| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 09.02.09 01:39l 932 Lines 34831 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 7608-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 65
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 090209/0034Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:7608 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:7608-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Satellite tracking for Nokia N800/810 (Greg D.)
2. Re: Satellite tracking for Nokia N800/810 (Paul Williamson)
3. Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency choice,
etc. (Edward Cole)
4. Re: Was HEO naivete (Bill Ress)
5. AO-7??? (w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxxx
6. Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency choice, etc.
(James Duffey)
7. Re: AO-7??? (Alan Cresswell)
8. Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency choice, etc.
(w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxxx
9. Re: HEO naivete (Nate Duehr)
10. Re: HEO naivete (John B. Stephensen)
11. PE1RAH's transponder (Bruce Robertson)
12. Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency choice, etc.
(Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
13. Re: PE1RAH's transponder (James Duffey)
14. Fw: PE1RAH's transponder (Roger Kolakowski)
15. Re: PE1RAH's transponder (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:05:35 -0800
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Satellite tracking for Nokia N800/810
To: <w9ae@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BLU133-W486E98E052FE19F3BF76B8A9BF0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Hi Wayne,
Assuming it has a C compiler, you should have no trouble compiling "predict"
to run on it. As a text-mode application, it should run on just about
anything.
Greg KO6TH
> Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 13:25:19 -0600
> From: w9ae@xxxxxxx.xxx
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Satellite tracking for Nokia N800/810
>
> I recently ordered a Nokia N810 "internet tablet". It's a pocket-sized
> computer with a 400 MHz Texas Instruments OMAP2420 processor running a
> stripped-down version of Linux called "Maemo". It's open source, of
> course, and a community of enthusiasts develops software for this
> platform. Unfortunately, the maemo.org software index does not list a
> satellite tracking program.
>
> What are the practical options to put a satellite tracking program on a
> Nokia N810? The display is 800x480 pixels, much larger than most
> "palmtop" computers. Is there an existing Linux satellite tracking
> program that might work with Maemo Linux if I install the necessary
> libraries? Or should I try a Palm OS emulator and use something like
> PocketSat that is designed for a much smaller display? Any other
> emulation options to consider?
>
> I'm NOT a Linux geek, so I don't know what are the range of options to
> investigate. The device can access online satellite tracking
> applications using a Wi-Fi connection. But I'm looking for something to
> track ham satellites when no wireless Internet connection is available.
>
> Wayne Estes W9AE
> Oakland, Oregon, USA, CN83ik
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_explore_022009
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:11:46 -0800
From: Paul Williamson <kb5mu@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Satellite tracking for Nokia N800/810
To: Wayne Estes <w9ae@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <a06230910c5b4ec7f14d5@xxxx.xxx.x.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Or should I try a Palm OS emulator and use something like
>PocketSat that is designed for a much smaller display? Any other
>emulation options to consider?
If you can run DOSBOX you can probably run InstantTrack inside DOSBOX. Your
screen is plenty big for that, and InstantTrack is fast enough that the
emulation overhead shouldn't kill it.
73 -Paul
kb5mu@xxxxx.xxx
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:44:21 -0900
From: Edward Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency
choice, etc.
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <200902082044.n18KiL7Z025368@xxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Rocky,
May I add a little historical perspective (as I understand it) about
AO-40 (Inserted):
At 10:47 AM 2/8/2009, Rocky Jones wrote:
> > 73, Drew KO4MA
> >
>Drew and the group
>Thanks again for your well thought out reply. I would just respond
>with a few things that had "I" been in the board meeting I would have said.
>
>
>1. I don't think that appealing to "the young people" or the
>"computer generation" is a viable means to increase our
>ranks. First off the "kids" (under 25 for me) of today almost have
>unlimited data transfer capability with cell type equipment...and
>that is going to do nothing but grow even during an economic
>turndown. My twin girls on their "youngster cruise" were
>continually sending back "video's" of their experience, even on the
>boat. And that was a few years ago.
>
>My impression is that the market is the same as it has always
>been...kids who get interested in "radio" (not computers) and
>parents who have the time and money to spare in such an activity. I
>think that there is some validity in the "how difficult is it to get
>on the satellite" metric...but I think one reason that the LEO FM
>birds are what they are an Oscar 7is what it is in terms of people
>is that the equipment for the LEO FM birds is acquirable for under
>200 dollars AND has uses other places...
