Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite? Could be we are too stupid here and we swallow anything "the official" says but with the figures given 3.5$ millions can be reached in 3 years by 6000 supporters at a contribution rate of 200$ per year.
I know figures was given in pounds but it is achievable if one day or another the AMSAT'S regroup under an unique satellite funding structures any goals will be achievable. It's true that "FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE" but the context never evolved the same AMSAT'S pattern remain as if it was the only one TRUE solution...It's not.
OPINION POLL AND SURVEYS
I start one "unscientific" couple years ago AMSAT-NA make one more scientific...too and the last one show up the very same results the amateur community want's by a very strong margin HEO'S. The cube sat concept is already very well served by all the cube sats group. It will be logical NOW that the NON CUBE amsat's refocused their goals on HEO'S.
It should be their primary goals not making cube sats as they are cheaper to construct and launch but making or financially/technically supporting the most viable actual HEO'S project eg: P3E.
Again after a small period of darkness someone light up the candle at the end of the tunnel and the tunnel is under the Atlantic with the exit at +- 4000 KM from here.
Still hope when there is still life!
"-"
Luc Leblanc VE2DWE Skype VE2DWE www.qsl.net/ve2dwe WAC BASIC CW PHONE SATELLITE
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
John: Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on charity, and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you haven't heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs. It seems that the DL folks haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as it is to launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they gave us a tangible figure we can work with. This amount may be a reach for AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would take to make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding toward that effort? Following the PE3 launch, if any surplus remains, the surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle). If no surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and would have the lowest risk. Rather than spending time and resources on a new, untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't an opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd. Launching an appliance to serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users won't do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO. I don't care if it's free, like AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's nice" and be done with it. Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon GEO as a viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of the Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow for experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions that our resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No rotator required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to get on the air. I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
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
Since AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA both require funding from outside the amateur radio community, are going after different sources of funding, and neither can predict when they will get that funding, having two efforts would seem to double the opportunity for a non-LEO satellite.
I don't think that the risk decreases with P3E. 50% of P3 satellites were lost due to failures of engines in the launch vehicle or in the satellite.
I don't see how having a linear transponder in a geostationary orbit versus a Molniya orbit makes it an appliance satellite. The antennas and transceivers on ground are the same in either case.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 16:32 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
John: Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on charity, and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you haven't heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs. It seems that the DL folks haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as it is to launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they gave us a tangible figure we can work with. This amount may be a reach for AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would take to make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding toward that effort? Following the PE3 launch, if any surplus remains, the surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle). If no surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and would have the lowest risk. Rather than spending time and resources on a new, untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't an opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd. Launching an appliance to serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users won't do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO. I don't care if it's free, like AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's nice" and be done with it. Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon GEO as a viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of the Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow for experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions that our resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No rotator required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to get on the air. I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
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
John: So regarding risk, how many HEO Satellites has AMSAT-NA launched that required firing a rocket motor to achieve a Molniya Orbit? It seems that AMSAT-DL has the lead on that front, additionally, the gentleman that did the PE3 Presentation at the AMSAT-UK Symposium indicated that PE3 uses the same platform as AO10 and AO13, and has been tested. At least we have a more predictable risk. I took a look at the Satellite history and it appears that the HEO Flights were all joint ventures with AMSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL. I recall a great deal of publicity in QST surrounding the AO40 launch including fund raising activities. Why don't we observe the same level of commitment that we had for those projects from AMSAT-NA Leadership?.
AO40 provided extraordinary opportunities for the satellite experimenter, it wasn't that difficult and was great deal of fun. Additionally, it did push the operator to work on improving their station for weak signal work. Remember all of the great AO40 how to web sites that popped up? Lots of home brew projects! Lots of pictures of stations! How many of those are out there for AO51?
I believe for those who endeavored to develop hardware and software definitely furthered the science. I constructed many different antennas and feeds learned a great deal all in my back yard with minimal investment using "arm strong" , home-brew az-el set up.
Regarding GEO vs. HEO, I would argue that in terms of the overall experience, there are significant differences that boil down to the following:: 1. GEO isn't a moving target 2. HEO has a weaker signal 3. With GEO, the antenna is locked down to a fixed Az-EL. No Doppler, no need to synchronize the orbit or to integrate software applications.
I would challenge you to tell me how GEO wouldn't be an appliance. What's left once you mount your Downconverter, feed, LNA, etc, bring it to your xcvr, short of tuning across the transponder to find a clear frequency to call CQ, or to locate a contact what's left to do? I agree that GEO would be great for emergencies, nets, and long rag chews on what will be extremely crowded xponder space. Additionally, I think that you would agree that the skill level and overall experience is diminished. But that's just me.
All I'm saying is allow the membership vote on how AMSAT-NA resources should be used, I don't mean to suggest we vote on the type of RX to use, but on the overall project. It is my belief that most members wouldn't want resources diverted to a GEO Project before an HEO Project is fully deployed. If we loose sight of the main goal, this process could go on for years. To be successful, AMSAT-NA needs a narrow focus as it has very little in the way of resources, both human and financial.
I would be satisfied if AMSAT-NA would simply articulate a clear set of goals and priorities, hell even use the survey that was accomplished in 04. Communicate these goals to the members at large and finally stand by them. If at the end of the day those goals are not what the members want, then they can vote with their wallets.
