I have been following the digital satellite discussion with great
interest. Both sides have valid points.
I would like to pose a strictly engineering question. Keep in mind that
I'm not an engineer but consider myself reasonably well read on the
amateur satellite
world.
A digital satellite
would never have gotten
interested in satelites at all. The congestion on the FM sateliltes drove me
to start using linear satellites.
Doug
K9DLP
>
> From: Dave Marthouse
>To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
>Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 10:41 AM
>Subject
You don't necessarily need to do the processing on the satellite. There
still is concern over radiation and power for all Fox-1 satellites. To run
the FM transponder, IHU, experiments, etc. all on 1.9W to 2.5W (varies)
from the solar cells is extremely difficult. That's less power on average
than m
On 07/22/2014 08:41 AM, Dave Marthouse wrote:
> A digital satellite would imply loads of processing power on the
> satellite. I would assume that with this additional activity that there
> will be more
> hardware on the bird with more complexity as this won't be a bent pipe
> system.
Not necessa
On 07/22/2014 08:50 AM, Douglas Phelps wrote:
> And, in a related question, wouldn't more proccessing demand more
> power from the batteries/solar panels? I know my PC cetainly draws a
> lot more power when the CPO is working hard.
Not really. The biggest load in a communications satellite, or al
> The biggest load in a communications satellite
> is almost always the downlink RF power amplifier(s)...
True for some, not true for others. The locations of ham operators are
only about 10% of the earths surface. 90% of transmitter power can be
saved if the transmitter is not left on 100%
