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

RE: Another view & possible corrections

Pardon if this is a duplicate.  My mailer returned an error and I need
to correct something.  The first attempt cited Ken as the author of the
paper on a constellation in RS-15 orbits.  It wasn't.  It was Martin
Davidoff, K2UBC.

But Globalstar uses a large constellation of satellites.  How many?
Surely the
logistics and technical challenges to building. launching and
controlling an
entire constellation must be equal or greater to that of a single high

At the AMSAT symposium in Toronto several years back Ken Ernandes did a
presentation of the coverage available by a constellation of three
satellites in
a RS-15-type orbit.  The percentage of continuous coverage all over the
world by
at least one satellite was around 80%, as I recall.

I recall the anticipation about the launch of RS-15 as being right up
there with
AO-40.  It was right about this time of year, too.  While the spacecraft
lived up to our hopes, the orbit was wonderful.  High enough that the
shift was quite manageable while giving a good footprint, low enough so
that big
antennas weren't necessary.

I'm not saying that a new satellite in that orbit should be Mode A
(though I
happen to like Mode A) but I think the orbit should be considered.  At
there was a talk about the deployment platform for microsats that
Stanford is
developing.  Three cubes can fit in the "launcher" and more than one
launcher can
be fitted.  I did some doodling about the power available for a
consisting of two units tethered together, each three microsats high,
and it
looked pretty good.  One side could hold the IHU and beacon, the other
transponder.  Both would have batteries that could be charged from the
cells on either or both...mmm - call them "pods".  That way if the
died the transponder could operate autonomously.

Since all surfaces of the pods, except perhaps the end where they
connect, could
be covered with solar cells maybe attitude control wouldn't be a big
Could it be spin stabilized around the center of the tether?  The
small cross section would mean that the antennas would be minimally
almost regardless of the attitude.  Maybe put the receive antenna in the
with a  transmit antenna on each end (one beacon, one transponder).
Could the
antennas serve as gravity booms as well?

Using this kind of form factor would allow us to use a standardized
system that could be used on a variety of launch platforms thereby
increasing the
chances for a ride.

Dave Reinhart

Phil Karn wrote:

> >LEOs lose because you have very limited access times and very limited
> When my wife and I were in Greece a few months ago, we made several
> phone calls through my Globalstar phone. Access time wasn't limited at

> all, and our calls reached all the way to the US. Globalstar certainly

> qualifies as a LEO system.
> Phil

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