Re: AO40 replacement !!!
Just read a posting about a possible replacement for the ill fated super sophisticated over-engineered ultra complex AO40 satellite. My perception is that any attempt to create a New Generation Molnya Orbit Satellite must undergo a very serious and comprehensive engineering research , in order to keep it within an area of simplicity that will make possible a much higher degree of reliability. No, it is not a call for an ultra simple parrot satellite, or a medium level of sophistication... what I am proposing is to achieve a consensus on how to keep the new satellite within engineering performance parameters that will help to keep costs down, increase the MTBF ( Mean Time Between Failures ) of its equipment, and also to achieve a high degree of operational control so that it can be kept working for a long time. In the meantime, until an AO40 Molnya satellite may be designed and funds can be found to build it and then obtain a piggy back ride on a launch... it would be nice to try to assemble one or more satellites that could follow the very effective and practical designs of the RS10, RS12 and RS 15... If such satellites are built they will certainly be most welcome at a worldwide scale, especially now that heliophysicists ( i.e. solar scientists ) are almost sure that the present solar cycle and the one following are going to bring monthly sunspot averages not seen in more than a century !!! Maybe this posting could start a very productive thread on the AMSAT.BB amigos !!! It would be nice to hear opinions and points of view from all around the world on this topic 73 and DX Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich ( AKA Arnie Coro ) Emergency Coordinator IARU Region II Area C Host of Dxers Unlimited radio hobby program Radio Havana Cuba
In my opinion (it's worth every penny you just paid for it) if they are going to create a new super sophisticated "Phase III Part Deux" it should perhaps be taken to the ISS in pieces, assembled there and blown into a long-period orbit. But then that's just my opinion. If I remember correctly AO-40 was damaged by a collision with the launch vehicle shortly after separation. Of course a new generation of easy-sats that can be worked using a J-pole setup would be nice too.
Kevin Muenzler, WB5RUE Grid EL09uf Eagle Creek Observatory http://www.eaglecreekobservatory.org I can melt ice with my mind, it just takes a few minutes.
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 5:21 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
Just read a posting about a possible replacement for the ill fated super sophisticated over-engineered ultra complex AO40 satellite. My perception is that any attempt to create a New Generation Molnya Orbit Satellite must undergo a very serious and comprehensive engineering research , in order to keep it within an area of simplicity that will make possible a much higher degree of reliability. No, it is not a call for an ultra simple parrot satellite, or a medium level of sophistication... what I am proposing is to achieve a consensus on how to keep the new satellite within engineering performance parameters that will help to keep costs down, increase the MTBF ( Mean Time Between Failures ) of its equipment, and also to achieve a high degree of operational control so that it can be kept working for a long time. In the meantime, until an AO40 Molnya satellite may be designed and funds can be found to build it and then obtain a piggy back ride on a launch... it would be nice to try to assemble one or more satellites that could follow the very effective and practical designs of the RS10, RS12 and RS 15... If such satellites are built they will certainly be most welcome at a worldwide scale, especially now that heliophysicists ( i.e. solar scientists ) are almost sure that the present solar cycle and the one following are going to bring monthly sunspot averages not seen in more than a century !!! Maybe this posting could start a very productive thread on the AMSAT.BB amigos !!! It would be nice to hear opinions and points of view from all around the world on this topic 73 and DX Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich ( AKA Arnie Coro ) Emergency Coordinator IARU Region II Area C Host of Dxers Unlimited radio hobby program Radio Havana Cuba _______________________________________________ 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
At 05:40 PM 9/4/2012, you wrote:
In my opinion (it's worth every penny you just paid for it) if they are going to create a new super sophisticated "Phase III Part Deux" it should perhaps be taken to the ISS in pieces, assembled there and blown into a long-period orbit. But then that's just my opinion.
Right you are.
Hi Kevin,
Two comments...
1. I belive it was AO-10 that was damaged by a collision with the launch vehicle. AO-40 had a problem with it's on-board rocket motor, which exploded shortly after it's first burn, taking a good bit of the satellite with it. Only through an extraordinary effort by the command team did they get what was left working again. Amazing bird (and amazing command team!).
