Discussion in 'Satellite and Space Communications' started by W5SAT, Jul 29, 2019.
It was use it or lose it.
A link was provided about them in post #14.
Here it is again -> ARDC
Conservative estimates put their haul to be worth at least DOUBLE the total value of ALL cash and investment assets currently held by the ARRL.
Note those who are involved are also HAMS, fervent educators and satellite fans.
Their intention is to use the windfall to advance Amateur Radio.
That's something to ponder.
The at least $50M number has been confirmed by one of the BOD of ARDC. Here's the e-mail.
Thanks for sharing your idea. That's not what we are discussing.
Ordinary dues, yes, by all means, every year.
Large donation, different animal, need some assurance that it won't be squandered.
By analogy, go talk to your estate lawyer about planning distributions; it's actually quite deep.
The simplest concept has two satellites, each transmitting both to the ground and to its partner satellite with its single omnidirectional transmitter and antenna. One satellite is Mode J, while the other is Mode B. The single receiver on a satellite receives uplinks from ground stations and the crosslink from the other satellite. The single transmitter on a satellite transmits the downlink to ground stations and the crosslink to the other satellite.
A ground station in the footprint of both satellites could receive the UHF downlink from Satellite J directly, and with a slight delay and some S/N degradation, might also receive the same SSB signal via the VHF downlink from Satellite B. As this illustrates, another advantage of this approach is that each individual satellite is still a viable linear transponder satellite on its own even if the other satellite fails.
Whether or not this approach would have adequate link margin and adequate transponder bandwidth to handle intersatellite Doppler correction would require some analysis to determine.
73, Ryan AI6DO
I've never been a fan of orbiting repeaters, but the reality is that this is effectively the easiest step to exploring satellites, and possibly the first interest point in the hobby. Every amateur that watched me work the birds at Field Day was there because they were already listening to the FM satellites. If the mission of AMSAT includes the encouragement of exploration of space communications for amateurs and non-amateurs alike, this is where that gets accomplished.
A compromise for more linear satellite work might be replicating those dearly missed RS-12/RS-15 birds with modes K and T. Again, exceptionally modest requirements and absolutely boatloads of fun. Although, I remain convinced that the joy and simplicity of working those birds was due in no small part to their host mission, which made for very stable spacecraft.
Replicating Es'hail is a nice goal, but one that I don't see an easy financial path to pulling off. This is going to take a lot of creative work on raising money where required, labor where applicable and generally finding a lot of favor among people in positions to throw this thing into space. Candidly, not seeing it right now.
Thanks, Drew. Looking forward to those.
In case anyone is having trouble with the previously posted links to ARDC, here is a cut & paste from it of who they are (you may recognize a few names and call signs) and what they intend to do with their now partially liquidated assets.
Its difficult not imagining AMSAT being a likely candidate ... if only ...
It is our intention to grant funds across all reaches of the
educational, research, and development spectrum, with awards being
made to support qualified organizations whose programs could well
serve to advance the art of digital communication, with special
emphasis on that which would benefit Amateur Radio.
Additionally, another way we will be able to help our community is
to contract with research firms and consultants to carry out related
research and development to produce procedures, techniques, methods,
designs, and intellectual property that would then be made freely
available for the benefit of all.
The ARDC Board of Directors
Brian Kantor, WB6CYT
Phil Karn, KA9Q
K. C. Claffy, KC6KCC
John Gilmore, W0GNU
And a few of our supporting advisors
Hank Magnuski, KA6M
Bdale Garbee, KB0G
Skip Hansen, WB6YMH
Bill Horne, W4EWH
John Ricketts, KI5D
Jann Traschewski, DG8NGN
Paul Vixie, KI6YSY
Heh. I just came across the thread and thought it was rather amusing that one has to call for civil discussion in the first place, which is totally a sign of the times (I'm sure many recall when holding a discussion was simply expected to be civil without the adverb, because being polite was the norm).
And it gets a bit - troubling? (IMO) - when it's a call for civility in discussing a HOBBY, almost scary to think that hams can't get together to discuss a segment of their hobby without being hostile, with hostile being the expected norm and civil needing to be invoked as a rule of order prior to the start of the discussion.
Times change. I recall when the saying was something like 'never discuss politics or religion in polite company' and yeah, that's a sure nosedive into the mud if you do bring either one up on a forum, as it has been since Day One. I guess now it truly has spread, so it's 'never discuss politics, religion, or amateur radio clubs/groups/organizations/corporations in polite company'!
Just some early morning coffee musing, before I head out to the 'Civil Discussion of PC Operating Systems and Lunch' gathering being held at our aptly named Firehouse Restaurant, to share some of the fun I had running and doing some programming for OS/2 for over 20 years.
I imagine a generic meme of the "grumpy hobbyist", a retired guy with a furrowed brow and scowl. If he's having such a bad time in his FUN hobby, god help anyone who toiled alongside him in the workplace for decades. ;-) Or the early days of Linux in which an honest question would be answered with open hostility in some circles. Thankfully those days are largely gone, and the "services" of such people are no longer "needed."
This is such a huge hobby, with so many sub-hobbies, that even the satellite aspect needs to be teased apart into something like an "org chart". AMSAT wears many hats -- educational/outreach, scientific/engineering, coordinating, LEO, HEO, fund-raising, etc. If it were me, I'd lay out all potential areas as if money were no issue at all. What dedicated satellite DX'ers and chasers want might go under one category. Whereas what might present a low-barrier and FUN activity for new hams and K-12/educational might be something else. And a potential crowd-sourced scientific/propagation research project would be something else again. No single satellite/effort that could answer all. Clearly, prioritization must eventually kick in. But sometimes money comes with strings attached, so it's best to have things on multiple white-boards ready to implement if the opportunity for one venue opens up.
But they needn't step on one another on-the-ground, since they belong to different boxes on the chart. There really are multiple valid answers, since there are differing scopes.
73, KD0KZE / Paul