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/XQHLUE3INQQCVL6UYH6NA7CAIBMDAAOW/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "XQHLUE3INQQCVL6UYH6NA7CAIBMDAAOW",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/A5P6WWRSAPTIDBSRFTTE5E66FVDSEAI4/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "orbitjet (a) hotmail.com",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Rocky Jones",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: FW: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 401",
    "date": "2009-08-16T05:39:20Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/A5P6WWRSAPTIDBSRFTTE5E66FVDSEAI4/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "\nFrank\n\n\" This e-mail is filled with so many inaccuracies\n> and wrong statements that it would be a disservice to the amateur community\n> to go through this and challenge each of your statements.  \"\n\nso what was the purpose of the six additional paragraphs?\n\nQuestion...Is suitsat going to have a new name?\n\nRobert WB5MZO\n\n> From: [email protected]\n> To: [email protected]\n> Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 21:57:59 -0400\n> Subject: [amsat-bb]  FW: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 401\n> \n> Miles,\n> \n> I find it really sad that you have stooped this low.....character\n> assassination and the like.  This e-mail is filled with so many inaccuracies\n> and wrong statements that it would be a disservice to the amateur community\n> to go through this and challenge each of your statements.  \n> \n> While I am no longer part of the ARISS team, I think it would be best for me\n> to respond to this e-mail as I think some clarifications are worthy of a\n> response.  And given the fact that I led the ARISS team for 13 years.\n> \n> Your main gripe was that you were not invited to the ARISS meeting at ESA\n> Estec a few months ago.  It should be noted that AMSAT did not make this\n> final decision.  Specifically, it was your (Miles) actions that caused you\n> to be not invited.  Not some  \"closed\" organization as you (Miles)\n> stipulate.  The crux of the issue is that if one disregards verbal or\n> written direction from space agencies and, as a result, you violate space\n> agency policy or company/agency proprietary rules, then a significant\n> element of distrust is built up.  ARISS cannot let this happen.  And Miles,\n> through your actions, you did this.  And as a result, you did this to\n> yourself.\n> \n> Let me also be clear that MAREX as a team was not singled out.  Only Miles.\n> So if MAREX had thoughts or proposals, they were and are welcome to share\n> them with the ARISS team.  And, if there are other members of MAREX, besides\n> Miles, that wanted to attend future meetings, I would expect that they\n> probably would be allowed to attend.  As long as they abide by the space\n> agency rules.  (But remember, I don't make those decisions)\n> \n> ARISS is an international working group consisting of National Amateur Radio\n> Societies, AMSAT organizations and the international space agencies from the\n> 5 ISS regions (Europe, Japan, Russia, Canada and the USA).  This working\n> group works hand-in-hand to develop and operate the amateur radio system on\n> ISS.  ARISS cannot do this without the space agencies and the crew on-board.\n> ARISS has and continues to do its best to be as transparent (open) as\n> possible.  International meetings are open to the public, as long as an\n> element of trust is not violated.  While the ARISS model is not perfect,\n> nothing is.  But I must say that the international participation and support\n> that comes from the ARISS team is some of the best I have ever seen\n> anywhere.  To say that ARISS is a failure is ludicrous.\n> \n> It is my personal opinion that the national radio society model (e.g. in the\n> US ARRL and AMSAT) is the right model for ARISS.  It has worked well and\n> provides an outstanding educational outreach program that gives students and\n> communities a very positive view of ham radio.  ARISS has not excluded\n> universities from participating.  For example, the Kursk University in\n> Russia is currently building an experiment for SuitSat-2.  The Santa Rosa\n> Junior College in the US is an ARISS telebridge station.  Students at the\n> College of New Jersey in the US participated in the testing of the SuitSat-2\n> SDX.  And the Wroclaw University of Technology in Poland built the L/S band\n> ARISS antennas that are installed on the Columbus module.  \n> \n> In summary, I think we should stop the whining.  And recognize that we need\n> to work hand-in-glove with the international space agencies if we want to\n> sustain a ham radio program on human spaceflight vehicles.  This may mean\n> that our pet project might not fly now (or ever).  That there will be times\n> when the crew does not get on the ham radio.  And that there will be give\n> and take within the international ARISS and international space agency team\n> on how hardware gets developed, who develops it and when it gets tested,\n> repaired or operated.