[amsat-bb] S band and Eagle: an appeal for more transparency (was S band and Eagle: an appeal for a higher level discussion)
stefan_wagener at hotmail.com
Thu Sep 7 16:57:58 PDT 2006
I have to agree with Bruce, however I don't take statements made by Bob
McGwier (N4HY) (see below) for face value.
Quote by Bob(email to Amsat-bb on Tue 25/07/2006): "In upcoming journal
articles and in Eaglepedia documents showing the detailed calculations upon
which our statements are based"
It is important that the data are presented, discussed, accepted or thrown
The main problem with the whole discussion is that the majority of folks
have NOT seen the data. In addition, if the data are as sound as they are
portrait, why is AMSAT-DL not believing in them and is including S-band as a
downlink. How is the discussion between ANSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL going on this?
The lack of transparency is concerning and Eaglepedia is just an empty word
if key documents and information is not published especially if it is
available. Waiting for journal articles to come does not help. At the same
time Eaglepedia still has the now "old" mechanical design specs and
information on the S-band TX transponder available with no indication that
both are obsolete.
73, Stefan VE4NSA
From: amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Bruce Robertson
Sent: September 7, 2006 5:06 PM
To: amsat-bb at amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] S band and Eagle: an appeal for a higher level
....As I understand it, the Eagle design team have used standard
801.11 usage to determine mathematically that by the time of launch the
radio environment will simply not support reliable communications. I cannot
imagine that they like these conclusions. Implementing new bands entails
new risks, after all. But numbers don't lie (or shouldn't), and it would be
a horrible disservice to all of us if they designed and launched a bird
that was effectively mute at launch.....
More information about the AMSAT-BB