On 10/15/2012 05:55 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote:

I don't agree with these elitist arguments for intentionally making things difficult. This "anti-easy-sat" mentality doesn't buy us anything. Let the dead horse decompose.

I don't think anybody actually wants to make things deliberately harder. But hams have always pushed the boundaries. Going further with less power and less bandwidth. Fooling around with useless frequencies above 1 MHz. And so forth. And the satellite operator is no different.

It may be easy to reliably work a future generation of satellites with an HT and a rubber duckie. But that won't be challenging. And we (the operators) won't be learning anything new.

Driving innovation and spawning a new generation of experimenters is a more realistic vision. Create opportunities for people to step outside their "box" and homebrew equipment. That excites people.

Which is a long way of saying "I want hard sats!" :-)

Hi Robert, WB5MZO

I have answered off board to your previous letter to me but unfortunately it was rejected by your provider.

- These recipients of your message have been processed by the mail server: [email protected]; Failed; 4.4.7 (delivery time expired)

Do you have another email address ?

Please let me know

73" de

i8CVS Domenico

----- Original Message ----- From: "R Oler" [email protected] To: [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: "Amsat BB" [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 2:54 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OH2AUE P3E transponder demo video

We should in my view have satellites which increase the number of people on them! Robert WB5MZO

---

Sent via [email protected]. 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 Paolo, PU2PHK

I suggest you to contact William PE1RAH at [email protected]

73" de

i8CVS Domenico

----- Original Message ----- From: "Paulinho - PU2PHK" [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 6:45 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] transponder

Hello I'm doing some experiments and I wonder if anyone has some scheme of a Linear Transponder VHF - UHF to provide me. Now appreciate any help. Thanks. Paulo PU2PHK Brasil

---

Sent via [email protected]. 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 the AMSAT-DL meeting in Bochum last weekend William presented a U/V lineartransponder for 1U cubesats.... (weight only 30 gramms)

73 Mike DK3WN

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Jari Koivurinne Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2012 10:26 An: Paulinho - PU2PHK Cc: [email protected] Betreff: [amsat-bb] Re: transponder

Hello I'm doing some experiments and I wonder if anyone has some scheme of a Linear Transponder VHF - UHF to provide me. Now appreciate any help. Thanks. Paulo PU2PHK Brasil

Hello!

This is one ready to fly analog transponder: http://www.qsl.net/pe1rah/LE002.htm

-jari oh3uw

_______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. 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 10/15/2012 10:18 PM, Ben Jackson wrote:

...

It may be easy to reliably work a future generation of satellites with an HT and a rubber duckie. But that won't be challenging. And we (the operators) won't be learning anything new.

But instead folks are promoting an anachronism. They're discussing learning something new at the same time saying we should be using a technology that has been in use since the 1960s.

So then instead of focusing on linear transponders how about deploying HSMM nodes into space, TDMA, or DMR technology? (No idea how feasible any of of this is)

I'm in favour of all this. But as Robert WB5MZO said, you want to maximize usability as well. A linear transponder allows more people to use the satellite, and is probably less demanding on the satellite as well. I'd like to see a satellite that operated in FM mode around perigee so simple equipment could work the bird, and as the slant-range and path losses, as well as the size of coverage circle and potential numbers of hams within the circle increases, as the bird heads on up to apogee, it could switch to linear mode.

Newer technology and more advanced modes can be made available for experiment, either simultaneously, on (say) bands L, S, C, etc, and also on more accessible bands (U, V) by having the bird switch mode accordingly.

As far as meshed networks, etc, are concerned, I fear that multiple birds will be necessary (obviously) and I don't know how practical it is to consider this, when we have so much difficulty getting a single bird in the sky. But I'm all in favour! If orbits could be coordinated, and sat-2-sat links established, your uplink could appear as coordinated downlinks in several parts of the globe simultaneously.

How about something that supports TCP/IP? People were discussing how a AMSAT could generate interest in a kickstarter for a HEO? Promise a bunch of hackers and geeks that with a small donation, sitting for a ham radio test, and buying some kind of kit, they can get a (slow) network connection in far flung locations I'm feel fairly confident that they would start hurling their wallets at you screaming "Shut up and take my money!"