2. ISS assembly is an interesting idea, but I have a really hard time believing you'd get anything resembling a rocket motor to be shipped up to the ISS. That would comdemn the bird to be in a low and short-lived orbit. Unless they could convince the Russians to turn the Progress around and fire the retro engines the other way to RAISE it's orbit instead of trashing it into the planet? Bolt our sat to the side. Sort of a SuitSat on steroids? Wonder how high it could go?
But, keep the ideas coming.
Greg KO6TH
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Kevin Muenzler < kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org> wrote:
In my opinion (it's worth every penny you just paid for it) if they are going to create a new super sophisticated "Phase III Part Deux" it should perhaps be taken to the ISS in pieces, assembled there and blown into a long-period orbit. But then that's just my opinion. If I remember correctly AO-40 was damaged by a collision with the launch vehicle shortly after separation. Of course a new generation of easy-sats that can be worked using a J-pole setup would be nice too.
Kevin Muenzler, WB5RUE Grid EL09uf Eagle Creek Observatory http://www.eaglecreekobservatory.org I can melt ice with my mind, it just takes a few minutes.
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 5:21 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
Just read a posting about a possible replacement for the ill fated super sophisticated over-engineered ultra complex AO40 satellite. My perception is that any attempt to create a New Generation Molnya Orbit Satellite must undergo a very serious and comprehensive engineering research , in order to keep it within an area of simplicity that will make possible a much higher degree of reliability. No, it is not a call for an ultra simple parrot satellite, or a medium level of sophistication... what I am proposing is to achieve a consensus on how to keep the new satellite within engineering performance parameters that will help to keep costs down, increase the MTBF ( Mean Time Between Failures ) of its equipment, and also to achieve a high degree of operational control so that it can be kept working for a long time. In the meantime, until an AO40 Molnya satellite may be designed and funds can be found to build it and then obtain a piggy back ride on a launch... it would be nice to try to assemble one or more satellites that could follow the very effective and practical designs of the RS10, RS12 and RS 15... If such satellites are built they will certainly be most welcome at a worldwide scale, especially now that heliophysicists ( i.e. solar scientists ) are almost sure that the present solar cycle and the one following are going to bring monthly sunspot averages not seen in more than a century !!! Maybe this posting could start a very productive thread on the AMSAT.BB amigos !!! It would be nice to hear opinions and points of view from all around the world on this topic 73 and DX Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich ( AKA Arnie Coro ) Emergency Coordinator IARU Region II Area C Host of Dxers Unlimited radio hobby program Radio Havana Cuba _______________________________________________ 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
You are right here, it was AO-10 that was damaged by the collision. I didn't remember that AO-40 had an engine issue but that explains quite a bit. It would be difficult to get some sort of rocket aboard the ISS now that the space shuttle missions are finished but it's just an idea. Maybe when the next generation of "Space Shuttles" come on line (yeah, right) we'll have that opportunity again.
Kevin
From: Greg Dolkas [mailto:ko6th.greg@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 10:27 PM To: Kevin Muenzler Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
Hi Kevin,
Two comments...
1. I belive it was AO-10 that was damaged by a collision with the launch vehicle. AO-40 had a problem with it's on-board rocket motor, which exploded shortly after it's first burn, taking a good bit of the satellite with it. Only through an extraordinary effort by the command team did they get what was left working again. Amazing bird (and amazing command team!).
2. ISS assembly is an interesting idea, but I have a really hard time believing you'd get anything resembling a rocket motor to be shipped up to the ISS. That would comdemn the bird to be in a low and short-lived orbit. Unless they could convince the Russians to turn the Progress around and fire the retro engines the other way to RAISE it's orbit instead of trashing it into the planet? Bolt our sat to the side. Sort of a SuitSat on steroids? Wonder how high it could go?
But, keep the ideas coming.
