I'll second Bob's comments and thank Bill for his efforts and leadership with the project.
It has been interesting to work with this diverse group and I'm proud of the work we have accomplished. A great thanks goes to Bob who did a super job building Blinky.
Success in a project within an organization comes down to several factors, the most important of which is a champion at higher levels. At this point, it would appear Pacsat lacks that critical factor and possibly it is time to declare success and wait for the future. I believe it is important for AMSAT to have a digital presence in space and hope our efforts can make some contribution.
So, time to file everything away and start on the pile OProjects cluttering the room.
73 and TNX
Jim
-----Original Message----- From: Bob Stricklin via pacsat-dev [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 4:37 PM To: Bill Reed [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; Mike Moore [email protected] Subject: [pacsat-dev] Re: Pacsat status, March 11, 2025
This is a nice summary of the status of the PASAT project. Bill has done a great job shepherding it along and the efforts can be enjoyed by future AMSAT missions.
Bob
On Mar 11, 2025, at 2:40 PM, Bill Reed via pacsat-dev [email protected] wrote:
March 11, 2025
Dear pacsat team,
I want to tell you where I think pacsat stands today. We still have no funding, but I have had a discussion with Gerry Buxton about the project and I will try to convey to you what I have heard him say. ( Gerry, please correct me if I am wrong.)
2024 ended with a successful pacsat prototype. Our blinky board works but it needs a few tweaks before it could fly. Our software works. It may have a few minor defects and missing a few enhancements, but it is basically ready for flight. The ground station software is ready.
I anticipated that 2025 would be a milestone year. I believed we could build flight ready modules. Consequently, in November 2024 I submitted our 2025 pacsat budget. I believe that budgets establish a projects direction. I proposed a budget that would, in my mind, establish that direction.
I proposed the following:
Monies to resolve the few existing hardware issues with the blinky board. It cost us $2000 to build each blinky board and I felt we would need to prototype a few fixes. Instead of $2000 for each tweak, I proposed that we enhance our launchpad design at a cost of $150 for each tweak and then consolidate our final design layout on a cubesat size board. This budget item has not been funded yet. I am hopeful it will be. I recognized that the current design that used the AX5043 was limited. The AX5043 is out of production. We purchased some supply of parts from questionable suppliers, hoping that those parts were acceptable. Also, the AX5043 was limited to FM packets at 1200 bps AFSK and 9600 bsp GFSK. We would need a new design if we expected to use higher data rates and new protocols. I proposed that we start a software designed radio (SDR) effort for that new design. Gerry indicated to me that an SDR design effort would not be funded. The University of North Dakota satellite group contacted me indicating they would like to fly a pacsat board on an upcoming mission. They indicated that previous attempts to contact AMSAT had failed. They had no design interface at that time, but I agreed to work with them as their flight mission progressed. I proposed some monies in the 2025 budget to build them some prototype boards. Gerry indicated to me that effort would not be funded. ARISS engineering approached me about a pacsat system on the International Space Station. Again we had no design requirements but I proposed some monies to support any hardware we might build for them. Gerry indicated to me that effort would not be funded. Gerry did suggest that we build several "generic" pacsat boards and place those boards in inventory. I think we have a challenge in defining what a "generic flight board" consists of. It could be as simple as our blinky prototype board cleaned up for flight. There are a few interface issues that need to be resolved. Gerry indicated that the Fox-Plus-B flight still planned to fly a pacsat board on that mission. There has been much discussion about the project but no interface description has been provided. I don't know what Gerry plans for us to do but I am sure that he will provide direction in the future. I requested funding for this mission but the status of that funding is unknown.I believe that the pacsat team's efforts over the last two years have been exceptional. I want to thank all of you for your efforts.
From a personal standpoint, my funding efforts have been very frustrating. I submitted my budget proposal last November and I expected that to be approved by January 1, 2025. In my mind that's the way that budgets work. Now, without any budget at all, we are not knowing which projects we should be working on and how we might progress.
I have decided to step back from my role as pacsat team lead. I still intend to be a member of the pacsat team, but at this point I would like to participate in the SDR design task. If it continues to be unfunded then I will need to determine how we might proceed.
Please don't give up on our pacsat efforts. We have a great design and we can make it successful.
Bill Reed, NX5R
pacsat-dev mailing list -- [email protected] View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
pacsat-dev mailing list -- [email protected] View archives of this mailing list at https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at https://mailman.amsat.org