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

Re: New AO-27?

Many things are technically feasible but never happen and the problem is
usually the amount of money that is required. A lot of what good engineering
is about is minimizing the cost of the solution. Many of the responses for
not doing a geosynchronous satellite are just explaining the technical
reasons why it will cost so much. Since AMSAT has little money it has to
come up with ways to minimize the cost of the satellite and it's launch at
the expense of increasing the cost of the ground station.

This may be the best way. We have just seen billions of dollars spent by
profit-making organizations on putting up geostationary satellites and
constellations of LEO satellites to provide mobile satellite telephone
service and most are bankrupt or close to it. The only successes are Orbcom
who minimized their investement in space hardware and limited the service to
low-speed data and Inmarsat (which is subsidized) who requires $10,000
radiotelephones to use their satellite.


> No one has told me yet why it can not be done. Several have said that it
> couldn't be done for what amounts to POLITICAL REASONS ... but not to
> physical & technical reasons why it can't be done.
> Tell DirectTV that it can't be done.
> If Amsat-NA wanted to build a bird [FM or SSB/CW or Digital] and put it
> into a geo-stationary orbit over the USA and had the money and expertise
> do so, tell me why it can NOT be done.
> I never said that such a bird should be the only project in the future. I
> also see the need for world-wide sats, especially if AO-40 is lost.

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