Greg KO6TH
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Kevin Muenzler kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org wrote:
In my opinion (it's worth every penny you just paid for it) if they are going to create a new super sophisticated "Phase III Part Deux" it should perhaps be taken to the ISS in pieces, assembled there and blown into a long-period orbit. But then that's just my opinion. If I remember correctly AO-40 was damaged by a collision with the launch vehicle shortly after separation. Of course a new generation of easy-sats that can be worked using a J-pole setup would be nice too.
Kevin Muenzler, WB5RUE Grid EL09uf Eagle Creek Observatory http://www.eaglecreekobservatory.org I can melt ice with my mind, it just takes a few minutes.
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 5:21 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
Just read a posting about a possible replacement for the ill fated super sophisticated over-engineered ultra complex AO40 satellite. My perception is that any attempt to create a New Generation Molnya Orbit Satellite must undergo a very serious and comprehensive engineering research , in order to keep it within an area of simplicity that will make possible a much higher degree of reliability. No, it is not a call for an ultra simple parrot satellite, or a medium level of sophistication... what I am proposing is to achieve a consensus on how to keep the new satellite within engineering performance parameters that will help to keep costs down, increase the MTBF ( Mean Time Between Failures ) of its equipment, and also to achieve a high degree of operational control so that it can be kept working for a long time. In the meantime, until an AO40 Molnya satellite may be designed and funds can be found to build it and then obtain a piggy back ride on a launch... it would be nice to try to assemble one or more satellites that could follow the very effective and practical designs of the RS10, RS12 and RS 15... If such satellites are built they will certainly be most welcome at a worldwide scale, especially now that heliophysicists ( i.e. solar scientists ) are almost sure that the present solar cycle and the one following are going to bring monthly sunspot averages not seen in more than a century !!! Maybe this posting could start a very productive thread on the AMSAT.BB amigos !!! It would be nice to hear opinions and points of view from all around the world on this topic 73 and DX Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich ( AKA Arnie Coro ) Emergency Coordinator IARU Region II Area C Host of Dxers Unlimited radio hobby program Radio Havana Cuba _______________________________________________ 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
On 9/5/2012 8:57 AM, Kevin Muenzler wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Kevin Muenzler kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org wrote:
In my opinion (it's worth every penny you just paid for it) if they are going to create a new super sophisticated "Phase III Part Deux" it should perhaps be taken to the ISS in pieces, assembled there and blown into a long-period orbit. But then that's just my opinion. If I remember correctly AO-40 was damaged by a collision with the launch vehicle shortly after separation. Of course a new generation of easy-sats that can be worked using a J-pole setup would be nice too.
Keep in mind that astronaut time is a very precious commodity, particularly astronaut EVA time. I seriously doubt you'd ever get buy-in by the authorities to have the astronauts devote any of their precious EVA time to assembling an amateur satellite in orbit. Furthermore, I'm not sure of the benefit of on-orbit assembly, unless you believed that you could break down the satellite into such small pieces that they could go along for a "free ride" whenever astronauts or cargo were being sent up. Even AO-40 would have fit into the cargo bay of the (now, sadly, grounded) shuttles, although its nitrogen tetroxide oxidizer and monomethylhydrazine fuel would never have allowed it to fly on a manned shuttle.
Granted, it is easier to get a ride for a 1U cubesat than another AO-40, and the best way to get a ride to orbit is to make the hardware as small and light as possible. But other than shrinking the bird, I don't think that it's so much a problem of re-engineering a whole new satellite design. The design of AO-40 was incredibly good. The design failure was in the step-by-step commissioning process that left a fuel port cap in place prior to launch which then led to the explosion that crippled the bird. People bemoan how "over-engineered" and how "excessively complex" AO-40 was, but it was precisely that complexity and over-engineering that allowed us to get any use out of the bird after the explosion. Getting a ride to a satisfactory orbit is far and away the biggest obstacle.
