Hams are not poor, many of us are willing to spend thousands on the latest radio gear, and DX-peditions have raised substantial amounts of money to finance trips to remote islands so that contributors can get a rare QSL card. We have the financial means but are lacking the organization. We have to convince members that if they can spend $2000 on a new radio then they can also send a $2000 check to AMSAT if they want new satellites in orbit.
Some of our members are quite satisfied with low orbit FM satellites and think that keeping these in space is the top priority. Many others still remember the days of AO-10, AO-13 and AO-40 (when it was working). Many of those members became discouraged and left AMSAT when we failed to replace those satellites with new ones. We can keep the LEO sats in orbit for those who want them by offering our radio boards to universities and other groups who want to build CubeSats but don't know a lot about radio. To serve the long term interests of the amateur radio community we must set our sights on larger, more powerful and higher satellites, and we will probably have to pay for those launches because the era of free launches for satellites larger than a Cubesat is gone and not coming back. Fortunately the newly emerging private space industry offers launch options for much less money than the days when we got "free" launches from the government.
The short lifetime of Phase 3D is a valid point, it was intended to last much longer except for a simple and avoidable mistake. The trouble is that P3D was a one of a kind mission with no possibility of a follow up mission. Future AMSAT HEO programs must be ongoing programs in which the lessons learned from earlier satellites can feed into subsequent missions. AMSAT must also prove that we are capable of learning lessons from ours and other's failures and applying them to new satellites. AMSAT has to prove that it is capable and worthy of such support, because we are only as good as our last failure. The petty bickering that has occurred recently has to end so that we can present a professional appearance to outsiders.
I was working in the Hubble control center when the flawed mirror was discovered. Much has been written about why the conflicting optical tests were not followed up, but the project WAS behind schedule and over budget and Congress was looking at cancellation if it fell any further behind. Schedule and budget pressure are very real worries for NASA missions. I will simply point out that NASA repaired the flawed telescope within three years at minimal cost and the telescope has worked flawlessly for over 30 years now and is still going strong. That is a pretty successful failure. And NASA runs the CubeSat Launch Initiative and deploys many of them from the ISS, so it obviously does support CubeSats.
Dan Schultz N8FGV
------ Original Message ------ Received: Mon, 01 Feb 2021 07:08:27 AM EST From: Dimitrios Simitas va3dsz@gmail.com Subject: Re: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Cubesats
If AMSAT were to build another AO-40, it would take 9 years of current budget to finance it ($4-$4.5 million). And it's life of 4 years, would mean years between satellite activity. Cubesats are a compromise that allows them to launch one every year based on their budget. And during the last 5 years, this has given amateurs near continuous use of the Fox
series.
If the goal is to keep satellites in space at all times, CubeSats are the only feasible option under AMSAT's budget constraints. If the membership desires better, then collectively more donations need to be made. Can't ask for a Rolls Royce to drive you around then expect to pay Yellow Cab rates.
As for criticisms from NASA, they hold the record for the most costly satellite blunder, failing to properly verify the $4 billion Hubble before launch.