Probably the best reason they are called "Easy Sats"...easy on wallet
and effort.
>2. In other words Ithink that the issue with the sats is primarily
>the cost of acquisition of equipment AND what its use is when the
>sats are not "up" (or working). No science or polls behind
>that...just my viewpoint.
>
>3) Where I think that hamsats went off the wrong end was AO-40....it
>was to many eggs in one basket, to much money was spent on the
>"supersat" and far far to much was expected in terms of technical
>expertise of the staff that was putting it together. I realize one
>cannot get to the orbit the bird was designed for without
>propulsion, but it is clear that propulsion is rocket science and
>that was the fatal flaw of 40...or probably any "amateur
>effort"...unless we get some very talented volunteer "rocket scientist".
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. What you didn't state (and may not
be aware of) was AO-40 was developed at a time when a nearly free
ride existed for a big sat. Having that opportunity, I'm guessing
that the thought was to try to lift as much capability as could be
accomplished with money and technical resources. The concept was a
wonderful "does-everything" satellite. The failures apparently are
attributable to the rocket engine failures, and not with electronics
(I generalize here).
So if AO-40 were still working or better yet fully functional, all
this monday morning quaterbacking would exist. I did worry about the
complication factor of trying to do so much in one satellite. But it
was done in a time when the ride was available (now we see how rare
and short that existed).
>Without a ride to the appropriate orbit that might be the fatal link
>in any future HEO. But in any event more smaller birds to me make
>more sense then "one big one". And if we cannot get that for
>various reasons...more AO-7's in my view are the answer.
The main obstacle is not big vs small, but how to launch
anything. Launch availability drives what can be done or considered.
Keeping this in mind the current effort toward building blocks that
can be rapidly assembled for custom designs to respond to a launch
offer, is a good approach...Sort of a spin off the cube-sat philosophy.
>Oh well I learned a long time ago that the joy in life was changing
>the things you could change and just dealing with what one
>cannot...and that for me just is using the sats that are 'there' and
>having a ball at it.
>
>thanks again for your time and allowing me to bend your ear. I use
>to be The President of my Community Association so I realize what a
>thankless job you and the AMSAT board have.
>
>Robert
>
73, Ed - KL7UW
QRV 80m - 3cm
AMSAT #3212
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 13:01:58 -0800
From: Bill Ress <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Was HEO naivete
To: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <498F4846.4030409@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Rocky, Ed, et al,
I've been monitoring the thread and find that the responses, included
yours, are stating very realistic and practical assessments of AMSAT-NA
possibilities for future satellite projects and launches.
As a Board member/alternate and one who is heading up the AMSAT-NA
Engineering Task Force, I can tell you that:
1) AMSAT-NA has many folks actively working to uncover ANY and ALL
launch opportunities. HEO, even with the current pessimistic outlook due
to the extremely high launch cost (8 million $ plus) is still being
actively pursued on the funding front and the technical concepts front.
If anyone has contacts with possible funding agencies or funding
suggestions, by all means, contact our President, Barry Baines
(wd4asw@xxxxx.xxxx.
2) At the October 2008 Board meeting, the Board, recognizing a very
challenging HEO situation, changed its Mission Vision to include not
just HEO but LEO and MEO launch opportunities to insure that we didn't
focus all our efforts into one effort (HEO) that is looking rather bleak
- and end up not building and launching anything. We need to recognize
that satellites do fail and need replacements in the ready. Just look at
the unfortunate failure of the linear transponder capability that was
provided by Delfi-C3 (my best wishes to the team in trying to resolve
the problem).
3) To accomplish 2) above, an Engineering Task Force was put in place to
not only continue developing technical concepts for an HEO opportunity,
but to expand our technical outlook to support a "modular hardware
concept" development program of the key satellite pieces applicable to
and modifiable for ANY launch opportunity. You will soon be reading in
the Journal about how the SDX, IHU, Receiver and Transmitter being
developed for the SuitSat2 program will provide the first "modular"
AMSAT-NA hardware that can fly in a CubeSat or an HEO.
