[eagle] Re: Revised Module Suggestion

[Chuck Green]

Hi Bob,

I've had two experiences with having things built for AMSAT.  In one 
case, I was very disappointed with the parts placement precision.  I'd 
like to think that was just the result of a poor choice of vendors.  In 
both cases I found the amount of solder on most joints to be less than I 
would want to fly so I added solder to every joint.  But having the 
parts already in place saved me a *lot* of time.

Chuck

Robert McGwier wrote:
> While I would have preferred a different route for this discussion to 
> have been joined, it is timely.  I have suggested that we do not have 
> the right computer for our new possible mission.  We are pushing on the 
> new opportunity with all our might.  It does not make sense in any way 
> to fly the IHU-3 with IPS on it since there is no reason whatsoever to 
> have real time control of the possible new mission package.  We need the 
> simplest kind of computer that we believe will control the packages, 
> conduct communications with contro, and last for 15 years.
>
> That said, there is nothing that changes in our need for the IHU-3.  We 
> are committed to bringing them to the table for P3E and should we fly a 
> satellite, stand alone, it is likely to be needed there.  I am going to 
> arrange to have the IHU-3's built incorporating the changes/mods we have 
> learned about from others.  Lyle and I have discussed this and I have 
> promised him I would have them built.
>
>
> For the future:
>
> I am actually even suggesting that we are near the end of life on our 
> ability to build these kinds of devices in our basements/shops and get 
> them reliable enough with a high enough yield to be useful.  I am 
> suggesting that if a cool head takes a long hard look at where we are, 
> where the parts are,  and what resources we have,  that we are likely to 
> decide we are better off having our people do the designs and then 
> having the boards manufactured for us.  The price has fallen so far on 
> set up charge and building that this probably makes sense.  I am not 
> mandating this,  I am suggesting that we should investigate this.
>
>
> I have suggested that if we fly our own core in a fully qualified rad 
> hard FPGA,  there are OPEN CORES for processors.  We can easily modify 
> these cores to have fully EDAC registers and memory on chip for cache 
> and off chip memory can be the slow EDAC we know about.  In other words, 
>   time has marched on, and there is no reason we should not investigate 
> whether we should not move on as well.  These cores are available TODAY 
> in the opencores.org group.  We should look.
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
> Rick Hambly (W2GPS) wrote:
>   
>> Lyle,
>>
>> Thank you. You are exactly correct.
>>
>> Rick
>> W2GPS
>> AMSAT LM2232
>>  
>>
>>     
>
>