Regards, - Joe K7ZT
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
Since AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA both require funding from outside the amateur radio community, are going after different sources of funding, and neither can predict when they will get that funding, having two efforts would seem to double the opportunity for a non-LEO satellite.
I don't think that the risk decreases with P3E. 50% of P3 satellites were lost due to failures of engines in the launch vehicle or in the satellite.
I don't see how having a linear transponder in a geostationary orbit versus a Molniya orbit makes it an appliance satellite. The antennas and transceivers on ground are the same in either case.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 16:32 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
John: Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on charity, and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you haven't heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs. It seems that the DL folks haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as it is to launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they gave us a tangible figure we can work with. This amount may be a reach for AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would take to make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding toward that effort? Following the PE3 launch, if any surplus remains, the surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle). If no surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and would have the lowest risk. Rather than spending time and resources on a new, untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't an opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd. Launching an appliance to serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users won't do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO. I don't care if it's free, like AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's nice" and be done with it. Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon GEO as a viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of the Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow for experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions that our resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No rotator required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to get on the air. I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
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
Hi Joe,
The Eagle ride-share requires no engine from AMSAT as it is supplied by and operated by Intelsat. They have an order of magnitude more experience than any AMSAT organization and a better track record. It also eliminates more than half of the work in building the satellite. That has to reduce risk.
AMSAT-NA members are working on P3E and AMSAT-NA has supplied money for the project so I don't see a lack of support.
Since a HEO and GEO are at similar altitudes, I don't forsee a big difference in signal strength. The only disadvantage of a GEO for hams is that it doesn't move so I can't work India from here as I could on AO-13. However, Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders so there is an advantage in raising funds. Making satellites hard to use certainly doesn't help in rasing money. The aspect of AO-40 that QST pushed during fund-rasing was that it would be easier to use than AO-13.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 22:06 UTC Subject: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
John: So regarding risk, how many HEO Satellites has AMSAT-NA launched that required firing a rocket motor to achieve a Molniya Orbit? It seems that AMSAT-DL has the lead on that front, additionally, the gentleman that did the PE3 Presentation at the AMSAT-UK Symposium indicated that PE3 uses the same platform as AO10 and AO13, and has been tested. At least we have a more predictable risk. I took a look at the Satellite history and it appears that the HEO Flights were all joint ventures with AMSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL. I recall a great deal of publicity in QST surrounding the AO40 launch including fund raising activities. Why don't we observe the same level of commitment that we had for those projects from AMSAT-NA Leadership?.
AO40 provided extraordinary opportunities for the satellite experimenter, it wasn't that difficult and was great deal of fun. Additionally, it did push the operator to work on improving their station for weak signal work. Remember all of the great AO40 how to web sites that popped up? Lots of home brew projects! Lots of pictures of stations! How many of those are out there for AO51?
I believe for those who endeavored to develop hardware and software definitely furthered the science. I constructed many different antennas and feeds learned a great deal all in my back yard with minimal investment using "arm strong" , home-brew az-el set up.
Regarding GEO vs. HEO, I would argue that in terms of the overall experience, there are significant differences that boil down to the following::
- GEO isn't a moving target
- HEO has a weaker signal
- With GEO, the antenna is locked down to a fixed Az-EL. No Doppler, no
need to synchronize the orbit or to integrate software applications.
I would challenge you to tell me how GEO wouldn't be an appliance. What's left once you mount your Downconverter, feed, LNA, etc, bring it to your xcvr, short of tuning across the transponder to find a clear frequency to call CQ, or to locate a contact what's left to do? I agree that GEO would be great for emergencies, nets, and long rag chews on what will be extremely crowded xponder space. Additionally, I think that you would agree that the skill level and overall experience is diminished. But that's just me.
All I'm saying is allow the membership vote on how AMSAT-NA resources should be used, I don't mean to suggest we vote on the type of RX to use, but on the overall project. It is my belief that most members wouldn't want resources diverted to a GEO Project before an HEO Project is fully deployed. If we loose sight of the main goal, this process could go on for years. To be successful, AMSAT-NA needs a narrow focus as it has very little in the way of resources, both human and financial.
I would be satisfied if AMSAT-NA would simply articulate a clear set of goals and priorities, hell even use the survey that was accomplished in 04. Communicate these goals to the members at large and finally stand by them. If at the end of the day those goals are not what the members want, then they can vote with their wallets.
Regards,
- Joe K7ZT
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
Since AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA both require funding from outside the amateur radio community, are going after different sources of funding, and neither can predict when they will get that funding, having two efforts would seem to double the opportunity for a non-LEO satellite.
I don't think that the risk decreases with P3E. 50% of P3 satellites were lost due to failures of engines in the launch vehicle or in the satellite.
I don't see how having a linear transponder in a geostationary orbit versus a Molniya orbit makes it an appliance satellite. The antennas and transceivers on ground are the same in either case.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 16:32 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
John: Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on charity, and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you haven't heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs. It seems that the DL folks haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as it is to launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they gave us a tangible figure we can work with. This amount may be a reach for AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would take to make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding toward that effort? Following the PE3 launch, if any surplus remains, the surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle). If no surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and would have the lowest risk. Rather than spending time and resources on a new, untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't an opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd. Launching an appliance to serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users won't do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO. I don't care if it's free, like AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's nice" and be done with it. Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon GEO as a viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of the Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow for experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions that our resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No rotator required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to get on the air. I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
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
Works OK for the US Sirius radio network with a period of approx 24 hours.