Now I'll get onto my soapbox for a few moments. I do not understand why we keep pouring our limited resources into single-channel FM satellites. Even a cubesat is capable of carrying a linear transponder, and even if it is put into a LEO, it has to be more useful than an FM transponder in the same orbit. Since the big issue is getting a ride to orbit, why not send up the most capable satellite that we can within the constraints of the allowable package size and weight? I mean, in the worst case, if we launched a linear transponder and "everyone" complained that it was too hard to work it, it could still be operated as a single-channel FM transponder if you allowed people to transmit in FM, much as it would break my heart to allow it. You would not have lost anything by sending up the linear transponder. Make every launch count for as much as possible. Getting off my soapbox now.
My thanks go out to all the folks working behind the scenes to try their darndest to get us new launch opportunities and to get new flight hardware built and ready to go in case a launch opportunity is found. The AMSAT BOD and staff and volunteers put a remarkable amount of effort into this stuff, and seldom get the acknowledgement that they deserve, since major breakthroughs like the launch of an AO-40 are prevented by forces outside of their control. Which just means that they are working all the harder, *NOT* that they are slackers.
And don't get me wrong, I think that cubesats are a good thing, particularly if they are truly educational (teach us how to build better, smaller satellites), and especially if they are able to someday solve the problem of sufficiently safe and effective on-board propulsion to achieve higher orbits. But please, try and put the best possible RF hardware on them when they go up! (Sorry for the short jump back onto the soapbox there!)
73 de W0JT AMSAT-NA Life Member
--- On Wed, 5/9/12, Kevin Muenzler kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org wrote:
It would be difficult to get some sort of rocket aboard the ISS now that the space shuttle missions are finished
I doubt it was ever feasible, if I understand it correctly there are even issues with shipping rechargable batteries up there let alone a rocket.
Also with regards to ISS bear in mind buying astronauts time to do anything would cost a fortune. They are employed by their respective organizations to work up there.
Getting CubeSat's to MEO or HEO will depend on developing propulsion, fold-out solar panels, and even CubeSat directional antennas - I wonder could a 2m 2 ele Yagi be incorporated into a 3U CubeSat ?
73 Trevor M5AKA
I can understand that!
What I meant was that it could be launched as so many have been launched -- from the shuttle cargo bay. But, no more shuttles...Mr. Obama gave them all away. :(
-----Original Message----- From: Trevor . [mailto:m5aka@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 10:48 AM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org; Kevin Muenzler Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
--- On Wed, 5/9/12, Kevin Muenzler kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org wrote:
It would be difficult to get some sort of rocket aboard the ISS now that the space shuttle missions are finished
I doubt it was ever feasible, if I understand it correctly there are even issues with shipping rechargable batteries up there let alone a rocket.
Also with regards to ISS bear in mind buying astronauts time to do anything would cost a fortune. They are employed by their respective organizations to work up there.
Getting CubeSat's to MEO or HEO will depend on developing propulsion, fold-out solar panels, and even CubeSat directional antennas - I wonder could a 2m 2 ele Yagi be incorporated into a 3U CubeSat ?
73 Trevor M5AKA
On 05/09/12 17:15, Kevin Muenzler wrote:
What I meant was that it could be launched as so many have been launched -- from the shuttle cargo bay. But, no more shuttles...Mr. Obama gave them all away. :(
Much as I love the Space Shuttles, they were long overdue for their final voyage to the mixed metals yard.
There is absolutely no reason why NASA is wasting time and money on routine flights to the ISS - it's a delivery, get DHL to do it. Maybe they can spend some money on a more suitable delivery vehicle, instead of patching together the spacegoing equivalent of a rusty 1981 Ford Transit.
How would it be assembled on ISS? You would have to build it on the ground, document every step, take it apart and rebuild it to be sure the assembly documentation is correct and then ship it up bit by bit. Meanwhile each crew trains quite awhile on their respective increments aboard before they launch. So, you would have to hope you train the right crew to assemble it which means your upmass bits and pieces would have to make every launch they are scheduled for. Being a ham radio satellite what do you think the priority is should something more pressing come along? There goes your trained crew, remember the broken antenna on ARISSat-1? The crew that deployed it was not the crew that had been trained on the ground for that deployment. Assembly of anything even remotely close to AO-40 aboard ISS is unrealistic. The best chance of getting a so called replacement for AO40 is to find a way to complete and launch P3D which is sitting on the ground in Germany. Maybe they'd like to disassemble it, document it and work shipping it to ISS via ESA?