\n> \n> With sincere interest in ARISS Program Success,\n> \n> Frank H. Bauer, KA3HDO\n> \n> \n> --------------------------------------------------\n> Message: 9\n> Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:20:38 -0700 (PDT)\n> From: MM <[email protected]>\n> Subject: [amsat-bb]  Lets Fix ISS, Replace ARISS\n> To: [email protected]\n> Message-ID: <[email protected]>\n> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8\n> \n> Marex \n> \n> Miles Mann WF1F\n> \n> Marex\n> \n> [email protected]\n> \n> \n> \n> August 25, 2009\n> \n> Dear ARISS supporters:\n> \n> I am writing to you because of the extremely poor track record that ARISS\n> has accumulated over the past 12 years regarding ISS hardware projects.\n> \n> The only way to correct the problem and fix the Amateur Radio educational\n> program is to completely reorganization the current ARISS hardware\n> structure.\n> \n> Under the new ARISS Closed Door policy, only selected members from AMSAT-NA\n> are allowed to participate.\n> \n> This new policy has turned the once open ARISS into a closed door Monopoly\n> controlled by the AMSAT Corporation.\n> \n> Based on the current actions of ARISS and their very poor performance with\n> in-flight hardware I would like to propose a complete reorganization of the\n> ARISS hardware process.\n> \n> Please review the enclosed information.\n> \n> I look forward to discussing the proposal with you are your earliest\n> opportunity.\n> \n> Sincerely\n> \n> G. Miles Mann\n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n> Memo from ARISS April 2009\n> \n> >From Gaston Bertels ARISS Chairman\n> \n> Hi Miles,\n> \n> By decision of the ARISS Board, participation to ARISS-i meetings is limited\n> to delegates from the Member Societies and observers nominated by these\n> societies.\n> \n> USA member societies are the ARRL and AMSAT NA.\n> \n> Only these societies can nominate participants to the ARISS-i meetings.\n> \n> Best regards\n> \n> 73\n> \n> Gaston Bertels, ON4WF\n> \n> ARISS Chairman\n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n> ARISS Reorganization Proposal\n> \n> By Miles Mann\n> \n> June 17, 2009\n> \n> Rev 1.01\n> \n>  \n> \n> What is ARISS?\n> \n> The goal of ARISS was to create an organization to select, control and\n> coordinate Amateur Radio projects designed for the International Space\n> Station (ISS).\n> \n> The ARISS program would then assist the 16 countries (Russia, Canada, Japan,\n> Brazil, USA, member nations of ESA, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany,\n> Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United\n> Kingdom), which are supporting the ISS to help choose the best educational\n> Amateur Radio projects for ISS.\n> \n> Each county would have delegate-voting privileges on ARISS and project\n> selection activities.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Summary:\n> \n> When Dave Larsen and Miles Mann (MAREX) helped form ARISS in August 1996,\n> one of our goals was to keep Space open for the public and not turn the ISS,\n> into a monopoly controlled by the AMSAT Corporation.\n> \n> We were partially successful. Unfortunately most of the ARISS voting\n> delegation came from AMSAT Corporation representatives from different\n> counties and a few other radio clubs. The newly formed ARISS agreed to allow\n> competing clubs to submit proposals. The MAREX team helped create ARISS,\n> however since the majority of people present were from the AMSAT\n> Corporation, MAREX was not allowed to have any voting privileges.\n> \n> Prior to 2009, ARISS would say that its meetings were open to the public and\n> other clubs were welcome to observer. In 2009 ARISS changed its open door\n> policy to a closed-door policy. The public is no longer allowed to attend\n> any of the meetings.\n> \n> Now, only selected members of the AMSAT Corporation are allowed to present\n> Amateur radio project proposals to ARISS for International Space Station.\n> \n> The AMSAT Corporation has full control over the voting and the hardware\n> selection process, thus creating a monopoly on the International Space\n> station for Amateur Radio projects.\n> \n>  \n> \n> ARISS Reorganization Proposal:\n> \n> There are two main reasons to reorganize the ARISS delegate voting\n> structure.\n> \n> 1) The AMSAT Corporation has a monopolistic control over ARISS and has\n> routinely blocked competitive Educational Amateur radio projects from being\n> submitted. The new closed-door policy and \"Selected AMSAT Members only\"\n> policy are part of the struggling AMSAT Corporations attempt to make the\n> International Space Station their private Space Station monopoly.\n> \n>  \n> \n> The actions of the AMSAT Corporation remind me of a fictional movie Quote\n> \"Star Wars, A New Hope\" Princess Leia, says to Governor Wilhuff Tarkin:\n> \n> \"The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through\n> your fingers\"\n> \n> 2) Over the past 12 years AMSAT Corporation has demonstrated its inability\n> to Select, Manage and Maintain Educational Amateur Radio hardware projects\n> for the International Space Station. The hardware track record of the AMSAT\n> Corporation control over ARISS projects on ISS has been very poor.