As one who was involved in the frustrations of the Eagle program, I can
tell you now that I'm experiencing a much more positive attitude about
what AMSAT-NA is doing now and how we are planning for its future. I'm
very confident that we will soon resolve the ITAR issues that have
troubled many of our key satellite builders in their attempts to not
only help our international commitments to P3E, but work on "domestic"
satellite programs as well (read more about all this in the upcoming
Journal).
In closing, this might possibly be a good time to cast a wide net for
those interested in offering to support the efforts of AMSAT-NA. Fell
free to contact me (n6ghz@xxxxx.xxxx with your technical interests and
Gould Smith at wa4sxm@xxxxx.xxx to support the many other areas where
volunteers are need.
Thanks for you time...Bill - N6GHz
Rocky Jones wrote:
>
>> 73, Drew KO4MA
>>
>>
> Drew and the group
> Thanks again for your well thought out reply. I would just respond with a
few things that had "I" been in the board meeting I would have said.
>
>
> 1. I dont think that appealing to "the young people" or the "computer
generation" is a viable means to increase our ranks. First off the "kids"
(under 25 for me) of today almost have unlimited data transfer capability with
cell type equipment...and that is going to do nothing but grow even during an
economic turndown. My twin girls on their "youngster cruise" were continually
sending back "video's" of their experience, even on the boat. And that was a
few years ago.
>
> My impression is that the market is the same as it has always been...kids
who get interested in "radio" (not computers) and parents who have the time
and money to spare in such an activity. I think that there is some validity
in the "how difficult is it to get on the satellite" metric...but I think one
reason that the LEO FM birds are what they are an Oscar 7is what it is in
terms of people is that the equipment for the LEO FM birds is acquirable for
under 200 dollars AND has uses other places...
>
> 2. In other words Ithink that the issue with the sats is primarily the cost
of acquisition of equipment AND what its use is when the sats are not "up" (or
working). No science or polls behind that...just my viewpoint.
>
> 3) Where I think that hamsats went off the wrong end was AO-40....it was to
many eggs in one basket, to much money was spent on the "supersat" and far far
to much was expected in terms of technical expertise of the staff that was
putting it together. I realize one cannot get to the orbit the bird was
designed for without propulsion, but it is clear that propulsion is rocket
science and that was the fatal flaw of 40...or probably any "amateur
effort"...unless we get some very talented volunteer "rocket scientist".
>
> Without a ride to the appropriate orbit that might be the fatal link in any
future HEO. But in any event more smaller birds to me make more sense then
"one big one". And if we cannot get that for various reasons...more AO-7's in
my view are the answer.
>
> Oh well I learned a long time ago that the joy in life was changing the
things you could change and just dealing with what one cannot...and that for
me just is using the sats that are 'there' and having a ball at it.
>
> thanks again for your time and allowing me to bend your ear. I use to be
The President of my Community Association so I realize what a thankless job
you and the AMSAT board have.
>
> Robert
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.
> http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_AE_Faster_022009
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 5
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:22:57 +0000 (UTC)
From: w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-7???
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<506151658.1567151234128177946.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx.
xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Anyone have any luck With AO-7 in the last six hours or so.? I should be in
mode A.? We'll see what happens when it goes to mode B at about 2100Z.
73 Bob W7LRD
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 14:30:14 -0700
From: James Duffey <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency
choice, etc.
To: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <6BA63016-21A6-42F6-919F-0A125AB3B033@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Feb 8, 2009, at 12:47 PM, Rocky Jones wrote:
> 2. In other words Ithink that the issue with the sats is primarily
> the cost of acquisition of equipment AND what its use is when the
> sats are not "up" (or working). No science or polls behind
> that...just my viewpoint.
One of the benefits of a Mode A bird when we had them up was that most
hams already had the rigs needed to operate it. HF for the 10M down
link and a keyed HT for the uplink. Sure the note was chirpy and
sometimes worse, but it did demonstrate what one could do without
additional investment. Particularly on QRP days. Remember those?
I got in to satellite on the cheap. In 1980 I bought a used Ameco
TX-62 and accompanying VFO for $50, paired it with my FT101E and had a
blast on Mode A through the 80s with AO-7, AO-8 and a number of RS
birds. Home brew antennas were and are cheap. Later a homebrew preamp
helped the anemic FT101E.
