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

Re: JUly 2001 President's Letter

Hi, Robert,

At 03:46 PM 29-07-01 -0500, Robert Oler wrote:
>thank you for being so kind as to answer my post AND pardon the late 
>reply.  Life has been moving at an unbelievable pace.

You're most welcome.  Hope life calms down a little bit for you.  It's 
madness  here.  But, that's normal.....

>I really dont understand this paragraph.  First off it seems to state the 
>if asked the membership would probably want something pretty much status 
>quo But then you state that "in Amsat" there are very creative people.

My experience indicates that most people, when asked what they want, will 
answer relying on their own experiences.  For example, consider the many 
folks over the years asking for "Mode A" or "OSCAR-13" or an FM satellite 
or something else which similar to a past experience.  Quite normal and 
expected.  All were familiar, worked out well, and require little or 
nothing new in terms of time, hardware, or software.

>Well the folks who mostly are going to pay the bills for this new bird are 
>probably AMSAT members and it strikes me that they should be the ones who 
>get to decide (or at least have some input) on what goes on the bird.  I 
>am pretty sure you were not implying ONLY the people who "made the 
>decisions" are 1) AMSAT or 2) the only creative people in the 
>organization....but what would it hurt to poll the membership?

Poll away.

In our AMSAT organization, the decision comes down to two things.  First, 
is the Board of Directors, elected by our Members (get your ballots in!!), 
who are responsible for the corporation.  And, second, as always in our 
volunteer based organization, are the folks who actually do the work.  I'd 
expect to see a consensus between the two.

>TDMA is a neat mode BUT its success on the satellite depends on a couple 
>of things...not the least of which is software to use the mode AND the 
>radios to do so.

The Denver group is well aware of these problems.  Suggest following and/or 
contributing to developments.  Phil Karn, KA9Q, can tell you more.  Check 
out his web site (previously posted).

>Of course that might only be the start and if it works then we might have 
>something, whats the catchword for everything these days "exciting and 
>fun".  On the other hand we might have PANSAT.

Yes.  However, in JJ, workable Earth station design and implementation is 
an important part of the overall system design.  Very different from PANSAT.

>The use it or lose it approach really is a fiction I think of the 220 battle.

Coming from the frequency management business, let me reassure you that our 
frequency assets are extremely valuable and it takes a great deal of work 
to preserve what we have.  We owe a great debt to IARU, ARRL, and all the 
other national amateur radio societies for working to defend our 
allocations.  Consider that it's much easier to defend the continued use of 
a band if it is used.

>It would be interesting to find out what the "majority" of AMSAT members 
>want.  I for one (as a life member) would like to see that.

Propose your idea to the Board.  They're Members just like the rest of 
us.  Expect them to give you a reasonable hearing.

Hope all this makes some sense.

73, art.....

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