I would also vote AO40 was not to complex, it was failed by an accident.
Not wishing to bring up bad memories, but two questions:
Did anything other than the plug incident happen? (In other words, did
any systems fail before the explosion?)
Was there a backup bird built of the same design that
- Original Message -
From: Floyd Rodgers kc5...@swbell.net
To: bstguitar...@gmail.com; Phil Karn k...@ka9q.net
Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] I want this. I want that. Here comes another FM LEO
sat.
I would also vote AO40
Op 27-07-14 om 20:17 schreef Floyd Rodgers:
Was there a backup bird built of the same design that just might be
flyable if we could find a ride?
Not a backup for phase 3d but a satelite with simular spaceframe and
capabiletie to get in the same orbit, phase 3e is capable of being
flight test
On 07/22/2014 12:26 AM, Bryce Salmi wrote:
By usher in he was clearly referring to gaining technical abilities as a
group to attack more complex satellites.
That's not how I read it. In any event, AMSAT has already built far more
complex satellites; remember AO-40? (Maybe that one was *too*
Ao40 was not too complex. I work in the space industry, I've already have
my electronics fly to orbit (not AMSAT), it's awesome and scary all In one.
Watching it launch not too long ago was gut wrenching, the entire system is
complex but I trusted in my testing, I trusted my coworkers testing, and
Nativity = autocorrect of being naive :) sorry about that
On Saturday, July 26, 2014, Bryce Salmi bstguitar...@gmail.com wrote:
Ao40 was not too complex. I work in the space industry, I've already have
my electronics fly to orbit (not AMSAT), it's awesome and scary all In one.
Watching it
In addition most cubsats just buy prebut of commercial modules
(clydespace...) so those teams have to do little actual engineering. Those
teams however are limited I. Their scope for the future whereas AMSAT-NA is
developing the basic building blocks of heir own platform to build on. I.
Addition
Hi Phil,
The new era I speak of is AMSAT-NA's foray into CubeSats. Certainly FM
birds are nothing new. I'd like to see more efficient modes and methods
in the future. Perhaps leverage a smartphone interface for the roving
digital operator?
I am a firm believer in the direction of
I dont keep up with these things at all but what happen to the others?
failed, dropped out of orbit, what?
One day someone is going to be saying sorry, ghost rider the pattern
is full
JAB
___
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are
Off the top of my head:
AO-51 - Battery failure (Problem fixed in Fox series - shorted
batteries will be cut loose from the circuit and the satellite will
operate when in the sun)
AO-27 - Likely radiation damaged memory (Problem fixed in Fox series -
IHU failure will cause it to become a dumb FM
On 07/22/2014 06:49 AM, Clayton Coleman wrote:
Hi Phil,
The new era I speak of is AMSAT-NA's foray into CubeSats.
Well, I guess I could read that as when all you have is lemons, make
lemonade. AMSAT used to make spacecraft that, while small by
commercial/military/scientific standards, dwarfed
Phil,
You're missing the point. Do I personally think Fox-1 is pushing the
bleeding edge of technology? No. Buts it's a great step to building a good
foundation. I think your frustration with the lack of digital birds is
overcoming an understanding of where AMSAT currently is and where it's
going.
On 7/22/2014 9:21 AM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
Off the top of my head:
AO-51 - Battery failure (Problem fixed in Fox series - shorted
batteries will be cut loose from the circuit and the satellite will
operate when in the sun)
This is an original conops for Fox-1 that did not make it to reality.
Jerry,
Thanks for the clarification. It is unfortunate that it got removed,
but understandable. Hopefully the batteries will last the entire 11
year lifetime of the orbit and, if not, that newer and better
satellites will continually be launched!
Is the feature that allows the FM transponder to
Being involved in the power system, I personally am hoping to get this
included in the near future on some of the next Fox's. We will see!
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Jerry Buxton am...@n0jy.org wrote:
On 7/22/2014 9:21 AM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
Off the top of my head:
AO-51 - Battery
They simply don't realize how much more could be done with
21st century technology. That's what I'm trying to change, so far
without much success.
Phil, the technology you describe could equally well be used in cross-band
terrestrial transponders. Has anyone yet developed it for terrestrial
On 07/22/2014 04:06 PM, M5AKA wrote:
Phil, the technology you describe could equally well be used in
cross-band terrestrial transponders. Has anyone yet developed it for
terrestrial use ?
Sure, there are several digital schemes now appearing for ham VHF/UHF
voice use, such as D*Star
I am pleased that AMSAT-NA is going to move forward with a LEO
CubeSat, single channel, analog FM transponder. If successful, it
will be immensely popular worldwide. My hope is that it will help
usher in a new, improved series of satellites with more advanced
payloads. There is great potential
On 07/21/2014 05:36 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote:
It's very easy to be a pessimist or a cynic. Very little risk is
involved. It doesn't take any cojones to sit in a comfy chair and
email snarky comments. If you are optimistic about a project and it
fails, your peers may see your actions as a
19 matches
Mail list logo