Has AMSAT ever taken a survey to find out what the membership wants for future satellites, or are we so insignificant that our wants do not matter, just as long as the dollars keep flowing toward AMSAT? How many of us would rather see a couple of FM birds put into orbit, rather than the difficult to work satellites? How many of us members have their fun on the FM birds? I know that I do, roving, etc. The simplicity of the FM birds made satellite radio fun. A handheld antenna and one or two HT's out in a corn field or a park, giving different grids to those who need them. Just an opinion. Brad Smith KC9UQR In a message dated 2/1/2021 1:02:26 PM Central Standard Time, n8fgv@usa.net writes: Hams are not poor, many of us are willing to spend thousands on the latestradio gear, and DX-peditions have raised substantial amounts of money tofinance trips to remote islands so that contributors can get a rare QSL card.We have the financial means but are lacking the organization. We have toconvince members that if they can spend $2000 on a new radio then they canalso send a $2000 check to AMSAT if they want new satellites in orbit. Some of our members are quite satisfied with low orbit FM satellites and thinkthat keeping these in space is the top priority. Many others still rememberthe days of AO-10, AO-13 and AO-40 (when it was working). Many of thosemembers became discouraged and left AMSAT when we failed to replace thosesatellites with new ones. We can keep the LEO sats in orbit for those who wantthem by offering our radio boards to universities and other groups who want tobuild CubeSats but don't know a lot about radio. To serve the long terminterests of the amateur radio community we must set our sights on larger,more powerful and higher satellites, and we will probably have to pay forthose launches because the era of free launches for satellites larger than aCubesat is gone and not coming back. Fortunately the newly emerging privatespace industry offers launch options for much less money than the days when wegot "free" launches from the government. The short lifetime of Phase 3D is a valid point, it was intended to last muchlonger except for a simple and avoidable mistake. The trouble is that P3D wasa one of a kind mission with no possibility of a follow up mission. FutureAMSAT HEO programs must be ongoing programs in which the lessons learned fromearlier satellites can feed into subsequent missions. AMSAT must also provethat we are capable of learning lessons from ours and other's failures andapplying them to new satellites. AMSAT has to prove that it is capable andworthy of such support, because we are only as good as our last failure. Thepetty bickering that has occurred recently has to end so that we can present aprofessional appearance to outsiders. I was working in the Hubble control center when the flawed mirror wasdiscovered. Much has been written about why the conflicting optical tests werenot followed up, but the project WAS behind schedule and over budget andCongress was looking at cancellation if it fell any further behind. Scheduleand budget pressure are very real worries for NASA missions. I will simplypoint out that NASA repaired the flawed telescope within three years atminimal cost and the telescope has worked flawlessly for over 30 years now andis still going strong. That is a pretty successful failure. And NASA runs theCubeSat Launch Initiative and deploys many of them from the ISS, so itobviously does support CubeSats. Dan Schultz N8FGV
On 02/01/21 13:22, Brad Smith via AMSAT-BB wrote:
How many of us would rather see a couple of FM birds put into orbit, rather than the difficult to work satellites?
Therein lies the rub: What is difficult for you may be simple for someone else.
My experience on the FM satellite is much less rosy than yours. I mostly hear a bunch of squeals, noise, and one station occupying the pass. I'll give you that I only monitored them briefly before deciding the linear sats were where I wanted to spend my time.
The linear satellites offer an opportunity for tens of stations to complete SSB QSOs, simultaneously, or hundreds to work CW contacts. Additionally, power-efficient digital modes can also be sent through the transponder, with appropriate respect for power utilization across the entire band.
You can get started on the linear sats with a cheap SDR dongle, LNA, and an FT-818 for about $700 total. Not much more than a couple of quality HTs, and you can sell one of those HTs and use the 818 instead!
So, you see that it all depends on your likes. It is my vote that we provide satellites that have _both_ capabilities and include even more bands to keep our spectrum fully utilized. That's the mission of the GOLF series!
--- Zach N0ZGO
Don't you also need a computer to plug the SDR dongle into? If so, is the computer, dongle, LNA, FT-818 combo a portable station as you'd have with two HTs and an Arrow antenna? Or at this point are you referring to an in-shack type station with tower mounted antennas?
Steve AI9IN ----- Original Message ----- From: Zach Metzinger (zmetzing@pobox.com) Date: 02/01/21 14:37 To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Cubesats
You can get started on the linear sats with a cheap SDR dongle, LNA, and an FT-818 for about $700 total. Not much more than a couple of quality HTs, and you can sell one of those HTs and use the 818 instead!
--- Zach N0ZGO
On 2/1/21 4:48 PM, Steve Kristoff wrote:
Don't you also need a computer to plug the SDR dongle into? If so, is the computer, dongle, LNA, FT-818 combo a portable station as you'd have with two HTs and an Arrow antenna? Or at this point are you referring to an in-shack type station with tower mounted antennas?
