[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
The numbers are low, was there an option to vote on line? That may be something to look at for next year or something like it * Dan ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
I disagree with the principle of prodding apathetic people to vote. If somebody isn't willing to do the research, fill out a card, and mail it back, then why should we go out of our way to get a vote they themselves apparently don't care about. I'm more interested in the opinions of those who are motivated enough to do this relatively simple task. I don't understand the fixation with getting a higher percentage of the membership to vote. 73, Ken N2WWD Sent from my iPad On Sep 18, 2012, at 4:22 PM, "Daniel" wrote: > The numbers are low, was there an option to vote on line? That may be > something to look at for next year or something like it > > * Dan > > ___ > 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 ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Hey! Thats an interesting idea! Dave, AA4KN - Original Message - From: "Daniel" To: Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 4:22 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes The numbers are low, was there an option to vote on line? That may be something to look at for next year or something like it * Dan ___ 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 ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
> Did all of the people who complain about AMSAT and the lack of this or > that satellite or feature or they way they are built or when do we get > another HEO or how someone failed once, did they all vote? The complainers need to do more than vote, they need to run for office themselves. > All of the above. Most care less about the politics. Even fewer actually > would give their time to make a difference. But there never is a shortage > of complainers. The US presidential election will be decided by about half of our eligible voters. The rest of them are too busy watching American Idol to give a damn about who runs the country for the next four years, or else they believe that nothing will change no matter which side wins. >The numbers are low, was there an option to vote on line? That may be >something to look at for next year or something like it. An excellent idea. Why don't you go ahead and make it so? You would need to figure out how to verify that only paid-up members can vote. That is why the paper ballots are mailed out to active members each year. While you are at it, I would also like to have a password protected members-only section of the web site where we could post the symposium materials that I have been collecting and archiving over the past half dozen years. My web coding skills are not up to the task but I would like to share these materials with the paid-up Amsat members. > > Seems to be true of anything anymore, only 10% of our homeowners > > showed up for the annual meeting. 5% of those had complaints that > > they only voice once a year at the annual meeting. I don't know if > > that means I'm doing a great job as a board member, or nobody gives a > hoot either way. Try erecting an 80 foot radio tower in your backyard. That should increase your homeowner's association turnout by a large amount! 73 Dan Schultz N8FGV ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
I agree. But its easier to sit on your butt and point fingers. If you actually do something you have to take responsibility for the failure not just the success. I wish the folks who long for the HEO's would solve two problems. Where the money will come from to build it and where the money will come from to launch it. Or who will provide a ride share deal and where the money will come from for that. I hear it all the time at hamfests about how amsat screwed up how amsat is wrong how much money they lost etc etc etc and when asked how they will help the usual answer is either nothing or they will help when the HEO flies. Yeah right John AG9D On Sep 19, 2012 3:04 PM, "Daniel Schultz" wrote: > > Did all of the people who complain about AMSAT and the lack of this or > > that satellite or feature or they way they are built or when do we get > > another HEO or how someone failed once, did they all vote? > > The complainers need to do more than vote, they need to run for office > themselves. > > > > All of the above. Most care less about the politics. Even fewer actually > > would give their time to make a difference. But there never is a shortage > > of complainers. > > The US presidential election will be decided by about half of our eligible > voters. The rest of them are too busy watching American Idol to give a damn > about who runs the country for the next four years, or else they believe > that > nothing will change no matter which side wins. > > > >The numbers are low, was there an option to vote on line? That may be > >something to look at for next year or something like it. > > An excellent idea. Why don't you go ahead and make it so? You would need to > figure out how to verify that only paid-up members can vote. That is why > the > paper ballots are mailed out to active members each year. While you are at > it, > I would also like to have a password protected members-only section of the > web > site where we could post the symposium materials that I have been > collecting > and archiving over the past half dozen years. My web coding skills are not > up > to the task but I would like to share these materials with the paid-up > Amsat > members. > > > > > Seems to be true of anything anymore, only 10% of our homeowners > > > showed up for the annual meeting. 5% of those had complaints that > > > they only voice once a year at the annual meeting. I don't know if > > > that means I'm doing a great job as a board member, or nobody gives a > > hoot either way. > > Try erecting an 80 foot radio tower in your backyard. That should increase > your homeowner's association turnout by a large amount! > > 73 > > Dan Schultz N8FGV > > > > > > > ___ > 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 > ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