John - AG9D
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Trevor . m5aka@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
--- On Wed, 5/9/12, Kevin Muenzler kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org wrote:
It would be difficult to get some sort of rocket aboard the ISS now that the space shuttle missions are finished
I doubt it was ever feasible, if I understand it correctly there are even issues with shipping rechargable batteries up there let alone a rocket.
Also with regards to ISS bear in mind buying astronauts time to do anything would cost a fortune. They are employed by their respective organizations to work up there.
Getting CubeSat's to MEO or HEO will depend on developing propulsion, fold-out solar panels, and even CubeSat directional antennas - I wonder could a 2m 2 ele Yagi be incorporated into a 3U CubeSat ?
73 Trevor M5AKA
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
I am resigned to the fact we will in all probability never see another AO-40 (sobsob) unless one of us wins the lottery. We would call it the LRD bird (if I won). As far as putting one together on the ISS, we would have to send a "real" ham to the ISS., to put it together. Remember they busted a antenna on the last one. The best chance is from our DL friends with the AO-10/13 type frame. Untill then we will have to be content with what we have and when we have it. We can play around with interesting propulsion systems etc. I realize we have smart people in high places within various organizations, and trusting them is necessary. Finally if a HEO is ever on the horizon (pun intended), they will come in droves. 73 Bob W7LRD
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Spasojevich" johnag9d@gmail.com To: "Trevor ." m5aka@yahoo.co.uk Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:40:09 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
How would it be assembled on ISS? You would have to build it on the ground, document every step, take it apart and rebuild it to be sure the assembly documentation is correct and then ship it up bit by bit. Meanwhile each crew trains quite awhile on their respective increments aboard before they launch. So, you would have to hope you train the right crew to assemble it which means your upmass bits and pieces would have to make every launch they are scheduled for. Being a ham radio satellite what do you think the priority is should something more pressing come along? There goes your trained crew, remember the broken antenna on ARISSat-1? The crew that deployed it was not the crew that had been trained on the ground for that deployment. Assembly of anything even remotely close to AO-40 aboard ISS is unrealistic. The best chance of getting a so called replacement for AO40 is to find a way to complete and launch P3D which is sitting on the ground in Germany. Maybe they'd like to disassemble it, document it and work shipping it to ISS via ESA?
John - AG9D
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Trevor . m5aka@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
--- On Wed, 5/9/12, Kevin Muenzler kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org wrote:
It would be difficult to get some sort of rocket aboard the ISS now that the space shuttle missions are finished
I doubt it was ever feasible, if I understand it correctly there are even issues with shipping rechargable batteries up there let alone a rocket.
Also with regards to ISS bear in mind buying astronauts time to do anything would cost a fortune. They are employed by their respective organizations to work up there.
Getting CubeSat's to MEO or HEO will depend on developing propulsion, fold-out solar panels, and even CubeSat directional antennas - I wonder could a 2m 2 ele Yagi be incorporated into a 3U CubeSat ?
73 Trevor M5AKA
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
I was watching a video a few weeks ago (YouTube I think) about putting cube-sats ("triple-cube") in geosynchronous orbit using ion power. They would be launched to the ISS, unpacked and released during an EVA. They would slowly spiral out over several months to a permanent orbit. I'll see if I can find it again and post it here.
