[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]
Re: Amateur as secondary payload
- Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Amateur as secondary payload
- From: "Dave hartzell" <hartzell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:10:10 -0700
- DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta;h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;b=O913gp1e7LqhaZcjP3LaqjVr/ZUqYDzKkJjbVvVomuQ3FU8dnBB+TsQpi94ZIC4jBTky6QIsy2/r1qAt0JevoJlP2dGcOUuG5tbe016BoHFVf65l/nIiYitDVZQbKl+IGBdoHOHWFNteEXNVXrzoMAirv9T1geiI3FohtmYPEok=
Pat,
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
issues:
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.
73,
Dave
N0TGD
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
AMSAT Home