Juan:

And you would be absolutely right. Since John developed the original requirements document in concert with engineering management to meet the requirements we wanted (PAVE PAWS immunization, support SDX, etc.) aren't we glad that we have followed this procedure? We will again.

Let me know if you receive two copies of this email. If you did, you are a member of the group. A CAVEAT: YOU MUST POST FROM THE ACCOUNT ON WHICH YOU RECEIVE THIS EMAIL. It has to have some identifier to go by.

Bob

Juan Rivera wrote:

John,

Its no reflection on you but I still feel that it is fundamentallky

wrong for the designers and builders to create the requirements document. It's an issue of customer vs. supplier. The requirements should be supplied by the customer (AMSAT management). Then the folks that are tasked with designing and building the device should generate a plan to meet the requirements.

I'd post this on the AMSAT/Eagle newsgroup if I was on that list but

I'm not.

73, Juan

On 5/26/07, *John B. Stephensen* <kd6ozh@comcast.net

mailto:kd6ozh@comcast.net> wrote:

I think that the next step in the development of the 70 cm receiver
needs to
be updating the requirements document and getting it approved by
those who
will interface to the receiver. It was written over a year ago and
things
have changed. In my mind, there are several issues that need to be
resolved:

1) Storing the frequency setting.

2) Phase noise.

3) Frequency reference failure detection and switchover.

4) Thermal environment.

5) Waiving the hardware telecommand decoding requirement.

I'm in the process of updating the document and should done done in
the next
few days.

73,

John
KD6OZH