Hello Steve,
You do need something to plug the SDR dongle into, and most of the time that's a laptop or desktop PC. However, for the brave:
https://www.electronicsforu.com/electronics-projects/software-defined-radio-...
You might even be able to scrounge a phone (sans SIM card) from someone who is on the cell-phone upgrade treadmill. You know the one: it's thinner, sleeker, has more battery, uses the 5G rays right into your eyeballs for better resolution, etc. :-)
I've used a Mac and a *NIX (FreeBSD, Linux, etc.) as SDR platforms. I typically use Gqrx, but I've been looking for something more lightweight.
On the LNA front, I've used homebrew LNAs -- and learned a lot about how not to build a LNA. However, LNA4ALL is a good solution if your dongle doesn't already have an LNA built in (like the FCDP+).
--- Zach N0ZGO
I'd forgotten about the smart phone option. Definitely makes it more portable. The rusty old wheels in my head are starting to turn.
Getting a little off topic here, so I'm done, but thanks for the reminder! Steve AI9IN ----- Original Message ----- From: Zach Metzinger (zmetzing@pobox.com) Date: 02/01/21 20:03 To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Cubesats
On 2/1/21 4:48 PM, Steve Kristoff wrote:
Don't you also need a computer to plug the SDR dongle into? If so, is the computer, dongle, LNA, FT-818 combo a portable station as you'd have with two HTs and an Arrow antenna? Or at this point are you referring to an in-shack type station with tower mounted antennas?
Hello Steve,
You do need something to plug the SDR dongle into, and most of the time that's a laptop or desktop PC. However, for the brave:
https://www.electronicsforu.com/electronics-projects/software-defined-radio-...
You might even be able to scrounge a phone (sans SIM card) from someone who is on the cell-phone upgrade treadmill. You know the one: it's thinner, sleeker, has more battery, uses the 5G rays right into your eyeballs for better resolution, etc. :-)
On 02/01/2021 11:22, Brad Smith via AMSAT-BB wrote:
Has AMSAT ever taken a survey to find out what the membership wants for future satellites, or are we so insignificant that our wants do not matter, just as long as the dollars keep flowing toward AMSAT? How many of us would rather see a couple of FM birds put into orbit, rather than the difficult to work satellites? How many of us members have their fun on the FM birds? I know that I do, roving, etc. The simplicity of the FM birds made satellite radio fun. A handheld antenna and one or two HT's out in a corn field or a park, giving different grids to those who need them. Just an opinion. Brad Smith KC9UQR
Brad, that is your opinion - which you are totally entitled to.
Unfortunately, there are several major categories of amateur satellite operations. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. There are amateurs who favor one vs the others. In other words, you can't please everyone with any one satellite, and there is not the budget to do it all.
Just for the record, although I have over 1,000 contacts on FM satellites, I really don't give a crap about conversations that consist of nothing more than a callsign and report (if you're lucky). I actually want to be able to TALK to people. That applies to non-satellite operations too. Fortunately, being very close to the US west coast, there were a few of us that could regularly get on the FM birds when they were way out to sea and actually hold conversations with others. The vast majority of my satellite operating time has been SSB on linear birds - preferably at something higher than LEO. I got to operate on AO-10, AO-40, and was on AO-7 on it's first day in it's second life. FO-20 and FO-29 were almost daily operation for me.
So for me, I would prefer one FO-29 class satellite over a dozen FM or digital LEO cubesats. GTP or HEO would be even better. But that's my opinion.
So it sounds like what we all want is a HEO satellite with both FM and linear transponders. This could be in a bigger form factor cubesat to improve thermal issues and power budget. Maybe we can share some space with university experiments as well to fill it out and share costs. One issue would be frequency allocation. Assuming two transponders and the ability to use them simultaneously, you would need 4 frequencies. U, V, and L would be obvious, but the 4th frequency would likely be 10m, which is hard to get gain on, or higher frequencies where it's hard to find a radio.
