[amsat-bb] Re: S band, experience from UK
rwmcgwier at comcast.net
Sun Sep 10 06:42:05 PDT 2006
Less massive and less expensive than AO-40. P3E is less massive than
sco at sco-inc.com wrote:
> Please correct me if I am wrong. But AO-40 did not fail because of
> poor engineering workmanship. It failed because of HUMAN ERROR in the
> preparation of the satellite for launch. Are you saying that P3E will
> cost more to build and to launch than Eagle?
> Les W4SCO
> At 03:47 AM 9/10/2006, you wrote:
>> Since we want to do only one engine burn, Eagle will be at a lower elevation
>> and WiFi interference will be greater than for P3E -- especially for users
>> in Alaska. Consequently, Eagle is also lighter and less expensive and less
>> likely to explode.
AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman
"You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat.
You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los
Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly
the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there.
The only difference is that there is no cat." - Einstein
More information about the AMSAT-BB