I sent this direct first but was rejected because I'm not on his "approved" list. Ken I really think that there are a large number like myself waiting to see what is going to happen for a replacement for AO40. From people that I have talked to with a license calls above tech and more then a HT could care less about another FM bird. John At 03:47 PM 9/18/2012, you wrote: >I disagree with the principle of prodding apathetic people to vote. If >somebody isn't willing to do the research, fill out a card, and mail it back, >then why should we go out of our way to get a vote they themselves apparently >don't care about. I'm more interested in the opinions of those who are >motivated enough to do this relatively simple task. I don't understand the >fixation with getting a higher percentage of the membership to vote. > >73, Ken N2WWD ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
At 04:23 PM 9/19/2012, you wrote: >I'm sorry, but I'm not understanding the connection between the two. not need to try to explain then. ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
The reason for my thinking is simple. I was 10 when Gene Cernan walked on the moon. In case you forgot, he was the LAST an to walk on the moon. I've been waiting 38 years for it to happpen again. So rather then wait for P3E or AO-40 part deux I would rather have something up there than nothing at all. John - AG9D On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 5:09 PM, John Spasojevich wrote: > The way I understand this age old train of thought and I get it a lot from > my local hams when I do a hamfest for AMSAT in my area is that, just like > in many ham clubs, there are a group of people who feel that they are "real > hams". Whether it's because they had to pass a harder test ( as in the old > advanced test was harder then the current extra ) of they had to pass a 20 > WPM code test or they had to drive to the FCC and that people coming into > the hobby today are second class citizens, not good enough because the test > criteria changed. Same thing with AMSAT. Unless you work linear birds you > are not a "real" satellite operator. We can take that a step or two > farther. I'd say you are not a real satellite operator unless you use the > old Oscar Locator, figure your own pass predictions without the benefit of > a computer. We can make the argument of who is a better man all day long > and still end up with the same two groups on opposite sides of the room. > No doubt a HEO bird or geosync is idea, we've read it here a million times. > We've heard the "build it and they will come" comments a million times. No > one ever talks about the reality. Most of you guys who want HEO admit that > you don't support AMSAT in it's current mission. So I assume you don't go > to symposiums or have other routes to information. How much did AO40 cost > in it's day? That part I don't know. I recall a slide from the 2010 > Symposium I think it was that showed the cost of a replacement AO-51 and it > was around $500K, the price IntelSat wanted just to place a transponder on > the open space of their bird and carry it to geosync was $1.2M. So how > long will it take all of you "build it and they will come" guys to pony up > that kind of money? Then there is a launch...visit www.batc.tv and watch > AMSAT-DL's 2012 symposium update. P3E is sitting almost ready to go, the > hardware is nearly 5 years old...there is no launch...no one can > realistically raise that much money. If you have noticed there is not > really that much development of new launchers so no opportunities to ride > as ballast like in the old days. > > If you are going to push education, it's not real easy to sell someone > like NASA who has launchers available, that their interest in education is > served by launching an AO-40 replacement when it'll be full of "real hams" > and little opportunity for students. The road to reduced cost launches lies > with the education card and that is the path AMSAT-NA is on and until one > of the "real hams" wants to step up and head a drive to raise several > million dollars, I think you'll all be dead a buried before another AO-40 > flies. > > John - AG9D > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 3:49 PM, John Becker wrote: > >> I sent this direct first but was rejected because I'm not on his >> "approved" >> list. >> >> >> Ken >> I really think that there are a large number like myself waiting to >> see what is going to happen for a replacement for AO40. >> >> From people that I have talked to with a license calls above tech >> and more then a HT could care less about another FM bird. >> >> >> John >> >> >> >> >> >> At 03:47 PM 9/18/2012, you wrote: >> >I disagree with the principle of prodding apathetic people to vote. If >> somebody isn't willing to do the research, fill out a card, and mail it >> back, then why should we go out of our way to get a vote they themselves >> apparently don't care about. I'm more interested in the opinions of those >> who are motivated enough to do this relatively simple task. I don't >> understand the fixation with getting a higher percentage of the membership >> to vote. >> > >> >73, Ken N2WWD >> >> ___ >> 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 >> > > ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
The way I understand this age old train of thought and I get it a lot from my local hams when I do a hamfest for AMSAT in my area is that, just like in many ham clubs, there are a group of people who feel that they are "real hams". Whether it's because they had to pass a harder test ( as in the old advanced test was harder then the current extra ) of they had to pass a 20 WPM code test or they had to drive to the FCC and that people coming into the hobby today are second class citizens, not good enough because the test criteria changed. Same thing with AMSAT. Unless you work linear birds you are not a "real" satellite operator. We can take that a step or two farther. I'd say you are not a real satellite operator unless you use the old Oscar Locator, figure your own pass predictions without the benefit of a computer. We can make the argument of who is a better man all day long and still end up with the same two groups on opposite sides of the room. No doubt a HEO bird or geosync is idea, we've read it here a million times. We've heard the "build it and they will come" comments a million times. No one ever talks about the reality. Most of you guys who want HEO admit that you don't support AMSAT in it's current mission. So I assume