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

Re: AO-40



Robert:

When I said I had some concerns about the Phase 3D project, I didn't
elaborate.  I agree the money might have been better spent on a number of
less elaborate satellites - spreading the risk.  But it has been interesting
to watch the attitudes go from euphoria over the launch to second guessing
and grumbling over the possible failure.  I support the team whatever the
outcome.

As to my taking KB5RUE to task, he has tried to create dissension on this
reflector on a number of occaisions and I have little patience for his
repeated whining.

73,
Dennis
WA4ZJJ
----- Original Message -----
From: Laura Jolley <jolleybuckaroo@hotmail.com>
To: <amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2000 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-40


>
>
>
> >From: denmorr@bellsouth.net
> >To: <wb5rue@arrl.net>, "'amsat-bb'" <amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
> >Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-40
> >Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 13:28:31 -0500
> >
> >Kevin:
> >
> >I had some doubts about the Phase 3D idea.  However, it was AMSAT's
> >decision
> >to go this way and we should all be 100% behind the project.  No hardware
> >is
> >ever 100% foolproof.  Just ask the auto manufacturers.  And the team is
far
> >from failure at this point.  You should be sking the team what you can do
> >to
> >help instead of second guessing them. I'm not surprised at your
comments -
> >you seem to have a sour outlook in general.
> >
>
> Your right of course in that the project is far from failure...but I think
> that your other comments are a bit harsh.
>
> First off I dont think that its necessary to be "100%" behind AMSAT or any
> group at any one time particularly when its a "membership" organization.
> Now is no time to start pointing fingers (indeed there never is the time
to
> do that) BUT if the situation does not change then future projects should
be
> measured in terms of what this one promised, this one took, and this one
> did.
>
> Its pretty clear that the pockets for a hamsat are well not that all deep

> nor is the talent in terms of "backups" all that deep.  Yet an aweful lot
> was attempted on this satellite and it strikes me that a lot more "eggs"
> could have been incubated if satellites of smaller sizes and capabilities
> were built.
>
> In the end I think that while the quest for a large "easy sat" is an
> admirable one the question I asked is "is it necessary".  A "working"
OScar
> 10 would be "great"...two or three would be better, perhaps with different
> transponders.
>
> OK you couldnt recieve it with little bitty helixes...but then even in
areas
> where antennas were "impossible" part of the joy of this hobby has been
> making them happen.
>
> In the end the toughest thing to do from a project standpoint is to fit
the
> project with the resources available...and if there is no AO-40 it seems
> clear that the answer is that this project was a bridge to far.
>
> If we dont learn from that then we are well not wise.
>
> Robert G. Oler WB5MZO  (Laura Jolley is my fiance).
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
> ----
> Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@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



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home