to for these launch opportunities.
>
> Or get a bunch of money because that probably is the second biggest
> barrier...
>
> Jerry Buxton, N?JY
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 07:51:09 -0500
From: "JoAnne Maenpaa" <k9jkm@???????.???>
To: "'AMSAT-BB'" <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX
(HEO) to attract more interest and revenue]
Message-ID: <002701d5479e$a1093e00$e31bba00$@???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> Everyone, The next is how do we remove the barriers ... [and other BS] ...
The AMSAT Board of Directors Meeting, October 16-17
Hilton Arlington, 950 North Stafford Street, Arlington, Virginia, 22203
See you there?
--
73 de JoAnne K9JKM
k9jkm@?????.???
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:40:07 -0700
From: KE6BLR Robert <ke6blr.robert@?????.???>
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Satellite APRS Packets
Message-ID:
<CABaTVVZaOYKq-e8=Drxe4ohGhPp_N7EJVPtMGoEZgEaEScq_1w@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Our club provides tools and tutorials for Boy Scouts seeking merit badges
in Radio, Robotics, and Space Exploration. We provide a public website for
monitoring Satellite APRS Packets. Feel free to give it a test drive and
bookmark for future use:
http://spaceCommunicator.club/aprs
This covers all packets from all satellites. Packets waterfall after 24
hours.
73
Robert
KE6BLR
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:19:36 +0000 (UTC)
From: Amsat Argentina <lu7aa@?????.???>
To: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] ISS-SSTV Aug 1-4
Message-ID: <299098564.391543.1564593576401@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On http://www.ariss.org ARISS plan to send SSTV from ISS on 145.800 KHz
PD-120.
Opportunity to start or complete ARISS-SSTV Diploma http://amsat.org.ar?f=9
Congrats to IK1SLD, IU4APB, LW9DVW and DL4YCD for theirs Diplomas achievement.
Passes at http://amsat.org.ar/pass?satx=iss Good luck on capture !
73, LU7AA, AMSAT Argentina
http://amsat.org.ar
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:42:24 -0400
From: Robert Bruninga <bruninga@????.???>
To: amsat bb <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] ISS-SSTV Aug 1-4 (and PSAT2)
Message-ID: <c91c4d981d0cc5c2d4082385c427c5d7@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
And while you are waiting to see SSTV from ISS, remember PSAT2 also has
SSTV.
It turns out PSAT2's strings of passes and ISS strings of passes are
more-or-less alternating. So if ISS passes are generally in view now,
PSAT2's are not. And if you have to wait several hours for ISS, then
check and see if PSAT2 passes are in the area. PSAT2 is object number
44354. SSTV downlink is 435.350 +/- Doppler. SSTV is only on when the
satellite is in Sun.
It helps to keep the PSAT2 transponder up if there is someone also on the
PSK31 uplink during the pass on 29.4815 MHz.
Bob, WB4aPR
-------------------------------Original
Message--------------------------------------------
From: Amsat Argentina via AMSAT-BB
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 1:20 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] ISS-SSTV Aug 1-4
On http://www.ariss.org ARISS plan to send SSTV from ISS on 145.800 KHz
PD-120.
Opportunity to start or complete ARISS-SSTV Diploma
http://amsat.org.ar?f=9
Congrats to IK1SLD, IU4APB, LW9DVW and DL4YCD for theirs Diplomas
achievement.
Passes at http://amsat.org.ar/pass?satx=iss Good luck on capture !
73, LU7AA, AMSAT Argentina
http://amsat.org.ar
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:48:54 -0400
From: John Brier <johnbrier@?????.???>
To: John Kludt <johnnykludt@?????.???>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX
(HEO) to attract more interest and revenue]
Message-ID:
<CALn0fKOwkuZ5SCeciBLPuDv2abbd9odD96gAE62YsXxhO8aN-A@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Bacon's law here means everyone is no more than six people away from
someone who personally knows Kevin Bacon. He is saying we all know a
lot of people, enough people that we might be able to do impressive
things with them.
Also, surely he doesn't mean AMSAT should drop everything for this
idea. I think you're reading into Ev's message too much.
73, John Brier KG4AKV
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:26 AM John Kludt via AMSAT-BB
<amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>
> Ev,
>
> The orbital debris regulations are a huge barrier. See Jerry's post on
> this reflector. It is not the case that AMSAT is not looking very hard at
> the issue. Everything has an opportunity cost associated with it. AMSAT
> has limited resources both in terms of people and dollars. Are you
> suggesting AMSAT drop everything they are working on and pursue your pet
> option?
