Hi Mark!

It's great to have someone else taking a look at the data, so thanks!

> There may not be any x/y data to be had other than to really understand
> what we have and why its the way it is, and work on making sure next
> time we get data thats more useful.

Huh. We looked at the raw data streams, and thought they were valid. And
we saw reasonable numbers of packets per second, so I wonder if this is
a post-processing problem. Jamey/Larry, did you see this same thing in
your processing?

I'm going to be very surprised if the X/Y data is toast. Mark, you
should show up at one of our meetings and we should go over the data
with you. Again, this smells like a post-processing problem.

And by the way Jamey, that was NOT a cheap ADC. Me *and* Maxim
Semiconductor are offended. It was... low cost. But not cheap!


> This data should be looked at as if it holds valuable secrets.  Within
> in it are system issues that need to be addressed that will influence
> you avionics, payload, and software designs.  Its full of gold.

We totally agree :) ! And if we weren't totally focussed on rebuilding
the rocket from scratch (sigh) we'd be spending a lot more time getting
at the data. So thanks for helping with the processing of it!


Andrew Greenberg

Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  P: 503.788.1343  C: 503.708.7711

psas-software mailing list

Reply via email to