Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
What exactly is the most appropriate post regarding this matter? A complete sentence might have helped to make your point clear.
BTW even if somebody has "insider" information on something, it's highly inappropriate to disclose that in advance of an official announcement.
I am therefore, not sure why you would suggest I keep quiet when I am merely asking that people wait until we have a clear announcement before effectively (and rudely) telling others the shut up.
73, Ken N2WWD
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Ress bill@hsmicrowave.com Sent: Aug 12, 2008 1:23 PM To: Ken Ernandes n2wwd@mindspring.com Cc: k7zt@suddenlink.net, Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com, amsat-bb@amsat.org, "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
Ken,
Possibly, one of the most appropriate post regarding this matter.
As a result of last weekend's BOD and Senior Officer special meeting, I'm confident you'll soon be getting the "AMSAT strategy update" from them.
So please hold off on your comments until you have the most recent facts regarding AMSAT-NA's planned direction.
Regards...Bill - N6GHz
Ken Ernandes wrote:
Overruled? Interesting...
What I've see in this discussion on the HEO issues appear to be more speculative than based on fact or any official announcement from the AMSAT-NA BOD. I personally would consider it premature to summarily declare the discussion closed.
We could, perhaps put it on hold until the AMSAT-NA BOD provides current status. Perhaps it would be better to refrain from inflammatory statements with "absolutes" before we have an official statement on the HEO subject.
73, Ken Ernandes N2WWD
-----Original Message-----
From: k7zt@suddenlink.net Sent: Aug 12, 2008 12:31 PM To: Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com, amsat-bb@amsat.org, "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
NOTICE to ALL HEO proponents:
YOU HAVE BEEN OVERRULED, dialog is finished, so stop it.
---- Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com wrote:
At this point AMSAT is going to take the first thing that gets us above LEO that we can afford. If that is HEO, so be it. If it is GEO, it's GEO. Being divided and fussy over the details only detracts from the effort. We are basically beggars in the launch market, and we all know the saying about beggars and choosers. The mission is to provide long access time satellite comms on a daily, then 24/7 basis. How that happens is yet to be determined...
Sorry to be so brief but I have a lot going on with my day job at the moment. There will be more information forthcoming.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 8:44 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
John: That certainly is one approach, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that, it's just a change in the stated goals of Eagle. The leadership needs to get in front of this and announce this is a significant shift in organizational strategy if indeed that is the plan.
At they same time for the sake of honesty they should probably tell folks that this will end AMSAT-NA sponsorship of an HEO (Molmiya Orbit) anytime soon or even in their lifetime ;-/
- Joe
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:05 AM Subject: Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
> It appears that leadership is allowing realities of > a rare, expensive launch opportunity drive the mission rather than the > mission driving the launch method, it's a bit like the tail wagging the > dog > don't you think? > > AO-40 was the case of a rare launch opportunity driving the mission. The AMSAT BoD has stated that the purpose of creating a relelationship with Intelsat would be to provide multiple launch opportunities. It seems to me that finding an affordable launch method should be the first step rather than the last step.
73,
John KD6OZH
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
So is this really what adults do with their free time? Argue about satellite orbits and the direction of AMSAT?
I agree with Drew's ideas on making change happen. Instead of arguing about it, run for a BoD position and make the change happen.
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Ken Ernandes n2wwd@mindspring.com wrote:
What exactly is the most appropriate post regarding this matter? A complete sentence might have helped to make your point clear.
BTW even if somebody has "insider" information on something, it's highly inappropriate to disclose that in advance of an official announcement.
I am therefore, not sure why you would suggest I keep quiet when I am merely asking that people wait until we have a clear announcement before effectively (and rudely) telling others the shut up.
73, Ken N2WWD
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Ress bill@hsmicrowave.com Sent: Aug 12, 2008 1:23 PM To: Ken Ernandes n2wwd@mindspring.com Cc: k7zt@suddenlink.net, Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com,
amsat-bb@amsat.org, "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and
AMSAT-NAPriorities
Ken,
Possibly, one of the most appropriate post regarding this matter.
As a result of last weekend's BOD and Senior Officer special meeting, I'm confident you'll soon be getting the "AMSAT strategy update" from
them.
