[amsat-bb] Re: satellite average elevation

Andrew Glasbrenner glasbrenner at mindspring.com
Tue Apr 12 11:45:30 PDT 2011


Your difference of opinion may stem from the fact that AO-6 through AO-8 had orbits that were in the 1450km range, and not the 600-800km that is more common now. That might hose up the numbers some, as the angles and path losses are considerably different.

You just might be _BOTH_ right for the assumed scenario.

73, Drew KO4MA

-----Original Message-----
>From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>
>Sent: Apr 12, 2011 2:24 PM
>To: amsat-bb at amsat.org
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: satellite average elevation
>> As I said, in the "goode olde dayes" we used 
>> 30 degree up tilt and it worked well...
>> Lessening the up tilt may increase the gain 
>> for the lower angle passes but will also decrease 
>> the gain on the higher angle passes.  So, it is a 
>> "trade off" no matter what you do!
>Sorry to sound like I am quibbling... but that last sentence implies the
>idea of an equal "trade off".  But the tradeoff is not equal at all and may
>be missing the point here. 

More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list