\n> \n> In a separate document I will go over the hardware failures and the success\n> we have had in the ARISS project. You will clearly see a pattern of\n> extremely poor hardware management, including:\n> \n> Poor project selection (even when there is ample evidence to reject a\n> project, the AMSAT Corporation would approve a project) \n> Inability to maintain projects in flight. When problems were discovered\n> in-flight, the AMSAT Corporation would either deny the problem existed or\n> take 3 or 4 plus years to correct the problem. \n> Failure to provide NASA and ESA valid project status information. The AMSAT\n> Corporation would routinely deny there are problems with equipment, even\n> when ISS crewmembers in-flight reported the problems with the ARISS\n> projects. \n> AMSAT Corporations refusal to perform basic compatibly and usability testing\n> on projects has led to some embarrassing failures. The lack of testing has\n> been a reoccurring team throughout the ARISS projects. \n>  \n> \n> Reorganization Solution:\n> \n> Change the current voting delegate structure from an AMSAT Corporation\n> controlled formation to a new structure in which corporations do not control\n> the Hardware project selection and voting. The best way to manage ARISS\n> fairly is to select representatives from Universities from around the wold\n> to take over the delegate voting positions in ARISS hardware projects.\n> \n> What I proposed is that representative from 16+ ISS countries each select\n> two Universities to act as voting ARISS delegates. The new University\n> delegates would take the place of the existing ARISS delegates.\n> \n> The supporting corporations would still be welcome to participate in ARISS\n> projects, however the corporations would not have Voting rights.\n> \n> I also envision that most of the existing duties current performed by the\n> existing ARISS volunteers wold still continue with the same volunteers and\n> supporting agencies. The majority of changes will be focused on the\n> University providing an independent view on which projects make the best\n> sense.\n> \n> The ARISS team claims to provide educational opportunities for the world.\n> However during the 12 years of ARISS existence, no school or university has\n> ever built a project for ARISS. The new University Delegate plan would now\n> open the doors for Universities and other schools to participate in future\n> ARISS projects.\n> \n> Note: the Military funded PC-Sat-2 project by the US Naval Academy may have\n> had some student involvement.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Who should choose the University Delegates?\n> \n> The Space Agency representatives from each supporting ISS nation will be\n> asked to contact qualifying universities in their countries. Our goal is to\n> have two universities, with educational programs related to RF technologies\n> or Space exploration / satellite programs participate as delegates for\n> ARISS.\n> \n> The universities will be asked to participate in the ARISS program as a\n> voting delegate for 4-year terms, with the option to renew.\n> \n>  \n> \n> University Delegate responsibilities:\n> \n> The responsibilities of the university delegates will be similar to the\n> existing ARISS tasks, including:\n> \n> Hardware Guild Lines \n> Project Selection \n> Hardware meetings and conferences \n> Work with ESA, NASA and other agencies for the proper approvals and\n> additional guidelines. \n> In-flight Project Management \n> Existing ARISS supporting corporations:\n> \n> The existing corporations and clubs such as, ARRL, AMSAT, IARU, MAREX and\n> others will still be allowed to act as technical consultants and manage\n> different aspects of ARISS. However these corporations will not have voting\n> privileges in the hardware selection process.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Additional Benefits:\n> \n> TBD\n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n> This section contains a brief over view of example of common ARISS/AMSAT\n> Corporation failures.\n> \n> Poor project selection:\n> \n> When ample evidence is presented to ARISS to reject a hardware project, the\n> ARISS team will still peruse projects that have little benefit for the\n> Amateur Radio community based on the amount of effort required to fly a\n> project to ISS.\n> \n> Toss-Satellites:\n> \n> Toss-Satellites are usually small projects which are literally tossed out\n> the hatch of the Space Station. Several of these projects were successfully\n> launched from the Space Station Mir during its 15-year flight.\n> Toss-Satellites will only run for a few months. Due to the orbit of ISS/Mir\n> the orbit decay will cause these satellites to re-enter the earth\n> astmothsphere in 6-18 months.\n> \n> With ISS scheduled to be retired in 2015, it is very important for ARISS to\n> select projects that have a short development time and a great return on the\n> effort.\n> \n> Early on during the ISS project, Frank Bauer (ARISS Chairman and VP of AMSAT\n> Corporation) said he did not want to waste our valuable resources on\n> building Toss-Satellites. The MAREX team supported Frank Bauer?s position on\n> Toss-Satellites. A few years later Frank Bauer and ARISS approved the\n> Suit-Sat1 Toss-Satellite project.\n> \n> The Suit-Sat1 project incorporated a \"Expired\" spacesuit that was scheduled\n> to be disposed of in an incinerating Progress module. Instead, the spacesuit\n> was stuffed with an Amateur Radio beacon and released as a free flying\n> project.\n> \n> The original plan called for the \"off-the-shelf-hardware\" to be partially\n> pressurized inside the spacesuit. At the last minute the plans changed and\n> the equipment was exposed to the full vacuum of space. The transmitter for\n> the project failed and only a handful of stations were able to hear its\n> extremely weak signal.\n> \n>  \n> \n> The project was partially successful in that it generated worldwide\n> attention to ISS and Amateur Radio.