[amsat-bb] Re: Eagle Satellite Design

[Edward R. Cole]

George and the list:

Let me also state that, though I respectfully disagree with cancelling the
mode-S downlink, I do want to continue to support the launch of Eagle as it
WILL provide mode-U/V (old mode-B).  My main satellite interest is in HEOs
so I think we should make sure that Eagle is launched even if not exactly
the bird we hoped for.  Amsat-NA has proven record with various launch
entities and still best at finding us the ride into orbit.  

I saw many old satellite hands quit after the demise of AO-40 mode-V
failure.  Everyone loss from their quiting...they lost a fun ham
activity...Amsat lost support...the rest of us lost stations to contact...I
lost a local friend who essentially quit ham radio.

S/C-rider is a still mostly an "unknown" to most of us and may tunr out to
be a very fun mode after more is revealed and "cemented" in the design
process.

I just wanted Rick, Bob, and Tom to know this.  My offer of backup
emergency command support remains.

73's Ed - KL7UW
50/144/222*/432/927/1296/2400/3456*/10368/24192* MHz
*under construction

At 03:59 PM 9/9/2006 -0500, George Henry wrote:
>
>A number of BB participants have already indicated that they WON'T fund a 
>satellite that they don't want,
>which begs the question:  will Eagle fly, period?  Has the design committee 
>effectively killed the bird by killing
>enough interest?
>
>I hope not, but time will be the judge.  I am disappointed by the loss of 
>mode S, but would rather at least have a V/U HEO than
>no HEO.  (I still maintain that the dire predictions for 2.4 GHz will not 
>come to pass)
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Emily Clarke" <emily at clarke-design.com>
>To: "George Henry" <ka3hsw at earthlink.net>
>Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 2:33 PM
>Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Eagle Satellite Design
>
>
>>
>> Most likely AMSAT wouldn't let you do it - it would interfere with the 
>> primary mission.  Besides - why should AMSAT members fund a satellite they 
>> don't want, and they have to pay even more to rent space for a payload 
>> they do want?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Emily
>>
>>
>> At 11:09 AM 9/9/2006, you wrote:
>>>So, how much to rent one of the TSFR spaces?  Maybe all of us who still
>>>believe in S-Band could pool our funds to fly our own transponder..... 
>>>fund
>>>the mode instead of the bird?
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Rick Hambly (W2GPS)" <w2gps at cnssys.com>
>>>To: <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
>>>Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 5:21 AM
>>>Subject: [amsat-bb] Eagle Satellite Design
>>>
>>>
>>><snip>
>>> >
>>> > c) There are at least two TSFR (This-Space-For-Rent) packages that 
>>> > could
>>> > possibly contain other RF or other payloads, conditioned on the
>>> > availability
>>> > of power, antenna space and compatibility with the primary payloads.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> 
73's,
Ed - KL7UW 
===================================
BP40iq,  Nikiski, AK      http://www.qsl.net/al7eb
Amsat #3212
Modes: V - U - L - S
===================================