On 10/15/2012 8:26 PM, Gus 8P6SM wrote:
On 10/15/2012 05:55 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote:
I don't agree with these elitist arguments for intentionally making
things difficult. This "anti-easy-sat" mentality doesn't buy us
anything. Let the dead horse decompose.
I don't think anybody actually wants to make things deliberately harder.
But hams have always pushed the boundaries. Going further with less
power and less bandwidth. Fooling around with useless frequencies above
1 MHz. And so forth. And the satellite operator is no different.
It may be easy to reliably work a future generation of satellites with
an HT and a rubber duckie. But that won't be challenging. And we (the
operators) won't be learning anything new.
But instead folks are promoting an anachronism. They're discussing
learning something new at the same time saying we should be using a
technology that has been in use since the 1960s.
So then instead of focusing on linear transponders how about deploying
HSMM nodes into space, TDMA, or DMR technology? (No idea how feasible
any of of this is)
How about something that supports TCP/IP? People were discussing how a
AMSAT could generate interest in a kickstarter for a HEO? Promise a
bunch of hackers and geeks that with a small donation, sitting for a ham
radio test, and buying some kind of kit, they can get a (slow) network
connection in far flung locations I'm feel fairly confident that they
would start hurling their wallets at you screaming "Shut up and take my
money!"
However, the SSB mafia is firmly entrenched in their ways and will
simultaneously bemoan the easy sats, yet pooh-pooh "hard sats" that
won't support the divine mode.
--
Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA
bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/
_______________________________________________
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
