I renew my request for AMSAT-NA Engineering and Operations to publish the OIC.
If they still object, I'm sure the following questions would could be quickly answered for the benefit of the membership, with no chance of violating ITAR or NDAs with launch integrators or providers:
Was bombarding the transponder with high power CW a step taken during initial contact trials? -if YES, what was the result? What was the Tx power and antenna gain used? How many times was it tried successfully/unsuccessfully? What stations were used in these attempts (general location)? -if NO, why not? During the attempts to get Fox-1Cliff to respond, we were told that "high power stations" were used to try and get a response - why would that not have been tried for Fox-1E?
I would just like to point out, amid all the secrecy surrounding the OIC and commissioning of Fox-1E, it was a simple everyday sat op with a hamshack in his backyard in a little shed that was the first to publish a technical update on the satellite. Imagine what we could do if AMSAT-NA utilized the entire brain power of it's membership.....
I will not speak for the rest of the members, only for myself, when I say that the reason I request documentation related to the commissioning of this satellite is to improve the process for this and future satellites.
And here's my first suggestion for Golf's OIC: Every few major technical operations should have a secondary deliverable of updating the membership with a one or two line status report. Example: "Steps 12 though 26 completed - Beacon period observed to be 2:10 rather than expected 2:00. Telemetry frame count is consistent with Tx period. Telemetry shows no anomalies other than side Y over-temperature - however this is likely due to failed thermocouple/circuit as reported temperature is 800K."
--Roy K3RLD