John B. Stephensen wrote: Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders
However, it takes 3 Molniya orbit satellites for Sirius to provide continuous coverage of the U.S. XM uses 1 geostationary satellite.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" nigel@ngunn.net To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 03:24 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
Works OK for the US Sirius radio network with a period of approx 24 hours.
John B. Stephensen wrote: Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders _______________________________________________ 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
Actually, XM has 2 functioning satellites, and 2 orbiting spares.
This makes the current active satellites as XM-3 "Rhythm" and XM-4 "Blues" with two in-orbit spares: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM_Satellite_Radio
73 de W4AS Sebastian
On Aug 12, 2008, at 6:25 AM, John B. Stephensen wrote:
However, it takes 3 Molniya orbit satellites for Sirius to provide continuous coverage of the U.S. XM uses 1 geostationary satellite.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" nigel@ngunn.net To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 03:24 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
Works OK for the US Sirius radio network with a period of approx 24 hours.
John B. Stephensen wrote: Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders
On Aug 12, 2008, at 7:24 AM, Sebastian wrote:
Actually, XM has 2 functioning satellites, and 2 orbiting spares.
And "actually" XM and Sirius are now the same company after their merger. So, referring to them as separate companies is inaccurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM_Satellite_Radio - discusses why their two original birds are no longer in use. Solar panel fogging which shortened their life-span.
-- Nate Duehr, WY0X nate@natetech.com
True. That 3 sats is for continuous coverage and reltively non directional user antennas. Most amateurs have never insisted on 24 hour coverage.
John B. Stephensen wrote:
However, it takes 3 Molniya orbit satellites for Sirius to provide continuous coverage of the U.S. XM uses 1 geostationary satellite.
73,
John
And if I may make an even simpler appeal: I will take any non-FM satellite HEO, MEO, or GEO in a time frame that falls within our lifetime. Did I overstate that? We know that HEO's take lots of time in design, fabrication, space-qualification and financing. Many hams are getting up there in years and may not be able to wait another 10-15 years!
HEO's are great fun and challenge, but a GEO would suffice vs only having FM Leos for the next decade. If the GEO is more feasible/practical/realistic, bring it on!
If we can sell one with Emcomm capabilities added to our favorite modes, why not? If we wait on this too long, it will be done by the commercial sats so they will not need the ham version. Only hams like stuff that is "hard to use" - real world is interested in utility (can you hear me now)
Bottom Line: "Time waits for nobody" P3E -great Eagle -wonderful when we can swing it P4 on Intelsat - don' t miss this ride
I started accumulating "stuff" in 1996 to get on AO-10/13. 1998 got my Drake converters for AO-40 and the FT-847. 2000-2008 accumulating my stuff for mw's - is that twelve years? I will retire in 2011. I hope there is a satellite up there soon!
At 06:33 PM 8/11/2008, John B. Stephensen wrote:
Hi Joe,
The Eagle ride-share requires no engine from AMSAT as it is supplied by and operated by Intelsat. They have an order of magnitude more experience than any AMSAT organization and a better track record. It also eliminates more than half of the work in building the satellite. That has to reduce risk.
AMSAT-NA members are working on P3E and AMSAT-NA has supplied money for the project so I don't see a lack of support.
Since a HEO and GEO are at similar altitudes, I don't forsee a big difference in signal strength. The only disadvantage of a GEO for hams is that it doesn't move so I can't work India from here as I could on AO-13. However, Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders so there is an advantage in raising funds. Making satellites hard to use certainly doesn't help in rasing money. The aspect of AO-40 that QST pushed during fund-rasing was that it would be easier to use than AO-13.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 22:06 UTC Subject: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
John: So regarding risk, how many HEO Satellites has AMSAT-NA launched that required firing a rocket motor to achieve a Molniya Orbit? It seems that AMSAT-DL has the lead on that front, additionally, the gentleman that did the PE3 Presentation at the AMSAT-UK Symposium indicated that PE3 uses the same platform as AO10 and AO13, and has been tested. At least we have a more predictable risk. I took a look at the Satellite history and it appears that the HEO Flights were all joint ventures with AMSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL. I recall a great deal of publicity in QST surrounding the AO40 launch including fund raising activities. Why don't we observe the same level of commitment that we had for those projects from AMSAT-NA Leadership?.
AO40 provided extraordinary opportunities for the satellite experimenter, it wasn't that difficult and was great deal of fun. Additionally, it did push the operator to work on improving their station for weak signal work. Remember all of the great AO40 how to web sites that popped up? Lots of home brew projects! Lots of pictures of stations! How many of those are out there for AO51?
I believe for those who endeavored to develop hardware and software definitely furthered the science. I constructed many different antennas and feeds learned a great deal all in my back yard with minimal investment using "arm strong" , home-brew az-el set up.
Regarding GEO vs. HEO, I would argue that in terms of the overall experience, there are significant differences that boil down to the following::
- GEO isn't a moving target
- HEO has a weaker signal
- With GEO, the antenna is locked down to a fixed Az-EL. No Doppler, no
need to synchronize the orbit or to integrate software applications.
I would challenge you to tell me how GEO wouldn't be an appliance. What's left once you mount your Downconverter, feed, LNA, etc, bring it to your xcvr, short of tuning across the transponder to find a clear frequency to call CQ, or to locate a contact what's left to do? I agree that GEO would be great for emergencies, nets, and long rag chews on what will be extremely crowded xponder space. Additionally, I think that you would agree that the skill level and overall experience is diminished. But that's just me.
