Re: [amsat-bb] UO-36 over S.America?

[Jim Walls <k6ccc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jon Ogden wrote (in part):

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

Remember Jon that AO-10 has been in orbit almost 14 years past the end of it's
projected lifetime.  The CPU that controls it failed well over a decade ago, and
the batteries are dead.  We are lucky that when the bird gets into sunlight for a
while it powers back up in an operational state at all.  This is not a "power
budgeting" issue.  How well would the batteries on your handheld be working after
after 17 years?  Answer, they would be just like AO-10's, they would be absolutely
flat DEAD!  We are lucky that they failed open and not shorted so at least the
satellite has a chance to operate when it's in sunlight.

> 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.
>

I think Jon needs to get involved in a group building a satellite and learn more
about compromises required when designing a satellite.

73
----------------------
Jim Walls - K6CCC
k6ccc@amsat.org


----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org