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

RE: AO-54?--reply by K7RR

No, that's not what I meant at all!

We as a society have evolved and so should the requirements for AO numbers. 
Would we give an AO number to someone that built Oscar-1 today after all the 
advancements in technology that are out there?  Maybe, but I think the 
discussions would be similar to those of SuitSat whereas people (notice I 
didn't say members as I don't know what the members think) expect more out of 
satellites than just broadcasting.

Sure the package is different but could we have put different equipment inside 
in order to allow two-way communications?  Probably.  But of course we 
wouldn't have wanted to throw a lot of money into a project that would just be 
vaporized in a few short weeks.

Since there are discussions about the next SuitSat maybe we could put a KPC3 
onboard and configure it similarly to NO-44.


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgwier@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, 09 February, 2006 10:26
To: Christensen, Eric
Cc: Cliff Buttschardt; Emily Clarke; AL7CR; amsat-bb@amsat.org; Greg Wycoff;
Robert Bruninga; Polysat@atl.calpoly.edu; bod@amsat.org
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-54?--reply by K7RR

So now we are going to go back and remove the Oscar numbers from Oscar
9,  Oscar 11 as well as Oscar 1.  Man we really are getting ambitious.


Christensen, Eric wrote:
> I'll have to agree with everything Cliff and Emily have said here.
> While OSCAR-1 was a technology feat in its' day, I don't think SuitSat
> (with similar capabilities) is looked at similarly with the ability to
> do what we can now do with satellites.  I'm not sure how to describe
> what I'm seeing in my head as the basis for issuing an AO number but
> "I know it when I see it".
> Maybe a requirement should be that the satellite has the ability to
> repeat what it hears on an uplink.  That the satellite's main mission
> is for amateur communications and not just to broadcast.  While all of
> our satellites are experiments in some sense of the word it shouldn't
> have been built strictly as an experiment (which is how many of these
> CUBESATs are being built).
> Like I said, I don't know how to properly define an AO satellite, but
> I know it when I see it (as I think many others do as well).
> 73s,
> Eric KF4OTN
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* owner-AMSAT-BB@amsat.org on behalf of Cliff Buttschardt
> *Sent:* Thu 09-Feb-06 02:04
> *To:* Emily Clarke
> *Cc:* Robert McGwier; AL7CR; amsat-bb@amsat.org; Greg Wycoff; Robert
> Bruninga; Polysat@atl.calpoly.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [amsat-bb] AO-54?--reply by K7RR
> Emily Clarke wrote:
> > [Caveat - opinions are my own and not the opinion of AMSAT or the
> Board.]
> >
> > Robert McGwier wrote:
> >
> >> There are published guidelines about who can get an oscar number.  If
> >> you meet those with a wet noodle generating a femtowatt,  you too will
> >> get an oscar number.  Is it not an orbitting satellite carrying
> >> amateur radio?
> >>
> >> Bob
> >> N4HY
> >>
> >

AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity.  Guilty as charged!

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/x-pkcs7-signature which had a name of smime.p7s]
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