[eagle] Re: what is going on?, some technical content at last.

[John B. Stephensen]

AO-40 was heavily promoted in QST and downlinks were 10 dB stronger than 
AO-13 so activity went up. I don't know how long it would have lasted. One 
interesting fact was that the AO-13 70 cm downlink worked much better in Los 
Angeles than the 2 meter downlink. Ambient noise was about 15 dB lower.

73,

John
KD6OZH

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner at mindspring.com>
To: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh at comcast.net>; "Bob McGwier" 
<rwmcgwier at gmail.com>; "'Bill Ress'" <bill at hsmicrowave.com>; "'David 
Goncalves'" <davegoncalves at gmail.com>
Cc: <eagle at amsat.org>; "'AMSAT BoD'" <bod at amsat.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 02:16 UTC
Subject: Re: [eagle] Re: what is going on?, some technical content at last.


>I wasn't on AO-13 on my own, although I was exposed to it via a ham friend 
>a few times. AO-40 had enough traffic that 25kHz would not begin to be 
>enough, even on UL/S. I'd say 100 kHz would be a good lower limit.
>
> It's my view, and one shared by others, that a linear transponder would 
> certainly still have most, if not all, of the same EMCOMM benefits as the 
> ACP, and should be in the running for governmental aid as well. It is 
> certainly more within our -immediate- grasp, and would keep us alive 
> membership-wise while we complete the ACP. I don't want anyone to think 
> I'm against the ACP as a project, I'm simply being practical about what 
> our priorities may need to become to ensure the organizations immediate 
> survival.
>
> I think both roads really lead us to a rideshare of some sort, whether 
> that be Intelsat or GPS or GOES, or whomever else we can hitch our wagon 
> to.
>
> 73, and thanks for the ongoing discussion,
> Drew KO4MA
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh at comcast.net>
> To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner at mindspring.com>; "Bob McGwier" 
> <rwmcgwier at gmail.com>; "'Bill Ress'" <bill at hsmicrowave.com>; "'David 
> Goncalves'" <davegoncalves at gmail.com>
> Cc: <eagle at amsat.org>; "'AMSAT BoD'" <bod at amsat.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 9:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [eagle] Re: what is going on?, some technical content at 
> last.
>
>
>> Assuming the average occupancy that I witnessed on AO-13, a 25 kHz wide 
>> linear transponder would work for the current membership, but I have no 
>> idea whether they would provide enough donations to fund it.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> John
>> KD6OZH
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner at mindspring.com>
>> To: "Bob McGwier" <rwmcgwier at gmail.com>; "'John B. Stephensen'" 
>> <kd6ozh at comcast.net>; "'Bill Ress'" <bill at hsmicrowave.com>; "'David 
>> Goncalves'" <davegoncalves at gmail.com>
>> Cc: <eagle at amsat.org>; "'AMSAT BoD'" <bod at amsat.org>
>> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 11:20 UTC
>> Subject: Re: [eagle] Re: what is going on?, some technical content at 
>> last.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Bob wrote:
>>>> There is an alternative to think about.  I would not wait forever for 
>>>> the
>>>> larger picture to come together, for the good of AMSAT and amateur 
>>>> radio. A
>>>> likelihood assessment needs to be made regularly about the "Vision 
>>>> Thing"
>>>> and the will power to change directions should be found if it needs to 
>>>> be
>>>> done.  We could put together a small, simple package and smaller than
>>>> desirable antennas and give our users analog transponders on an 
>>>> Intelsat
>>>> platform.   This would require large antennas on the ground and would 
>>>> serve
>>>> to make our current user base quite happy I am sure.   If we do this, 
>>>> it
>>>> should be the absolute dumbest, most bullet proof, impossible to 
>>>> destroy,
>>>> dumber than rock, transponder without a single chance of failing in 300
>>>> years unless the rocket blows up or it is hit by a meteor.  It would be 
>>>> a
>>>> box with two connectors and a power plug going to the smallest possible
>>>> CREDIBLE antennas.  There has been an argument that this is very 
>>>> undesirable
>>>> for the long term health of AMSAT, Inc.  I made the argument in the 
>>>> open and
>>>> have suffered regular personal threats as a result since from one very 
>>>> angry
>>>> disgruntled member.  I am sure it was the manner in which I presented 
>>>> the
>>>> argument that caused the reaction so I am 99% to blame.
>>>>
>>>> But this is clearly outside of the vision statement of AMSAT, but it 
>>>> would
>>>> be a way forward.  If we come in with very low mass, with little 
>>>> footprint
>>>> and 50-100 w peak power requirements,  and we look at the matrix of 
>>>> costs
>>>> Intelsat gave us,  I think we might be able to raise that amount from
>>>> "amateur radio sources".
>>>
>>> This idea has been floating around for some time now, but to see you 
>>> suggest it is a powerful example of convergent thinking. I do not 
>>> believe that it is an either/or situation. The ACP is a complex design, 
>>> and developing and implementing it is going to be a long road, that 
>>> frankly we may not have enough momentum to carry us down. A simple, 
>>> SMALL linear transponder as you describe would serve as an intermediate 
>>> step, allowing us to keep the organization alive, build the membership 
>>> and hence the donation base, and blaze the trail to launching ACP.
>>>
>>> One point of disagreement is that this intermediate step is, to me at 
>>> least, clearly -inside- the mission statement, even moreso than the ACP. 
>>> For those that have forgotten, here is the mission statement:
>>>
>>> "AMSAT is a non-profit volunteer organization which designs, builds and 
>>> operates experimental satellites and promotes space education. We work 
>>> in partnership with government, industry, educational institutions and 
>>> fellow amateur radio societies. We encourage technical and scientific 
>>> innovation, and promote the training and development of skilled 
>>> satellite and ground system designers and operators.
>>>
>>> Our Vision is to deploy high earth orbit satellite systems that offer 
>>> daily coverage by 2009 and continuous coverage by 2012. AMSAT will 
>>> continue active participation in human space missions and support a 
>>> stream of LEO satellites developed in cooperation with the educational 
>>> community and other amateur satellite groups."
>>>
>>> The intermediate step would immediately fulfill the continuous coverage 
>>> part of the vision statement, and I think it has a much better chance of 
>>> success by 2012, and certainly 2009, than does the ACP.
>>>
>>> The decision to make this course correction certainly does have 
>>> considerable benefits and risks, but I think it is one the BOD -and- the 
>>> members should carefully consider, and if we go forward with it, the 
>>> infighting and Monday morning quarterbacking needs to be left behind and 
>>> a serious "get to the moon" effort be undertaken. We'll need 10 times 
>>> the people soliciting donations as actually building the thing, but I do 
>>> believe it's well within reason to be accomplished.
>>>
>>> 73, Drew KO4MA
>>>
>>
>