[amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities

12 Aug 2008

      Edward:
For the most part, I agree with your analysis, AMSAT-NA just needs to get
that out to the membership for a up/down vote.
It would seem that based on the latest (un-scientific) pole most folks still 
desire an HEO over GEO.
http://app.sgizmo.com/reports/18952/48864/4G6MMZP08F5CHHRFD5IFKRUG0SX47H/
"Eagle -wonderful when we can swing it"   I really don't believe that this 
will
ever happen  if we shift the direction of Eagle to GEO.
I do like the MEO alternative though.
BTW; I'm working on a second retirement.
73's DE Joe K7ZT
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Edward Cole" kl7uw@acsalaska.net
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 4:01 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA
Priorities
...
And if I may make an even simpler appeal:  I will take any non-FM
satellite HEO, MEO, or GEO in a time frame that falls within our
lifetime.  Did I overstate that?
We know that HEO's take lots of time in design, fabrication,
space-qualification and financing.  Many hams are getting up there in
years and may not be able to wait another 10-15 years!
HEO's are great fun and challenge, but a GEO would suffice vs only
having FM Leos for the next decade.
If the GEO is more feasible/practical/realistic, bring it on!
If we can sell one with Emcomm capabilities added to our favorite
modes, why not?  If we wait on this too long, it will be done by the
commercial sats so they will not need the ham version.  Only hams
like stuff that is "hard to use" - real world is interested in
utility (can you hear me now)
Bottom Line:  "Time waits for nobody"
P3E -great
Eagle -wonderful when we can swing it
P4 on Intelsat - don' t miss this ride
I started accumulating "stuff" in 1996 to get on AO-10/13.  1998 got
my Drake converters for AO-40 and the FT-847.  2000-2008 accumulating
my stuff for mw's  - is that twelve years?  I will retire in 2011.  I
hope there is a satellite up there soon!
At 06:33 PM 8/11/2008, John B. Stephensen wrote:
...
Hi Joe,
The Eagle ride-share requires no engine from AMSAT as it is supplied by
and
operated by Intelsat. They have an order of magnitude more experience than
any AMSAT organization and a better track record. It also eliminates more
than half of the work in building the satellite. That has to reduce risk.
AMSAT-NA members are working on P3E and AMSAT-NA has supplied money for
the
project so I don't see a lack of support.
Since a HEO and GEO are at similar altitudes, I don't forsee a big
difference in signal strength. The only disadvantage of a GEO for hams is
that it doesn't move so I can't work India from here as I could on AO-13.
However, Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders so there is
an
advantage in raising funds. Making satellites hard to use certainly
doesn't
help in rasing money. The aspect of AO-40 that QST pushed during
fund-rasing
was that it would be easier to use than AO-13.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net
To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 22:06 UTC
Subject: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
...
John:
So regarding risk, how many HEO Satellites has AMSAT-NA launched that
required firing a rocket motor to achieve a Molniya Orbit?
It seems that AMSAT-DL has the lead on that front, additionally, the
gentleman that did the PE3 Presentation at the AMSAT-UK Symposium
indicated
that PE3 uses the same platform as AO10 and AO13, and has been tested.
At
least we have a more predictable risk.  I took a look at the Satellite
history and it appears that the HEO Flights were all joint ventures
with
AMSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL.  I recall a great deal of publicity in QST
surrounding the AO40 launch including fund raising activities. Why
don't
we
observe the same level of commitment that we had for those projects
from
AMSAT-NA Leadership?.
AO40 provided extraordinary opportunities for the satellite
experimenter,
it
wasn't that difficult and was great deal of fun. Additionally, it did
push
the operator to work on improving their station for weak signal work.
Remember all of the great AO40 how to web sites that popped up?
Lots of home brew projects! Lots of pictures of stations!
How many of those are out there for AO51?
I believe for those who endeavored to develop hardware and software
definitely
furthered the science.   I constructed many different antennas and
feeds
learned a
great deal all in my back yard with minimal investment using "arm
strong"
, home-brew az-el  set up.
Regarding GEO vs. HEO, I would argue that in terms of the overall
experience, there are significant differences that boil down to the
following::

GEO isn't a moving target
HEO has a weaker signal
With GEO, the antenna is locked down to a fixed Az-EL. No Doppler,

no
need to synchronize the orbit or to integrate software applications.
I would challenge you to tell me how GEO wouldn't be an appliance.
What's
left
once you mount your Downconverter, feed, LNA, etc, bring it to your
xcvr,
short of tuning across the transponder to find a clear frequency to
call
CQ,
or to locate a contact what's left to do?  I agree that GEO would be
great
for emergencies, nets, and long rag chews on what  will be extremely
crowded xponder space.
Additionally, I think that you would agree that the skill level and
overall experience is diminished. But
that's just me.
All I'm saying is allow the membership vote on how AMSAT-NA resources
should
be used, I don't mean to suggest we vote on the type of RX to use, but
on
the overall project.
It is my belief that most members wouldn't want resources diverted to a
GEO Project before an HEO Project is fully deployed.
If we loose sight of the main goal, this process could go on for years.
To be successful, AMSAT-NA needs a narrow focus as it has very little
in
the way of resources, both human and financial.
I would be satisfied if AMSAT-NA would simply articulate a clear set of
goals and priorities, hell even use the survey that was accomplished in
04.
Communicate these goals to the members at large and finally stand by
them.
If at the end of the day those goals are not what the members want,
then
they can vote with their wallets.
Regards,

Joe K7ZT

----- Original Message -----
From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net
To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; "Luc Leblanc"
lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com
Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
...
Since AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA both require funding from outside the
amateur
radio community, are going after different sources of funding, and
neither
can predict when they will get that funding, having two efforts would
seem
to double the opportunity for a non-LEO satellite.
I don't think that the risk decreases with P3E. 50% of P3 satellites
were
lost due to failures of engines in the launch vehicle or in the
satellite.
I don't see how having a linear transponder in a geostationary orbit
versus a Molniya orbit makes it an appliance satellite. The antennas
and
transceivers on ground are the same in either case.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net
To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; "Luc Leblanc"
lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com
Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 16:32 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
...
John:
Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on
charity,
and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you
haven't
heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs.  It seems that the DL
folks
haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as
it
is
to
launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they
gave
us a tangible figure we can work with.  This amount may be a reach
for
AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would
take
to
make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding
toward
that effort?    Following the PE3 launch, if  any surplus remains,
the
surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle).  If
no
surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and
would
have the lowest risk.  Rather than spending time and resources on a
new,
untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't
an
opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd.  Launching an appliance
to
serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users
won't
do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO.  I don't care if it's free,
like
AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's
nice"
and be done with it.  Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon
GEO
as
a
viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of
the
Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow
for
experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions
that
our
resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No
rotator
required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to
get
on
the air.  I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted
neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net
To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca;
eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com
Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
...
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at
least
2
years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
>
> Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter
> Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
>
> ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
>
> FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED
> BEFORE
> AND
> WILL NOT WORK NOW.
>
> I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge
> seems
> to
> be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?

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

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