It's really cross sectional area rather than length. Can't really
assume military radar is on a specific frequency.
I think what perhaps should be avoided is the use of any angular
surfaces in the body designed to keep the cubesat either in orbit or to
help it pass through the atmosphere. i.e. sample return missions or
atmospheric 'skipping'
Similarly, the use of titanium and heat resistant ceramics should be
avoided although that is too specific for legislation. PerhapsNot
designed for atmospheric re entry, would be better.
Sorry, back to the topic, angular surfaces and radar absorbing
coatings not a good idea.
Thanks es gl
David G0MRF
-Original Message-
From: Graham Shirville g.shirvi...@btinternet.com
To: AMSAT BB amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 22:32
Subject: [amsat-bb] Technical question about radar reflectivity
Hi All,
I am preparing a response to the UK Space Agency Consultation Document
on the
planned Reform of the UK Outer Space Act. Generally the proposals
appear to
support cubesat development here in the UK and therefore should be
supported.
Included in the Impact Assessment document that comes with the
Consultation
Document is a finding that “ Further, cubesat designers should be
encouraged to
incorporate appropriate reflectors on the outside of their platforms to
enhance
their radar cross-section/signatures and therefore their detectability
from the
ground in order to minimise the potential collision risk with other
operational
satellites.”
Would I be technically correct to be able to state something along the
lines
of... “Many/most cubesat platforms have communication systems that use
frequencies in the 435-438MHz amateur satellite service and use
projecting 1/4
wave monopole or 1/2 wave dipole antennas. As these frequencies are
adjacent
to those used by many of the ground based radars used for tracking
space
objects, it can be demonstrated that this finding is being and will be
satisfied”
I assume that their reflection will be enhanced by these antennas but
want to
make certain of the facts . so expert comments please.
thanks
Graham
G3VZV
___
Sent via AMSAT-BB@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
___
Sent via AMSAT-BB@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