Some of the CAS satellites supposedly will have FM and linear, but I'm guessing it's some kind of SDR so they can just program whatever mode they want.
It also sounds like making things as analog as possible is the best. I would think some kind of simple old-school processor could handle turning the radio on and off. However, so far the problems with the AMSAT birds does not sound like issues with the chips, as far as I can tell.
-Stephen N8URE
Jim... So I take it you're not much of a fan of FT-8. I'm totally with you. FO-20, FO-29, The Russian RS sats - these were great.
For me FM is almost impossible. By the time I hear them they are jammed. I'm not going to fight my way through for a call sign and a grid square. In the 80's and 90's you could at least get a minute or two in and know who you were talking to and what he was running.
Doug -- K0DXV
On 2/1/2021 3:47 PM, Jim Walls wrote:
On 02/01/2021 11:22, Brad Smith via AMSAT-BB wrote:
Has AMSAT ever taken a survey to find out what the membership wants for future satellites, or are we so insignificant that our wants do not matter, just as long as the dollars keep flowing toward AMSAT? How many of us would rather see a couple of FM birds put into orbit, rather than the difficult to work satellites? How many of us members have their fun on the FM birds? I know that I do, roving, etc. The simplicity of the FM birds made satellite radio fun. A handheld antenna and one or two HT's out in a corn field or a park, giving different grids to those who need them. Just an opinion. Brad Smith KC9UQR
Brad, that is your opinion - which you are totally entitled to.
Unfortunately, there are several major categories of amateur satellite operations. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. There are amateurs who favor one vs the others. In other words, you can't please everyone with any one satellite, and there is not the budget to do it all.
Just for the record, although I have over 1,000 contacts on FM satellites, I really don't give a crap about conversations that consist of nothing more than a callsign and report (if you're lucky). I actually want to be able to TALK to people. That applies to non-satellite operations too. Fortunately, being very close to the US west coast, there were a few of us that could regularly get on the FM birds when they were way out to sea and actually hold conversations with others. The vast majority of my satellite operating time has been SSB on linear birds - preferably at something higher than LEO. I got to operate on AO-10, AO-40, and was on AO-7 on it's first day in it's second life. FO-20 and FO-29 were almost daily operation for me.
So for me, I would prefer one FO-29 class satellite over a dozen FM or digital LEO cubesats. GTP or HEO would be even better. But that's my opinion.
-- 73
Jim Walls - K6CCC jim@k6ccc.org Ofc: 818-548-4804 http://members.dslextreme.com/users/k6ccc/ AMSAT Member 32537 - WSWSS Member 395
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)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!
View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/amsat-bb@amsat.org To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
I'm just curious why AMSAT couldn't concentrate on 1 HEO every 9 years or so while the universities build the LEO's with transponders or repeaters? I can't see why the Amateur community couldn't ask them to include an FM repeater to go along with their telemetry beacon, instead of a beacon-only sat everyone loses interest in after the students graduate. There's probably a long complicated answer, but I figured it would be worthwhile to show my point of interest (HEO). I still have my 2.4G RX antenna for AO-40...
How much would SpaceX charge us for a launch? I'm guessing much cheaper than NASA at this point. It would've been interesting to have the next HEO on his Roadster!
Larry N1MIW
On Mon, Feb 1, 2021, 7:00 PM Doug Person doug@k0dxv.com wrote:
Jim... So I take it you're not much of a fan of FT-8. I'm totally with you. FO-20, FO-29, The Russian RS sats - these were great.
For me FM is almost impossible. By the time I hear them they are jammed. I'm not going to fight my way through for a call sign and a grid square. In the 80's and 90's you could at least get a minute or two in and know who you were talking to and what he was running.
