> But as far as I'm concerned, it IS NOT the ultimate objective of a > satellite operator. It is the BARE MINIMUM of satellite operation, and > there is no way I'm going to be satisfied with that for more than one or > two passes. Fair opinion to have, you are entitled to it. However, stating it the way you do gives the impression (to me at least) that you can't see how anyone else would think any differently. When you say "it is NOT the ultimate objective of a satellite operator" I ask myself, 'How does he come to that conclusion?" It may not be YOUR ultimate objective, but I know several satellite operators who relish the idea of operating satellites while portable with minimum equipment. One took his annual work holiday to do nothing BUT that! It is analogous to saying that all HF operators dream of a high powered station with a tall tower and large antennas. However there are quite a number of people who prefer to pursue minimalist operations with tiny flea powered rigs and jury rigged antennas. Myself, I am somewhere in between. =^)
In other words, Gus... maybe it's not that you were previously misunderstood; rather, I would suggest that you didn't realize what you were actually saying. Your statement imposed 'your goals' on the rest of the sat community. Your statement is EXCLUSIVE... I am simply suggesting to widen your view and be INCLUSIVE. > To imply to the uneducated observer and potential future satellite > operator, that standing in the rain is the pinnacle of hamsat ground > station technology is (in my opinion) counter productive and, yes, > stupid.On the contrary, I happen to think that the opposite is the ingrained > preconception that uneducated observers might have. I would argue that the > heretofore concept of a sat station is long boom yagi antennas, AZ-EL rotors > and sophisticated, high powered equipment. Don't underestimate the power of a > preconceived notion! It can linger. Because I think a lot of general hams > probably still think that way. Moreover the general public and new hams > likely have such a conception. I would further posit that the demonstration > of simplicity actually implies that more complex equipment will beget more > complex and interesting operations with the 'pinnacle' is implied to be > elsewhere. In other words, "If I can do THIS with an HT, what can I do with > more?" I mean, I got an HT to dip my toe in the water and now I have an > FT-847 with a closet full of preamps, rotors, cable and boxed antennas > waiting for good weather to dig and lay conduit. Standing in the rain is the pinnacle of the technology? I don't think anyone implies that. (That would be... dare I say, "stupid".) I'm saying that one cannot define the pinnacle of what another finds fun and interesting. Yours might be to build the latest and greatest station... others might simply see the technology as a means to an end; the actual pursuit of the communication itself as the goal. - As for the rain... I know when to get out of it. I have a rather high ceiling in my living room and a tolerant wife. But again, I reiterate, some people actually enjoy the FM birds and it IS a good place for new sat ops to get their feet wet. I'm simply asking for folks to consider that those that operate FM birds might be put off by having it implied that what they chose to do is something to be looked down upon. And for those that do not like the FM birds, I am suggesting that they are the best way to garner new members to AMSAT and therefore the financial and volunteer support needed for future, more technologically advanced sat projects. Not to mentioning the engineering expertise!!! 73, Kevin N4UFO ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Control is the need of the fearful mind. Trust is the need of the courageous heart." _______________________________________________ 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
