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

Re: AO-54?

At 06:36 AM 2/9/2006, Bruce Bostwick wrote:
>Couple of things ..
>The vector they throw it on would need to be calculated pretty
>carefully to get the HT-sat into any kind of predetermined orbit, and
>throwing it on a random ad hoc vector could have pretty
>counterintuitive results.  More than likely the best vector will be
>up and behind ISS, putting your sat in more or less a SuitSat-like
>orbit with a time to reentry somewhere around a month or so, and a
>useful lifetime of maybe a few orbits.

That would probably be the best.  In any case, you can't get it into 
a higher orbit (i.e. higher energy) without some sort of rocket 
propulstion that would have to kick in after the initial shove - 
without that, the new orbit would intersect the ISS orbit (and added 
effects of drag).  The "higher" you could "throw" it, the lower the 
perigee has to be, so the end result is throwing it "higher" could 
cause an earlier demise.  I'd agree a Suitsat like orbit (close to 
ISS, but pulled away by drag) would be best.

>You might get a few useful orbits out of a configuration like that,
>although you'd need a radio that can transmit on the downlink more or
>less continuously (UHF up and VHF down might be easier on the finals
>thermally) .. bear in mind that you can absolutely positively count

Also, VHF down would allow the possibility of a low power (100-500 mW 
downlink), further easing the load on the finals.  UHF up would 
minimise pirate QRM on the uplink.

73 de VK3JED
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