Doug -- K0DXV On 2/1/2021 3:47 PM, Jim Walls wrote:
On 02/01/2021 11:22, Brad Smith via AMSAT-BB wrote:
Has AMSAT ever taken a survey to find out what the membership wants for future satellites, or are we so insignificant that our wants do not matter, just as long as the dollars keep flowing toward AMSAT? How many of us would rather see a couple of FM birds put into orbit, rather than the difficult to work satellites? How many of us members have their fun on the FM birds? I know that I do, roving, etc. The simplicity of the FM birds made satellite radio fun. A handheld antenna and one or two HT's out in a corn field or a park, giving different grids to those who need them. Just an opinion.
Brad Smith KC9UQR
Brad, that is your opinion - which you are totally entitled to.
Unfortunately, there are several major categories of amateur satellite operations. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. There are amateurs who favor one vs the others. In other words, you can't please everyone with any one satellite, and there is not the budget to do it all.
Just for the record, although I have over 1,000 contacts on FM satellites, I really don't give a crap about conversations that consist of nothing more than a callsign and report (if you're lucky). I actually want to be able to TALK to people. That applies to non-satellite operations too. Fortunately, being very close to the US west coast, there were a few of us that could regularly get on the FM birds when they were way out to sea and actually hold conversations with others. The vast majority of my satellite operating time has been SSB on linear birds - preferably at something higher than LEO. I got to operate on AO-10, AO-40, and was on AO-7 on it's first day in it's second life. FO-20 and FO-29 were almost daily operation for me.
So for me, I would prefer one FO-29 class satellite over a dozen FM or digital LEO cubesats. GTP or HEO would be even better. But that's my opinion.
-- 73
Jim Walls - K6CCCjim@k6ccc.org Ofc: 818-548-4804http://members.dslextreme.com/users/k6ccc/ AMSAT Member 32537 - WSWSS Member 395
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)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!
View archives of this mailing list athttps://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/amsat-bb@amsat.org To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)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!
View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/amsat-bb@amsat.org To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
With a little planning, we could have had SuitSat2 in that roadster in solar orbit!
-Stephen N8URE
I’ll throw in my $.02 into the discussion. I listened to the Sputnik in 1957 on my Hallicrafters S20R receiver my Dad got me. I got my ham ticket a year later at the age of 12. . I started using the satellites in the early 80’s, using SSB, CW, Packet, etc. I built my Trackbox for automated tracking, antenna pointing, etc. The TAPR Group put out some great kits for those who wanted to invest the time & effort. I got great pleasure working DX on SSB & CW through the satellites, or downloading camera data, or rag chewing with the MIR space station crew regularly.
It was never “easy”, but that is what made it so worthwhile. It was a challenge, a learning experience, but so rewarding once you had success. I’ve always viewed the hobby as a way to expand knowledge, not just push a button & talk, anybody can do that. Trying to navigate the QRM on FM satellites is of very little interest for me. If I want to rag chew, jump on a repeater or HF & do your thing. Most everybody I’ve met over the years who’s truly interested in satellite communications welcomes the challenges.
My thoughts are the digital modes are also fine for satellites, the narrow bandwidth lends itself well without taking up a bunch of passband. I don’t see the negative at all in modes other than FM being the focus. If there’s some skills & learning required, it weeds those out who don’t want to put in the effort & commitment. Let’s face it, there’s not enough satellites & bandwidth for hoards of users to all be fighting for nothing more than a callsign & grid locator.
To net it out, IMO putting up geosynchronous or LEO FM satellites does not serve the best interest of the hobby nor promote a place for people who have a thirst for broadening their horizons. It’s about evolution, invention, & discovering new things. I can talk to anywhere in the world on EchoLink using my cell phone but what fun is that?
Mike N7ASZ
From: Doug Person doug@k0dxv.com Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 3:58 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Cubesats
Jim... So I take it you're not much of a fan of FT-8. I'm totally with you. FO-20, FO-29, The Russian RS sats - these were great.
For me FM is almost impossible. By the time I hear them they are jammed. I'm not going to fight my way through for a call sign and a grid square. In the 80's and 90's you could at least get a minute or two in and know who you were talking to and what he was running.
