[amsat-bb] Re: satellite durability fm vs. linears
Alan P. Biddle
APBIDDLE at UNITED.NET
Tue Nov 29 08:21:13 PST 2011
Good question. Part of the answer depends on your definitions of "working
properly," and "quickly."
HO-68 and SO-67 have gone away quickly, that is within about a year of
launch. By comparison, AO-51 was launched in 2004, with many years of
service. AO-7 was dead for a couple of decades before returning to life,
albeit with a bit of senility. FO-29 has periods of outages. AO-27, an FM
bird launched almost 20 years ago, remains quirky in scheduling but popular.
SO-50, 10 years old, also gets much use.
When you look at them all, there isn't much correlation between the type
satellite and lifetime. Issues such as the technology used, and the orbit,
are much bigger issues. And as always, Murphy gets the last laugh.
From: amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org] On
Behalf Of zach hillerson
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 9:49 AM
To: amsat-bb at amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] satellite durability fm vs. linears
Serious question regarding satellite durability. It seems with HO68, SO67,
and now AO51, the FM satellites are quickly going away. It also seems that
the older linear counterparts such as AO7, VO52 and FO29 all seem to
continue working properly.
Is there a design issue with the FM birds that limits the useful lifespan or
is it purely random luck? Usage rates, etc... play a role?
It seems to happen far too often (even with a small sample size) to be a
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