[amsat-bb] Re: Keep It Simple Silly
David B. Toth
ve3gyq at amsat.org
Sun Sep 30 00:44:30 PDT 2007
At 02:49 AM 9/30/2007, Patrick McGrane wrote:
>Regarding Miles desire for simplified electronics, I wholeheartedly agree!
>I was very disappointed that amsat-na pushed for the SDX on the german P3E.
>I'm sure its a better receiver but its never flown.
>P3E was built around a proven AO-13 design.
>If someone were to fly a payload a quarter of a million miles to the
>moon, It should be
>dramatically simple and long lasting, That means no short life
>components like batteries.
Patrick: it is too bad that you were unable to join us here in
Hartford, CT this weekend for the TAPR-ARRL DCC ...
There were many presentations on SDR, some by AMSAT personnel ...
The hardware does not GET any simpler than in SDX ... the HUGE
advantage is that a component with a shifting value (such as might
occur in a spacecraft with wide temperature swings) does not degrade
the performance/optimization of a device, because if the hardware
does age/shift, then that can be compensated for in software ...
By the way, doing an amplifier in DSP/SDR greatly improves the
efficiency and power budget too ... you do NOT want to fly today's
missions with yesterday's technology ...
I'd encourage you to visit Pittsburgh for the AMSAT-NA annual meeting
in October ... you can hear it first hand in the presentations, and
talk to the people that build hardware and the others that bang bits !
President TAPR, INC.
More information about the AMSAT-BB