Doug -- K0DXV
On 2/1/2021 3:47 PM, Jim Walls wrote:
On 02/01/2021 11:22, Brad Smith via AMSAT-BB wrote:
Has AMSAT ever taken a survey to find out what the membership wants for future satellites, or are we so insignificant that our wants do not matter, just as long as the dollars keep flowing toward AMSAT? How many of us would rather see a couple of FM birds put into orbit, rather than the difficult to work satellites? How many of us members have their fun on the FM birds? I know that I do, roving, etc. The simplicity of the FM birds made satellite radio fun. A handheld antenna and one or two HT's out in a corn field or a park, giving different grids to those who need them. Just an opinion.
Brad Smith KC9UQR
Brad, that is your opinion - which you are totally entitled to.
Unfortunately, there are several major categories of amateur satellite operations. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. There are amateurs who favor one vs the others. In other words, you can't please everyone with any one satellite, and there is not the budget to do it all.
Just for the record, although I have over 1,000 contacts on FM satellites, I really don't give a crap about conversations that consist of nothing more than a callsign and report (if you're lucky). I actually want to be able to TALK to people. That applies to non-satellite operations too. Fortunately, being very close to the US west coast, there were a few of us that could regularly get on the FM birds when they were way out to sea and actually hold conversations with others. The vast majority of my satellite operating time has been SSB on linear birds - preferably at something higher than LEO. I got to operate on AO-10, AO-40, and was on AO-7 on it's first day in it's second life. FO-20 and FO-29 were almost daily operation for me.
So for me, I would prefer one FO-29 class satellite over a dozen FM or digital LEO cubesats. GTP or HEO would be even better. But that's my opinion.
The linear transponders can also work FM. On the Vo-52 we had reserved days when the linear transponder was used for FM. The FM satellites are actually more efficient with their power budget. The reason is that the transmitter doesn't have to be switched on unless you detect the 67 Hz CTCSS on the uplink. Now, the satellite receiver can be made to run with less than 20 mAs, the OBC takes another 5 mA (on sleep). A total of 25 ma Standing current. At 5v, that is 100 mW of power. The solar panels of a cubesat will generate 2 watts from each side when full lit, so, we are well within the budget. As most of the time the satellite over the poles or the Pacific /Atlantic oceans, as most of the activity is over North America/Europe and Asia, the FM transmitter will remain switched off. When it is switched on, it operates class C. At 0.5 watts of output, the transmitter will draw about 1.5 watts of power (including the power chain). If it does this for about 20% of the time, the average transmit draw is 300 mW. The total satellite power budget is 400 mw, well within the power generated by the tiny solar panels. Now, let's look at the linear transponder. The receiver will draw the same 100mw of power, however, the transmitter will be always switched on and it will continuously draw 1.5 watts (probably more as the PA is linear and it has higher standing current). We are looking at a continuous current draw of 2 watts. This is beyond what the 1U solar panels can generate unless we can add attitude control and increase the size from 1U to 2U or 3U format which will triple the cost of the mission. These are interesting exercises. You have to throw in the eclipse periods as well (usually in eclipse for 33% of the orbit). the eclipse changes with the time of the year (figure this out for yourself). You can usually do the power budget calculations with a paper and pencil. It is great education. - f
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 12:22 PM Mike Lucas documike@comcast.net wrote:
I’ll throw in my $.02 into the discussion. I listened to the Sputnik in 1957 on my Hallicrafters S20R receiver my Dad got me. I got my ham ticket a year later at the age of 12. . I started using the satellites in the early 80’s, using SSB, CW, Packet, etc. I built my Trackbox for automated tracking, antenna pointing, etc. The TAPR Group put out some great kits for those who wanted to invest the time & effort. I got great pleasure working DX on SSB & CW through the satellites, or downloading camera data, or rag chewing with the MIR space station crew regularly.
It was never “easy”, but that is what made it so worthwhile. It was a challenge, a learning experience, but so rewarding once you had success. I’ve always viewed the hobby as a way to expand knowledge, not just push a button & talk, anybody can do that. Trying to navigate the QRM on FM satellites is of very little interest for me. If I want to rag chew, jump on a repeater or HF & do your thing. Most everybody I’ve met over the years who’s truly interested in satellite communications welcomes the challenges.
