[amsat-bb] Re: Keep It Simple Silly
vk3jed at gmail.com
Sun Sep 30 13:23:56 PDT 2007
At 05:23 AM 10/1/2007, SV1BSX wrote:
>....hmmm, and its also unfair to don't say that, the possibility for a
>malfuction with 20,000 vs
>20 transistors is .... 1,000 times greater !
>Simple mathematics... even if these 20,000 transistors
>do a better job, the risk is too big.
Well, I don't think the risk of failure should be keeping us in the
1970's. Sure, the SDX is untested, but so was every other technology
that is used in space at one stage. If you don't take the risk, you
don't learn how to enable these things to survive in space either. I
certainly like the idea of a backup analog transponder, so that the
satellite can perform some useful function, even if its primary
"experiment" fails. Having older technology alongside the new also
gives a benchmark to compare against, in terms of how they degrade
over time in the space environment.
Oh, and we don't seem to get the same complaints about the digital
birds that have been flying for over 2 decades, or newer and more
complex IHUs that have flown. The way I see it, is new technology
has to be flown when the risks seem acceptable to make it worth
putting into space. I don't have a problem with having backup, in
case the experiment fails (obviously, there is a weight penalty
here), but my question is whether there is really any value in an am
Amateur satellite service that does little more than puts "more of
the same old stuff" in orbit. Shouldn't be putting some of our
energy into finding out how to safely use new technologies in the
space environment at an affordable cost?
73 de VK3JED
More information about the AMSAT-BB