>
> Bacon's Law was passed by the Virginia Legislature June 23, 1676, after
> Nathaniel Bacon *invaded* Jamestown and *forced* the legislature to grant
> him a charter to go fight Indians. *That* Bacon's Law? So you are
> suggesting we *invade* AMSAT HQ and *force* the Board of Director's to
> authorize this project?
>
> Maybe you are referring to a different Bacon's Law. Sounds kind of over
> the top to me.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:12 AM Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
> wrote:
>
> > Somewhere in AMSAT there is someone who has "Project Managed" long enough
> > (or has access to process-flow diagrams) and can publish a generic work
> > breakdown of both the steps and resources needed to put a highly
elliptical
> > (presumably less expensive) or Geostationary (presumably more expensive)
> > bird into orbit and manage it.
> >
> > If that person (or people) could publish that along with a "checkmark"
> > next to the items that are "already in place", "in active progress", and
> > "needs sponsor/enthusiast" then we are more likely to fill-in the gaps.
> >
> > Remember the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" game (a.k.a. "Bacon's Law")?
> > Let's play it out here!
> > Ev, W2EV
> >
> > On Tuesday, July 30, 2019, 6:15:19 PM EDT, Jerry Buxton via AMSAT-BB <
> > amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/28/2019 18:46, Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> > > What are the top barriers to revisiting highly elliptical and AO-40 type
> > goals?
> > Actually, from my perspective right now the top barrier is orbital
> > debris regulations. GOLF-1 isn't going where I wanted to go because the
> > enforcement has become stringent and a hot topic worldwide. We can't
> > license or launch anything that doesn't de-orbit within 25 years and a
> > HEO orbit (GTO actually, keeping it simple for this point) is likely to
> > last "too long" by itself. There are options available for deorbit BUT
> > the kicker right now is that they have to be proven and approved by the
> > FCC. In that we know of no such device(s) available at this time,
> > keeping within the current expectations of 3U. A change in size (6U)
> > might yield some possibilities but I know of none there either, right
> > now. We have been discussing and working with both NASA and FCC for
> > possibilities. If something is available whether drag or propulsion,
> > then we get into the cost issue not to mention the price of a launch to
> > a GTO which is currently around $900k MSRP. If we had a million bucks
> > and approved device(s) were available right now that fit within a $1
> > million budget then we would be pursuing that.
> >
> > Another option is to find a launch with a low enough perigee to
> > naturally decay in 25 years, but whether earning an ELaNa launch or
> > buying one, we will always be secondary payload and don't have a lot of
> > say in specific orbit parameters.
> >
> > One more option is rideshare, and that is also in active discussion.
> > The point there would be that the onus of orbital debris compliance is
> > on the satellite we hitch a ride with, although that also goes into not
> > having a lot of say on the final orbit not to mention satisfying a
> > primary payload that everything will be just fine if they take us
> > along. And then again, there's likely cost there too... We have some
> > options that wouldn't necessarily require lots of money, they just won't
> > be happening today.
> >
> > Other possibilities? As far as I know we are pursuing the current
> > options available per NASA and FCC, but that doesn't mean that there
> > aren't other possibilities. If you have any, keep in mind that building
> > a good case for use of whatever the possibility might be is key to
> > gaining any approval. And 90% probability that whatever will get you
> > back in less than 25 years is a tough challenge.
> >
> > We are bucking a trend, general CubeSat missions are happy with going
> > lower or from ISS, and bucking the trend not new with AMSAT but it is
> > new in this world today because of the regulation and stakes as well as
> > the fact that most everyone we deal with has no knowledge of AMSAT
> > beyond the record the we have created and grown in the last 4 years of
> > launches. We are not magically known just because we launched some
> > pretty cool satellites in the past. Hopefully we will be known by more
> > through our continued contact, cooperation, and "by the book" production
> > and delivery of CubeSats with NASA, FCC, launch integrators, and others
> > who we look to for these launch opportunities.
> >
> > Or get a bunch of money because that probably is the second biggest
> > barrier...