\n> \n> The Suit-Sat1 version of the project used a combination of existing ARISS\n> hardware and \"off-the-shelf-hardware\". The project was completed in a\n> relatively short periods of time (less than 2 years) primary because it used\n> mostly existing hardware. The Suit-Sat1 project did consume resources that\n> could have been used for longer duration projects.\n> \n> In 2006, AMSAT Corporation director and ARISS Hardware Manager Lou McFadin\n> proposed building another project called Suit-Sat2. For this project, rather\n> than using affordable and easy to deliver \"off-the-Shelf\" hardware, McFadin\n> decided to custom build a new transceiver from scratch, using new technology\n> called \"Software Defined Radio\".\n> \n> The Suit-Sat2 project required over 4 years to develop and will not be ready\n> for flight until 2010. The Suit-Sat2 project will have a flight life\n> expectancy of 4-12 months.\n> \n> The effort placed into Suit-Sat2 has caused other long term projects to be\n> ignored.\n> \n> \n> Summary:\n> \n> The Suit-Sat1 transmitter failed immediately. \n> Design called for a pressurized suit, was changed to full vacuum, without\n> any testing. \n> AMAST Corporation is continuing to push for more short duration projects. \n> Longer duration projects are being ignored \n>  \n> \n> University Charter proposal changes:\n> \n> Under the new ARISS Reorganization Charter, I propose that we cancel all\n> Toss Satellite projects for the duration of the remaining ISS mission and\n> focus our attention on longer duration projects that reach more users.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Inability to Maintain projects in flight\n> \n> Kenwood TM-D700 Project:\n> \n> The Kenwood TM-D700 Transceiver, is a very good product. It is unique it\n> that is has a built in Data modem and mailbox. The downside to this\n> transceiver is that it gives the users too much control over the \"User\n> Editable Software\". It is possible to modify the software in a way that\n> makes the transceiver too difficult to operate, and that is exactly what\n> happened on this ARISS project.\n> \n> The MAREX team encouraged the AMSAT Corporation to keep the software setup\n> simple. The MAREX team had used a similar transceiver on Mir and quickly\n> discovered the Mir cosmonauts were easily confused by the Kenwood PM buttons\n> (a PM button is a Function button that have the ability to reboot the radio\n> into a completely new configuration).\n> \n> For the sake of brevity, the software complexity failed in many ways, I will\n> highlight one of the significant failures caused by the complex \"User\n> Editable Software\" TM-D700 software.\n> \n> The first thing we noticed in December 2003 when the Kenwood TM-700 was\n> activated from the International Space Station, was that the Packet Mailbox\n> was practically unusable. Only a very experienced operator, with thousands\n> of watts of power could access the TM-D700 mailbox. The Data delays caused\n> by the \"User Editable Software\" reduced the Mailbox data throughput from 300\n> bits per second to less than 50 bits per second (See Data Test note #1).\n> Even very experienced Satellite packet mailbox users had extreme difficulty\n> access the TM-D700 mailbox. By comparison, entry level users could easily\n> access the Mailbox that MAREX installed on Mir.\n> \n> ARISS was immediately notified of the problem, however ARISS did not put any\n> effort into analyzing or correcting the problem. The MAREX team researched\n> the problem independently of ARISS and discovered that stock terrestrial\n> versions of the TM-700 had a working Packet Mailbox. The MAREX team soon\n> discovered the problem was caused by the Criss-Cross software configured\n> that ARISS had used on the ISS version of the TM-D700. It took MAREX 4 years\n> of actively lobbying ARISS to fix the problem.\n> \n>  \n> \n> In the spring of 2008 (4+ years after the problem was first discovered) the\n> ARISS team finally had a new version of software that appeared to work. The\n> MAREX team tested a subset of this software that was manually configured on\n> board ISS. The TM-D700 Mailbox began to work for the first time 4 years,\n> with a normal data throughput. Unfortunately, due to a lack of coordination,\n> a Replacement TM-D700 was sent to ISS in the summer of 2008. The Replacement\n> TM-D700 was not loaded with the new software and we are back where we were\n> in December 2003, running the bad software.\n> \n> As of spring 2009 the working \"User Editable Software\" software has NOT been\n> loaded on to the ISS version of the TM-D700. The packet mailbox is still\n> broken on ISS TM-D700.\n> \n> Summary:\n> \n> The ARISS / AMSAT Corporation never performed any type of functionality\n> testing of the TM-D700 project before flight. \n> The ARISS team accepted the project from Bob Brurunga team at face value and\n> never attempted to verify if the project meet the original operational\n> goals. \n> The ARISS team took no action to research or fix the problem. After 5 years\n> of flight, the easily fixable mailbox feature is still broken on ISS. \n> University Charter proposal changes:\n> \n> Under the new ARISS Reorganization Charter, I propose that the university\n> form a monitoring team to periodically review the status of all Amateur\n> Radio projects on board ISS and other satellites sharing the same\n> frequencies. The Review team will provide the NASA and ESA representatives\n> the status of the On board projects. These reports will include the health\n> of the projects and what adjustments if any may be required for the safe\n> operation of the equipment.