So please hold off on your comments until you have the most recent facts regarding AMSAT-NA's planned direction.
Regards...Bill - N6GHz
Ken Ernandes wrote:
Overruled? Interesting...
What I've see in this discussion on the HEO issues appear to be more
speculative than based on fact or any official announcement from the AMSAT-NA BOD. I personally would consider it premature to summarily declare the discussion closed.
We could, perhaps put it on hold until the AMSAT-NA BOD provides current
status. Perhaps it would be better to refrain from inflammatory statements with "absolutes" before we have an official statement on the HEO subject.
73, Ken Ernandes N2WWD
-----Original Message-----
From: k7zt@suddenlink.net Sent: Aug 12, 2008 12:31 PM To: Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com,
amsat-bb@amsat.org, "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and
AMSAT-NAPriorities
NOTICE to ALL HEO proponents:
YOU HAVE BEEN OVERRULED, dialog is finished, so stop it.
---- Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com wrote:
At this point AMSAT is going to take the first thing that gets us
above LEO
that we can afford. If that is HEO, so be it. If it is GEO, it's GEO.
Being
divided and fussy over the details only detracts from the effort. We
are
basically beggars in the launch market, and we all know the saying
about
beggars and choosers. The mission is to provide long access time
satellite
comms on a daily, then 24/7 basis. How that happens is yet to be determined...
Sorry to be so brief but I have a lot going on with my day job at the moment. There will be more information forthcoming.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 8:44 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
John: That certainly is one approach, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that, it's just a change in the stated goals of Eagle. The leadership needs to get in front of this and announce this is a significant shift in organizational strategy if indeed that is the
plan.
At they same time for the sake of honesty they should probably tell
folks
that this will end AMSAT-NA sponsorship of an HEO (Molmiya Orbit) anytime soon or even in their lifetime ;-/
- Joe
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:05 AM Subject: Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
>> It appears that leadership is allowing realities of >> a rare, expensive launch opportunity drive the mission rather than
the
>> mission driving the launch method, it's a bit like the tail
wagging the
>> dog >> don't you think? >> >> > AO-40 was the case of a rare launch opportunity driving the mission.
The
> AMSAT BoD has stated that the purpose of creating a relelationship
with
> Intelsat would be to provide multiple launch opportunities. It seems
to
> me > that finding an affordable launch method should be the first step
rather
> than the last step. > > 73, > > John > KD6OZH > > > _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the
author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Ken Ernandes wrote:
What exactly is the most appropriate post regarding this matter? A complete sentence might have helped to make your point clear.
Just trying to add adding a second to your "appropriate" comments " We could, perhaps put it on hold until the AMSAT-NA BOD provides current status. Perhaps it would be better to refrain from inflammatory statements with "absolutes" before we have an official statement on the HEO subject."
BTW even if somebody has "insider" information on something, it's highly inappropriate to disclose that in advance of an official announcement.
I don't see anyone disclosing any insider information.
I am therefore, not sure why you would suggest I keep quiet when I am merely asking that people wait until we have a clear announcement before effectively (and rudely) telling others the shut up.
Again I was attempting to second your own opinion, that people wait until facts are known and would not suggest that you keep quiet.
73, Ken N2WWD
Regards...Bill - N6GHz
Ken Ernandes wrote:
... BTW even if somebody has "insider" information on something, it's highly inappropriate to disclose that in advance of an official announcement. ...
This is, in my opinion, an area in which AMSAT has serious problems.
As I recall, the chair of the AMSAT Board meeting traditionally admonishes participants and observers that they should not talk about what transpires at the meeting until the official minutes are available. (Does this still happen? I haven't observed an AMSAT Board meeting for a few years.) These minutes are then typically not published (in a fairly restricted venue, namely in the [paper] AMSAT Journal, not online) until _over a year later_! In my view, this reflects a board that wants to operate without the knowledge, much less advise and feedback, of the membership. Never mind that this is very poor governance -- it is a recipe for mischief on the part of the Board.
Yes, even not-for-profit organizations like AMSAT need to restrict the flow of certain types of information. And, this is what the closed portion of the Board meetings are for. But, I believe that the current approach of restricting the flow of information to which the members ought to have [nearly immediate] access is inappropriate and facilitates abuse.