you don't go to symposiums or have other routes to information. How much did AO40 cost in it's day? That part I don't know. I recall a slide from the 2010 Symposium I think it was that showed the cost of a replacement AO-51 and it was around $500K, the price IntelSat wanted just to place a transponder on the open space of their bird and carry it to geosync was $1.2M. So how long will it take all of you "build it and they will come" guys to pony up that kind of money? Then there is a launch...visit www.batc.tv and watch AMSAT-DL's 2012 symposium update. P3E is sitting almost ready to go, the hardware is nearly 5 years old...there is no launch...no one can realistically raise that much money. If you have noticed there is not really that much development of new launchers so no opportunities to ride as ballast like in the old days. If you are going to push education, it's not real easy to sell someone like NASA who has launchers available, that their interest in education is served by launching an AO-40 replacement when it'll be full of "real hams" and little opportunity for students. The road to reduced cost launches lies with the education card and that is the path AMSAT-NA is on and until one of the "real hams" wants to step up and head a drive to raise several million dollars, I think you'll all be dead a buried before another AO-40 flies. John - AG9D On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 3:49 PM, John Becker wrote: > I sent this direct first but was rejected because I'm not on his "approved" > list. > > > Ken > I really think that there are a large number like myself waiting to > see what is going to happen for a replacement for AO40. > > From people that I have talked to with a license calls above tech > and more then a HT could care less about another FM bird. > > > John > > > > > > At 03:47 PM 9/18/2012, you wrote: > >I disagree with the principle of prodding apathetic people to vote. If > somebody isn't willing to do the research, fill out a card, and mail it > back, then why should we go out of our way to get a vote they themselves > apparently don't care about. I'm more interested in the opinions of those > who are motivated enough to do this relatively simple task. I don't > understand the fixation with getting a higher percentage of the membership > to vote. > > > >73, Ken N2WWD > > ___ > 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 > ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
On 09/19/2012 06:09 PM, John Spasojevich wrote: If you are going to push education, it's not real easy to sell someone like NASA who has launchers available, that their interest in education is served by launching an AO-40 replacement when it'll be full of "real hams" and little opportunity for students. The road to reduced cost launches lies with the education card and that is the path AMSAT-NA is on and until one of the "real hams" wants to step up and head a drive to raise several million dollars, I think you'll all be dead a buried before another AO-40 flies. I fear you are correct. About the likelihood of another HEO launch. But I disagree about the rest. The education card may gain us cheaper launches, but why are we bothering? A recent post here mentioned a five-satellite CubeSat launch, concluding that "Four of the CubeSats carry Amateur Radio payloads..." Excuse me? F-1 transmits on 145.980 MHz and 437.485 MHz which are both ham frequencies. But hams can't use this bird, because unless you want to look at earth images (and live in the vicinity of the ground-station) or you are interested in the spacecraft's obscure telemetry, there is nothing for you here. And if you ARE interested, you don't have to be a ham radio operator to "use" the satellite. All you need is the appropriate receiver and no license. FITSAT-1 transmits on 437.250 MHz, 437.445 MHz and 5.840 GHz. Again, all ham frequencies, and again, useable by ANYONE, with or without a ham license, because all you need is a receiver (seeing as all you can do is listen to some more obscure telemetry). The Hi-Brite LEDs writing CW in the sky is really neet... but you won't see it unless you live near the ground-station which I don't WE-WISH (apparently) downlinks on ham frequency 437.505 MHz. It seems to have a thermal imager on it, and presumably lots more obscure telemetry. Once again, non-hams can use this as easily as hams because it only requires you have a receiver, no interaction being possible. TechEdSat will allow you (and any non-ham with a receiver) to listen to the obscure telemetry (hereinafter "ObsTel") on ham frequency 437.465 MHz. Why you would want to, I can't imagine. So. Is this the sort of "Amateur Radio Payload" that we should hope for, if we continue to play the education card? Personally, I can't see why we should bother. Judging by these satellites, the phrase "carries an amateur radio payload" really means "usurps amateur radio frequencies for non-amateur use for telemetry and telecommand on non-amateur satellites". Let me make it plain. I have no objection to (and indeed, I support) satellites being launched for educational reasons. I suppose that I really don't even object to the HamSat frequencies being used for non-ham purposes, seeing as WE aren't using those frequencies for anything much. But what are we gaining from playing this education card? The hope that occasionally, we can arrange the launch of some short lifespan, low range, fast pass, single channel FM bird that I get to shout callsign and gridsquare at for 6-8 minutes at a time, on a good day? You know, I don't have 10M to spare, to pay for a HEO launch. If I did, I would. I might scrape together 10K to donate. But honestly now, why should I? Apparently there will never be another AO-13 for me (and "real hams") to enjoy, because such a bird will offer little opportunity for students. But of course, I am nobody special, and not even an AMSAT member (I'll tell you why, if you want me to) so you can safely ignore my post. -- 73, de Gus 8P6SM The Easternmost Isle ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
