Re: [amsat-bb] eagle costs

["KC6UQH" <kc6uqh@xxxxxxx>]

Guess I will throw in my two cents.

How do we know what works? After an explosion on AO-40 many transponders did
not have enough left to test. 5.8 / 10.45 GHz being one of those. AO-40
would have died much earlier if it did not have two 2.4 GHz transmitters.
Redundancy does not impact power budget, but can and did extend the life of
AO-40.

KISS and build what works sounds good , but what about learning something
new, and maybe advancing the state of the Radio Art? Have we forgot the
purposes of Amateur Radio as outlined in Part 97.1?

Nature is a balance. Hence why not something old, tried, and true? Plus
something exciting, wild, and new?

A in-band transponder for voice and data on the 10 GHz band would get my
vote. With the 500 MHz bandwidth it could be done, and dish gain is not hard
to come by at that frequency. With 400 MHz difference the Doppler would
almost cancel. Make it wide enough for a MPEG Video channel!

Art, KC6UQH


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Sanford" <wb4gcs@AMSAT.Org>
To: "wa6fwf" <wa6fwf@pacbell.net>
Cc: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 5:39 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] eagle costs


> Kevin et al:
> The Eagle team is proceeding very much along the lines you suggest.  We
are:
> 1.  Stating our goals and objectives, derived from a structure which is
> capable of being launched from many launch vehiclesw ==> maximum
> flexibility for launch.  Structure drives power generation.
> 2.  Starting from a stated objective of the RF payload.  Rather than
> waiting for a launch opportunity and then scramblng to cobble something
> together at the last minute, we started with a payload which is
> minimally "worth the effort".  We feel that this is better than the mad
> scramble approach.  Based on my experience, I very STRONGLY agree with
> this approach -- my opinion.
> 3.  We are re using many components -- the IHU (shared with P3E and
> Eagle's successor), the CAN bus for control (shared with P3E and Eagle's
> successor).
> 4.  We have settled on standard module sizes, allowing certain things
> "on the shelf".
> 5.  We are planning each module with an eye toward duplication -- either
> for the shelf, or Eagle's successor.
> 6.  We're still writing specs, but I'd expect, based on the above, that
> the power system will be standardized.
> 7.  We are working toward more explicit, public documentation so that we
> can employ more builders than historically.
>
> The Amsat symposium will discuss Eagle in great detail.  Please come,
> ask questions, and understand. Then help us get there by assisting in
> the fund raising.
>
> 73,
> Jim
> wb4gcs@amsat.org
>
>
> wa6fwf wrote:
>
> >Hi All,
> >  I wish to thank everyone for responding,some were very interesting and
> >enlightening...
> >
> >   The DoD Space Test Program (STP) looks very interesting and I'm glad
that
> >someone  mentioned that it is being looked into.
> >
> >   One person missed my point I guess, that the transponders are not the
cost
> >but the support for those transponders is, if you cut back on
transponders
> >you cut back on the support requirements, smaller solar panels, smaller
> >batteries, smaller sat equals cheaper launch.
> >
> >  One might almost think that we could be going the wrong way on the
whole
> >project, the old cart before the horse situation, might be better to be
> >looking for a cheap or free launch opportunity and then build that sat to
> >match, especially since everyones agrees that the launch is the most
> >expensive part.
> >
> > I would think this would mean  that we would have to have a standardized
> >control system, power system and xponders sitting on a shelf so we could
> >react quickly when the opportunity presented itself.
> >
> >   I also agree with the one comment why must every sat be almost from
> >scratch?  lets build on what works.
> >
> > I think we should always be seeking new ways to do it cheaper and
better.
> >
> >   Anyway Thank You for  all the replies..
> >
> >73
> >Kevin
> >WA6FWF
> >#19623
> >
> > whether you want a big sat or little sat, remember to join and donate or
> >there wont be any sat
> >----
> >Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> >Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> >To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
> ----
> Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
----
Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org