> >
> > Jerry Buxton, N?JY
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> > expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> > AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> > expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> > AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 14:14:32 -0400
From: John Kludt <johnnykludt@?????.???>
To: John Brier <johnbrier@?????.???>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX
(HEO) to attract more interest and revenue]
Message-ID:
<CABsMmtRDLLh0zzKeSx-MG4TXJLsw8U7foqxu5j0k-t8vR0w03A@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
John,
Ah, like I said a different Bacon's Law. With very different implications.
John
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 1:49 PM John Brier <johnbrier@?????.???> wrote:
> Bacon's law here means everyone is no more than six people away from
> someone who personally knows Kevin Bacon. He is saying we all know a
> lot of people, enough people that we might be able to do impressive
> things with them.
>
> Also, surely he doesn't mean AMSAT should drop everything for this
> idea. I think you're reading into Ev's message too much.
>
> 73, John Brier KG4AKV
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:26 AM John Kludt via AMSAT-BB
> <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> >
> > Ev,
> >
> > The orbital debris regulations are a huge barrier. See Jerry's post on
> > this reflector. It is not the case that AMSAT is not looking very hard
> at
> > the issue. Everything has an opportunity cost associated with it. AMSAT
> > has limited resources both in terms of people and dollars. Are you
> > suggesting AMSAT drop everything they are working on and pursue your pet
> > option?
> >
> > Bacon's Law was passed by the Virginia Legislature June 23, 1676, after
> > Nathaniel Bacon *invaded* Jamestown and *forced* the legislature to grant
> > him a charter to go fight Indians. *That* Bacon's Law? So you are
> > suggesting we *invade* AMSAT HQ and *force* the Board of Director's to
> > authorize this project?
> >
> > Maybe you are referring to a different Bacon's Law. Sounds kind of over
> > the top to me.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:12 AM Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB <
> amsat-bb@?????.???>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Somewhere in AMSAT there is someone who has "Project Managed" long
> enough
> > > (or has access to process-flow diagrams) and can publish a generic work
> > > breakdown of both the steps and resources needed to put a highly
> elliptical
> > > (presumably less expensive) or Geostationary (presumably more
> expensive)
> > > bird into orbit and manage it.
> > >
> > > If that person (or people) could publish that along with a "checkmark"
> > > next to the items that are "already in place", "in active progress",
> and
> > > "needs sponsor/enthusiast" then we are more likely to fill-in the gaps.
> > >
> > > Remember the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" game (a.k.a. "Bacon's Law")?
> > > Let's play it out here!
> > > Ev, W2EV
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, July 30, 2019, 6:15:19 PM EDT, Jerry Buxton via
> AMSAT-BB <
> > > amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 7/28/2019 18:46, Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> > > > What are the top barriers to revisiting highly elliptical and AO-40
> type
> > > goals?
> > > Actually, from my perspective right now the top barrier is orbital
> > > debris regulations. GOLF-1 isn't going where I wanted to go because
> the
> > > enforcement has become stringent and a hot topic worldwide. We can't
> > > license or launch anything that doesn't de-orbit within 25 years and a
> > > HEO orbit (GTO actually, keeping it simple for this point) is likely to
> > > last "too long" by itself. There are options available for deorbit BUT
> > > the kicker right now is that they have to be proven and approved by the
> > > FCC. In that we know of no such device(s) available at this time,
> > > keeping within the current expectations of 3U. A change in size (6U)
> > > might yield some possibilities but I know of none there either, right
> > > now. We have been discussing and working with both NASA and FCC for
> > > possibilities. If something is available whether drag or propulsion,
> > > then we get into the cost issue not to mention the price of a launch to
> > > a GTO which is currently around $900k MSRP. If we had a million bucks
> > > and approved device(s) were available right now that fit within a $1
> > > million budget then we would be pursuing that.
> > >
> > > Another option is to find a launch with a low enough perigee to
> > > naturally decay in 25 years, but whether earning an ELaNa launch or
> > > buying one, we will always be secondary payload and don't have a lot of
> > > say in specific orbit parameters.
> > >
> > > One more option is rideshare, and that is also in active discussion.
> > > The point there would be that the onus of orbital debris compliance is
> > > on the satellite we hitch a ride with, although that also goes into not
> > > having a lot of say on the final orbit not to mention satisfying a
> > > primary payload that everything will be just fine if they take us
> > > along. And then again, there's likely cost there too... We have some
> > > options that wouldn't necessarily require lots of money, they just
> won't
> > > be happening today.
