[amsat-bb] Re: AO-40 Replacement

Virgil Bierschwale vbiersch at gmail.com
Wed Sep 4 18:52:44 PDT 2013

I've enjoyed reading this segment and I wasn't going to touch it, but this
one makes me want to chip in my two cents.

Granted, I'm not up to speed on what ya'll have done or what you haven't

But we used to use a ucc1 in the navy to receive messages.


It would allow us to receive something like 16 or 32 separate traffic
channels on one frequency.

Wouldn't it be possible to develop something like that in satellite

I ask because if you were to do it, you could substantially increase the
amount of channels that you could process?


-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org] On
Behalf Of John Stephensen
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 8:31 PM
To: Clint Bradford; amsat-bb at amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-40 Replacement

If we want the most "bang for the buck", it would be something that supports
the most QSOs per watt of solar power. Since most hams have computers,
something that supports half a dozen PSK31 sessions would suffice. Given the
new open-source voice codec you could also make something that supports
multiple digital voice QSOs with less power than now required for analog FM
or SSB.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Clint Bradford" <clintbrad4d at earthlink.net>
To: <amsat-bb at amsat.org>; <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 00:27 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-40 Replacement

>>> ... launch opportunities are so rare that we ought to
> fly the most capable equipment we can on those rare
> occasions when we can get a launch ...
> Perhaps we should define, "most capable equipment." And
> we also need to define "bang for the buck."

Sent via AMSAT-BB at 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

More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list