I had been meaning sent e-mail to the list asking the current Board candidates whether this issue concerns them. Thanks for reminding me...
-tjs
I think you'll be quite surprised by the transparency of the meeting we just had, although it was not an official BOD meeting and no votes were taken. The notes are being typed up for publication as we speak.
73, Drew
----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy J. Salo" salo@saloits.com To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 4:47 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. andAMSAT-NAPriorities
Ken Ernandes wrote:
... BTW even if somebody has "insider" information on something, it's highly inappropriate to disclose that in advance of an official announcement. ...
This is, in my opinion, an area in which AMSAT has serious problems.
As I recall, the chair of the AMSAT Board meeting traditionally admonishes participants and observers that they should not talk about what transpires at the meeting until the official minutes are available. (Does this still happen? I haven't observed an AMSAT Board meeting for a few years.) These minutes are then typically not published (in a fairly restricted venue, namely in the [paper] AMSAT Journal, not online) until _over a year later_! In my view, this reflects a board that wants to operate without the knowledge, much less advise and feedback, of the membership. Never mind that this is very poor governance -- it is a recipe for mischief on the part of the Board.
Yes, even not-for-profit organizations like AMSAT need to restrict the flow of certain types of information. And, this is what the closed portion of the Board meetings are for. But, I believe that the current approach of restricting the flow of information to which the members ought to have [nearly immediate] access is inappropriate and facilitates abuse.
I had been meaning sent e-mail to the list asking the current Board candidates whether this issue concerns them. Thanks for reminding me...
-tjs
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Hi Timothy,
Being a current AMSAT Board candidate, I'll respond to your last paragraph.
My candidate statement sent, out with the ballot, and the statements I've posted on this .bb before and since, clearly state my disappointment with AMSAT management "communication" and my desire, if elected, to help identify and participate in solutions.
Let me tell you now that our AMSAT management recognizes their deficiencies in this area of communication (and not just in communications).
How do I know? Being a Board candidate, was invited to and did attend the recently concluded weekend AMSAT Senior Officer and BOD meeting in Baltimore. It was what I would call, a "soul searching - gut wrenching" assessment of current AMSAT conditions and to seek improvements and solutions. Just on the subject of "communications" there was a clear recognition that communications has been a problem and specific action items were suggested to make serious improvements.
One of those actions items was to report the meeting details as soon as the usual process of summarizing the meeting notes, and review by attendees is completed. I expect the first place it will show up is on the AMSAT web site, followed by the AMSAT Journal and discussions at the October Atlanta AMSAT Symposium.
It was a very full two day session and many serious topics were discussed. Putting it all into a cohesive statement without forgetting any details will take a little time. Please give everyone the time to get it accurate.
Regards...Bill - N6GHz
Timothy J. Salo wrote:
Ken Ernandes wrote:
... BTW even if somebody has "insider" information on something, it's highly inappropriate to disclose that in advance of an official announcement. ...
This is, in my opinion, an area in which AMSAT has serious problems.
As I recall, the chair of the AMSAT Board meeting traditionally admonishes participants and observers that they should not talk about what transpires at the meeting until the official minutes are available. (Does this still happen? I haven't observed an AMSAT Board meeting for a few years.) These minutes are then typically not published (in a fairly restricted venue, namely in the [paper] AMSAT Journal, not online) until _over a year later_! In my view, this reflects a board that wants to operate without the knowledge, much less advise and feedback, of the membership. Never mind that this is very poor governance -- it is a recipe for mischief on the part of the Board.
Yes, even not-for-profit organizations like AMSAT need to restrict the flow of certain types of information. And, this is what the closed portion of the Board meetings are for. But, I believe that the current approach of restricting the flow of information to which the members ought to have [nearly immediate] access is inappropriate and facilitates abuse.
I had been meaning sent e-mail to the list asking the current Board candidates whether this issue concerns them. Thanks for reminding me...
-tjs
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
participants (5)
-
Andrew Glasbrenner -
Andrew Koenig -
Bill Ress -
Ken Ernandes -
Timothy J. Salo