HTs are nice. I have been reading about the plans for Eagle and how it must serve the HT and CC&R community of hams. Thats fine, when Eagle is close to Earth HT users can work it. But when Eagle is 40,000 km out in space that is when the larger tracking antenna arrays should come into their own. That lets both camps (HTs and tracking arrays) use and enjoy the next HEO satellite.
CC&R restrictions should be taken care of with new state laws like PRB-1 to allow Hams to have antennas on their property that asist in case of natural disasters and in the war with Islamic Facists.
If the goal is to launch 3 HEO sats over a 13 year period that means design and build one style spaceframe then change the insides as more modern technology is developed over the time span waiting for launch. P3E seems to be using a tried and true spaceframe. Why did Eagle need to be different? If there are plans for a 2nd P3E #2 or #3 that would interest me more than Eagle #1 with unproven ideas. Let most of the experimentation take place in the ground stations, not in space (at least not until we can send a repairman to space to fix it). Can't PSK31 work thru a HEO using very small V and U band antennas for one thing? Let the digital crowd do that and let the SSB folks use their tracking arrays to work voice on V and U and yes even S band if the users want to try it (thru the future interference). Maybe by then we will be using digital voice with techniques to work thru the interference on S band. Are we just going to give up and move to a higher band everytime a few commercial users get on one of our bands? Why?
It may take 13 years to design, build and launch the first Eagle. You can not launch 3 Eagles in 13 years with the way you are going now.
Just a few thoughts from a ham satellite user.
Les W4SCO
Unfortunately, we have to plan based on current laws and Eagle needs to be as small and light as possible so that we can afford two.
We're stuck when the FCC allocates our bands to millions of unlicensed users. We can increase our power levels for terrestrial use, but its just too expensive for HEO satellites.
73,
John KD6OZH
----- Original Message ----- From: sco@sco-inc.com To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 18:57 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] HT Mindset
HTs are nice. I have been reading about the plans for Eagle and how it must serve the HT and CC&R community of hams. Thats fine, when Eagle is close to Earth HT users can work it. But when Eagle is 40,000 km out in space that is when the larger tracking antenna arrays should come into their own. That lets both camps (HTs and tracking arrays) use and enjoy the next HEO satellite.
CC&R restrictions should be taken care of with new state laws like PRB-1 to allow Hams to have antennas on their property that asist in case of natural disasters and in the war with Islamic Facists.
If the goal is to launch 3 HEO sats over a 13 year period that means design and build one style spaceframe then change the insides as more modern technology is developed over the time span waiting for launch. P3E seems to be using a tried and true spaceframe. Why did Eagle need to be different? If there are plans for a 2nd P3E #2 or #3 that would interest me more than Eagle #1 with unproven ideas. Let most of the experimentation take place in the ground stations, not in space (at least not until we can send a repairman to space to fix it). Can't PSK31 work thru a HEO using very small V and U band antennas for one thing? Let the digital crowd do that and let the SSB folks use their tracking arrays to work voice on V and U and yes even S band if the users want to try it (thru the future interference). Maybe by then we will be using digital voice with techniques to work thru the interference on S band. Are we just going to give up and move to a higher band everytime a few commercial users get on one of our bands? Why?
It may take 13 years to design, build and launch the first Eagle. You can not launch 3 Eagles in 13 years with the way you are going now.
Just a few thoughts from a ham satellite user.
Les W4SCO
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
participants (2)
-
John B. Stephensen -
sco＠sco-inc.com