All I'm saying is allow the membership vote on how AMSAT-NA resources should be used, I don't mean to suggest we vote on the type of RX to use, but on the overall project. It is my belief that most members wouldn't want resources diverted to a GEO Project before an HEO Project is fully deployed. If we loose sight of the main goal, this process could go on for years. To be successful, AMSAT-NA needs a narrow focus as it has very little in the way of resources, both human and financial.
I would be satisfied if AMSAT-NA would simply articulate a clear set of goals and priorities, hell even use the survey that was accomplished in 04. Communicate these goals to the members at large and finally stand by them. If at the end of the day those goals are not what the members want, then they can vote with their wallets.
Regards,
- Joe K7ZT
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
Since AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA both require funding from outside the amateur radio community, are going after different sources of funding, and neither can predict when they will get that funding, having two efforts would seem to double the opportunity for a non-LEO satellite.
I don't think that the risk decreases with P3E. 50% of P3 satellites were lost due to failures of engines in the launch vehicle or in the satellite.
I don't see how having a linear transponder in a geostationary orbit versus a Molniya orbit makes it an appliance satellite. The antennas and transceivers on ground are the same in either case.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 16:32 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
John: Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on charity, and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you haven't heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs. It seems that the DL folks haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as it is to launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they gave us a tangible figure we can work with. This amount may be a reach for AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would take to make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding toward that effort? Following the PE3 launch, if any surplus remains, the surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle). If no surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and would have the lowest risk. Rather than spending time and resources on a new, untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't an opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd. Launching an appliance to serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users won't do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO. I don't care if it's free, like AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's nice" and be done with it. Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon GEO as a viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of the Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow for experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions that our resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No rotator required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to get on the air. I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
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
Edward: For the most part, I agree with your analysis, AMSAT-NA just needs to get that out to the membership for a up/down vote. It would seem that based on the latest (un-scientific) pole most folks still desire an HEO over GEO.
http://app.sgizmo.com/reports/18952/48864/4G6MMZP08F5CHHRFD5IFKRUG0SX47H/
"Eagle -wonderful when we can swing it" I really don't believe that this will ever happen if we shift the direction of Eagle to GEO.
I do like the MEO alternative though.
BTW; I'm working on a second retirement.
73's DE Joe K7ZT
----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Cole" kl7uw@acsalaska.net To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 4:01 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
And if I may make an even simpler appeal: I will take any non-FM satellite HEO, MEO, or GEO in a time frame that falls within our lifetime. Did I overstate that? We know that HEO's take lots of time in design, fabrication, space-qualification and financing. Many hams are getting up there in years and may not be able to wait another 10-15 years!
HEO's are great fun and challenge, but a GEO would suffice vs only having FM Leos for the next decade. If the GEO is more feasible/practical/realistic, bring it on!
If we can sell one with Emcomm capabilities added to our favorite modes, why not? If we wait on this too long, it will be done by the commercial sats so they will not need the ham version. Only hams like stuff that is "hard to use" - real world is interested in utility (can you hear me now)
Bottom Line: "Time waits for nobody" P3E -great Eagle -wonderful when we can swing it P4 on Intelsat - don' t miss this ride
I started accumulating "stuff" in 1996 to get on AO-10/13. 1998 got my Drake converters for AO-40 and the FT-847. 2000-2008 accumulating my stuff for mw's - is that twelve years? I will retire in 2011. I hope there is a satellite up there soon!
At 06:33 PM 8/11/2008, John B. Stephensen wrote:
Hi Joe,
The Eagle ride-share requires no engine from AMSAT as it is supplied by and operated by Intelsat. They have an order of magnitude more experience than any AMSAT organization and a better track record. It also eliminates more than half of the work in building the satellite. That has to reduce risk.
AMSAT-NA members are working on P3E and AMSAT-NA has supplied money for the project so I don't see a lack of support.
Since a HEO and GEO are at similar altitudes, I don't forsee a big difference in signal strength. The only disadvantage of a GEO for hams is that it doesn't move so I can't work India from here as I could on AO-13. However, Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders so there is an advantage in raising funds. Making satellites hard to use certainly doesn't help in rasing money. The aspect of AO-40 that QST pushed during fund-rasing was that it would be easier to use than AO-13.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 22:06 UTC Subject: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
John: So regarding risk, how many HEO Satellites has AMSAT-NA launched that required firing a rocket motor to achieve a Molniya Orbit? It seems that AMSAT-DL has the lead on that front, additionally, the gentleman that did the PE3 Presentation at the AMSAT-UK Symposium indicated that PE3 uses the same platform as AO10 and AO13, and has been tested. At least we have a more predictable risk. I took a look at the Satellite history and it appears that the HEO Flights were all joint ventures with AMSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL. I recall a great deal of publicity in QST surrounding the AO40 launch including fund raising activities. Why don't we observe the same level of commitment that we had for those projects from AMSAT-NA Leadership?.
AO40 provided extraordinary opportunities for the satellite experimenter, it wasn't that difficult and was great deal of fun. Additionally, it did push the operator to work on improving their station for weak signal work. Remember all of the great AO40 how to web sites that popped up? Lots of home brew projects! Lots of pictures of stations! How many of those are out there for AO51?
I believe for those who endeavored to develop hardware and software definitely furthered the science. I constructed many different antennas and feeds learned a great deal all in my back yard with minimal investment using "arm strong" , home-brew az-el set up.
Regarding GEO vs. HEO, I would argue that in terms of the overall experience, there are significant differences that boil down to the following::
- GEO isn't a moving target
- HEO has a weaker signal
- With GEO, the antenna is locked down to a fixed Az-EL. No Doppler,
no need to synchronize the orbit or to integrate software applications.
I would challenge you to tell me how GEO wouldn't be an appliance. What's left once you mount your Downconverter, feed, LNA, etc, bring it to your xcvr, short of tuning across the transponder to find a clear frequency to call CQ, or to locate a contact what's left to do? I agree that GEO would be great for emergencies, nets, and long rag chews on what will be extremely crowded xponder space. Additionally, I think that you would agree that the skill level and overall experience is diminished. But that's just me.
All I'm saying is allow the membership vote on how AMSAT-NA resources should be used, I don't mean to suggest we vote on the type of RX to use, but on the overall project. It is my belief that most members wouldn't want resources diverted to a GEO Project before an HEO Project is fully deployed. If we loose sight of the main goal, this process could go on for years. To be successful, AMSAT-NA needs a narrow focus as it has very little in the way of resources, both human and financial.
I would be satisfied if AMSAT-NA would simply articulate a clear set of goals and priorities, hell even use the survey that was accomplished in 04. Communicate these goals to the members at large and finally stand by them. If at the end of the day those goals are not what the members want, then they can vote with their wallets.
Regards,
- Joe K7ZT
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
Since AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA both require funding from outside the amateur radio community, are going after different sources of funding, and neither can predict when they will get that funding, having two efforts would seem to double the opportunity for a non-LEO satellite.
I don't think that the risk decreases with P3E. 50% of P3 satellites were lost due to failures of engines in the launch vehicle or in the satellite.
I don't see how having a linear transponder in a geostationary orbit versus a Molniya orbit makes it an appliance satellite. The antennas and transceivers on ground are the same in either case.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 16:32 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
John: Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on charity, and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you haven't heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs. It seems that the DL folks haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as it is to launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they gave us a tangible figure we can work with. This amount may be a reach for AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would take to make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding toward that effort? Following the PE3 launch, if any surplus remains, the surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle). If no surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and would have the lowest risk. Rather than spending time and resources on a new, untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't an opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd. Launching an appliance to serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users won't do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO. I don't care if it's free, like AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's nice" and be done with it. Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon GEO as a viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of the Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow for experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions that our resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No rotator required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to get on the air. I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca > > Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter > Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read: > > ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY > > FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED > BEFORE > AND > WILL NOT WORK NOW. > > I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge > seems > to > be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
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
----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Cole" kl7uw@acsalaska.net To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 11:01 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
And if I may make an even simpler appeal: I will take any non-FM satellite HEO, MEO, or GEO in a time frame that falls within our lifetime. Did I overstate that?
Hi Ed, KL7UW
You don't overstate that because AO40 died on 25 jan 2004 and in more than 4 + 1/2 years of waiting is now evident that P3-E is actually our only real gleam of hope even if in this time of waiting many satellite users already died because they were relatively old and not in a time frame that falls within normal lifetime to wait for a non bright satellite future.
We know that HEO's take lots of time in design, fabrication, space-qualification and financing. Many hams are getting up there in years and may not be able to wait another 10-15 years!
Speaking for my self there are two possible outcomes, wait to see if P3-E will be operational within the fall of 2009 or when VO-52 + FO-29 + OSCAR-7 will fail decide to completely abandone the satellite activity removing all satellite antennas from the roof. For space communication I plan to change again my activity only with 23 cm EME while to start again with the HF to replace worldwide social communications. Please note that I losted all my HF friends when I decided to dedicate my activity to satellites beginning with OSCAR-6 in 1972 when the satellite future was bright and then I losted again all my satellite friends worlwide as soon AO40 died the beginning of 2004 when the satellite future becomes to be very dark
HEO's are great fun and challenge, but a GEO would suffice vs only having FM Leos for the next decade. If the GEO is more feasible/practical/realistic, bring it on!
I agree with you but any of the above possibility should already been discussed and decided when AO40 was alive and well.
If we can sell one with Emcomm capabilities added to our favorite modes, why not? If we wait on this too long, it will be done by the commercial sats so they will not need the ham version. Only hams like stuff that is "hard to use" - real world is interested in utility (can you hear me now)
I can hear you strong and clear on that.
Bottom Line: "Time waits for nobody" P3E -great Eagle -wonderful when we can swing it P4 on Intelsat - don' t miss this ride
P3-E is actually the only reality and the rest is only on paper.
I started accumulating "stuff" in 1996 to get on AO-10/13. 1998 got my Drake converters for AO-40 and the FT-847. 2000-2008 accumulating my stuff for mw's - is that twelve years? I will retire in 2011. I hope there is a satellite up there soon!
I started accumulating "stuff" in 1972 for OSCAR-6 and everyting up to 2004 with AO40 was dedicated to a specialized satellite station wich is difficult to actually convert to VHF/UHF/SHF Tropo or MS or TEP specialized activities having the same top capabilities designed for satellite use. In addition all the above "stuff" requires preventional maintenance waiting for the future particularly referring to the antennas and everyting is installed over the roof actually unused and becoming rusty. I am retired from the job but I am 76 years old and here only God know if I am in a time frame that falls within my lifetime to see P3-E operational.
Dear Ed I believe that if P3-E will not be operational within the fall of 2009 it is best for you and me to communicate off the moon on 1296 MHz EME I did 432 MHz EME between 1977 to 1980 but at that time the satellite future seems to be very bright with OSCAR-10 OSCAR-13 and AO40 and they were fun until they lasted..........more and more fun than EME. Apparently things are actually completely changed but the conversion from a satellite station to an EME station seems to be more feasible and convenient than to wait for years and maybe for noting when the moon it there at no cost.
Best 73" de
i8CVS Domenico
John:
I agree, the GEO Ride would be safer than a Amateur Radio rocket boost into final orbit, my argument simply had nothing to do with the Ride Share option.
I get the GEO / Molmiya differences, and I still maintain that in terms of getting a Molniya Bird into orbit AMSAT-DL has the experience, tested platform, etc.
AMSAT-NA needs to make this distinction in the Eagle mission statement, as it has a significant bearing on the nature of the satellite experence.
In case anyone who hasn't seen the latest survey of AMSAT Users, here is the link:
http://app.sgizmo.com/reports/18952/48864/4G6MMZP08F5CHHRFD5IFKRUG0SX47H/
Additionally AMSAT needs to have an up/down vote on the ride share to GEO option detailing its abilities and limitations and impact on any possibility of a future HEO Launch. 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?
If the mission has changed to.the prospect of abandoning HEO for a GEO Bird I personally would find that to be unacceptable.. I have no interest in the Amateur Radio version of XM Satellite (2-Way) Radio even if it is the only viable alternative to secure a launch.
I completely understand that many members may give a nod to a GEO Satellite Ride Share option in lieu of an HEO (Molmiya Orbit) Satellite and that's ok but again, that decision should be made by the AMSAT-NA Membership and NOT the BoD alone and it should happen before we get too far down the development road.
I'm very happy to hear that our European counterparts have been creative and may have a niche fit for PE3 that could get the launch funded.
My money rides on PE3!
73's, DE Joe, K7ZT ----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 9:33 PM Subject: Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
Hi Joe,
The Eagle ride-share requires no engine from AMSAT as it is supplied by and operated by Intelsat. They have an order of magnitude more experience than any AMSAT organization and a better track record. It also eliminates more than half of the work in building the satellite. That has to reduce risk.
AMSAT-NA members are working on P3E and AMSAT-NA has supplied money for the project so I don't see a lack of support.
Since a HEO and GEO are at similar altitudes, I don't forsee a big difference in signal strength. The only disadvantage of a GEO for hams is that it doesn't move so I can't work India from here as I could on AO-13. However, Molniya orbits aren't very useful to outside funders so there is an advantage in raising funds. Making satellites hard to use certainly doesn't help in rasing money. The aspect of AO-40 that QST pushed during fund-rasing was that it would be easier to use than AO-13.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 22:06 UTC Subject: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
John: So regarding risk, how many HEO Satellites has AMSAT-NA launched that required firing a rocket motor to achieve a Molniya Orbit? It seems that AMSAT-DL has the lead on that front, additionally, the gentleman that did the PE3 Presentation at the AMSAT-UK Symposium indicated that PE3 uses the same platform as AO10 and AO13, and has been tested. At least we have a more predictable risk. I took a look at the Satellite history and it appears that the HEO Flights were all joint ventures with AMSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL. I recall a great deal of publicity in QST surrounding the AO40 launch including fund raising activities. Why don't we observe the same level of commitment that we had for those projects from AMSAT-NA Leadership?.
AO40 provided extraordinary opportunities for the satellite experimenter, it wasn't that difficult and was great deal of fun. Additionally, it did push the operator to work on improving their station for weak signal work. Remember all of the great AO40 how to web sites that popped up? Lots of home brew projects! Lots of pictures of stations! How many of those are out there for AO51?
I believe for those who endeavored to develop hardware and software definitely furthered the science. I constructed many different antennas and feeds learned a great deal all in my back yard with minimal investment using "arm strong" , home-brew az-el set up.
Regarding GEO vs. HEO, I would argue that in terms of the overall experience, there are significant differences that boil down to the following::
- GEO isn't a moving target
- HEO has a weaker signal
- With GEO, the antenna is locked down to a fixed Az-EL. No Doppler, no
need to synchronize the orbit or to integrate software applications.
I would challenge you to tell me how GEO wouldn't be an appliance. What's left once you mount your Downconverter, feed, LNA, etc, bring it to your xcvr, short of tuning across the transponder to find a clear frequency to call CQ, or to locate a contact what's left to do? I agree that GEO would be great for emergencies, nets, and long rag chews on what will be extremely crowded xponder space. Additionally, I think that you would agree that the skill level and overall experience is diminished. But that's just me.
All I'm saying is allow the membership vote on how AMSAT-NA resources should be used, I don't mean to suggest we vote on the type of RX to use, but on the overall project. It is my belief that most members wouldn't want resources diverted to a GEO Project before an HEO Project is fully deployed. If we loose sight of the main goal, this process could go on for years. To be successful, AMSAT-NA needs a narrow focus as it has very little in the way of resources, both human and financial.
I would be satisfied if AMSAT-NA would simply articulate a clear set of goals and priorities, hell even use the survey that was accomplished in 04. Communicate these goals to the members at large and finally stand by them. If at the end of the day those goals are not what the members want, then they can vote with their wallets.