Well there are no more predictable Mode A birds. AO-7 gets up in Mode
A when it feels like it and the loud RS birds appear to be forever gone.
But I digress, I put together a Mode J/Mode B station with a $200
TR-9130 and a $150 FT-780R. Again homemade antennas, this time WA5VJB
Yagis, and I was on the air. That is not a significant investment.
I later picked up an FT290/FT490 pair for $125 each and they make a
good pair to operate the satellites. Even later I picked up an FT480R
to go with the FT780R for $75. Used gear is not that expensive if you
shop around for it. By the way, the 480/780 pair are very nice for the
FM birds as they will tune in 1 kHz steps, nicely compensating for
Doppler.
An $35 AIDF converter added S band.
So the bargains are out there if one looks and is patient. And if
people kept their old gear when they upgraded and loaned it out to
newcomers who express an interest in the satellites, that would help
too.
The VHF CW and SSB gear have use beyond the satellites. Weak signal
VHF and UHF work is quite challenging. VHF/UHF contesting is a blast.
Activity nights are held in most places so that is a place to look for
encouragement when the satellites are below the horizon.
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:35:40 -0000
From: "Alan Cresswell" <alancresswell@xxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-7???
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <B058838C235344E4A82D0D59541C1792@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
AO-07 was fine in mode B at 2111z
Alan
ZL2BX
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx
Sent: Sunday, 8 February 2009 21:23
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-7???
Anyone have any luck With AO-7 in the last six hours or so.? I should be in
mode A.? We'll see what happens when it goes to mode B at about 2100Z.
73 Bob W7LRD
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:39:54 +0000 (UTC)
From: w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency
choice, etc.
To: James Duffey <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<567312122.1572461234129194141.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx.
xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
This email brings up the Puyallup flea market
http://www.mikeandkey.org/FLYER2009.pdf
If you are reasonably close it is worth the trip.? Two huge floors of wall to
wall goodies, (and junque).? Then one persons junque is anothers treasure.?
See you there.
73 Bob W7LRD
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Duffey" <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Rocky Jones" <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "Amsat BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 8, 2009 1:30:14 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency choice,
etc.
On Feb 8, 2009, at 12:47 PM, Rocky Jones wrote:
> 2. ?In other words Ithink that the issue with the sats is primarily ?
> the cost of acquisition of equipment AND what its use is when the ?
> sats are not "up" (or working). ?No science or polls behind ?
> that...just my viewpoint.
One of the benefits of a Mode A bird when we had them up was that most ?
hams already had the rigs needed to operate it. HF for the 10M down ?
link and a keyed ?HT for the uplink. Sure the note was chirpy and ?
sometimes worse, but it did demonstrate what one could do without ?
additional investment. Particularly on QRP days. Remember those?
I got in to satellite on the cheap. In 1980 I bought a used Ameco ?
TX-62 and accompanying VFO for $50, paired it with my FT101E and had a ?
blast on Mode A through the 80s with AO-7, AO-8 and a number of RS ?
birds. Home brew antennas were and are cheap. Later a homebrew preamp ?
helped the anemic FT101E.
Well there are no more predictable Mode A birds. AO-7 gets up in Mode ?
A when it feels like it and the loud RS birds appear to be forever gone.
But I digress, I put together a Mode J/Mode B station with a $200 ?
TR-9130 and a $150 FT-780R. Again homemade antennas, this time WA5VJB ?
Yagis, and I was on the air. That is not a significant investment.
I later picked up an FT290/FT490 pair for $125 each and they make a ?
good pair to operate the satellites. Even later I picked up an FT480R ?
to go with the FT780R for $75. Used gear is not that expensive if you ?
shop around for it. By the way, the 480/780 pair are very nice for the ?
FM birds as they will tune in 1 kHz steps, nicely compensating for ?
Doppler.
An $35 AIDF converter added S band.
So the bargains are out there if one looks and is patient. And if ?
people kept their old gear when they upgraded and loaned it out to ?
newcomers who express an interest in the satellites, that would help ?
too.
The VHF CW and SSB gear have use beyond the satellites. Weak signal ?
