10 Sep
2006
10 Sep
'06
3:42 p.m.
Les:
Less massive and less expensive than AO-40. P3E is less massive than Eagle.
Bob N4HY
sco@sco-inc.com wrote:
Please correct me if I am wrong. But AO-40 did not fail because of poor engineering workmanship. It failed because of HUMAN ERROR in the preparation of the satellite for launch. Are you saying that P3E will cost more to build and to launch than Eagle?
Les W4SCO
At 03:47 AM 9/10/2006, you wrote:
Since we want to do only one engine burn, Eagle will be at a lower elevation and WiFi interference will be greater than for P3E -- especially for users in Alaska. Consequently, Eagle is also lighter and less expensive and less likely to explode.
73,
John KD6OZH
--
AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman
"You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat.
You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los
Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly
the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there.
The only difference is that there is no cat." - Einstein