On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Clint Bradford [email protected] wrote:
On Oct 7, 2008, at 12:00 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Your comment that the League is not interested in satellite operations is, in my opinion, also proper.
Sorry if I am repeating myself, but WE are responsible for educating the ARRL and the media when it comes to amateur satellites.
We should NOT expect ANY non-AMSAT entity to know anything about this aspect of the hobby.
It is up to us who are involved in our "specialties" to convey - intelligently and using proper, approved methods - that information to appropriate sources.
Most of our news comes from "media alerts" nowadays. Knowing HOW to contact and WHOM to contact with media alerts is OUR responsibility.
Clint Bradford, K6LCS / KAF3359 909-241-7666
To shore up Clint's point with some evidence, note the ARRL's podcast and email 'Letter'. These routinely announce interesting events and changes in status pertaining to satellites. DO-64 was nicely highlighted, both on launch with the other cubesats and upon its mode change; and the re-purposing of AO-16 made good text.
Other podcasts such as TWIAR and Newsline have regular features on AMSAT affairs. Frankly, I think we do a good job of getting our word out. The times I've found my callsign spread across the web have been instances where the AMSAT news service has caught a post of mine and relayed it.
Where we might fail, and where people might incorrectly be faulting ARRL, is in the quantity of satellite-related articles published in QST. But QST depends on submissions, so unless we have evidence of them junking AMSAT articles en masse, all we can do is step up our submissions if we wish to alter this. Every editor I know is happy to have lots of new stuff.
73, Bruce VE9QRP
Sent via [email protected]. 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