[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: UO-36 over S.America?



on 3/31/00 4:09 AM, Chris Jackson at c.jackson@eim.surrey.ac.uk wrote:

> Due to the low power budget on UO-36 the satellite downlink is normally OFF.
> 
> I will release a new version of MSPE that has the ability to switch the
> downlink on during the pass (hopefully later today).

This isn't meant to be an offense, but why the heck do we build satellites
with power budgets incapable of supporting normal amateur usage and
operation?

AO-10 is a great bird, but I don't think we are supposed to follow its power
budgeting scheme.

Why do we do this?  Let's see we have AO-27, KO-25, UO-36, SO-35 and who
knows what else.  All have power budget issues.  Where are we missing it
design wise?

OK, OK, so AO-27 and SO-35 have other payloads that take precedence, but it
still doesn't eliminate the problem of not enough power budget for normal
operations.

Again, it isn't meant as an insult.  It's a real problem that we put birds
up there that can't be used more regularly.

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



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home