I'm not convinced that slow TCP/IP is much of an inducement. You may be right, but I think there are precious few places that you can't obtain connectivity at a reasonable price, and the places that you CAN'T are not likely to be inhabited by people who can finance a satellite launch. I think it is a laudable goal, to make connectivity available in such locations, but I don't see it as a potential source of funding. But I've been wrong before...

What I think might work is to build a big satellite, and "rent" or "sell" space on board to people who want to perform space-born experiments without messing about with communications hardware. Data from various experiments can be stored, and downloaded an orbit at a time as the satellite passes within range of selected amateur ground-stations. The data can be separated out into individual feeds for the individual "tenants" and forwarded to them via terrestrial internet. Telecommand can be via the reverse path. If the satellite is one that operates at higher altitudes with a longer anticipated lifespan, educational institutions may find it an opportunity to perform experiments that a short-lived, LEO bird can't support.

However, the SSB mafia is firmly entrenched in their ways and will simultaneously bemoan the easy sats, yet pooh-pooh "hard sats" that won't support the divine mode.

I should be mad at you for making this comment, because I suspect "SSB mafia" is targeted directly at people just like me. But I'm not mad, because the other SSB mafia probably feel just as I do. I won't apologize for enjoying SSB, CW and even RTTY (once, tried but no response) via satellite. I don't groan about the "easy sats" because they are "easy sats". I gripe about the fact that there aren't anything BUT "easy sats". Where are these "hard sats" you mention? And why DON'T they support the divine mode, damnit?!?? I have a divine-mode transceiver here that I'd love use, even if as nothing more than a gateway mode to these "hard sats" you speak of. And if I remember correctly from my days on the Microsats, the divine mode was the basis for many digital encoding schemes.

Naturally, I would also enjoy doing some DXing and ragchewing with the divine mode as well. (Enjoying ragchewing and DXing is, I'm told, another thing I need to apologize for.)

By the way, what is so easy about these "easy sats?" Don't you have to stand in the yard, in the dark, with the rain falling on your head, operating two HTs and a voice recorder with one hand and waving a broomstick yagi with the other, while your laptop gets wet? In comparison, sitting back comfortably in my chair, with the mic/key in one hand, a Planters Punch in the other, the cat in my lap and Fido at my feet, while I work DX or ragchew with a friend (There! Those expletives again!) doesn't sound all that hard!

AMSAT-BB,

I usually don't comment on the list but this is the third or fourth email string in the last month that brought up the HEO vs. LEO argument. I am relatively new to AMSAT but even then, have been working hard to learn its history, getting to know who is involved, and started volunteering to help the organization build the FOX series of satellites. I'm excited to be a part of it. Before people keep going on arguing that AMSAT is or is not developing the right technology to suit their needs or to even launch a satellite into orbit. I urge you to find out what AMSAT is currently working towards.

I have linked to an interview with Barry Baines, WD4ASW, on the HamRadioNow youtube channel. The link below links directly to minute 18:00 of the interview. To everyone not currently up-to-date with why AMSAT is developing portions of the FOX project please watch from minute 18:00 to minute 23:00.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3o_PV2b9F6g#t=...

I hope to keep learning about AMSAT, keep volunteering my time and resources, and to keep promoting amateur radio. As a college engineering student (senior) and as someone who has worked in the aerospace industry (R&D of launch vehicles and satellites) I can understand why the colleges need to educate future engineers, why launch opportunities cost so much, and why AMSAT is on the direction it is currently heading. Again, I'm not an expert in these areas and I have much to learn, but I have the background to at least understand some of the reasoning behind these topics. I look at many of the satellites that people talk about on this list, wishing they were still working, and realizing many of them were in operation before I was even born. Maybe we will see similar satellites in orbit one day, I sure hope so. Launch costs need to come down. Thank you for your time, I look forward to meeting all on the air one day!

Sincerely,

Bryce Salmi KB1LQC

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, JoAnne Maenpaa [email protected] wrote:

Hello,

...

Newer technology and more advanced modes can be made available for experiment, either simultaneously, on (say) bands L, S, C, etc, and also on more accessible bands (U, V) by having the bird switch mode accordingly ... As far as meshed networks ...

Like these designs?

Proposed in 2003 - http://www.cnssys.com/files/amsat/cc_amsat.pdf Proposed in 2004 - http://www.cnssys.com/files/amsat/cc-revisited.pdf Proposed in 2006 - http://www.cnssys.com/files/amsat/SDX_and_Future_AMSAT_Missions.pdf

Thing is ... everyone knows we've been looking for a suitable launch since the dates of these papers. Other cool designs live in the Symposium Proceedings for AMSAT-Eagle and the Phase IV GEO-Rideshare projects.

Some of the good old days are archived in the "Historical AMSAT-NA Symposium Proceedings" - http://www.klofas.com/amsat_symposium/

-- 73 de JoAnne K9JKM [email protected]

---

Sent via [email protected]. 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 10/17/2012 05:38 PM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

We're going to have to try coming up with clever satellites, rather than flying a bent-pipe box the size of a fridge. No-one is going to want to lift that, without us paying full price.

I may not be 100% on the 'bent pipe' definition, but if it means hams 'talk' on the UP and other hams 'listens' on the DOWN, then that's what we need. Whether it be the size of a fridge of a matchbox, if ham radio operators can't use it to communicate, then it's pretty pointless. It don't matter how much telemetry it sends, how many LEDs it blinks, how clever the beacons, or what purty pictures it downlinks. If hams can't use it to QSO, then why bother?

Wow, a narrow self centric view of the world:

a huge trend to build more and more of these shoe boxes.. ... most of them are almost useless... What kind of science is it,... The wheels are re-invented again and again... For us AMSAT'ers.. this is something we did almost 30 years ago!!!! This is history and nothing like science anymore...

Please do not speak for me. Obviously the writer above has no clue what education is all about.

Guess what! Every single year, the teacher has to start EXACTLY back at square ZERO.

That is what EDUCATION is all about. Teaching each new year of students the same thing over and over and over. Its not fun... but it is challenging...

Now I do not defend all repeats of stupid ideas and other mistakes, but education is a repeating process every year by definition.

Now, if you want a different satellite built , THEN BUILD IT. It does no credit to lambast at least those that are DOING SOMETHING... even if it is not what you want, then either build what you want, and launch it, or get out of the way....

I have not been following this thread at all. So if my comments are inappropriate, I apologize. But some people have no clue what it takes to educate a completely new class starting over every year.

Bob, WB4APR

On 18/10/12 03:28, Gus 8P6SM wrote:

On 10/17/2012 05:38 PM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

...

We're going to have to try coming up with clever satellites, rather than flying a bent-pipe box the size of a fridge. No-one is going to want to lift that, without us paying full price.

I may not be 100% on the 'bent pipe' definition, but if it means hams 'talk' on the UP and other hams 'listens' on the DOWN, then that's what

What I am referring to is linear transponders. They're heavy and consume a lot of power. We need to either devise a new way of doing that, that doesn't involve heavy inefficient linear amplifiers, or stick to something like FM or GMSK where a little lightweight PA that doesn't dissipate most of the input power as heat will do the job.

we need. Whether it be the size of a fridge of a matchbox, if ham radio operators can't use it to communicate, then it's pretty pointless. It

If it's big it won't fly, unless you pay for the whole flight. Have you noticed how airlines have stopped carrying children for free, too?

don't matter how much telemetry it sends, how many LEDs it blinks, how clever the beacons, or what purty pictures it downlinks. If hams can't use it to QSO, then why bother?

It depends what you're trying to achieve. I'll respond to Domenico's comments here, too.

Most satellites are not built by radio amateurs. They're not there so you can talk to your friends. They are built so the engineering students that will build the satellites and spacecraft of the future. Like it or not, amateur radio is a secondary service on 70cm. We don't own that chunk of band. If you want to work a band free from "beep sats", stick to 2m and good luck with your build.

Well all this sounds great , BUT does Amsat have the money to put anything in space If so why has it not been done. As I said once before the cubsats that go beep beep have not helped me or anyone get a single new grid.. Can anyone at Amsat convince the schools or the rocket folks to let a ham satellite ride along with any launch? Im am sure that there are alot of satellite users out there who careless about the beepers. Looking to the future I would think that Amsats support may drop off some without something positive for the supporters to lock on to ( A DATE ) I just don't understand the need for beepers Im sorry Damon

----- Original Message ----- From: "Gus 8P6SM" [email protected] To: "Gordon JC Pearce" [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 9:55:01 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OH2AUE P3E transponder demo video

On 10/18/2012 02:47 AM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

On 18/10/12 03:28, Gus 8P6SM wrote:

...