- Original Message - From: "Gus 8P6SM" <8p...@anjo.com> To: Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 5:30 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes > Judging by these satellites, the phrase "carries > an amateur radio payload" really means "usurps amateur radio frequencies > for non-amateur use for telemetry and telecommand on non-amateur > satellites". > 73, de Gus 8P6SM > The Easternmost Isle Hi Gus, 8P6SM Well said ! I agree completely with you 73" de i8CVS Domenico ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Gus, I understand what you are saying I share the same thoughts on the use of the frequencies. Maybe by their use of them it keeps them active. I don't presume to have the answers or the money. I just wish I knew what a "real" ham is or was because no matter what part of the hobby I stick my nose into it seems the "good old days" are the measure. My observation of the hobby from my short 12 years in is that it's a hobby terribly stuck in the past for a large number of folks. John AG9D Sent from my iPod On Sep 19, 2012, at 10:30 PM, Gus 8P6SM <8p...@anjo.com> wrote: > On 09/19/2012 06:09 PM, John Spasojevich wrote: >> If you are going to push education, it's not real easy to sell someone like >> NASA who has launchers available, that their interest in education is >> served by launching an AO-40 replacement when it'll be full of "real hams" >> and little opportunity for students. The road to reduced cost launches lies >> with the education card and that is the path AMSAT-NA is on and until one >> of the "real hams" wants to step up and head a drive to raise several >> million dollars, I think you'll all be dead a buried before another AO-40 >> flies. > > I fear you are correct. About the likelihood of another HEO launch. But I > disagree about the rest. > > The education card may gain us cheaper launches, but why are we bothering? A > recent post here mentioned a five-satellite CubeSat launch, concluding that > "Four of the CubeSats carry Amateur Radio payloads..." Excuse me? > > F-1 transmits on 145.980 MHz and 437.485 MHz which are both ham frequencies. > But hams can't use this bird, because unless you want to look at earth images > (and live in the vicinity of the ground-station) or you are interested in the > spacecraft's obscure telemetry, there is nothing for you here. And if you > ARE interested, you don't have to be a ham radio operator to "use" the > satellite. All you need is the appropriate receiver and no license. > > FITSAT-1 transmits on 437.250 MHz, 437.445 MHz and 5.840 GHz. Again, all ham > frequencies, and again, useable by ANYONE, with or without a ham license, > because all you need is a receiver (seeing as all you can do is listen to > some more obscure telemetry). The Hi-Brite LEDs writing CW in the sky is > really neet... but you won't see it unless you live near the > ground-station which I don't > > WE-WISH (apparently) downlinks on ham frequency 437.505 MHz. It seems to > have a thermal imager on it, and presumably lots more obscure telemetry. > Once again, non-hams can use this as easily as hams because it only requires > you have a receiver, no interaction being possible. > > TechEdSat will allow you (and any non-ham with a receiver) to listen to the > obscure telemetry (hereinafter "ObsTel") on ham frequency 437.465 MHz. Why > you would want to, I can't imagine. > > So. Is this the sort of "Amateur Radio Payload" that we should hope for, if > we continue to play the education card? Personally, I can't see why we > should bother. Judging by these satellites, the phrase "carries an amateur > radio payload" really means "usurps amateur radio frequencies for non-amateur > use for telemetry and telecommand on non-amateur satellites". > > Let me make it plain. I have no objection to (and indeed, I support) > satellites being launched for educational reasons. I suppose that I really > don't even object to the HamSat frequencies being used for non-ham purposes, > seeing as WE aren't using those frequencies for anything much. But what are > we gaining from playing this education card? The hope that occasionally, we > can arrange the launch of some short lifespan, low range, fast pass, single > channel FM bird that I get to shout callsign and gridsquare at for 6-8 > minutes at a time, on a good day? > > You know, I don't have 10M to spare, to pay for a HEO launch. If I did, I > would. I might scrape together 10K to donate. But honestly now, why should > I? Apparently there will never be another AO-13 for me (and "real hams") to > enjoy, because such a bird will offer little opportunity for students. > > But of course, I am nobody special, and not even an AMSAT member (I'll tell > you why, if you want me to) so you can safely ignore my post. > -- > 73, de Gus 8P6SM > The Easternmost Isle > ___ > 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 ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Hi Gus...a bit painful to read, however I agree with about 99.9% if it. The truth hurts. 73 Bob W7LED - Original Message - From: "Gus 8P6SM" <8p...@anjo.com> To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:30:50 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes On 09/19/2012 06:09 PM, John Spasojevich wrote: > If you are going to push education, it's not real easy to sell someone like > NASA who has launchers available, that their interest in education is > served by launching an AO-40 replacement when it'll be full of "real hams" > and little opportunity for students. The road to reduced cost launches lies > with the education card and that is the path AMSAT-NA is on and until one > of the "real hams" wants to step up and head a drive to raise several > million dollars, I think you'll all be dead a buried before another AO-40 > flies. I fear you are correct. About the likelihood of another HEO launch. But I disagree about the rest. The education card may gain us cheaper launches, but why are we bothering? A recent post here mentioned a five-satellite CubeSat launch, concluding that "Four of the CubeSats carry Amateur Radio payloads..." Excuse me? F-1 transmits on 145.980 MHz and 437.485 MHz which are both ham frequencies. But hams can't use this bird, because unless you want to look at earth images (and live in the vicinity of the ground-station) or you are interested in the spacecraft's obscure telemetry, there is nothing for you here. And if you ARE interested, you don't have to be a ham radio operator to "use" the satellite. All you need is the appropriate receiver and no license. FITSAT-1 transmits on 437.250 MHz, 437.445 MHz and 5.840 GHz. Again, all