Re: [amsat-bb] Geostationary Satellites?

["John K. Peterson" <kg5za@xxxxxxxx>]

Actually HF still exists because the department of defence wants a redily
available means of communications should the current state of the art
satalite system fail for what ever reason!  Enough said?

                                   73"
                                        John
                                               KG5ZA
In The Twinkling of a Star,
            All That Glitters is Not Gold!


On Sun, 20 Feb 2000 08:33:32 -0600 Jon Ogden <jono@enteract.com> writes:
> on 2/20/00 12:19 AM, Frank Grossman at 71042.1303@compuserve.com 
> wrote:
> 
> > Somebody in this discussion commented that a network of geosync 
> ham
> > transponders would make HF obsolete.  Isn't that the point?  HF is
> > obsolete.  
> 
> As the person who said that let me tell you something:  HF is NOT 
> obsolete
> in any way, shape or form.  IMHO, anyone who thinks that has no clue 
> of what
> HF operating is all about.  The remark was made somewhat tounge in 
> cheek.
> HF is there because of the challenge.  And your comments about 
> needing large
> antennas and lots of power is not accurate either.  Thousands of 
> hams
> operate QRP all the time with 5 watts or less and talk all over the 
> world.
> When conditions are good, you don't need much power.  And if you 
> call 100
> watts that most rigs put out "a lot of power" how many 100 watt 
> light bulbs
> do you use in your house?  HF may be obsolete or nearly so for 
> commercial
> use.  But take a listen.  The aircraft industry still uses it.  
> There is
> still commercial radio telegraph.  When I was in South America, 
> there were a
> TON of commercial outfits using frequencies right around 40 meters 
> for
> commercial traffic.  The US is a special case in the world.  Many 
> developing
> countries cannot afford the higher cost of satellite networks.
> 
> So, HF is NOT obsolete in any way, shape or form.
> 
> Secondly, regarding Picosat technology on geosynchronous satellites: 
> Stensat
> is operating at an orbit of a couple hundred miles.  A geosynch is 
> about 10
> times that (around 23,000 miles I think).  The path loss increases 
> by a
> factor of 1/R^2 (or is it 1/R for far field?) where R is the radius 
> out to
> the bird.  Stensat has a very low power transmitter.  Something that 
> low
> would probably not work well from the distance of 23K miles.  Talk 
> about
> needing big antennas.
> 
> Sorry if I sound like a smart ass, but it gets my dander up when 
> people call
> ANY mode of ham radio obsolete.  We do it for the fun of it.  Just 
> like you
> said that people still ride horses for fun even though cars are used 
> for
> transportation.  This is a hobby and we do it for the fun of it.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Jon
> KE9NA
> 
> -------------------------------------
> Jon Ogden
> KE9NA
> 
> Member:  ARRL, AMSAT, DXCC, NRA
> 
> http://www.qsl.net/ke9na
> 
> "A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
> 
> ----
> Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org