My thoughts are the digital modes are also fine for satellites, the narrow bandwidth lends itself well without taking up a bunch of passband. I don’t see the negative at all in modes other than FM being the focus. If there’s some skills & learning required, it weeds those out who don’t want to put in the effort & commitment. Let’s face it, there’s not enough satellites & bandwidth for hoards of users to all be fighting for nothing more than a callsign & grid locator.
To net it out, IMO putting up geosynchronous or LEO FM satellites does not serve the best interest of the hobby nor promote a place for people who have a thirst for broadening their horizons. It’s about evolution, invention, & discovering new things. I can talk to anywhere in the world on EchoLink using my cell phone but what fun is that?
Mike N7ASZ
*From:* Doug Person doug@k0dxv.com *Sent:* Monday, February 1, 2021 3:58 PM *To:* amsat-bb@amsat.org *Subject:* [AMSAT-BB] Re: Cubesats
Jim... So I take it you're not much of a fan of FT-8. I'm totally with you. FO-20, FO-29, The Russian RS sats - these were great.
For me FM is almost impossible. By the time I hear them they are jammed. I'm not going to fight my way through for a call sign and a grid square. In the 80's and 90's you could at least get a minute or two in and know who you were talking to and what he was running.
Doug -- K0DXV
On 2/1/2021 3:47 PM, Jim Walls wrote:
On 02/01/2021 11:22, Brad Smith via AMSAT-BB wrote:
Has AMSAT ever taken a survey to find out what the membership wants for future satellites, or are we so insignificant that our wants do not matter, just as long as the dollars keep flowing toward AMSAT? How many of us would rather see a couple of FM birds put into orbit, rather than the difficult to work satellites? How many of us members have their fun on the FM birds? I know that I do, roving, etc. The simplicity of the FM birds made satellite radio fun. A handheld antenna and one or two HT's out in a corn field or a park, giving different grids to those who need them. Just an opinion.
Brad Smith KC9UQR
Brad, that is your opinion - which you are totally entitled to.
Unfortunately, there are several major categories of amateur satellite operations. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. There are amateurs who favor one vs the others. In other words, you can't please everyone with any one satellite, and there is not the budget to do it all.
Just for the record, although I have over 1,000 contacts on FM satellites, I really don't give a crap about conversations that consist of nothing more than a callsign and report (if you're lucky). I actually want to be able to TALK to people. That applies to non-satellite operations too. Fortunately, being very close to the US west coast, there were a few of us that could regularly get on the FM birds when they were way out to sea and actually hold conversations with others. The vast majority of my satellite operating time has been SSB on linear birds - preferably at something higher than LEO. I got to operate on AO-10, AO-40, and was on AO-7 on it's first day in it's second life. FO-20 and FO-29 were almost daily operation for me.
So for me, I would prefer one FO-29 class satellite over a dozen FM or digital LEO cubesats. GTP or HEO would be even better. But that's my opinion.
--
73
Jim Walls - K6CCC
jim@k6ccc.org
Ofc: 818-548-4804
http://members.dslextreme.com/users/k6ccc/
AMSAT Member 32537 - WSWSS Member 395
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)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!
View archives of this mailing list at
https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/amsat-bb@amsat.org
To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org
Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)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!
View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/amsat-bb@amsat.org To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
On 2/2/21 1:35 AM, Ashhar Farhan wrote:
The linear transponders can also work FM. On the Vo-52 we had reserved days when the linear transponder was used for FM.
Hello Farhan,
Another reason for not using FM on linear satellites is that FM takes much more bandwidth than the equivalent SSB channel for the same informational content. It is also a poor use of transmitter power, as FM requires greater SNR for the listener to hear anything more than noise.
It was nice talking to you in person at the 2019 Symposium. I hope we can all get together for an eyeball QSO next year!