ham frequencies, and again, useable by ANYONE, with or without a ham license, because all you need is a receiver (seeing as all you can do is listen to some more obscure telemetry). The Hi-Brite LEDs writing CW in the sky is really neet... but you won't see it unless you live near the ground-station which I don't WE-WISH (apparently) downlinks on ham frequency 437.505 MHz. It seems to have a thermal imager on it, and presumably lots more obscure telemetry. Once again, non-hams can use this as easily as hams because it only requires you have a receiver, no interaction being possible. TechEdSat will allow you (and any non-ham with a receiver) to listen to the obscure telemetry (hereinafter "ObsTel") on ham frequency 437.465 MHz. Why you would want to, I can't imagine. So. Is this the sort of "Amateur Radio Payload" that we should hope for, if we continue to play the education card? Personally, I can't see why we should bother. Judging by these satellites, the phrase "carries an amateur radio payload" really means "usurps amateur radio frequencies for non-amateur use for telemetry and telecommand on non-amateur satellites". Let me make it plain. I have no objection to (and indeed, I support) satellites being launched for educational reasons. I suppose that I really don't even object to the HamSat frequencies being used for non-ham purposes, seeing as WE aren't using those frequencies for anything much. But what are we gaining from playing this education card? The hope that occasionally, we can arrange the launch of some short lifespan, low range, fast pass, single channel FM bird that I get to shout callsign and gridsquare at for 6-8 minutes at a time, on a good day? You know, I don't have 10M to spare, to pay for a HEO launch. If I did, I would. I might scrape together 10K to donate. But honestly now, why should I? Apparently there will never be another AO-13 for me (and "real hams") to enjoy, because such a bird will offer little opportunity for students. But of course, I am nobody special, and not even an AMSAT member (I'll tell you why, if you want me to) so you can safely ignore my post. -- 73, de Gus 8P6SM The Easternmost Isle ___ 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 ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm shift or we will cease to exist. Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of his launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling before the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it. In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides for free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100 kg in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that price is to expand the supply of launches. This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire small satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small satellites are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company called Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors. AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram ride on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40 had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We gambled and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch opportunity. The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million. Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by making Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen. The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications aspects of space flight. I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching proper engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off the shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in the satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt that the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing or Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial financial support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public image of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams can use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely to be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we had better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission in mind. We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or are now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the HEO missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a higher orbit instead of helplessly watch it reenter a mere six months after deployment from the ISS? What if we had been able to nudge AO-13 away from its destructive resonance and prevent it from reentering far too early? Another area where Amsat has failed has been in the news media. When Amsat does not receive credit for its accomplishments, others are free to rewrite history and claim that they were the first to accomplish every new thing, sometimes claiming credit for things that Amsat first did three decades ago. The universities have professional public relations staff who know how to plant favorable news stories in the media. When Amsat launched AO-40 some of us tried to g
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Amen, Dan! Keith, W5IU -Original Message- From: Daniel Schultz To: amsat-bb Sent: Fri, Sep 21, 2012 1:05 am Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm shift or we will cease to exist. Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of his launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling before the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it. In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides for free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100 kg in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that price is to expand the supply of launches. This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire small satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small satellites are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company called Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors. AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram ride on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40 had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We gambled and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch opportunity. The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million. Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by making Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen. The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications aspects of space flight. I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching proper engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off the shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in the satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt that the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing or Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial financial support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public image of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams can use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely to be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we had better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission in mind. We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or are now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the HEO missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a higher orbit instead of helplessly watch it reenter a mere six months after deployment from the ISS? What if we had been able to nudge AO-13 away from its destructive resonance and prevent it from reentering far too early? Another area where Amsat has failed has been in the news media. When Amsat does not receive credit for its accomplishments, others are free to rewrite history and claim that they were the first to accomplish every new thing, sometimes claiming c
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Thanks Dan very well put. Exactly what I was trying to say. John AG9D On Sep 21, 2012 11:23 AM, wrote: > > Amen, Dan! > > Keith, W5IU > > > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Schultz > To: amsat-bb > Sent: Fri, Sep 21, 2012 1:05 am > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes > > > Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully > commercialized > and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm > shift or we will cease to exist. > > Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force > general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of > his > launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological > ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling > before > the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it. > > In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides > for > free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100 > kg > in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that > price > is to expand the supply of launches. > > This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire > small > satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts > laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small > satellites > are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company > called > Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors. > > AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram > ride > on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The > reasons > for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not > add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If > AO-40 > had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We > gambled > and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch > opportunity. > > The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a > more > modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular > basis > so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. > This > effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single > university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch > opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for > Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million. > > Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox > program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by > making > Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard > compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen. > > The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data > downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of > amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but > many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications > aspects > of space flight. > > I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching > proper > engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal > vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off > the > shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in > the > satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt > that > the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will > need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing > or > Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial > financial > support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and > inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public > image > of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse > code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams > can > use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely > to > be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we > had > better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building > well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission > in > mind. > > We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in > space. Many different forms of electric propulsion ar
