I wonder if we could hook up with a university somewhere? Become part of their graduate program in Astro-something, even get some graduate students to help with the design and manufacture... What sort of restrictions do they have on the definition of a "student"?
Just a thought, Greg KO6TH > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:14:38 -0700 > From: b...@hsmicrowave.com > To: tosca...@tc.umn.edu > CC: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITAR is interesting to me > > Hi John, > > The completed satellite is usually exempt. This is how AO-51, as a > completed satellite, went to Russia and was launched on a Dnepr. AMSAT > has in the past and will in the future, apply for an export license for > a satellite. It's when you try to export satellite components or > technology, like the IHU, the SDX for the P3E, or engage in dialog > regarding a satellites thermal performance the the AMSAT-DL folks to > assist them, that you run afoul of ITAR. > > There's a big different between sharing technology and components than > it is to export a complete satellite for launch. Often the State Dept. > will require that a representative(s) of the satellite builders (and > sometimes the State Dept. itself) accompany the satellite at all times, > insuring that no one can get a closer look than just the outside, right > through the launch. > > Yes, a bit confusing and frustrating, but workable. > > Regards...Bill - N6GHz > > John P. Toscano wrote: > > Bob McGwier wrote: > >> ANY aspect dealing with a satellite, software, hardware, ground stations > >> (hardware, software, protocols, etc.), ideas, random ejaculations from a > >> diseased mind or whatever that deals with spacecraft or ground stations > >> are DEEMED EXPORTS when they depart a U.S. citizen and are delivered to > >> a non-U.S. citizen. It is a nearly impossible task to abide by and one > >> that really makes me want to throw my hands up in despair and walk away. > >> > >> There are exceptions for classrooms and courses taught in U.S. > >> university's. A person, even a non-U.S. citizen, who can pay for taking > >> a course, may go and involve themselves in course work, even if it is > >> dealing with the design, construction, and control of spacecraft during > >> the course work. Some of this applies to your earlier questions but for > >> US service academies, there are very few non-U.S. citizens in them. > > > > Bob: > > > > I would not dream of second-guessing you for a moment, since you are > > fully engaged in this stuff and I am simply an interested observer. > > > > However, why doesn't the following quotation directly from the ITAR > > regulations provide the exemption we need? The quotation comes from the > > section that defines what are the items that are covered by ITAR: > > > > ITAR Part 121 - The United States Munitions List > > > > -----------------------< begin quote >------------------------------- > > > > Category XV - Spacecraft Systems and Associated Equipment > > > > *(a) Spacecraft, including communications satellites, remote sensing > > satellites, scientific satellites, research satellites, navigation > > satellites, experimental and multi-mission satellites. > > > > *NOTE TO PARAGRAPH (a): Commercial communications satellites, scientific > > satellites, research satellites, and experimental satellites are > > designated as SME only when the equipment is intended for use by the > > armed forces of any foreign country. > > > > -----------------------< end quote >--------------------------------- > > > > Note that SME refers to "Significant Military Equipment" > > > > Paragraph (a) seems to cover everything and anything having to do with > > satellites, but the asterisk and "NOTE" attached to it seems to say that > > an Amateur radio satellite for use by Amateurs instead of foreign armed > > forces should be exempted, doesn't it? > > > > Granted, I realize that we have already lost one argument with ITAR > > about our past cooperation with AMSAT-DL, but is there some compelling > > reason why the lawyers didn't point out this exception? > > > > Just wondering... > > If I had to guess the answer myself, after looking at the horribly > > convoluted language of the small piece of the ITAR regulations that I > > have looked at, there is probably another paragraph elsewhere that > > effectively says, "we were just kidding when we said that it had to be > > used by foreign armed forces, we really mean it to cover everything" > > > > John > > W0JT > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent via amsat...@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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via amsat...@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 _________________________________________________________________ Windows 7: I wanted more reliable, now it's more reliable. Wow! http://microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/default-ga.aspx?h=myidea?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_myidea:102009 _______________________________________________ Sent via amsat...@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
