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

Re: Amateur as secondary payload


This topic seems to come up now and then.  The idea is actually pretty
old, dating back to the early days of AMSAT, but I think here are the

1) Most commercial satellite operators don't want to sacrifice space
for an amateur payload.  They'd rather use any excess launch mass for
station keeping fuel.

2) Risk:  The risks of carrying a third-party payload can be mitigated
and well understood, but this takes time, effort and money.

3) Possible interference issues from the payload.

4) Power:  This can be budgeted for, but again, there are time, cost
and money issues associated with a parasitic payload.



On 4/13/07, Patrick McGrane <N2OEQ@aceweb.com> wrote:
> Greetings from Patrick N2OEQ
> What are some general comments regarding secondary amateur payloads on commercial satellites? I remember the old RS series and the new hamsat are secondary payloads. What are the costs involved versus building and launching individual autonomous satellites?
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb