Hosting our payload on a commercial GEO satellite would likely cost more than $10 million if the commercial satellite owner is to be fully compensated for the engineering modifications to their satellite and potential loss of transponder revenue from diverting satellite resources to a non-productive payload over a 15 year design lifetime. Offering a tax break will probably not make up this difference. You might have better luck seeking hosting on a government owned satellite such as the Air Force mission that was discussed by AMSAT a few years ago, but eventually fell through. This is where carefully cultivated personal relationships can come in, if you have any such friends in high places. OSCAR-1 got its launch approved back in 1961 because of a few highly placed hams in the Pentagon, so keep up with your networking and maybe it can happen.
Some orbits are inherently unstable, for example 63 degree Molniya orbits will reliably decay in a few years. The Late, Great OSCAR-13 provides a prime example of this. Their orbital lifetime is heavily sensitive to the time of launch, if AO-13 was launched a few hours earlier it would still be up there, a few hours later it would have reentered a couple of years after launch. This is easy to model in GMAT.
As a secondary payload, we don't get to choose the launch time, our only hope would be to use thrusters to make slight post-launch adjustments so the satellite reenters not too early (as AO-13 did) and not too late. I have been trying to figure out how to do this but have not had any results so far. If we have a dedicated launch all to ourselves we can choose a launch time that meets our requirements.
The NASA Cubesat that was recently grounded was aiming for a GTO launch, which has been mentioned as a possible target for an AMSAT mission because we could possibly get one cheap. Analysis of NORAD tracking data shows a lot of spent rocket bodies that have been in GTO for decades, so this might not be the best choice for a mission that needs a guaranteed reentry date.
Another possibility would be to place the satellite directly into the GEO graveyard orbit and let it slowly drift around the Earth. There are plenty of other HEO or Cislunar orbits that are not sensitive to orbital debris requirements and may not be commercially attractive but would work OK for our needs.
So yes, if we had $10 million in our bank account we could buy our way out of a lot of problems that only affect poor people who are lacking options.
73, Dan N8FGV
------ Original Message ------ Received: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 12:28:55 PM EDT From: Paul Andrews [email protected] Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite
Yes! Find a commercial GEOsat with room to support an amateur payload. Leverage commercial economics for launch and platform reliability. The commercial operator can donate (tax break) the value of the ham (STEM) capability. Maybe ham bands at 10 GHz and above. Simple bent pipe.
------ Original Message ------ Received: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:28:21 AM EDT From: "Mark Johns, K0JM" [email protected] Subject: Re: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite
The launch costs, while significant, are beside the point. The biggest issue with HEO satellites are the regulatory challenges. AMSAT and international partners could build and get ready for launch such a satellite within a few years, just as they did with AO-10, AO-13, and AO-40. But they would not get a license to put it into orbit in the current regulatory environment. The technical and financial challenges can be met, but the licensing requirements are killing us.
I have realized the past few days that our AMSAT group has some really smart Hams! Thanks very much for the information. I have a few more questions. As I said before I would like to have more than a five minute QSO. I am not much of a contester, more a rag chewer. But I am afraid, if I understand most of you correctly, that is probably not going to happen in my life time? I reference K0JM's comments it's not so much the money but the regulatory environment that will stop this. I don't see this getting any easier in the next year, five years, or ten years. Does anybody else see anything different? And throwing in N8FGV's comments about the timing of the launch seems like a long shot as well. I spent a ton of money prior to AO-40 getting equipment ready to go in high hopes of having an AO-13 length run with so much more to do! I was terribly excited about this bird only to have it vanish before my eyes before I really got started. My last question is would a GOLF type satellite have the same obstacles as a Phase IV bird? If so I am probably going to have a-lot of satellite ham gear for sale real soon. Again thanks for your input. WA5QAP (licensed in 1966)
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite
From: "Daniel Schultz" [email protected]
Date: Fri, August 12, 2022 6:57 pm
To: "AMSAT-BB" [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hosting our payload on a commercial GEO satellite would likely cost more than
$10 million if the commercial satellite owner is to be fully compensated for
the engineering modifications to their satellite and potential loss of
transponder revenue from diverting satellite resources to a non-productive
payload over a 15 year design lifetime. Offering a tax break will probably not
make up this difference. You might have better luck seeking hosting on a
government owned satellite such as the Air Force mission that was discussed by
AMSAT a few years ago, but eventually fell through. This is where carefully
cultivated personal relationships can come in, if you have any such friends in
high places. OSCAR-1 got its launch approved back in 1961 because of a few
highly placed hams in the Pentagon, so keep up with your networking and maybe
it can happen.
Some orbits are inherently unstable, for example 63 degree Molniya orbits will
reliably decay in a few years. The Late, Great OSCAR-13 provides a prime
example of this. Their orbital lifetime is heavily sensitive to the time of
launch, if AO-13 was launched a few hours earlier it would still be up there,
a few hours later it would have reentered a couple of years after launch. This
is easy to model in GMAT.
As a secondary payload, we don't get to choose the launch time, our only hope
would be to use thrusters to make slight post-launch adjustments so the
satellite reenters not too early (as AO-13 did) and not too late. I have been
trying to figure out how to do this but have not had any results so far. If we
have a dedicated launch all to ourselves we can choose a launch time that
meets our requirements.
The NASA Cubesat that was recently grounded was aiming for a GTO launch, which
has been mentioned as a possible target for an AMSAT mission because we could
possibly get one cheap. Analysis of NORAD tracking data shows a lot of spent
rocket bodies that have been in GTO for decades, so this might not be the best
choice for a mission that needs a guaranteed reentry date.
Another possibility would be to place the satellite directly into the GEO
graveyard orbit and let it slowly drift around the Earth. There are plenty of
other HEO or Cislunar orbits that are not sensitive to orbital debris
requirements and may not be commercially attractive but would work OK for our
needs.
So yes, if we had $10 million in our bank account we could buy our way out of
a lot of problems that only affect poor people who are lacking options.
73, Dan N8FGV
------ Original Message ------
Received: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 12:28:55 PM EDT
From: Paul Andrews [email protected]
Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite
Yes! Find a commercial GEOsat with room to support an amateur payload.
Leverage commercial economics for launch and platform reliability. The
commercial operator can donate (tax break) the value of the ham (STEM)
capability. Maybe ham bands at 10 GHz and above. Simple bent pipe.
------ Original Message ------
Received: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:28:21 AM EDT
From: "Mark Johns, K0JM" [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite
The launch costs, while significant, are beside the point. The biggest
issue with HEO satellites are the regulatory challenges. AMSAT and
international partners could build and get ready for launch such a
satellite within a few years, just as they did with AO-10, AO-13, and
AO-40. But they would not get a license to put it into orbit in the
current regulatory environment. The technical and financial challenges
can be met, but the licensing requirements are killing us.
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.
Acceptable Use and Privacy Policies available at https://www.amsat.org/about-amsat/
View archives of this mailing list at
To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org
Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
Jim,
I am like you and don’t like contest type of QSO but chatting with friends around the world and also technical experimentation.
As regards the regulations, your are right that this is probably the biggest hurdle to put our own GEO up there. Just trying to simplify the issues in a nutshell for easy understanding of all: first we will have to find a slot to cover an hemisphere (not cheap), then build the bird and find a launcher (extremely) expensive. More maintain the bird position in space for its life time (say 15 years) and finally park it in the graveyard, this operational part is probably beyond our capabilities and also the risks are huge e.g. (worst case) that we damage a commercial bird up there and all the possible legal and compensation issue.
Therefore, I reiterate that the QO-100 model is the best approach to have a global GEO network or at least one over Americas, AMSAT-DL & QSAR have done it and have the experience, they have the technical design of the transponders, know all possible issues and also now experienced of operating it. Thus we should use the knowledge acquired and copy with pride. Actually if it is Mitsubishi building a commercial GEO (as they build QO-100) for deployment over an interesting slot for us it would be even easier as they built the HAM transponders, contacting them can be an opportunity eventually as they can bridge the gap between us and their customers (just an idea), may be contacting all the GEO satellites manufacturers (not many anyway) is better as they may be able to put us in contact with their customers thus increasing chances of a ride.
I also again appeal to all AMSAT leaders to join force and have a common strategy for HAM in space, whatever the outcome HEO, GEO or LEO it will focus our efforts in one direction and enable to reinforce/keep our presence in space.
Another though, now that our Chinese friends have a space station it would be nice that they have some similar program such as ARISS for students and HAM radio on board, May be any B HAM leader could comment on same.
73
Jean Marc (3B8DU)
On Aug 15, 2022, at 5:37 AM, [email protected] wrote:
I have realized the past few days that our AMSAT group has some really smart Hams! Thanks very much for the information. I have a few more questions. As I said before I would like to have more than a five minute QSO. I am not much of a contester, more a rag chewer. But I am afraid, if I understand most of you correctly, that is probably not going to happen in my life time? I reference K0JM's comments it's not so much the money but the regulatory environment that will stop this. I don't see this getting any easier in the next year, five years, or ten years. Does anybody else see anything different? And throwing in N8FGV's comments about the timing of the launch seems like a long shot as well. I spent a ton of money prior to AO-40 getting equipment ready to go in high hopes of having an AO-13 length run with so much more to do! I was terribly excited about this bird only to have it vanish before my eyes before I really got started. My last question is would a GOLF type satellite have the same obstacles as a Phase IV bird? If so I am probably going to have a-lot of satellite ham gear for sale real soon. Again thanks for your input.
WA5QAP
(licensed in 1966)
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite From: "Daniel Schultz" [email protected] Date: Fri, August 12, 2022 6:57 pm To: "AMSAT-BB" [email protected]
Hosting our payload on a commercial GEO satellite would likely cost more than $10 million if the commercial satellite owner is to be fully compensated for the engineering modifications to their satellite and potential loss of transponder revenue from diverting satellite resources to a non-productive payload over a 15 year design lifetime. Offering a tax break will probably not make up this difference. You might have better luck seeking hosting on a government owned satellite such as the Air Force mission that was discussed by AMSAT a few years ago, but eventually fell through. This is where carefully cultivated personal relationships can come in, if you have any such friends in high places. OSCAR-1 got its launch approved back in 1961 because of a few highly placed hams in the Pentagon, so keep up with your networking and maybe it can happen.
Some orbits are inherently unstable, for example 63 degree Molniya orbits will reliably decay in a few years. The Late, Great OSCAR-13 provides a prime example of this. Their orbital lifetime is heavily sensitive to the time of launch, if AO-13 was launched a few hours earlier it would still be up there, a few hours later it would have reentered a couple of years after launch. This is easy to model in GMAT.
As a secondary payload, we don't get to choose the launch time, our only hope would be to use thrusters to make slight post-launch adjustments so the satellite reenters not too early (as AO-13 did) and not too late. I have been trying to figure out how to do this but have not had any results so far. If we have a dedicated launch all to ourselves we can choose a launch time that meets our requirements.
The NASA Cubesat that was recently grounded was aiming for a GTO launch, which has been mentioned as a possible target for an AMSAT mission because we could possibly get one cheap. Analysis of NORAD tracking data shows a lot of spent rocket bodies that have been in GTO for decades, so this might not be the best choice for a mission that needs a guaranteed reentry date.
Another possibility would be to place the satellite directly into the GEO graveyard orbit and let it slowly drift around the Earth. There are plenty of other HEO or Cislunar orbits that are not sensitive to orbital debris requirements and may not be commercially attractive but would work OK for our needs.
So yes, if we had $10 million in our bank account we could buy our way out of a lot of problems that only affect poor people who are lacking options.
73, Dan N8FGV
------ Original Message ------ Received: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 12:28:55 PM EDT
From: Paul Andrews [email protected]
Subject: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite
Yes! Find a commercial GEOsat with room to support an amateur payload. Leverage commercial economics for launch and platform reliability. The commercial operator can donate (tax break) the value of the ham (STEM) capability. Maybe ham bands at 10 GHz and above. Simple bent pipe.
------ Original Message ------ Received: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:28:21 AM EDT
From: "Mark Johns, K0JM" [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AMSAT-BB] Re: Phase IV satellite
The launch costs, while significant, are beside the point. The biggest issue with HEO satellites are the regulatory challenges. AMSAT and international partners could build and get ready for launch such a satellite within a few years, just as they did with AO-10, AO-13, and AO-40. But they would not get a license to put it into orbit in the current regulatory environment. The technical and financial challenges can be met, but the licensing requirements are killing us.
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Acceptable Use and Privacy Policies available at https://www.amsat.org/about-amsat/
View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Acceptable Use and Privacy Policies available at https://www.amsat.org/about-amsat/
View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
participants (3)
-
Daniel Schultz -
Jean Marc Momple -
jim＠beeson.cc