Ah yes and how many knew Martin Sweeting was involved in early design
meetings for P3A?  Sorry for leaving you out Sir Martin!


On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Robert McGwier <[email protected]>wrote:

> From one of the great minds of our history.  Marty showed us how good the
> kinds of writing he did would be for us......
>
> The first photo is one of the first formal meetings where Karl,  Jan,
> Marty Davidoff, Tom Clark and others discuss Phase 3A.  These were GLORIOUS
> years for AMSAT.  No one denies this and no amount of back biting or rehash
> of old incidents will fix it.  The tools they had were their brains, a
> pencil, and SOME calculation engine.  The tools we have today allow many
> more to play.  The achievements that Karl's GENIUS, Jan's system
> engineering and the technical input and guidance from the rest gave
> (including Marty) are unsung and poorly told songs of the indomitable
> spirit of these free spirited thinkers...
>
>
> http://n4hy.smugmug.com/AMSAT/Phase-3-A/001-Meetings-01-Technical/2053450_WkWbc9#!i=105550031&k=L7jf7FJ
>
>  And this one even earlier (that's Rich Zwirko, K1HTV in coat and tie).
>  If others can identify people (not including Tom, Marty, Karl, and Jan and
> Rich) please let me know who they are.
>
>
> http://n4hy.smugmug.com/AMSAT/Phase-3-A/001-Meetings-01-Technical/2053450_WkWbc9#!i=105550132&k=PqJ99cK
>
> I almost could wish I was 15 years older or had a time machine.....
>
> Bob
> N4HY
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Paul Stoetzer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I recently obtained a copy of the 1990 edition of Martin Davidoff's
>> Satellite Experimenters' Handbook and as I was browsing through the book,
>> I
>> came across a passage on page 4-9 about the difficulties with UO-11,
>> that's
>> very relevant to the ongoing debate about the lack of Phase 3 satellites:
>>
>> "If there's a message here, it's that taking part in the amateur satellite
>> program is not for the faint-hearted. Setbacks and barriers will always be
>> part of the picture. And, the most rewarding successes will probably come
>> from employing ingenuity and tenacity to overcome the 'impossible'
>> hurdles."
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul Stoetzer, N8HM
>> Washington, DC (FM18lv)
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 7:17 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi Dan,
>> >
>> > OSCAR-10 (P3-B) used the same 400N engine as OSCAR-13 (P3-C)  and
>> > OSCAR-40 (P3-D).
>> > For P3-E we have a 200N motor from EADS Astrium, the  same one which is
>> > used on the European ATV...
>> >
>> > I was AMSAT P3-A  (planned to be OSCAR-9) which used a solid propellant
>> > apogee  kick-motor.
>> > It's under the water near the cost of french Guiana..   RIP
>> >
>> > You can find an very good article  here:
>> > http://www.ka9q.net/AMSAT-Tech-Journal-2.pdf
>> > See page  8..15
>> >
>> > Rest assured, the PFA and propulsion system was qualified according  to
>> > highest commercial standards by commercial companies. Thus in no  way
>> > there would be any risk to the launcher or other payloads. This  also
>> > includes several levels of safety borders in the hardware design and  in
>> > the software.   The launch agencies have there own specialized  personal
>> > to review all the details...    Without that, nobody would  have
>> launched
>> > any of the P3 satellites !!!
>> > What happened to  AO-40 later on after orbit injection and after
>> > activating the systems is a  completely different matter and did not
>> > present any risk to the launcher at  any time!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Michael R. Lengruesser, DD5ER
>> >
>> > AMSAT-DL e.V.
>> > -- International Satellites for Communication,
>> > Science and Education --
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://www.amsat-dl.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > In einer eMail vom 22.09.2013 21:07:08 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit
>> schreibt
>> > [email protected]:
>> >
>> > >>The apogee motors for OSCAR-10,and OSCAR-13 were solid  propellant
>> > >>400 Newton trust motors donated to AMSAT-DL by the  Messerschmitt
>> > Aerospace
>> > >>Company in Germany.
>> >
>> > Only Phase 3A  had a solid fuel motor. AO-10 and AO-13 had liquid fuel
>> > bi-propellent  motors the same as AO-40. No matter how well designed
>> they
>> > are,
>> > they still  have the potential to blow up the entire launch stack if
>> > something
>> > goes  wrong. Since Dick Daniels is no longer with us, the knowledge has
>> > been
>> > lost  and we will not be launching any more of these in the future.
>> >
>> > Dan  Schultz  N8FGV
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Bob McGwier
> Owner and Technical Director, Allied Communication, LLC
> Professor Virginia Tech
> Senior Member IEEE, Facebook: N4HYBob, ARS: N4HY
> Faculty Advisor Virginia Tech Amateur Radio Assn. (K4KDJ)
>



-- 
Bob McGwier
Owner and Technical Director, Allied Communication, LLC
Professor Virginia Tech
Senior Member IEEE, Facebook: N4HYBob, ARS: N4HY
Faculty Advisor Virginia Tech Amateur Radio Assn. (K4KDJ)
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to