Email Detail

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/6QOPOV6A7SVPZ4SEXQTMPS2Z7A465IFN/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "6QOPOV6A7SVPZ4SEXQTMPS2Z7A465IFN",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/2KHIE6ZWAQEY4Y2AXNLNMMDSGAN4YR7Z/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "ve9qrp (a) gmail.com",
        "mailman_id": "4d6061838db34aba9a1c4722addebfaf",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/4d6061838db34aba9a1c4722addebfaf/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Bruce Robertson",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites",
    "date": "2009-09-26T05:46:55Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/MWVXT22EG6OFK6K3EQGAWDRXZBITWMWJ/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:03 AM, Rocky Jones <[email protected]> wrote:\n>\n>>\n>> Finally, a truism that probably bears repeating, though not addressing\n>> the two comments quoted above: if we call cubesats 'not amateur\n>> radio', then we should tar OSCAR 1 with that same brush.\n>>\n>> 73, Bruce\n>> VE9QRP\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>\n> Bruce...that is really not fair.\n\nI'm sorry if I'm not being fair. I rather think, though, that there is\nan important difference of opinion here on what constitutes amateur\nactivity. I'd like to explore it further with your permission.\n\n> Oscar 1 (and 2) were \"first time\" for a lot of things and had at their heart\n> the goal of building amateur radio communications platforms...that is why\n> Oscar \"X\" (I think that is what they call it...a repeat of Oscar 1 and 2)\n> was shelved in favor of Oscar III a communications platform.\n\nIf you are advocating a litmus test for amateur activity, especially\nin the satellite field, that is based on novelty, then I cannot see\nhow you are not equally opposed to those aspects of P3E that are\nself-consciously emulating previous satellites (everything other than\nSDX and CAN-DO?)\n\nIn fact, in common practice innovation is too high a bar to set for\namateur activity: we don't expect each ham to invent a new modulation\nscheme before getting on a local repeater for the first time; and I\nknow that when and if a HEO satellite is in orbit again, you will not\ndeprecate my enjoyment of following in the footsteps of many before me\nwho have undertaken linear transponder communications on that\nplatform.\n\nI will meet you half way and say that innovation is a hallmark of\namateur satellite operations, though not a requirement. This is why I\nam very excited by upcoming tests of SDX. It is also, incidentally,\nwhy I applaud the achievements of the cubesat groups, whose very\nform-factor is innovative, and who undertake innovative applications,\nsuch as spacecraft stabilization for potential experiments in\nformation flying, high-quality image capture, new communication modes,\nphysics experiments, etc., a list that reads much like the one you\napply to Oscar V below:\n\n> Both Oscar 1 and II lasted until their batteries ran out...indeed I think\n> Number 1 lasted until it decayed..Oscar V tested communications technology\n> from spacecraft stabilization to command systems etc. and it lasted until\n> its batteries ran out\n\nI can't tell here: are you suggesting that battery-operated satellites\nare more in the amateur spirit?  Doesn't this contravene your\ninnovation criterion? Were not batteries in Oscar 1-5 faute de mieux?\nYou seem to be implying that the Oscar 1 designers eschewed the solar\npanels available to them and wisely chose the limited lifetime option.\nMy understanding of the history of technology is somewhat hazy, but as\nit is, it doesn't fit this picture.\n\n> .that is far longer sat life then most of the cubesats have.  which mostly\n> have nothing to do with amateur radio\n\nIn your opinion, is short life a knock against cubesats? Maybe it's a\ngood idea to have shorter missions in some cases. Short life is not\nalways true, of course: CO-57, e.g., has been in operation for over\nsix years.\n\n73, Bruce\nVE9QRP\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}