VHF and UHF work is quite challenging. VHF/UHF contesting is a blast. ?
Activity nights are held in most places so that is a place to look for ?
encouragement when the satellites are below the horizon.
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
_______________________________________________
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: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 15:02:25 -0700
From: Nate Duehr <nate@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: HEO naivete
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <965E34DC-A2BE-4834-B013-E0C5B35423EF@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Feb 8, 2009, at 12:52 AM, John B. Stephensen wrote:
> Look at cell phones and wireless LANs to see what microwave
> equipment can
> cost.
>
> 73,
>
> John
> KD6OZH
Wireless LAN gear is mass produced by the hundreds of thousands.
Cell phones are also mass produced, but are subsidized (in the U.S.)
by the carriers out of subscription fees. For real prices, look at
Europe. Or just look at the 3.1 million dollars that Motorola's
cellular handset division lost in 2008, according to their annual
report.
So keep in mind the price tags you're using as examples, aren't the
full price, other than WiFi gear, which is produced in such quantity
that economies of scale are involved.
Nate WY0X
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 22:34:58 -0000
From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: HEO naivete
To: "Nate Duehr" <nate@xxxxxxxx.xxx>, "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <B95CE96317024C4EA466442F37E2DB1D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Ham microwave gear won't reach the manufacturing volume of wireless LAN
equipment, but the parts used are inexpensve and can be designed into ham
gear. The level of integration is higher than is acheived in HF equipment so
complete microwave transceivers could be produced at a lower cost than
amateur HF transceivers if there was a satellite to create a market.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nate Duehr" <nate@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 22:02 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: HEO naivete
>
> On Feb 8, 2009, at 12:52 AM, John B. Stephensen wrote:
>
>> Look at cell phones and wireless LANs to see what microwave
>> equipment can
>> cost.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> John
>> KD6OZH
>
> Wireless LAN gear is mass produced by the hundreds of thousands.
>
> Cell phones are also mass produced, but are subsidized (in the U.S.)
> by the carriers out of subscription fees. For real prices, look at
> Europe. Or just look at the 3.1 million dollars that Motorola's
> cellular handset division lost in 2008, according to their annual
> report.
>
> So keep in mind the price tags you're using as examples, aren't the
> full price, other than WiFi gear, which is produced in such quantity
> that economies of scale are involved.
>
> Nate WY0X
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 18:52:00 -0400
From: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] PE1RAH's transponder
To: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<49657a760902081452k647243c0w3909408c9dc42d8a@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Somewhere in all this discussion about the future of AMSAT we need to
recognize the work that William did on the 10cm^2 U/V transponder that
was featured in the most recent Journal. Here we have a young person
-- by the reckoning of most of us -- taking the very component-based
approach to satellite building that has been seriously suggested as a
way forward. He has made something that will fit the most narrow and
most cheap form in launches today, the cubesat, and the result would
fulfill our interests in analogue communications satellites.
I suppose I see this as something of a challenge for our forward
thinking. As a group, how do we respond to this? I would like to see
his work tested on ground, perhaps in more than one locale, perhaps in
an urban environment where it would get lots of traffic. Perhaps his
design could go through some sort of audit so that some of our
technical team could ensure that the most performance is being derived
from the least power.
73, Bruce
VE9QRP
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 23:22:24 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Was HEO naivete; now GEO rideshare frequency
choice, etc.
To: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <498F6930.4050009@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Oscars 10 and 13 handled the propulsion issues without mishap.
Oscar 40's mishap was human error, not a lack of design expertese.
Rocky Jones wrote: I realize one cannot get to the orbit the bird was
designed for without propulsion,
but it is clear that propulsion is rocket science and that was the fatal flaw
of 40...or
probably any "amateur effort"...unless we get some very talented volunteer
"rocket scientist".
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 16:28:07 -0700
From: James Duffey <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: PE1RAH's transponder
To: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <C626F5CE-050B-4378-B8EE-9AF935216597@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
This might be a good package for one or more of the ham radio balloon
groups. They often fly FM repeaters; perhaps a linear one would
encourage more activity from the weak signal group. - Duffey
On Feb 8, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Bruce Robertson wrote:
> Somewhere in all this discussion about the future of AMSAT we need to
> recognize the work that William did on the 10cm^2 U/V transponder that
> was featured in the most recent Journal. Here we have a young person
> -- by the reckoning of most of us -- taking the very component-based
> approach to satellite building that has been seriously suggested as a
> way forward. He has made something that will fit the most narrow and
> most cheap form in launches today, the cubesat, and the result would
> fulfill our interests in analogue communications satellites.