\n> \n> It is normal for projects to require simple periodic maintenance to ensure\n> proper operation. The Amateur Radio projects are often used for dedicated\n> School two-way radio links. It would be a simple procedure to have a basic\n> safety check worked into each school schedule to verify basic aspects of the\n> Amateur Radio project being used.\n> \n> If at any time an Amateur Radio project on ISS appears to be unstable or\n> possibly on the verge of an unsafe condition, the Review team will notify\n> NASA and ESA immediately and request the project be shutdown until it can be\n> reevaluated for safety.\n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n> Failure to provide NASA and ESA valid project status information\n> \n> The AMSAT Corporation would routinely deny there are problems with\n> equipment, even when ISS crewmembers in-flight reported the problems with\n> the ARISS projects.\n> \n> One example, Kenwood TM-D700 Fan.\n> \n> The TM-D700 transceiver has a built in Cooling Fan that operates when the\n> transmitter is active. None of us really paid much attention to the cooling\n> fan, nor did anyone bother to research the Duty cycle of the fan or its life\n> span. Instead we did focus on trying to keep the radio cool by not using the\n> High power mode and \"Hard Wiring\" the radio so that it would never\n> transmitter with more than 25 watts, (the terrestrial of the TM-D700 version\n> is capable of operating at 45 watts transmitter output).\n> \n> When the packet Radio options were being discussed, one of the features of\n> packet is called the Beacon Mode. With this option the packet station would\n> send out a short 1-2 second bust of data every few minutes.\n> \n> Example:\n> \n> RS0ISS>CQ [07/21/02 05:19:44]: <<UI>>:ARISS - INNTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION\n> \n> The purpose of the beacon is to signal stations on Earth that the ISS packet\n> station is in range of their location. Normally the window of access\n> opportunity to ISS is a small 10-minute window. By setting the beacon\n> correctly we could ensue that most stations would hear the beacon at least\n> once during their access window. If the beacon were set too frequently, it\n> would waist power and increase the heat load on the transmitter.\n> \n> The MAREX team requested a beacon set for 3-4 minutes at a power setting of\n> 5 watts. ARISS wanted a beacon set for 2 minutes at 10 watts transmitter\n> power. ARISS got their way. The beacon option may seem trivial, however it\n> did have a big effect on the status of the cooling fan.\n> \n> No one knew at that time, how the fan worked and what controlled the fans\n> On/Off cycle.\n> \n> The way it works, is when the transmitter is ON, the Fan is ON. When the\n> transmitter turns OFF, a timer is set and the fan keeps running for 2 more\n> minutes after the transmitter turns OFF.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Had we known this early, it would have influenced the beacon decision. Since\n> the beacon was set to Broadcast every two minutes. And the Cooling fan would\n> run for 2 minutes after the transmitter stopped, it meant that the fan was\n> running continuously 24 hours a day 7 days a week, whenever the TM-D700 was\n> turned on.\n> \n> The Packet software was designed to be on at all times (except during\n> Repeater mode). Even when the radio was in Voice mode, the packet system was\n> still running on a different pair of frequencies. And every two minutes the\n> packet system would send out another beacon, which kept the cooling fan\n> running all of the time.\n> \n> In August 2006 after 2.5 years of TM-D700 operations in flight, Cosmonaut\n> Commander Pavel Vinogradov reported the TM-D700 fan did not seem to be\n> working, \"I blow on it, the fan moves and then stops\". The day before the\n> Radio had over heated and locked up due to a problem with the Laptop\n> transmitter Vox-Box control cable (I will cover Vox-Box control cable in a\n> separate section).\n> \n> I was in the Tele-conference with ARISS when our Energia representative\n> repeated the conversation he had with Commander Pavel Vinogradov. ARISS\n> immediately went into denial mode and refused to believe the comments made\n> by Commander Pavel Vinogradov. The MAREX team requested on several occasions\n> that ARISS should perform a routine check out of the TM-700 on during one of\n> the weekly School schedule link days. It would be easy to add a few new\n> \"check list\" items to the school schedule checklist to examine the operation\n> of the fan to verify its status. ARISS flat-out refused to perform any\n> examination of the fan on the TM-D700.\n> \n> Frank Bauer said \"I do not want to bring any attention to NASA that we may\n> be having a problem with fan\".\n> \n> In August 2007 I talked to ISS crewmember Clayton Anderson on board ISS. I\n> asked Clayton the question that ARISS had been refusing to ask, \"Is the fan\n> on the TM-D700 working\". Clayton responded, \"It?s hard to tell, I do not\n> think the fan is working\".