On 7/5/13 11:37 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 12:14:20 -0400
Bob Camp <li...@rtty.us> wrote:
Indeed the atomic clocks on sats are set up so they can "tune" far
enough to take out the relativistic effects. That (and a bunch of other
things) makes them somewhat more expensive than their ground based cousins
(like by 10-100X).
Something being space qualified already makes it 10-100 times more expensive.
A "simple" FET costs easily 100USD, 1000USD is not unheard of.
the component is still <$10. It's the pallet load of paperwork that
accompanies that component, and the burden on the manufacturer(s) of
"traceability to sand" (I suppose we have to change that phrase.. not
much Gallium, Indium, etc. in sand)
That is changing though. Class S and V parts are getting harder and
harder to find, and the space biz is definitely moving towards more
"industrial" parts. AFter all, the required failure rates for components
used in engine control units for cars are substantially better than
those traditionally required for spaceflight.
It's more a matter of understanding what might go wrong, than the actual
probability of it going wrong.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