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Very well said. Thanks Dan. Dale-KL7XJ On 9/20/2012 9:48 PM, Daniel Schultz wrote: Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm shift or we will cease to exist. Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of his launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling before the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it. In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides for free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100 kg in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that price is to expand the supply of launches. This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire small satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small satellites are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company called Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors. AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram ride on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40 had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We gambled and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch opportunity. The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million. Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by making Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen. The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications aspects of space flight. I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching proper engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off the shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in the satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt that the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing or Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial financial support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public image of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams can use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely to be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we had better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission in mind. We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or are now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the HEO missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a higher orbit instead of helplessly watch it reenter a mere six months after deployment from the ISS? What if we had been able to nudge AO-13 away from its destructive resonance and prevent it from reentering far too early? Another area where Amsat has failed has been in the news media. When Amsat does not receive credit for its accomplishments, others are free to rewrite history and claim that they were the first to accomplish every new thing, sometimes claiming credit for things that Amsat first did three decades ago. The universities have professional public relations staff who know how to plan
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Well put Dan...the only issue I have is the elderly men part with vacuum tube radios...I recently set aside my Swan 350 & FT-101 for a FT-950. There are some people within the AMSAT organization that have some "connections" with the various space agencies. There must be a better than a 10 million deal. Checking my lottery ticket. 73 Bob W7LRD - Original Message - From: "Daniel Schultz" To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 10:48:22 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm shift or we will cease to exist. Things were a lot different in the 1960's and 70's. In 1961 an Air Force general had enough authority to allow Oscar 1 to be bolted to the side of his launch vehicle. It is like this in the early days of all new technological ventures. The internet in the early 1990's was a lot more free-wheeling before the "suits" took notice of it and started to regulate it. In today's world the bean counters are fully in charge, and nobody rides for free. When you have commercial companies offering $10 million to place 100 kg in orbit, that becomes the market price, and the only way to lower that price is to expand the supply of launches. This development is especially ironic because Amsat created the entire small satellite industry. There was a time when industry and government experts laughed at us and our little toy satellites. We proved that small satellites are valuable and now everybody wants to launch them. A little company called Surrey Satellite Technology grew out of Amsat endeavors. AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram ride on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40 had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We gambled and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch opportunity. The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million. Since cubesats are the only available launches, Amsat has started the Fox program to participate in the cubesat trend. Amsat can help its case by making Fox the best engineered cubesat ever built, which should not be too hard compared to some of the other cubesat designs that I have seen. The university cubesats use amateur radio frequencies as inexpensive data downlinks, but they do not otherwise contribute to the basis and purpose of amateur radio as defined in part 97. Education is mentioned in part 97 but many of these cubesat programs just barely touch on the communications aspects of space flight. I also don't think that most of the student built cubesats are teaching proper engineering techniques, I wonder how many of them have gone through thermal vacuum or radiation testing. Some cubesat groups are still purchasing off the shelf ham HTs and simply removing the plastic case before mounting it in the satellite, because they "don't know how to design an RF system". I doubt that the students are learning the engineering and career skills that they will need to survive in the real world when they get entry level jobs at Boeing or Lockheed Martin after graduation. Nevertheless there is substantial financial support for student built satellites which are perceived to be training and inspiring the next generation of engineers, while ham radio has a public image of being the last century's technology, a hobby of elderly men using Morse code and vacuum tube radios, and nobody with money to donate cares if hams can use a satellite to work rare DX countries. Our link to education is likely to be one of our only ways to secure low cost launches in the future, so we had better find ways to work with and direct the student groups toward building well engineered, long lived satellites with a real communications mission in mind. We can also look around and take notice of what other groups are doing in space. Many different forms of electric propulsion are in development or are now flying, and this technology has the possibility to enable some of the HEO missions that we desire. What if we had been able to propel ARRISSat into a higher orbit instead of help