Kevin Muenzler, WB5RUE Grid-EL09uf Eagle Creek Observatory http://www.eaglecreekobservatory.org I'd be unstoppable if it weren't for law enforcement and physics
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Bob- W7LRD Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 12:37 PM To: John Spasojevich Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
I am resigned to the fact we will in all probability never see another AO-40 (sobsob) unless one of us wins the lottery. We would call it the LRD bird (if I won). As far as putting one together on the ISS, we would have to send a "real" ham to the ISS., to put it together. Remember they busted a antenna on the last one. The best chance is from our DL friends with the AO-10/13 type frame. Untill then we will have to be content with what we have and when we have it. We can play around with interesting propulsion systems etc. I realize we have smart people in high places within various organizations, and trusting them is necessary. Finally if a HEO is ever on the horizon (pun intended), they will come in droves. 73 Bob W7LRD
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Spasojevich" johnag9d@gmail.com To: "Trevor ." m5aka@yahoo.co.uk Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:40:09 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
How would it be assembled on ISS? You would have to build it on the ground, document every step, take it apart and rebuild it to be sure the assembly documentation is correct and then ship it up bit by bit. Meanwhile each crew trains quite awhile on their respective increments aboard before they launch. So, you would have to hope you train the right crew to assemble it which means your upmass bits and pieces would have to make every launch they are scheduled for. Being a ham radio satellite what do you think the priority is should something more pressing come along? There goes your trained crew, remember the broken antenna on ARISSat-1? The crew that deployed it was not the crew that had been trained on the ground for that deployment. Assembly of anything even remotely close to AO-40 aboard ISS is unrealistic. The best chance of getting a so called replacement for AO40 is to find a way to complete and launch P3D which is sitting on the ground in Germany. Maybe they'd like to disassemble it, document it and work shipping it to ISS via ESA?
John - AG9D
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Trevor . m5aka@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
--- On Wed, 5/9/12, Kevin Muenzler kevin@eaglecreekobservatory.org wrote:
It would be difficult to get some sort of rocket aboard the ISS now that the space shuttle missions are finished
I doubt it was ever feasible, if I understand it correctly there are even issues with shipping rechargable batteries up there let alone a
rocket.
Also with regards to ISS bear in mind buying astronauts time to do anything would cost a fortune. They are employed by their respective organizations to work up there.
Getting CubeSat's to MEO or HEO will depend on developing propulsion, fold-out solar panels, and even CubeSat directional antennas - I wonder could a 2m 2 ele Yagi be incorporated into a 3U CubeSat ?
73 Trevor M5AKA
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
On 05/09/12 16:48, Trevor . wrote:
Getting CubeSat's to MEO or HEO will depend on developing propulsion, fold-out solar panels, and even CubeSat directional antennas - I wonder could a 2m 2 ele Yagi be incorporated into a 3U CubeSat ?
As a first-order approximation, my HB9CV is just about 260mm between elements, or a little shorter than a 3U cubesat. So it seems to me that you could make a two-element "tape measure" beam with the elements wrapped around the can at opposite ends and ensure it always points driven end downwards. The rest is just standard pyro to unwrap the aerial elements.
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 07:35:22PM +0100, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
On 05/09/12 16:48, Trevor . wrote:
Getting CubeSat's to MEO or HEO will depend on developing propulsion, fold-out solar panels, and even CubeSat directional antennas - I wonder could a 2m 2 ele Yagi be incorporated into a 3U CubeSat ?
As a first-order approximation, my HB9CV is just about 260mm between elements, or a little shorter than a 3U cubesat. So it seems to me that you could make a two-element "tape measure" beam with the elements wrapped around the can at opposite ends and ensure it always points driven end downwards. The rest is just standard pyro to unwrap the aerial elements.
Piece of wire driven by some electricity works well enough. No need for big pyro explosions.
-- Gordon JC Pearce MM0YEQ _______________________________________________ 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
Diane Bruce VA3DB
--- On Wed, 5/9/12, Diane Bruce db@db.net wrote:
Piece of wire driven by some electricity works well enough. No need for big pyro explosions.
Yes and the TetherSat CubeSat should be testing out exactly that next year, see
73 Trevor M5AKA
participants (10)
-
Bob- W7LRD -
Diane Bruce -
Gordon JC Pearce -
Greg Dolkas -
John Becker -
John P. Toscano -
John Spasojevich -
Kevin Muenzler -
Prof. Arnaldo Coro Antich -
Trevor .