Drew, et.al.:
Your message brings the wheel back around to my presentations of 2000 and 2002, and to also the buildable and manageable spaceframe that is designed and ready to be constructed. This would place the ACP where it belongs at the moment - as an experiment, not the prime payload.
'73, Dick Jansson, KD1K
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Glasbrenner Sent: Wednesday, 16 July, 2008 02:17 To: John B. Stephensen; Bob McGwier; 'Bill Ress'; 'David Goncalves' Cc: 'AMSAT BoD'; [email protected] Subject: [eagle] Re: what is going on?, some technical content at last.
I wasn't on AO-13 on my own, although I was exposed to it via a ham friend a
few times. AO-40 had enough traffic that 25kHz would not begin to be enough,
even on UL/S. I'd say 100 kHz would be a good lower limit.
It's my view, and one shared by others, that a linear transponder would certainly still have most, if not all, of the same EMCOMM benefits as the ACP, and should be in the running for governmental aid as well. It is certainly more within our -immediate- grasp, and would keep us alive membership-wise while we complete the ACP. I don't want anyone to think I'm against the ACP as a project, I'm simply being practical about what our priorities may need to become to ensure the organizations immediate survival.
I think both roads really lead us to a rideshare of some sort, whether that be Intelsat or GPS or GOES, or whomever else we can hitch our wagon to.
73, and thanks for the ongoing discussion, Drew KO4MA
(snip)