[amsat-bb] Re: [AMSAT-BB] ISS, what the heck happened?

i8cvs domenico.i8cvs at tin.it
Wed Jun 29 18:42:54 PDT 2011

Hi Ed, KL7UW

I agree completely with you on a hi power continuously operating U/V
linear transponder on board of the ISS may be 100 KHz BW because it
can be used as well for emergency communications on the earth without
intervention of the astronauts.

73" de

i8CVS Domenico

----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw at acsalaska.net>
To: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 10:24 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [AMSAT-BB] ISS, what the heck happened?

> Wasn't going to comment, but oh heck!
> I think Alex has it pegged.  I see a lot of Astronauts getting their
> ham license but figure that is probably NASA "encouraged" mainly for
> PR purposes and secondarily for emergency comms if the main systems
> fail.  It is likely many Astronauts are not particularly interested
> in ham radio, per se.  I'll admit making your first contact with
> either the shuttle or ISS is a thrill and fun, but the opportunities
> may be not that frequent, nor should any ham expect it to be so.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Now on a related subject, I would really favor Amsat approaching NASA
> for the installation of a linear transponder (say Mode UV) unit to be
> attached to the exterior of ISS (with remote shut-off for ISS
> critical operations).  This may be a better option to finding/paying
> for launch opportunities for free orbiting linear-transponder
> satellites.  Since there is a regular launch schedule to resupply ISS
> and no propellant/engine would be involved it would be a benign cargo
> I do not underestimate the difficulty quotient for such a mission,
> but we do have ham gear installed on ISS, and have done Suitsat and
> ARISSat with NASA and ISS.
> If no launch is forthcoming for P3E perhaps the backup unit (sans
> propellant system and solar panels) could be considered?  It would be
> in a Leo orbit but at least it would provide a long-term alternative
> to FM Leos.
> Something to chew on and consider?
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> At 05:57 AM 6/29/2011, Alexander Sack wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 7:40 AM, KM9U <arskm9u at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>> So I think everyone read the announcement ARRL made before FD.  Now
> > >>> that FD weekend is at an end, can someone explain to me why NASA
> > >>> couldn't let the astronauts have 10 minutes on the radio for one
> > >>>  I mean were they having issues with the radio itself?
> > >
> > > During Expedition 24/25, Col. Wheelock made many contacts from the ISS
> > > the evenings and on weekends during his free time. This was not
because he
> > > was "scheduled" to be the radio, but rather because he enjoyed doing
> > > I don't believe we can blame NASA for the current crew members obvious
> > > of interest in Amateur Radio. Had Col. Wheelock (or someone as
> > enthustiastic
> > > as he) been aboard the ISS on FD, NA1SS would likely not have been
> > >
> > >> Have you never make a calculation or an estimation on how it costs a
> > >> minutes of an astronaut activity all costs including on board of the
> >
> >I don't buy it.
> >
> >What I do believe is the current crew isn't that interested in making
> >contacts with amateur radio operators.  That's fine.  Operating the
> >radio outside the educational outreach program is ertainly not part of
> >their mission.  I will just have to be more patient and hope someone
> >gets the ham bug up there during some mission and starts to make
> >contacts.  I can wait.
> >
> >I DO want to state again I think it behooves NASA and the whole space
> >program to try to get someone on that radio like a Col Wheelock
> >(doesn't have to be as frequent as Col Wheelock) to generate the
> >enthusiasm and excitement for the ISS and the whole space program
> >among hams.  My 2 cents.
> >
> > > This brings up an interesting thought. The astronauts receive monetary
> > > compensation for performing their duties while employed by NASA. So,
> > > their employer schedules them to operate amateur radio as part of
their job
> > > assignment, would this not violate Part 97.113 (Prohibited
> > > which specifically prohibits "Communications in which the station
> > > or control operator has a pecuniary interest, including communications
> > > behalf of an employer".
> > > Now, DON'T GET YOUR PANTIES IN A WAD! It is just a question.
> > >
> >
> >There is no pecuniary interest involved as I see it.
> >
> >-aps (KC2ZSX)
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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
> >Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> 73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
> ======================================
> BP40IQ   500 KHz - 10-GHz   www.kl7uw.com
> EME: 50-1.1kw?, 144-1.4kw, 432-100w, 1296-60w, 3400-?
> DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa at gmail.com
> ======================================
> _______________________________________________
> 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 mailing list