[amsat-bb] Re: THE ROUGH TREATMENT OF ARISSAT-1 (relax!)
ka8qcu at pasty.net
Wed Aug 3 16:10:46 PDT 2011
Well said Bob. Even if the 70 CM antenna was still rolled up, I still had a
much stronger signal on the 400 MHZ band than on 2M, when they were doing
the test earlier this week. Enjoy the bird and get your kids to listen when
it comes by. That's the point. So everyone take a breath and have some fun
73 de Doug KA8QCU
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Bruninga" <bruninga at usna.edu>
To: "'amsat-bb'" <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 18:47
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: THE ROUGH TREATMENT OF ARISSAT-1 (relax!)
Everyone should relax.
We built PCSAT-2 that was also deployed on the outside of ISS back in 2006.
The requirements for any kind of such EVA hardware are clearly spelled out
by NASA since they (and anyone who thinks about it) realizes that carrying
ANYTHING by hand or on a tether in ZERO G is going to get banged around like
an ape with a suitcase.
It is naïve to assume otherwise.
So PCSAT-2 (and I assume Arissat) was built to be kicked, banged, hit,
dropped, stepped on, and even whizzed on (ISS water releases). The forces
were specified to include the 300lb impact of the astronauts foot (man and
suit) anywhere and everywhere on the object.
The live video proved how realistic these design requirements are.
So relax. What you saw is man working in space. Like making sausage, it
ain't pretty... but its what the laws of physics require when heavy objects
ArissSat was designed for this environment and apparently it survived just
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:05 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] THE ROUGH TREATMENT OF ARISSAT-1
> .. [BS...] Someone's ASS should be on the line for the
> rough treatment of this "project"... As far as I'M
> concerned...they sent out INEXPERIENCED rookies to
> deploy something that... was still important to US and
> the university that built the pressure experiment onboard.
> What if these cosmonauts DID destroy it? What if it had
> to be brought back to Earth? Who would have paid for
> it? Or would it have been a loss for the contributors involved?
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