Their original 3u design included a transponder. Hopefully they will overlook the boorish behavior and consider it for follow on projects.

Good luck and congratulations in advance on the deployment of F-1

73, Drew KO4MA Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 24, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Dave Webb KB1PVH kb1pvh@gmail.com wrote:

Insult them, that's a great way to get groups to consider a repeater on board. Believe it or not, some people enjoy the peacefulness of receiving telemetry versus the the fight with inconsiderate operators.

Dave-KB1PVH

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Droid RAZR _______________________________________________ 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

For what its worth. . .

some of the post to this subject seem to have been posted in the HTML mode.

This being a plain text list was just unreadable. Only fix was to delete.

On 09/24/2012 12:39 PM, John Spasojevich wrote:

Or maybe they will be reallocated to them.

The chances of which increases, with every satellite launched that uses the amateur bands but carries no amateur payload.

They use them more than we do.

Whose fault is that?

Maybe hams in your world own frequencies but in tge USA their use is a privilege not a right.

In my world, hams have a RIGHT to properly use the frequencies that are ALLOCATED for their use. And a RIGHT to complain when they are misused.

On 09/24/2012 01:32 PM, John Spasojevich wrote:

If I could launch a cube sat for my experimental interests it would use ham bands and may only send back tlm. So am I prohibited from that?

I, for one, would oppose the launch of, and object to your Cube Sat's use of amateur frequencies, if it used those frequencies for non-ham purposes.

Perhaps you should read ITU Radio Regulations – Article 1, specifically parts 55 thru 57:

1.55 Space research service A radiocommunication service in which spacecraft or other objects in space are used for scientific or technological research purposes.

1.56 Amateur service A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, by duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.

1.57 Amateur-satellite service A radiocommunication service using space stations on earth satellites for the same purposes as those of the amateur service.

We need to be VERY careful to maintain a DISTINCTION between 1.55 and 1.57. Otherwise, all those who currently operate under 1.55 can simply start freely using our frequencies and claim to be operating under 1.57 without let or hindrance. To say that whatever you do, if you simply claim it is "self-training" or "technical investigation" you get free use of the ham bands is to open a particularly nasty can of worms.

On 09/24/2012 02:56 PM, John Spasojevich wrote:

I fail to see where your references prohibit such activity as long as hams are involved. Would a school ham radio club be prohibited ?

Of course. IF what they were doing was not ham-related. Just because you have a ham license doesn't mean you can get on the air and use the frequencies for whatever you like.

Would it be OK for NASA to use ham frequencies for their Mars Rover project, just because someone at NASA went out and got themself a ham ticket? After all, the Mars Rover programme is undoubtedly educational, and also a technical investigation.

I think the main issue is that these birds don't satisfy YOUR personal interest. Just as ragchewing and dx-ing don't satisfy the schools exerimental goals.

And neither should the schools assume that the amateur radio community automatically stands ready to satisfy THEIR needs, no matter what those needs are.

So maybe helping them build a transponder would satisfy both.

Yes, I think it would, as a reasonable compromise. In fact, maybe we should PROVIDE them with a working comms board that gives them the data pathways they need to fulfill their experimental needs AND at the same time provides US with something that provides OUR needs.

It seems the entire focus these days is upon leveraging educational opportunities. The theory goes, as I understand it: Since we can't afford to pay for a launch of our own, we COOPERATE with educational institutions (who do seem able to get launches) to provide useable frequencies -- and potentially a global network of groundstations -- IN EXCHANGE for some sort of communications functionality that can be used BY US.

Except it isn't happening. One satellite after another, they get what we have to offer (bandwidth), and they offer us... NOTHING in return.

But then its not HEO so maybe just let the freqs die until funding is there for the appropriate use. By then thiae freqs will have long since been reallocated

I used to enjoy working HEO, but I am not against LEO satellites, and have worked quite a few myself. But low orbit or highly elliptical, the more people that end up using our frequencies for non-amateur purposes, the greater the case that is being made for the reallocation of those frequencies.

