ad: QSKLLC-1

Is SO-50 Okay?

Discussion in 'Satellite and Space Communications' started by KR0SIV, Dec 13, 2013.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
  1. W5PFG

    W5PFG Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    It's another day and these reference papers and project management documents indicating an eleven-year battery life for SO-50 are no where to be seen. You seem to have completely missed N8HM's request in your haste to dodge direct questions.

    There's no need to double-down further on the premise that you have some kind of special connection to the SO-50 team.

  2. WD9EWK

    WD9EWK Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well, to be honest, you put yourself into that position when you started citing from a document that was not already publicly available, and mentioning that you received that presentation from Dr. al-Saud - who was involved in those early SaudiSat projects. A few of us are genuinely interested in seeing that presentation, given the relative lack of documentation on the Internet about SO-50 (SaudiSat-1C). The information may be historical, but it does relate to a satellite currently in operation.

    If you only want to focus on current information and not serve as a historian, I have offered to host those documents somewhere else. That way, you're not storing them on your web space, and downloads of those documents won't use bandwidth from your web space.

    Looking forward to seeing that page, or link on an existing page, for whatever you have related to SO-50...

  3. K6LCS

    K6LCS Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    You guys are relentless ... (grin). A few years ago, I had a brief email conversation with a Saudi professor regarding SO-50. I am no one special. I used his publicly available email address. This isn't rocket science. Anyone can call or write to the University. A SaudiSat team member is on the staff at Stanford, too. I can post some history on SO-50 that I have garnered. But it surely is nothing that anyone else cannot access freely.

    And again, if you can find 2002-era literature on proposed battery life that states they'd be working in a satellite 100 at 100 per cent capacity after more than a decade of use, make sure you post THAT information for us all. For anyone to state that 2002-era batteries are near 100 per cent capabilities eleven years later is, well, not one who has read much about batteries. We are VERY fortunate that SO-50 is still working for the amateur radio community.

    Patrick - Doesn't AMSAT-NA have copies of the SaudiSat1 proposal and papers from 2001-2002?

    Clint Bradford
  4. W5PFG

    W5PFG Premium Subscriber QRZ Page


    I'll take your statement about relentlessness as a compliment. My intent has always been to identify the source of information for your claim that SO-50 was only available in eclipse. Once you referenced having read that the battery life was estimated to be eleven years, I desired the identity of that source as well.

    Reading the quoted posting above, it is my assumption that you do not have any information to substantiate your claims. It appeared to me in other posts you were doubling-down on claims of inside knowledge to the operations of that satellite. At other times, you simply dodged the request by using a "let's move along and work satellites" approach.

    This thread has turned silly. I'm sick and tired of it.

  5. WD9EWK

    WD9EWK Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thank you!

    Again, going back to your earlier comment, you said you received a presentation from Dr. al-Saud. As far as any of us can tell, this presentation was not publicly available. You're citing it in posts here. We'd like to see it. Simple. If the information was already available online somewhere, there would be no need to pursue this discussion here. We would have already had access to the information you were citing.

    I'm not looking for that information, and we're not interested in discussing 2002-era literature about battery life over time. We were, and are, interested in the documents you say you have about this satellite. In particular, the comment about the battery life as it relates to SO-50 being usable during eclipse periods (your comment earlier in this thread). The last sentence in that quote is something we all can agree on.

    Not sure. If anything, any paperwork or electronic documents would have been submitted to the IARU Satellite Advisor for frequency coordination. AMSAT-NA doesn't handle that. Again, I'm not interested in what AMSAT-NA may, or may not, have related to this satellite. Nobody from AMSAT-NA has made statements on this forum indicating that SO-50 was available only during daylight passes - that was you, on here and on your web site.

    If you really don't have this information, fine - come clean and admit that. This discussion will then come to an end. Otherwise, we are still here, and still interested in seeing whatever you received from Dr. al-Saud or any other sources about SO-50. We really are interested in learning more about the satellites we use.

  6. K6LCS

    K6LCS Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    >> ... your claim that SO-50 was only available in eclipse ...

    I never cited a source for "the batteries are dying" on SO-50. I never stated that I had any source other than anecdotal reports of slightly diminished reception during dead of night, which Patrick might have attributed to improper use of the satellite.

    Where "common sense" comes in to this - and bear with me, because "common sense" many times leaves these threads - is that battery technology of 2002 was not such that satellite builders were believing that their birds' batteries would last a decade. We are fortunate to have SO-50 still up and operational, indeed. For that reason alone I would tend to not attempt contacts in the dead of night - but that is COMMON SENSE talking.

    If someone was truly interested in finding out facts - they could contact those who built SO-50 and see what they have to say about current battery status. I can hand you the contact info later - or you could do the most basic of Google searches and find it yourself. Careful with phone calls - they are eleven hours ahead of us.

    Or, if you'd rather me do it, I will make the calls.

  7. W5PFG

    W5PFG Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Oh joy. More satellite wisdom from the land-of-no-polarity-fades.

    AO-7, FO-29, and VO-52 are getting pretty old considering the lifetime of most batteries. Heck, AO-7's battery is toast. Are you going to suggest we not work these satellites at night under your COMMON SENSE guidelines?

    I agree with you again, Clint. Common sense does leave these threads.
  8. AC0RA

    AC0RA Ham Member QRZ Page

    Common sense would state if you(Clint) had information on so-50 you would just post it or give it to us in one way or another so we could end this thread. If you don't have the info just admit to it so we don't have to keep asking for it.

    There is no need for anyone to call or contact anyone else. You either have the info or you don't there is no grey area.

    Also if it was as easy as doing a google search this would have never transpired.
  9. WD9EWK

    WD9EWK Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well, I didn't say "improper use of the satellite", but the two reasons I cited would probably be examples of unfamiliarity with the satellite. I'll even quote myself here:

    A big difference, Clint. Please come correct in your quotes and references. You've already been bitten once in the past 10 days by that, the AO-73 thread where you posted the contents of an AMSAT News Service bulletin without giving credit to ANS for the information.

    But you are in the US Pacific time zone, and claimed to have received a presentation regarding SO-50 that is not accessible online. If we are to take you at your word, we should be able to ask you for it here, via e-mail, or can we ring you tonight and discuss getting a copy of that presentation from you? If we take you at your word, we have no need to call Saudi Arabia - even if they are very nice people to talk to. Google searches have not yielded a document that has what you mentioned last night in this thread, so for the moment you are the source of the information. Or does this presentation simply not exist?

    Last edited: Dec 18, 2013
  10. K6LCS

    K6LCS Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    CLINT>> ... I have read user reports of slightly degraded RX in middle of the night ...

    HAM-1>> ... Nothing is wrong with SO-50 ...
    HAM-2>> ... SO-50 sounds good to me ...
    HAM-3>> ... Its eleven-year-old batteries are as good as new ...
    HAM-4>> ... How dare you dis' SO-50 ...

    Wow. OK. The reports I read were wrong. All is wonderful. Be careful with every word you write, 'cause you
    will need to back it up with citations. Which is fine. And I will publish some existing papers - as well as
    current (pun intended) information on SO-50. And you know what site it'll be on? If I mentioned it, I'd
    be chided for self-promotion ...

    I guess I am apologizing for reading my in box? Whatever. I am still collecting data, and will report
    to all later.

Share This Page