\n> \n> The statements made by Clayton Anderson and Commander Pavel Vinogradov while\n> using the TM-D700 on board ISS do not confirm the fan is actually broken,\n> however there is substantial information present for ARISS to at least start\n> an investigation. ARISS still refused to investigate the problem.\n> \n> Fortunately the Russian engineering team frequently ignores ARISS and\n> decided that there was sufficient information and decided to send a\n> replacement TM-D700 and Vox-Box to ISS in 2008.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Summary:\n> \n> ARISS / AMSAT Corporation knew there was a possibility the critical cooling\n> fan on the TM-D700 may have failed and took no action. \n> ARISS / AMSAT Corporation went out of their way to deny there was any\n> problem with the suspected cooling fan and continued to allow the\n> transceiver to operate in unattended modes. \n> ARISS / AMSAT Corporation refused to investigate the problem which had been\n> reported by 2 ISS crewmembers in-flight. \n> University Charter proposal changes:\n> \n> Under the new ARISS Reorganization Charter, I propose that the university\n> assign an independent team to perform a complete safety and functionality\n> check on every project approved by ARISS for ISS.\n> \n> The safety check will included the following:\n> \n> Complete review of all technical documentation. \n> Hardware compatibility testing. Including full End-to-End testing at least a\n> year before flight. \n> RFI emissions testing \n> Human Interface testing (Is the project too complex for the ISS crew to\n> operate?) \n> Project delivery schedule (If the project can not be completed in 2-years or\n> less, it should be canceled) \n> Hardware Donation to ARISS:\n> \n> The Kenwood Company donated (15) Kenwood TM-D700 transceiver to ARISS\n> (around the year 2000) for the ISS projects. Very early on in the project\n> TM- D700, MAREX asked Frank Bauer if we could to borrow one of the TM-D700\n> to evaluate the performance of the TM-D700 Software, Packet Mail system and\n> over all functionality. Frank agreed and promised to let MAREX borrow one of\n> the (15) TM-D700?s. MAREX made the request several time and was always give\n> the same response, \"Yes we will send you one when they are available\".\n> \n> ARISS never came through with their promise and as a result the TM-D700\n> never received the planned crosscheck evaluation of the project as had been\n> planned. This critical missing Quality Assurance check allowed many\n> correctable problems to slip through and resulted in an over all very poor\n> performing and embarrassing project for ARISS and ISS.\n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n>  \n> \n> Failure to test projects:\n> \n> AMSAT Corporations refusal to perform basic compatibly and usability testing\n> on projects has led to some embarrassing failures. The lack of testing has\n> been a reoccurring team throughout the ARISS projects.\n> \n> There are many example of the \"Failure to test\", however I will only\n> highlight one of the best document cases.\n> \n> Slow Scan TV project (SpaceCam1 SSTV):\n> \n> The SSTV project consisted for 5 parts:\n> \n> SSTV Software, provided by MAREX and Silicon-Pixels \n> MAREX Delivered the Beta software in 1999.\n> \n> Laptop Computer \n> ARISS took the responsibility of acquiring an approved Laptop to be used for\n> Amateur Radio project including Packet and Slow Scan TV. ARISS began the\n> acquisition in 1999 and was finally able to secure a Laptop in 2008. The\n> Laptop portion of the project only required 9 years to complete.\n> Occasionally the ISS crew would borrow the \"Tourist\" Laptops from other\n> projects that would be used intermittently with Amateur Radio projects.\n> \n> Erickson Transceiver \n> The original SAREX team had some leftover hardware from previous Shuttle\n> Missions. This hardware was flight qualified for ISS and delivered to ISS in\n> 2000.\n> \n> Vox-Box adapter \n> An interface needed to be built to allow a Laptop computer to connect to the\n> Erickson transceiver. AMSAT Corporation directory Lou McFadin (ARISS\n> Hardware Manager) volunteered to build the interface cable. This cable would\n> be used for SSTV and other Amateur radio projects. The Vox-Box cable design\n> began in 1999.\n> \n> Antenna System (Team effort from multiple agencies) \n> A total of 5 cable feed-throughs, with antennas were made available to\n> Amateur Radio project in the Russian modules.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Lack of End-to-End Testing:\n> \n> In the summer of 2000, AMSAT had sufficient hardware and software to start\n> performing End-to-end testing of the SpaceCam1 project. The ARISS/AMSAT\n> hardware team had the Antennas, Flight-Laptop (IBM-760XD), SpaceCam1\n> software, VOX-Box hardware and the Erickson Transceivers.\n> \n> The AMSAT hardware team never performed any End-to-end testing until August\n> 2003. At a meeting with ARISS in 2003, I was finally given access to the\n> Erickson hardware for the first time. To my utter amazement, no one on the\n> AMSAT hardware team had ever connected all of this equipment together prior\n> to this meeting. The ARISS hardware team had only tested individual parts\n> separately.\n> \n> I discovered numerous problems that should have been discovered years\n> earlier. The SpaceCam1 project was scheduled to fly to ISS in 2004 and we\n> had to perform qualifications testing in Moscow in November 2003.\n> \n> #1 Erickson Transceiver could not receive SSTV images.