>
> I suppose I see this as something of a challenge for our forward
> thinking. As a group, how do we respond to this? I would like to see
> his work tested on ground, perhaps in more than one locale, perhaps in
> an urban environment where it would get lots of traffic. Perhaps his
> design could go through some sort of audit so that some of our
> technical team could ensure that the most performance is being derived
> from the least power.
>
> 73, Bruce
> VE9QRP
> _______________________________________________
> 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
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 19:15:52 -0500
From: "Roger Kolakowski" <rogerkola@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Fw: PE1RAH's transponder
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <001801c98a4b$920437a0$0300a8c0@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Kolakowski" <rogerkola@xxx.xxx>
To: "Bruce Robertson" <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] PE1RAH's transponder
> We have to remember that William's first transponder has already flown and
> been proven on India's Amateur Satellite where when it's not in use it
> stands as a "spare" in orbit
>
> Roger
> WA1KAT
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruce Robertson" <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
> To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 5:52 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] PE1RAH's transponder
>
>
> > Somewhere in all this discussion about the future of AMSAT we need to
> > recognize the work that William did on the 10cm^2 U/V transponder that
> > was featured in the most recent Journal. Here we have a young person
> > -- by the reckoning of most of us -- taking the very component-based
> > approach to satellite building that has been seriously suggested as a
> > way forward. He has made something that will fit the most narrow and
> > most cheap form in launches today, the cubesat, and the result would
> > fulfill our interests in analogue communications satellites.
> >
> > I suppose I see this as something of a challenge for our forward
> > thinking. As a group, how do we respond to this? I would like to see
> > his work tested on ground, perhaps in more than one locale, perhaps in
> > an urban environment where it would get lots of traffic. Perhaps his
> > design could go through some sort of audit so that some of our
> > technical team could ensure that the most performance is being derived
> > from the least power.
> >
> > 73, Bruce
> > VE9QRP
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 15
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 23:42:25 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: PE1RAH's transponder
To: James Duffey <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <498F6DE1.80708@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I'd be happy to build one if it could be "kitted" at a reasonable cost.
James Duffey wrote:
> This might be a good package for one or more of the ham radio balloon
> groups. They often fly FM repeaters; perhaps a linear one would
> encourage more activity from the weak signal group. - Duffey
> On Feb 8, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Bruce Robertson wrote:
>
>> Somewhere in all this discussion about the future of AMSAT we need to
>> recognize the work that William did on the 10cm^2 U/V transponder that
>> was featured in the most recent Journal. Here we have a young person
>> -- by the reckoning of most of us -- taking the very component-based
>> approach to satellite building that has been seriously suggested as a
>> way forward. He has made something that will fit the most narrow and
>> most cheap form in launches today, the cubesat, and the result would
>> fulfill our interests in analogue communications satellites.
>>
>> I suppose I see this as something of a challenge for our forward
>> thinking. As a group, how do we respond to this? I would like to see
>> his work tested on ground, perhaps in more than one locale, perhaps in
>> an urban environment where it would get lots of traffic. Perhaps his
>> design could go through some sort of audit so that some of our
>> technical team could ensure that the most performance is being derived
>> from the least power.
>>
>> 73, Bruce
>> VE9QRP
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> --
> KK6MC
> James Duffey
> Cedar Crest NM
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.19/1938 - Release Date: 02/06/09
17:28:00
>
--
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Nigel A. Gunn. G8IFF W8IFF (was KC8NHF)
1865 El Camino Drive, Xenia, OH 45385-1115, USA 937 825 5032
e-mail nigel@xxxxx.xxx www http://www.ngunn.net
Member of ARRL, GQRP #11396, QRPARCI #11644, SOC #548, Flying Pig #385,
Dayton ARA #2128, AMSAT-NA LM-1691, AMSAT-UK, MKARS,
ALC
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 65
***************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