> > >
> > > Other possibilities? As far as I know we are pursuing the current
> > > options available per NASA and FCC, but that doesn't mean that there
> > > aren't other possibilities. If you have any, keep in mind that
> building
> > > a good case for use of whatever the possibility might be is key to
> > > gaining any approval. And 90% probability that whatever will get you
> > > back in less than 25 years is a tough challenge.
> > >
> > > We are bucking a trend, general CubeSat missions are happy with going
> > > lower or from ISS, and bucking the trend not new with AMSAT but it is
> > > new in this world today because of the regulation and stakes as well as
> > > the fact that most everyone we deal with has no knowledge of AMSAT
> > > beyond the record the we have created and grown in the last 4 years of
> > > launches. We are not magically known just because we launched some
> > > pretty cool satellites in the past. Hopefully we will be known by more
> > > through our continued contact, cooperation, and "by the book"
> production
> > > and delivery of CubeSats with NASA, FCC, launch integrators, and others
> > > who we look to for these launch opportunities.
> > >
> > > Or get a bunch of money because that probably is the second biggest
> > > barrier...
> > >
> > > Jerry Buxton, N?JY
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions
> > > expressed
> > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
> of
> > > AMSAT-NA.
> > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions
> > > expressed
> > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
> of
> > > AMSAT-NA.
> > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 14:24:49 -0400
From: John Brier <johnbrier@?????.???>
To: John Kludt <johnnykludt@?????.???>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX
(HEO) to attract more interest and revenue]
Message-ID:
<CALn0fKOEny0Bv5qozv-9MbbxWx_tHc5doAft5EukjLb8puGmfA@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Indeed sir.
If we can get ahold of Kevin Bacon maybe we can get a GEO sat!
;-)
73, John Brier KG4AKV
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 2:14 PM John Kludt <johnnykludt@?????.???> wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Ah, like I said a different Bacon's Law. With very different implications.
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 1:49 PM John Brier <johnbrier@?????.???> wrote:
>>
>> Bacon's law here means everyone is no more than six people away from
>> someone who personally knows Kevin Bacon. He is saying we all know a
>> lot of people, enough people that we might be able to do impressive
>> things with them.
>>
>> Also, surely he doesn't mean AMSAT should drop everything for this
>> idea. I think you're reading into Ev's message too much.
>>
>> 73, John Brier KG4AKV
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:26 AM John Kludt via AMSAT-BB
>> <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>> >
>> > Ev,
>> >
>> > The orbital debris regulations are a huge barrier. See Jerry's post on
>> > this reflector. It is not the case that AMSAT is not looking very hard
at
>> > the issue. Everything has an opportunity cost associated with it. AMSAT
>> > has limited resources both in terms of people and dollars. Are you
>> > suggesting AMSAT drop everything they are working on and pursue your pet
>> > option?
>> >
>> > Bacon's Law was passed by the Virginia Legislature June 23, 1676, after
>> > Nathaniel Bacon *invaded* Jamestown and *forced* the legislature to grant
>> > him a charter to go fight Indians. *That* Bacon's Law? So you are
>> > suggesting we *invade* AMSAT HQ and *force* the Board of Director's to
>> > authorize this project?
>> >
>> > Maybe you are referring to a different Bacon's Law. Sounds kind of over
>> > the top to me.
>> >
>> > Respectfully,
>> >
>> > John
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:12 AM Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB
<amsat-bb@?????.???>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Somewhere in AMSAT there is someone who has "Project Managed" long
enough
>> > > (or has access to process-flow diagrams) and can publish a generic work
>> > > breakdown of both the steps and resources needed to put a highly
elliptical
>> > > (presumably less expensive) or Geostationary (presumably more
expensive)
>> > > bird into orbit and manage it.
>> > >
>> > > If that person (or people) could publish that along with a "checkmark"
>> > > next to the items that are "already in place", "in active progress",
and
>> > > "needs sponsor/enthusiast" then we are more likely to fill-in the gaps.
>> > >
>> > > Remember the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" game (a.k.a. "Bacon's Law")?
>> > > Let's play it out here!
>> > > Ev, W2EV
>> > >
>> > > On Tuesday, July 30, 2019, 6:15:19 PM EDT, Jerry Buxton via
AMSAT-BB <
>> > > amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On 7/28/2019 18:46, Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB wrote:
>> > > > What are the top barriers to revisiting highly elliptical and AO-40
type
>> > > goals?