73,
--- Zach N0ZGO
Just an aside: As a former technical project manager I know how complicated, stressful and perhaps even impossible it is to pull off a perfect project - on time and on budget. I'm actually glad to see that Webb has been postponed repeatedly. It's a one trick pony. It goes up and works or the whole effort was for nothing. So, for them postpone and make it right is the only option. Not even the Space Shuttle could go fix that one.
So a question: Where does GOLF-TEE stand these days? The presentation suggests 2Q21 (which means around two months from now). Is it on schedule?
Doug -- K0DXV
On 2/1/2021 1:01 PM, Daniel Schultz wrote:
Hams are not poor, many of us are willing to spend thousands on the latest radio gear, and DX-peditions have raised substantial amounts of money to finance trips to remote islands so that contributors can get a rare QSL card. We have the financial means but are lacking the organization. We have to convince members that if they can spend $2000 on a new radio then they can also send a $2000 check to AMSAT if they want new satellites in orbit.
Some of our members are quite satisfied with low orbit FM satellites and think that keeping these in space is the top priority. Many others still remember the days of AO-10, AO-13 and AO-40 (when it was working). Many of those members became discouraged and left AMSAT when we failed to replace those satellites with new ones. We can keep the LEO sats in orbit for those who want them by offering our radio boards to universities and other groups who want to build CubeSats but don't know a lot about radio. To serve the long term interests of the amateur radio community we must set our sights on larger, more powerful and higher satellites, and we will probably have to pay for those launches because the era of free launches for satellites larger than a Cubesat is gone and not coming back. Fortunately the newly emerging private space industry offers launch options for much less money than the days when we got "free" launches from the government.
The short lifetime of Phase 3D is a valid point, it was intended to last much longer except for a simple and avoidable mistake. The trouble is that P3D was a one of a kind mission with no possibility of a follow up mission. Future AMSAT HEO programs must be ongoing programs in which the lessons learned from earlier satellites can feed into subsequent missions. AMSAT must also prove that we are capable of learning lessons from ours and other's failures and applying them to new satellites. AMSAT has to prove that it is capable and worthy of such support, because we are only as good as our last failure. The petty bickering that has occurred recently has to end so that we can present a professional appearance to outsiders.
I was working in the Hubble control center when the flawed mirror was discovered. Much has been written about why the conflicting optical tests were not followed up, but the project WAS behind schedule and over budget and Congress was looking at cancellation if it fell any further behind. Schedule and budget pressure are very real worries for NASA missions. I will simply point out that NASA repaired the flawed telescope within three years at minimal cost and the telescope has worked flawlessly for over 30 years now and is still going strong. That is a pretty successful failure. And NASA runs the CubeSat Launch Initiative and deploys many of them from the ISS, so it obviously does support CubeSats.
Dan Schultz N8FGV
------ Original Message ------ Received: Mon, 01 Feb 2021 07:08:27 AM EST From: Dimitrios Simitas va3dsz@gmail.com Subject: Re: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Cubesats
If AMSAT were to build another AO-40, it would take 9 years of current budget to finance it ($4-$4.5 million). And it's life of 4 years, would mean years between satellite activity. Cubesats are a compromise that allows them to launch one every year based on their budget. And during the last 5 years, this has given amateurs near continuous use of the Fox
series.
If the goal is to keep satellites in space at all times, CubeSats are the only feasible option under AMSAT's budget constraints. If the membership desires better, then collectively more donations need to be made. Can't ask for a Rolls Royce to drive you around then expect to pay Yellow Cab rates.
As for criticisms from NASA, they hold the record for the most costly satellite blunder, failing to properly verify the $4 billion Hubble before launch.
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)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!
View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/amsat-bb@amsat.org To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
participants (10)
-
Ashhar Farhan -
Brad Smith -
Daniel Schultz -
Doug Person -
Jim Walls -
Mike Lucas -
sjdevience＠gmail.com -
Steve Kristoff -
z man -
Zach Metzinger