[amsat-bb] Re: New satellies / Shuttle question
bill at hsmicrowave.com
Sat May 31 12:12:18 PDT 2008
A very sound suggestion.with which I agree 200%.
It appears that Eagle is languishing in inactivity and Intelsat needs
multi-millions which I don't see in the coffers for some time, if ever..
Pardon my pessimism, but I don't see AMSAT-NA launching a satellite,
using the current game plan, for at least 5 years, if then.
Your approach puts the "horse before the cart" so to speak and offers
the best chance of launching an new satellite within 2 years, if that is
what the satellite user folks want, and I sense they do.
Speaking of the (this time) "cart before the horse", AMSAT-NA has now
starting an ACP ground station initiative without knowing what the
satellite looks like it will have to work with.
I see your suggestion as positive and constructive and not one to be
construed as negative and counter productive and thanks for putting it
forward. I wonder what the rest of the reflector readers think?
Regards...Bill - N6GHz
G0MRF at aol.com wrote:
> Hi Edward / group.
> Most current construction or feasility study is centered on P3E / Eagle /
> Intelsat /HEO where launch opportunities are rare and costs are high.
> Perhaps we should look at this problem from another viewpoint. Start with
> what launch opportunities AMSAT can afford and then retake the technology
> initative and investigate what minaturised payloads can we launch for that price?
> For example. Imagine a 2 or 3U cubesat type structure, or even one half the
> size of AO-51 on last weeks Russian launch to 1500km. With payloads reduced
> to transponders and a basic onboard computer and an Electrical Power System,
> it would be feasable to put RF comms equipment into a decent orbit on 29MHz
> 145MHz 435MHz with an RX on 1269.
> For bands higher than 13cm doppler is a problem and path loss is quite high.
> It may not be possible to provide the necessary DC power for transmitters
> in a small structure.
> Talking of DC power, the number of cubesats that fail due to power problems
> is huge. The answer is to get inventive with deployable solar arrays. With
> the engineering excellence AMSAT possesses it should not be impossible to
> arrange a structure where the entire outer layer contains extra solar cells that
> are deployed after seperation from the launcher. Imagine a 3U cube which in
> orbit becomes a 3U box of electronics covered in cells, with an extended outer
> 3U shell that deploys forming a 6U structure producing nearly double the DC
> power. The 6U structure also makes antenna design easier
> For a slightly more risky idea.....small satellite propulsion. Again,
> perhaps 3U cube, with the last section comprising a small motor. A single burn
> unit could provide a really nice elliptical LEO orbit, perhaps 680km to 2000km.
> Wouldn't that be interesting. I notice that there is an Austrian university
> team who have developed a cubesat sized ion propulsion system asking if
> anyone would like to try it. So, while this may initially seem a 'wild idea' it
> is based on technology that is very nearly a reality.
> Worth investigating?
> David G0MRF
> In a message dated 30/05/2008 23:22:37 GMT Standard Time, vk3jed at gmail.com
> At 12:15 AM 5/31/2008, Edward Cole wrote:
>> Once you total the costs it may actually be cheaper to build a new
>> satellite and launch it!
>> Back the effort for P3E and Eagle/P4.
> That too, yes, a new bird would be the easiest approach
> indeed. Still, as I said, it was interesting contemplating how such
> a recovery might be achieved with today's technology. :)
> 73 de VK3JED
> 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