On 10/17/2012 05:38 PM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

...

We're going to have to try coming up with clever satellites, rather than flying a bent-pipe box the size of a fridge. No-one is going to want to lift that, without us paying full price.

I may not be 100% on the 'bent pipe' definition, but if it means hams 'talk' on the UP and other hams 'listens' on the DOWN, then that's what

What I am referring to is linear transponders. They're heavy and consume a lot of power. We need to either devise a new way of doing that, that doesn't involve heavy inefficient linear amplifiers, or stick to something like FM or GMSK where a little lightweight PA that doesn't dissipate most of the input power as heat will do the job.

A full-duty-cycle FM transponder that eats up the entire bandwidth of the satellite to allow a single ham to communicate strikes me as far less sensible than an efficient linear transponder that allows multiple simultaneous contacts and does not run the PA at full duty cycle.

But never the less, I don't really care what the operating mode for communication is, so long as there actually *IS* an operating mode for communication. Satellites that DON'T allow hams to communicate are not of any interest to me, and (IMHO) are not relevant in any discussion of AMATEUR satellites.

...

we need. Whether it be the size of a fridge of a matchbox, if ham radio operators can't use it to communicate, then it's pretty pointless. It

If it's big it won't fly, unless you pay for the whole flight. Have you noticed how airlines have stopped carrying children for free, too?

And most people have long ago stopped whining about it and now simply pay for their children to fly. So let's pay for a flight and stop whinging about how we can't get a free one.

...

don't matter how much telemetry it sends, how many LEDs it blinks, how clever the beacons, or what purty pictures it downlinks. If hams can't use it to QSO, then why bother?

It depends what you're trying to achieve. I'll respond to Domenico's comments here, too.

Most satellites are not built by radio amateurs. They're not there so you can talk to your friends. They are built so the engineering students that will build the satellites and spacecraft of the future.

Most satellites have nothing whatsoever to do with the engineering students of the future. But we don't get all goo-goo eyed over the launch of some military spy-sat because it has nothing to do with amateur radio. And neither do most of the cubesats.

Like it or not, amateur radio is a secondary service on 70cm. We don't own that chunk of band. If you want to work a band free from "beep sats", stick to 2m and good luck with your build.

Uh-oh! As a recent posting leads us to understand, UMSATS TSat-1 uses 437 *and* 145 MHz amateur radio bands. Is the 2 meter band a secondary service as well?

----- Original Message ----- From: "Gordon JC Pearce" [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 8:47 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OH2AUE P3E transponder demo video

What I am referring to is linear transponders. They're heavy and consume a lot of power. We need to either devise a new way of doing that, that doesn't involve heavy inefficient linear amplifiers, or stick to something like FM or GMSK where a little lightweight PA that doesn't dissipate most of the input power as heat will do the job.

It depends what you're trying to achieve. I'll respond to Domenico's comments here, too.

Gordon JC Pearce MM0YEQ

Hi Gordon, MM0YEQ

Linear transponder can be built not heavy not to consume a lot of power and not too costly.

Read please the following advise of William PE1RAH to my friend Roberto IW5BSF for a linear transponder designed for Ham radio frequencies to be integrated in CubeSat projects, balloon missions or terresterial repeaters.

http://www.leijenaarelectronics.nl/leijenaar_electronics_009.htm

Dear Roberto,

The transponder I sell as a complete (pre-made) package in which the programmer and software all is included.

It is made of very small SMD parts, 0402 size, that can only be soldered with profesional reflow oven (which I use).

The whole package includes:

Transponder on profesionally milled evaluation board (fully tested) , power supply, programmer included all cables, example source code, and manuals.

The transponder will be delivered with a testing report.

I can deliver it for the price of 1800 Euro (excluded shipping cost).

The transponder will be operational in a matter of minutes (the time to connect antenna cables and power supply). Manufacturing time is about 2 weeks, because of testing time to guarenty the quality.

Datasheet and information you can find on my website:

www.leijenaarelectronics.nl

Thank you for your interrest and kind regards,

William Leijenaar, PE1RAH Leijenaar Electronics Bergmanshofweg 2 5926 RH Venlo The Netherlands ---