\n> \n> The first big problem was that the Erickson transceiver was not able to\n> receive SSTV images.\n> \n> The Erickson Transceivers had an audio port connection, which would be\n> connected to the Laptop through the Vox-Box adapter. The Audio voltage level\n> coming out of the Erickson connection was approximately 10 volts p-p. The\n> Laptop microphone input port requires a voltage level of 1-2 volt p-p.\n> \n> Since the Erickson was running a voltage much higher than the requirements\n> of the Laptop, the images displayed on the laptop were completely distorted\n> and unusable.\n> \n> The fix for this problem was never implemented by ARISS and thus the\n> Erickson Transceiver could not be used for SSTV or any other type of Laptop\n> project.\n> \n>  \n> \n> #2 Vox-Box oscillations\n> \n> The Vox-Box is an adapter cable that takes the audio from the Laptop and\n> sends it to the Radio. The Vox-Box is also responsible to telling the Radio,\n> when to \"Transmit\". When the Vox-Box detects audio from the Laptop, it will\n> then tell the radio to \"Transmit\". When the audio stops, the Vox-Box will\n> tell the radio to switch back into receiving mode.\n> \n> During the Houston testing in August 2003, we noticed the Vox-Box adapter\n> would intermittently go into an uncontrolled Oscillation. The Oscillation\n> would then scramble any images being sent to the radio.\n> \n> Eventually a specific hardware configuration was found that seem to reduce\n> the Oscillations. The Kenwood TM-D700 and the IBM-760XD seemed to be\n> compatible. The AMSAT team that built the Vox-Box did not perform any\n> additional circuit modifications to understand or eliminate the Oscillation\n> problem.\n> \n> The two Vox-Box cables used on board ISS are both having problems\n> controlling the transmitter. When the Laptop signals the Vox-Box to start\n> transmit, the transmitter is activated correctly. When the Laptop signals\n> the Vox-Box to Stop transmitter, the Transmitter gets stuck ON.\n> \n> #3 Wiener Laptop\n> \n> The Wiener Laptop (166 MHz CPU, Windows 2000) was a backup Laptop provided\n> by the Russian team. This was the first time anyone at ARISS had seen this\n> Laptop. The Russians said, there was a spare Wiener Laptop on ISS and we\n> were welcome to use this computer for our Amateur Radio projects.\n> \n> The main problem with this computer was also associated with the Audio\n> output voltage levels. This Laptop was designed to run either low voltage\n> headsets (1-2 volts p-p) or higher voltage external speakers (15-20 volts\n> p-p). The Windows 2000 operating Systems was all in Russian and we had very\n> limited access to a Russian translator to assist with the settings. As a\n> result we were not able to fully document the changes required to keep the\n> Laptop running in the low voltage-operating mode. All images transmitted\n> from the Wiener Laptop while in the default Speaker setting came out\n> scrambled.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Moscow KIS testing November 2003\n> \n> During the months before the trip to Russia, the ARISS and MAREX team linked\n> up frequently by conference call. One of the goals requested by MAREX was\n> that we have a pre-test staging day set aside so that we could retest all of\n> the hardware, before going to the KIS testing facility. The pre-test staging\n> was very important because of the poor results we had during the August 2003\n> Houston testing session. Frank Bauer and the ARISS team agreed and plans\n> were made to set aside a day to stage all of the hardware before taking the\n> hardware to the KIS facility.\n> \n> Shortly after we arrived in Moscow, Frank Bauer told me that we would not\n> have a Staging test day and that we wold not have access to the hardware\n> until the morning of the KIS flight certification testing. A disaster was\n> looming.\n> \n> On the testing day, a good portion of the morning was taken up by going\n> through the required security processes. When we finally arrived in our\n> testing office with all of our hardware, we only had 1 hour to unpack and\n> get ready for the testing, inside the mockup module of the ISS service\n> module.\n> \n> All of the problems we had in Houston came back and then some. The first\n> stumbling block was that we did not have our translator with us. During the\n> previous 2 days of meetings, we had full access to a qualified translator.\n> However, in the KIS facility we did not have a translator, which would have\n> really been useful.\n> \n> The Wiener Laptop was installed in the Service module first. Unfortunately\n> the settings I made to the Wiener Laptop in August 2003 had been changed and\n> the Laptop was now sending speaker audio out at 20 volts p-p. The high\n> voltages caused all SSTV images sent from the service module to become\n> completely scrambled.\n> \n> The IBM 760XD and TM-D700 combination in the Office overlooking the Service\n> module was also having problems sending images to the Service Module.\n> \n> Our Back up Kenwood HT with a SSTV microphone (VCH1-Communicator) was out of\n> service because the battery had not been charged. Fortunately we had the 220\n> Volt power cube for the HT, unfortunately the plug pins were too short to\n> reach inside the Russian AC power outlet or Power strips.\n> \n> I went to a group of Russian engineers wearing white jackets and handed them\n> the Power Cube and a Power Strip and said in English, \"Fix\". The engineers\n> took the power cube and power strip and walked a way. A few minutes later\n> they came back. They had removed the protective cover to the power strip and\n> taped the Power Cube on to the exposed 220-Volt brass contact bars. The\n> engineer said in English \"No Touch\". Wow that was fast and simple Russian\n> engineering. I now had 1 working SSTV system. Unfortunately I needed two\n> working SSTV systems.\n> \n> I began working on the IBM-760XD in the lab and discovered the Audio levels\n> were set incorrectly, which was easy to correct. After a few minutes I was\n> able to send and receive SSTV images to the Backup VCH1-Commander system in\n> the same lab. I was also able to send Frank Bauer SSTVimages in the Service\n> module. Frank was still not able to Send images because of the audio level\n> problems with the Wiener Laptop.\n> \n> Frank ordered me into the Service Module to fix the Wiener computer.\n> Unfortunately, without a Russian translator, I could not easily navigate the\n> Russian version of Windows 2000 to find the correct audio settings. At one\n> point, a group of Cosmonauts squeezed into the Service model to see the new\n> SSTV project. Everyone posed for pictures. One of the cosmonauts looked at\n> the scrambled SSTV images on the screen and said in English, \"Not working?\"\n> I responded in poor Russian \"Little Problem\", I was very embarrassed.\n> \n> Then we got lucky, the battery on the Wiener computer died. We were not\n> allowed to run the laptops on AC power, they had to run on batteries for\n> their emission portion of the tests. The dead batter allowed us the blame\n> the battery for the problems and gave us the opportunity to swap over to the\n> IBM-760XD and Kenwood TM-D700 configuration. Within a few minutes the\n> working IBM-760XD was moved from the lab, into the Service Module. Once\n> setup Frank and I were able to Send and receive good quality SSTV images to\n> and from the Service Module and we were able to pass the emissions testing.\n> \n> Changes to the Vox-Box power source:\n> \n> A few weeks after the Moscow certification test, the power source for the\n> Vox-Box was changed from a 9-Volt battery to be able to receive power\n> directly from inside the Kenwood TM-D700 transceiver. This modification was\n> only performed on the TM-D700 in Russia, one of which was flown to ISS in\n> the fall of 2003. None of the other TM-700 in the USA based ARISS Hardware\n> team made the same changes or confirmed their functionality.\n> \n> When the Vox-Box was used in-flight for SSTV in August 2006, the Vox-Box\n> would turn ON the transmitter, however the Vox-Box circuit would get stuck\n> and would not turn the transmitter OFF.\n> \n> A new Vox-Box and TM-D700 were flown to ISS in the summer of 2008. When the\n> SSTV was activated again, the same problem occurred, the transmitter would\n> get stuck in the ON position. Flight participant Richard Garriott, tried two\n> different SSTV applications and both had the same problem. ARISS wants to\n> blame the SpaceCam1 SSTV software, however, since the problem was seen with\n> two completely different SSTV applications, we can assume that is its not a\n> software issue.\n> \n> The cause of the stuck transmitter is most likely and RF interference on the\n> DC power source feeding from the TM-D700 transmitter into the Vox-Box. I\n> have shown a few engineers the schematic for the ARISS Vox-Box and they all\n> ask the same questions, \"Where is the RF bypass filtering, there is none\".\n> Without proper RF bypass circuits, it would be easy for the Vox-Box switch\n> to get stuck on the ON condition.\n> \n>  \n> \n> Summary:\n> \n> Lack of End-to-end testing left us poorly prepared with limited hardware\n> options. \n> Canceling of the pre-test Staging resulted in an embarrassing and stressful\n> testing session. \n> The Vox-Box Oscillation problem was observed by oscilloscope in Moscow. \n> Changes to Vox-Box power source were not fully tested and may be the cause\n> of the two In-flight failures. \n>  \n> \n> University Charter proposal changes:\n> \n> Under the new ARISS Reorganization Charter, I propose that the university\n> assign an independent team to perform a complete safety and functionality\n> check on every project approved by ARISS for ISS.\n> \n> The safety check will included the following:\n> \n> Complete review of all technical documentation. \n> Hardware compatibility testing. Including full End-to-End testing at least a\n> year before flight. \n> RFI emissions testing \n> Human Interface testing (Is the project too complex for the ISS crew to\n> operate?) \n> Project delivery schedule (If the project can not be completed in 2-years or\n> less, it should be canceled) \n> Last minute changes will need to be verified before ARISS will signoff on a\n> problem. \n>  \n> \n> \n> \n> \n>       \n> \n> \n> \n> ------------------------------\n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author.\n> Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n> \n> \n> End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 401\n> ****************************************\n> \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_________________________________________________________________\nWith Windows Live, you can organize, edit, and share your photos.\nhttp://www.windowslive.com/Desktop/PhotoGallery",
    "attachments": []
}