Its beating a dead horse. That want HEO dx-ing and ragchewing are free to build one. You don't need AMSAT anywhere do do that.

I thought that's exactly what AMSAT was created for. The construction, launch, care and feeding of satellites for use by the community of amateur radio operators. Guess not, eh?

Channel your energy into such a constructive project. I seriously doubt the complaining will get anything done.

Neither, apparently, will AMSAT.

On 09/24/2012 04:07 PM, Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:

...

Yes, I think it would, as a reasonable compromise. In fact, maybe we should PROVIDE them with a working comms board that gives them the data pathways they need to fulfill their experimental needs AND at the same time provides US with something that provides OUR needs.

It seems the entire focus these days is upon leveraging educational opportunities. The theory goes, as I understand it: Since we can't afford to pay for a launch of our own, we COOPERATE with educational institutions (who do seem able to get launches) to provide useable frequencies -- and potentially a global network of groundstations -- IN EXCHANGE for some sort of communications functionality that can be used BY US.

We could even call it AMSAT Fox! And take donations on the front page of the website via PayPal! And use the same avionics on projects with other entities, and apply for free educational launches!

Excellent idea! When do we start? Because it seems there are a LOT of birds up there that DON'T actually give anything back. What ratio of satellites that DON'T to satellites that DO must we reach, before someone points out that it is in fact, no longer our band?

More seriously: I see the FOX PayPal applet saying a little under $7.5k at the present. How long has it taken to raise that amount? How much do we actually need? Or to get to the crux of the matter, at the current rate, when will we hit the required target, in comparison to when we need to pay for the launch?

On 09/24/2012 04:22 PM, John Spasojevich wrote:

Well Gus, I'm guessing you read Barry's comments regarding launch cost.

I did, and the number is exactly what I previously thought it was.

So write the check and we'll be ready.

Believe you me, if I had the cash, I would do exactly that.

By the time $10M is raised, the cost will have tripled.

Well, that depends upon how fast it is raised. How much have we raised so far? In the nearly twelve years since the last HEO launch?

We are talking about hams, not sure how their wallets are where you are but here in the states, if something is listed at 50 cents they'll try and screw you down to 5.

Same here. But we will still pay 10 grand for a rig if we really want to. Isn't it the same where you live? It's the bread and water principle. You eat bread and water, and save up for what you want. Enough bread and water and you can afford anything! :-)

So good luck raising that kind of cash in the a reasonable amount of time. Until a school or someone else needs a HEO bird, the path is pretty clear for now.

One way to make sure that you never raise the funds is to keep saying "We can't afford it!" and never save up.

I seem to have given the impression that I am against LEO birds. I am not. As it happens, I believe that HEO birds are better. In that they generally offer more facilities for hams generally, and my selfish, ragchewing, DX-chasing butt in particular. Where I live, LEO satellites mostly give me an opportunity to make contact with fish, swimming in the mid Atlantic. So yes, I have a preference for HEO satellites.

But I'm not against LEO birds per se. I AM against any satellite, HEO or LEO, that uses our frequencies as a free alternative to the "Space Research Band" and GIVE NOTHING BACK IN RETURN. Neither a functioning transponder that hams can use, nor a financial donation towards the launch of a bird of our own. Not even, in most cases, research of particular interest to the broader ham community.

As for paying for an HEO launch, I can't afford to cough up that much. I can't even afford to cough up 1% of the required sum towards a launch fund. Even 0.1% would be a financial strain, but it might be doable. As it turns out there IS no launch fund for any HEO satellite for me to contribute to.

On Sep 24, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Gus 8P6SM <8p6sm@

Or maybe we will consider denying them the use of ham frequencies?

-- 73, de Gus 8P6SM The Easternmost Isle _______________________________________________

Under what authority? They are licensed amateur radio operators, and self training and education has always been a tenet of amateur radio, whether you approve or not.

The level of discourse around here lately has been pretty dismal. If we are judged by our behavior on this list (and we are), I'm not surprised so few educational satellite programs want to work with us. The arrogance and entitlement mentality is embarrassing.

73, Drew KO4MA