>> > > Actually, from my perspective right now the top barrier is orbital
>> > > debris regulations. GOLF-1 isn't going where I wanted to go because
the
>> > > enforcement has become stringent and a hot topic worldwide. We can't
>> > > license or launch anything that doesn't de-orbit within 25 years and a
>> > > HEO orbit (GTO actually, keeping it simple for this point) is likely to
>> > > last "too long" by itself. There are options available for deorbit BUT
>> > > the kicker right now is that they have to be proven and approved by the
>> > > FCC. In that we know of no such device(s) available at this time,
>> > > keeping within the current expectations of 3U. A change in size (6U)
>> > > might yield some possibilities but I know of none there either, right
>> > > now. We have been discussing and working with both NASA and FCC for
>> > > possibilities. If something is available whether drag or propulsion,
>> > > then we get into the cost issue not to mention the price of a launch to
>> > > a GTO which is currently around $900k MSRP. If we had a million bucks
>> > > and approved device(s) were available right now that fit within a $1
>> > > million budget then we would be pursuing that.
>> > >
>> > > Another option is to find a launch with a low enough perigee to
>> > > naturally decay in 25 years, but whether earning an ELaNa launch or
>> > > buying one, we will always be secondary payload and don't have a lot of
>> > > say in specific orbit parameters.
>> > >
>> > > One more option is rideshare, and that is also in active discussion.
>> > > The point there would be that the onus of orbital debris compliance is
>> > > on the satellite we hitch a ride with, although that also goes into not
>> > > having a lot of say on the final orbit not to mention satisfying a
>> > > primary payload that everything will be just fine if they take us
>> > > along. And then again, there's likely cost there too... We have some
>> > > options that wouldn't necessarily require lots of money, they just
won't
>> > > be happening today.
>> > >
>> > > Other possibilities? As far as I know we are pursuing the current
>> > > options available per NASA and FCC, but that doesn't mean that there
>> > > aren't other possibilities. If you have any, keep in mind that
building
>> > > a good case for use of whatever the possibility might be is key to
>> > > gaining any approval. And 90% probability that whatever will get you
>> > > back in less than 25 years is a tough challenge.
>> > >
>> > > We are bucking a trend, general CubeSat missions are happy with going
>> > > lower or from ISS, and bucking the trend not new with AMSAT but it is
>> > > new in this world today because of the regulation and stakes as well as
>> > > the fact that most everyone we deal with has no knowledge of AMSAT
>> > > beyond the record the we have created and grown in the last 4 years of
>> > > launches. We are not magically known just because we launched some
>> > > pretty cool satellites in the past. Hopefully we will be known by more
>> > > through our continued contact, cooperation, and "by the book"
production
>> > > and delivery of CubeSats with NASA, FCC, launch integrators, and others
>> > > who we look to for these launch opportunities.
>> > >
>> > > Or get a bunch of money because that probably is the second biggest
>> > > barrier...
>> > >
>> > > Jerry Buxton, N?JY
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions
>> > > expressed
>> > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
of
>> > > AMSAT-NA.
>> > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
>> > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions
>> > > expressed
>> > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
of
>> > > AMSAT-NA.
>> > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
>> > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions expressed
>> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
of AMSAT-NA.
>> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
>> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 14:39:33 -0400
From: Nicholas Mahr KE8AKW <nicholasmahr1@?????.???>
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: [amsat-bb] HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO)
to attract more interest and revenue]
Message-ID:
<CAGu+VYt1_mW0x4h=C1PPpvi3uGLUuE7_2AHaEhv=PNenF-1G4w@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I know we currently have AMSAT-DL's P3E sitting in storage in Germany.
Perhaps some day we can find a good opportunity under the government to fly
P3E with a bunch of experiments for them like what AMSAT found under the
Virginia Tech P3E opportunity in 2015 which dident happen because they
wanted us to pay 4M to insure on time integration. I do think advocating
that it can be used for emergency communications and for flying their
experiments could definitely help us find a rare opportunity in that
Molniya type orbit. I assume that the de-orbiting could possibly be done
with its Kicker Motor? Ultimately, we are under the mercy of the launch
providers and government regulations. I do think that with hard work from
our wonderful AMSAT volunteers, we can get back to HEO/GEO at soon. Also
the work on Phase 4 ground has been wonderful. I wish the best fpr Phase 4
project and the GOLF program.
73, Nick KE8AKW
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@?????.???.
AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide
without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 14, Issue 292
*****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
