Bacon's law here means everyone is no more than six people away from someone who personally knows Kevin Bacon. He is saying we all know a lot of people, enough people that we might be able to do impressive things with them.
Also, surely he doesn't mean AMSAT should drop everything for this idea. I think you're reading into Ev's message too much.
73, John Brier KG4AKV
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:26 AM John Kludt via AMSAT-BB amsat-bb@amsat.org wrote:
Ev,
The orbital debris regulations are a huge barrier. See Jerry's post on this reflector. It is not the case that AMSAT is not looking very hard at the issue. Everything has an opportunity cost associated with it. AMSAT has limited resources both in terms of people and dollars. Are you suggesting AMSAT drop everything they are working on and pursue your pet option?
Bacon's Law was passed by the Virginia Legislature June 23, 1676, after Nathaniel Bacon *invaded* Jamestown and *forced* the legislature to grant him a charter to go fight Indians. *That* Bacon's Law? So you are suggesting we *invade* AMSAT HQ and *force* the Board of Director's to authorize this project?
Maybe you are referring to a different Bacon's Law. Sounds kind of over the top to me.
Respectfully,
John
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:12 AM Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB amsat-bb@amsat.org wrote:
Somewhere in AMSAT there is someone who has "Project Managed" long enough (or has access to process-flow diagrams) and can publish a generic work breakdown of both the steps and resources needed to put a highly elliptical (presumably less expensive) or Geostationary (presumably more expensive) bird into orbit and manage it.
If that person (or people) could publish that along with a "checkmark" next to the items that are "already in place", "in active progress", and "needs sponsor/enthusiast" then we are more likely to fill-in the gaps.
Remember the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" game (a.k.a. "Bacon's Law")? Let's play it out here! Ev, W2EV
On Tuesday, July 30, 2019, 6:15:19 PM EDT, Jerry Buxton via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@amsat.org> wrote:
On 7/28/2019 18:46, Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB wrote:
What are the top barriers to revisiting highly elliptical and AO-40 type
goals? Actually, from my perspective right now the top barrier is orbital debris regulations. GOLF-1 isn't going where I wanted to go because the enforcement has become stringent and a hot topic worldwide. We can't license or launch anything that doesn't de-orbit within 25 years and a HEO orbit (GTO actually, keeping it simple for this point) is likely to last "too long" by itself. There are options available for deorbit BUT the kicker right now is that they have to be proven and approved by the FCC. In that we know of no such device(s) available at this time, keeping within the current expectations of 3U. A change in size (6U) might yield some possibilities but I know of none there either, right now. We have been discussing and working with both NASA and FCC for possibilities. If something is available whether drag or propulsion, then we get into the cost issue not to mention the price of a launch to a GTO which is currently around $900k MSRP. If we had a million bucks and approved device(s) were available right now that fit within a $1 million budget then we would be pursuing that.
Another option is to find a launch with a low enough perigee to naturally decay in 25 years, but whether earning an ELaNa launch or buying one, we will always be secondary payload and don't have a lot of say in specific orbit parameters.
One more option is rideshare, and that is also in active discussion. The point there would be that the onus of orbital debris compliance is on the satellite we hitch a ride with, although that also goes into not having a lot of say on the final orbit not to mention satisfying a primary payload that everything will be just fine if they take us along. And then again, there's likely cost there too... We have some options that wouldn't necessarily require lots of money, they just won't be happening today.
Other possibilities? As far as I know we are pursuing the current options available per NASA and FCC, but that doesn't mean that there aren't other possibilities. If you have any, keep in mind that building a good case for use of whatever the possibility might be is key to gaining any approval. And 90% probability that whatever will get you back in less than 25 years is a tough challenge.
We are bucking a trend, general CubeSat missions are happy with going lower or from ISS, and bucking the trend not new with AMSAT but it is new in this world today because of the regulation and stakes as well as the fact that most everyone we deal with has no knowledge of AMSAT beyond the record the we have created and grown in the last 4 years of launches. We are not magically known just because we launched some pretty cool satellites in the past. Hopefully we will be known by more through our continued contact, cooperation, and "by the book" production and delivery of CubeSats with NASA, FCC, launch integrators, and others who we look to for these launch opportunities.
Or get a bunch of money because that probably is the second biggest barrier...
Jerry Buxton, NØJY
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb