Andrew: I didn't send out the flamer email, until you accused me of being "fussy". That tends to communicate to folks that you are closed any further dialog. Up to that point, I wasn't being rude.
- Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com To: k7zt@suddenlink.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org; "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
If anyone wants to know why the majority of BOD members avoid the -bb like the plague, replies like Joe's are why.
Dialog is always open, but sometimes facts get in the way. Do you know that AMSAT-NA has spent more money on P3E than Eagle so far? The launch is the prime problem we have to solve. AMSAT leadership is working very hard to find a way to get to a high orbit. As I type this we have people talking to various launch providers at the SmallSat conference about HEO, MEO, and GEO launch opportunities. AMSAT leadership also spent this entire weekend sequestered working on alternative strategies to accomplish our goals, and to fix the problems we know we have. I also recently travelled to the Alaska Hamfest (not on AMSAT's dime) to present our status to the attendees, and to take their concerns and recommendations into account. If you have some specific plan, idea, or want to volunteer to help make your desires come true, then by all means let someone know directly. Member opinions are important, and are taken seriously, and we need all the help we can get.
More information on these course corrections will be forthcoming soon. Sooner if people quit throwing stones.
73, Drew KO4MA
PS. Joe, I noticed your membership was last renewed in 2004. Perhaps you might want to call Martha at 1800 322 6728 and renew if you want your opinions for AMSAT's direction to be taken to heart. Successful change comes from within, and the last time I got mad at AMSAT I signed up as a Life Member, and then ran for the BOD the following year.
----- Original Message ----- From: k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org; "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:31 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
NOTICE to ALL HEO proponents:
YOU HAVE BEEN OVERRULED, dialog is finished, so stop it.
---- Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com wrote:
At this point AMSAT is going to take the first thing that gets us above LEO that we can afford. If that is HEO, so be it. If it is GEO, it's GEO. Being divided and fussy over the details only detracts from the effort. We are basically beggars in the launch market, and we all know the saying about beggars and choosers. The mission is to provide long access time satellite comms on a daily, then 24/7 basis. How that happens is yet to be determined...
Sorry to be so brief but I have a lot going on with my day job at the moment. There will be more information forthcoming.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 8:44 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
John: That certainly is one approach, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that, it's just a change in the stated goals of Eagle. The leadership needs to get in front of this and announce this is a significant shift in organizational strategy if indeed that is the plan.
At they same time for the sake of honesty they should probably tell folks that this will end AMSAT-NA sponsorship of an HEO (Molmiya Orbit) anytime soon or even in their lifetime ;-/
- Joe
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:05 AM Subject: Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
It appears that leadership is allowing realities of a rare, expensive launch opportunity drive the mission rather than the mission driving the launch method, it's a bit like the tail wagging the dog don't you think?
AO-40 was the case of a rare launch opportunity driving the mission. The AMSAT BoD has stated that the purpose of creating a relelationship with Intelsat would be to provide multiple launch opportunities. It seems to me that finding an affordable launch method should be the first step rather than the last step.
73,
John KD6OZH
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. 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