Regards,
- Joe K7ZT
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
Since AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA both require funding from outside the amateur radio community, are going after different sources of funding, and neither can predict when they will get that funding, having two efforts would seem to double the opportunity for a non-LEO satellite.
I don't think that the risk decreases with P3E. 50% of P3 satellites were lost due to failures of engines in the launch vehicle or in the satellite.
I don't see how having a linear transponder in a geostationary orbit versus a Molniya orbit makes it an appliance satellite. The antennas and transceivers on ground are the same in either case.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 16:32 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
John: Yes, you may have heard statements like in the past we've relied on charity, and Amateur Radio Operators alone can not fund a launch, what you haven't heard are any solutions for launching any HEOs. It seems that the DL folks haven't lost that as a focus, they acknowledge that as expensive as it is to launch an HEO, it is still doable. 3 - 4M Euros $4 - 5M at least they gave us a tangible figure we can work with. This amount may be a reach for AMSAT-NA alone, but given that we finally understand what it would take to make a HEO Launch reality, then why wouldn't we shift ALL funding toward that effort? Following the PE3 launch, if any surplus remains, the surplus could be transferred to the next HEO opportunity (Eagle). If no surplus remains then at least we would have one working HEO deployed.
Additionally, at least we know the PE3 platform is well vetted, and would have the lowest risk. Rather than spending time and resources on a new, untested platform why wouldn't we just facilitate PE3 FIRST?
Ok, I'll speech for myself here, but the GEO ride-share simply isn't an opportunity that will interest the HEO crowd. Launching an appliance to serve the disaster response community and entry level satellite users won't do a thing to satisfy the need for a HEO. I don't care if it's free, like AO51, I would probably get on it, make a couple contacts say "that's nice" and be done with it. Please understand, I'm not saying to abandon GEO as a viable option, just don't spend a cent on it until we launch an HEO.
What we need is a satellite that enables the real sprit and intent of the Amateur Radio Service, to push the envelop of the technology, allow for experimentation, consider all of the alternative antenna solutions that our resourceful community developed to receive the 2.4Gig Down Link. No rotator required, different feed systems, a fairly modest resource outlay to get on the air. I did it with a totally home brewed system in a restricted neighborhood back yard. Had a blast and learned allot.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net To: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca; eu-amsat@yahoogroups.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 3:14 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [eu-amsat] AMSAT UK P3E Lecture Available
I've been hearing these two statments from AMSAT-NA officals for at least 2 years -- in person and on this BB.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luc Leblanc" lucleblanc6@videotron.ca
Very nice presentations. One attract my attention was made by Peter Guelzow DB2OS one one of his slide we can read:
ATTRACTIVENESS OF AMATEUR RADIO HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY
FUNDING A SATELLITE FROM AMATEUR RESSOURCES ALONE NEVER WORKED BEFORE AND WILL NOT WORK NOW.
I don't how to explain how all the wisdom and reality knowledge seems to be concentrated in Europe when speaking about amateur satellite?
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
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
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
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
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
If anyone wants to know why the majority of BOD members avoid the -bb like the plague, replies like Joe's are why.
Dialog is always open, but sometimes facts get in the way. Do you know that AMSAT-NA has spent more money on P3E than Eagle so far? The launch is the prime problem we have to solve. AMSAT leadership is working very hard to find a way to get to a high orbit. As I type this we have people talking to various launch providers at the SmallSat conference about HEO, MEO, and GEO launch opportunities. AMSAT leadership also spent this entire weekend sequestered working on alternative strategies to accomplish our goals, and to fix the problems we know we have. I also recently travelled to the Alaska Hamfest (not on AMSAT's dime) to present our status to the attendees, and to take their concerns and recommendations into account. If you have some specific plan, idea, or want to volunteer to help make your desires come true, then by all means let someone know directly. Member opinions are important, and are taken seriously, and we need all the help we can get.
More information on these course corrections will be forthcoming soon. Sooner if people quit throwing stones.
73, Drew KO4MA
PS. Joe, I noticed your membership was last renewed in 2004. Perhaps you might want to call Martha at 1800 322 6728 and renew if you want your opinions for AMSAT's direction to be taken to heart. Successful change comes from within, and the last time I got mad at AMSAT I signed up as a Life Member, and then ran for the BOD the following year.
----- Original Message ----- From: k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org; "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:31 PM Subject: Re: [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
Andrew: I appreciate your concern. As soon as the BoD gets there act together on a strategy that ensures HEO as originally, planned/communicated to the members back in 2004 then I will jump back in the pool. In the mean time AMSAT-DL gets my money :-)
- Joe
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com To: k7zt@suddenlink.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org; "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
If anyone wants to know why the majority of BOD members avoid the -bb like the plague, replies like Joe's are why.
Dialog is always open, but sometimes facts get in the way. Do you know that AMSAT-NA has spent more money on P3E than Eagle so far? The launch is the prime problem we have to solve. AMSAT leadership is working very hard to find a way to get to a high orbit. As I type this we have people talking to various launch providers at the SmallSat conference about HEO, MEO, and GEO launch opportunities. AMSAT leadership also spent this entire weekend sequestered working on alternative strategies to accomplish our goals, and to fix the problems we know we have. I also recently travelled to the Alaska Hamfest (not on AMSAT's dime) to present our status to the attendees, and to take their concerns and recommendations into account. If you have some specific plan, idea, or want to volunteer to help make your desires come true, then by all means let someone know directly. Member opinions are important, and are taken seriously, and we need all the help we can get.
