[amsat-bb] Re: communication

[John B. Stephensen]

I really don't see a lack of communication. A technical committee trying to 
design one of the transponders determined that it needed a separate uplink 
band and was asked to recommend the best frequency. This turned out to be S1 
(2.4 GHz) for good technical reasons. A technical committee must make 
recommendations based on sound engineering principles and not fudge the 
results based on political correctness. This lets the decision makers make 
tradeoffs based on real facts. The fact that the recommendation was 
published to the membership allowed members to comment before a decision was 
made.

In addition to S1/C, two alternatives, LS2/C (1.26 & 3.4 GHz up / 5.85 Ghz 
down) and C/X (5.65 Ghz up / 10.45 GHz down) were also discussed. These are 
less desirable due to the fact that one penalizes European hams and the 
other raises the cost of the satellite. However, all decsions are 
compromises based on acheiving the greatest good for the geatest number of 
people.

73,

John
KD6OZH

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dean Shutt" <al7cr at amsat.org>
To: <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 18:24 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] A Reply to Mr. McGwier
> This to me fully supports the view that
> the designers wish to be funded to build what they wish and not what the
> amateur satellite community wish to operate. I do not believe attempting
> to squelch the free exchange of views is helpful. ... The current debate 
> started as a
> result of a lack of communication from the designers.  There will
> certainly be more if the situation does not improve.  The designers must
> realize that communication with the folks from whom they expect support
> is as much a part of assuring a successful project as the hardware design.