Bill,
Your premise that there is no L-band is incorrect and based on fragments of comments, not the whole story. The Eagle satellite is still undergoing design review but I suspect you will fine L-band to be active in the final design. If you want to be part of the discussions, join the Eagle project team and contribute your time and energy to the satellite design as many others are doing. That, and not amsat-bb is where the serious technical discussions are taking place.
Rick W2GPS AMSAT LM2232
-----Original Message----- From: Bill Ress [mailto:bill@hsmicrowave.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 1:15 PM To: Rick Hambly (W2GPS); sco@sco-inc.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: Why do the amsats get more and more complex?
Hi Rick,
I've been critical of the "no L-Band" decision and your recent comments don't lessen that critique.
Your last posting said "Second, there is fear that over the lifetime of Eagle that L-band could become unavailable, particularly in Europe, if the Galileo system is deployed. Galileo would be a primary service and Ham transmissions would likely interfere with low cost commercial receivers."
What concrete evidence is available that substantiates your claim? Perhaps "real" data could convince me and others that the decision is based on fact and not a paranoia about what could happen. Everything I've heard to date from AMSAT is anecdotal, opinionated and based on what you just said - FEAR.
To the contrary, the "fact" is that Galileo's own web site states (which I have referenced here already) the reality of having to work in an interference environment (i.e. ground ATC radar's and harmonics from TV transmitters just to name of few) and has already started a two year study program to evaluate appropriate design considerations.
I have been unable to find ANY reference to any governmental agency making plans to eliminate the L-Band Amateur allocation in view of Galileo. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
Another "fact" is that the P3E team, rather than "abandoning" the allocation, has an "engineering" approach to mitigate the potential for interference by selecting a L-Band frequency which puts the signal in a Galileo signal null (already pointed out by others here).
This debate could be put to rest if you could present us with "facts" and not the "lets get out of the kitchen 'cause we may not be able to stand the heat" argument I've seen so far.
Ready to be convinced...
Bill - N6GHz AMSAT #21049
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org]On Behalf Of Rick Hambly (W2GPS) Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 5:55 AM To: sco@sco-inc.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Why do the amsats get more and more complex?
Les,
Don't forget, these issues are all under review as we speak.
The answer is in two parts. First, an L-band ground antenna would be too large to disguise as a TVRO dish. Second, there is fear that over the lifetime of Eagle that L-band could become unavailable, particularly in Europe, if the Galileo system is deployed. Galileo would be a primary service and Ham transmissions would likely interfere with low cost commercial receivers.
I don't wish to debate these points. I'm just telling you the reasoning that went into not choosing L-band. I assure you that every possibility was considered. Lists were created and discussed on each alternative.
Rick W2GPS AMSAT LM2232
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb