Gentlemen, 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 <[email protected]> >Sent: Apr 12, 2011 2:24 PM >To: [email protected] >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. > _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. 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