More information on these course corrections will be forthcoming soon. Sooner if people quit throwing stones.
73, Drew KO4MA
PS. Joe, I noticed your membership was last renewed in 2004. Perhaps you might want to call Martha at 1800 322 6728 and renew if you want your opinions for AMSAT's direction to be taken to heart. Successful change comes from within, and the last time I got mad at AMSAT I signed up as a Life Member, and then ran for the BOD the following year.
----- Original Message ----- From: k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org; "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:31 PM Subject: Re: [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
Andrew: I didn't send out the flamer email, until you accused me of being "fussy". That tends to communicate to folks that you are closed any further dialog. Up to that point, I wasn't being rude.
- Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com To: k7zt@suddenlink.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org; "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
If anyone wants to know why the majority of BOD members avoid the -bb like the plague, replies like Joe's are why.
Dialog is always open, but sometimes facts get in the way. Do you know that AMSAT-NA has spent more money on P3E than Eagle so far? The launch is the prime problem we have to solve. AMSAT leadership is working very hard to find a way to get to a high orbit. As I type this we have people talking to various launch providers at the SmallSat conference about HEO, MEO, and GEO launch opportunities. AMSAT leadership also spent this entire weekend sequestered working on alternative strategies to accomplish our goals, and to fix the problems we know we have. I also recently travelled to the Alaska Hamfest (not on AMSAT's dime) to present our status to the attendees, and to take their concerns and recommendations into account. If you have some specific plan, idea, or want to volunteer to help make your desires come true, then by all means let someone know directly. Member opinions are important, and are taken seriously, and we need all the help we can get.
More information on these course corrections will be forthcoming soon. Sooner if people quit throwing stones.
73, Drew KO4MA
PS. Joe, I noticed your membership was last renewed in 2004. Perhaps you might want to call Martha at 1800 322 6728 and renew if you want your opinions for AMSAT's direction to be taken to heart. Successful change comes from within, and the last time I got mad at AMSAT I signed up as a Life Member, and then ran for the BOD the following year.
----- Original Message ----- From: k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org; "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:31 PM Subject: Re: [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
I think complaining about the direction of an organization you haven't been a member of in 4 years is pretty fussy. I apologize if that offends you, but that's the way I see it. I take direction and advice as a BOD member from the membership, consider the information available, and help guide the organization the best I can. It's a representative democracy.
We have all got to realize that merely wanting something, like a cheap HEO launch, is not enough to make it happen. That being said, we are exploring all avenues leading to the goal of daily, and then continuous coverage, as outlined in the Mission. Life is about compromise, and shades of color, and these deviations from the original HEO Eagle concept set out about the time you left AMSAT-NA are merely the leadership trying the best they can to make something good, and something real, happen before the organization evaporates.
73, Drew KO4MA
PS Let me extend an olive branch to you. If you will rejoin -NA by calling Martha today or tomorrow, I will donate the amount of a renewal to AMSAT-NA earmarked for P3E. Deal?
Andrew: I didn't send out the flamer email, until you accused me of being "fussy". That tends to communicate to folks that you are closed any further dialog. Up to that point, I wasn't being rude.
- Joe
Please allow me to apologise to the Board if my lame attempt at sarcism was missunderstood. I don't want anyone to think that I was telling them to "Shut UP".
Additionally, I woulld like to take you up on your generous invitation, however, I will call Martha and renew on my nickel.
Regards, - Joe
---- Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner@mindspring.com wrote:
I think complaining about the direction of an organization you haven't been a member of in 4 years is pretty fussy. I apologize if that offends you, but that's the way I see it. I take direction and advice as a BOD member from the membership, consider the information available, and help guide the organization the best I can. It's a representative democracy.
We have all got to realize that merely wanting something, like a cheap HEO launch, is not enough to make it happen. That being said, we are exploring all avenues leading to the goal of daily, and then continuous coverage, as outlined in the Mission. Life is about compromise, and shades of color, and these deviations from the original HEO Eagle concept set out about the time you left AMSAT-NA are merely the leadership trying the best they can to make something good, and something real, happen before the organization evaporates.
73, Drew KO4MA
PS Let me extend an olive branch to you. If you will rejoin -NA by calling Martha today or tomorrow, I will donate the amount of a renewal to AMSAT-NA earmarked for P3E. Deal?
Andrew: I didn't send out the flamer email, until you accused me of being "fussy". That tends to communicate to folks that you are closed any further dialog. Up to that point, I wasn't being rude.
- Joe
I don't think that they have been dishonest. Either a HEO or GEO would meet the stated goals for Eagle and they announced that they are talking to Intelsat months ago. If a contract with Intelsat is signed it isn't killing a HEO -- it's providing a GEO instead of nothing.
If you're thinking that Eagle in a geosynchronous orbit somehow kills P3E in a Molniya orbit, I don't see how. Two programs aimed at different launch agencies and different outside contributors only increases the changes for something more than LEO satellites in the future.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Westbrook" k7zt@suddenlink.net To: "John B. Stephensen" kd6ozh@comcast.net; amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:44 UTC Subject: Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
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
participants (10)
-
Andrew Glasbrenner -
Edward Cole -
i8cvs -
Joe Westbrook -
John B. Stephensen -
k7zt＠suddenlink.net
-
Luc Leblanc -
Nate Duehr -
Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF -
Sebastian