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
- Original Message - From: "Gus 8P6SM" <8p...@anjo.com> To: "i8cvs" Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 7:40 AM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes > On 09/19/2012 11:58 PM, i8cvs wrote: > > - Original Message - > > From: "Gus 8P6SM"<8p...@anjo.com> > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 5:30 AM > > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes > > > >> Judging by these satellites, the phrase "carries > >> an amateur radio payload" really means "usurps amateur radio > >> frequencies for non-amateur use for telemetry and telecommand > >> on non-amateur satellites". > > > >> 73, de Gus 8P6SM > >> The Easternmost Isle > > > > Hi Gus, 8P6SM > > > > Well said ! I agree completely with you > > > > 73" de > > > > i8CVS Domenico > > > > Hi, Dom! > > Worked you twice via AO-13, back in '93/'94. > > Those were the days! > > -- > 73, de Gus 8P6SM > The Easternmost Isle Hi Gus, 8P6SM Yes Gus, those were magic days but it was nice until it lasted. Unfortunately actually AMSAT is like a bomber without bombs or a bull without horns ! 73" de i8CVS Domenico ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
- Original Message - From: "Daniel Schultz" To: Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 7:48 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes > > Those of you who are lapsed Amsat members and will not rejoin until a HEO > is launched really should reconsider. The membership dues are not that > high, and we still need your active participation if any of this is to > come to fruition. > Giving up on Amsat by lapsing your membership pretty well insures that we > will never again have a HEO satellite. > > 73 > > Dan Schultz N8FGV > Hi Dan, N8FGV Not true ! I will donate only to AMSAT-DL because beginning from OSCAR-10 to AO40 only the policy of AMSAT-DL was able to get launches of HEO satellites from ESA and actually only AMSAT-DL is working to get a launch opportunity for P3-E or a GTO satellite as you can read here: http://www.southgatearc.org/news/september2012/amsat_dl_statement.htm 73" de i8CVS Domenico ___ 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
[amsat-bb] Re: 22% votes
Hi! Since this discussion started around the topic of the 700 ballots AMSAT-NA received for the Board election, let me add one point to that thought. Thanks to those who voted in the election, whether or not you voted for me. Thanks for taking the time to consider each person who was on the ballot, and for selecting the person or persons you voted for. > Amsat is living in a brave new world where launches are fully commercialized > and nobody gets a free ride anymore. We will either adapt to that paradigm > shift or we will cease to exist. This is the point some want to overlook. It is unfortunate that we are not able to get the free or extremely cheap launches that we had in the past. When there are more satellites to be launched than launches, the launch providers set the prices. Other than some opportunities like AMSAT has for Fox-1 from NASA, the days of free launches are pretty much a thing of the past. So we adapt to the new reality. > AO-40 was a once in a lifetime opportunity. ESA offered us a 600 kilogram ride > on one of the first Ariane 5 vehicles and we voted to go for it. The reasons > for AO-40's failure have been covered before, and further analysis will not > add to the discussion. It is not a mistake to throw deep sometimes. If AO-40 > had worked as designed, it would have revolutionized amateur radio. We gambled > and lost and we will most likely never see another 600 kg launch opportunity. > > The Eagle project was started about a decade ago in hope of launching a more > modest HEO replacement for AO-40, and to be able to do so on a regular basis > so that a single satellite failure would not ground the entire program. This > effort was overtaken by the tidal wave of cubesats. With every single > university on Earth launching a cubesat all of the available launch > opportunities are filled with pea-pod launchers and there is no room for > Eagle, unless someone writes a check for $10 million. Even before the late-2000s global financial crisis, AMSAT-NA was not receiving a steady stream of contributions to support the Eagle project. Add in the ITAR regulations that have put a serious crimp on how US hams can interact with the rest of the world on satellite projects, things have changed - and not for the better. ITAR also got in the way of US hams and AMSAT-NA helping AMSAT-DL with Phase-3E. Take a look at the AMSAT-NA Fox PayPal widget and how much it is up to. It will be helpful for Fox, but AMSAT-NA needs a whole lot more to begin talking about an HEO project. It's unfortunate, but that's what we're up against. If AMSAT-NA decided to build an HEO satellite without an airtight guaranteed launch opportunity or funding for a launch, this would be a most irresponsible move on the part of the AMSAT-NA Board. AMSAT-NA cannot, and should not, start an HEO project in the hopes there will be a launch opportunity or the funding for a launch that will show up when the satellite is ready. We'd end up with a satellite that sits on a lab shelf somewhere, just like Phase-3E, and the AMSAT-NA Board would deserve to be run out of town for an expenditure like that going nowhere. With this in mind, and the previous Eagle project's failure to attract the needed contributions, AMSAT-NA is proceeding with the Fox project and other efforts for launches or projects where an amateur payload can ride along on other satellites. AMSAT-DL is proceeding with its efforts to find a launch opportunity, and I hope they are successful. The same is true for AMSAT-UK and the FUNcube, the New Zealand KiwiSAT project, among others. Many of you have heard me talk about the fun I have had working the satellites over the past few years. I never had the opportunity to work the HEO satellites we had. If Phase-3E, or some other HEO satellite, were to be launched - I'd enjoy the work to change my station so it could use that satellite. Until then, I will enjoy working the satellites we have - all LEO, SSB and even FM, despite not holding a Technician license anymore. 73! Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK http://www.wd9ewk.net/ ___ 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
