[amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities

[Ken Ernandes]

Overruled?  Interesting...  

What I've see in this discussion on the HEO issues appear to be more speculative than based on fact or any official announcement from the AMSAT-NA BOD.  I personally would consider it premature to summarily declare the discussion closed.  

We could, perhaps put it on hold until the AMSAT-NA BOD provides current status.  Perhaps it would be better to refrain from inflammatory statements with "absolutes" before we have an official statement on the HEO subject.

73, Ken Ernandes N2WWD



-----Original Message-----
>From: k7zt at suddenlink.net
>Sent: Aug 12, 2008 12:31 PM
>To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner at mindspring.com>, amsat-bb at amsat.org, "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh at comcast.net>
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NAPriorities
>
>NOTICE to ALL HEO proponents:
> 
>YOU HAVE BEEN OVERRULED, dialog is finished, so stop it.
>
>---- Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner at mindspring.com> wrote: 
>> At this point AMSAT is going to take the first thing that gets us above LEO 
>> that we can afford. If that is HEO, so be it. If it is GEO, it's GEO. Being 
>> divided and fussy over the details only detracts from the effort. We are 
>> basically beggars in the launch market, and we all know the saying about 
>> beggars and choosers. The mission is to provide long access time satellite 
>> comms on a daily, then 24/7 basis. How that happens is yet to be 
>> determined...
>> 
>> Sorry to be so brief but I have a lot going on with my day job at the 
>> moment. There will be more information forthcoming.
>> 
>> 73, Drew KO4MA
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Joe Westbrook" <k7zt at suddenlink.net>
>> To: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh at comcast.net>; <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 8:44 AM
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and 
>> AMSAT-NAPriorities
>> 
>> 
>> > John:
>> > That certainly is one approach, I'm not saying that there is anything 
>> > wrong
>> > with that, it's just a change in the stated goals of Eagle.
>> > The leadership needs to get in front of this and announce this is a
>> > significant shift in  organizational strategy if indeed that is the plan.
>> >
>> > At they same time for the sake of honesty they should probably tell folks
>> > that this will end AMSAT-NA sponsorship of an HEO (Molmiya Orbit)
>> > anytime soon or even in their lifetime ;-/
>> >
>> > - Joe
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----- 
>> > From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh at comcast.net>
>> > To: "Joe Westbrook" <k7zt at suddenlink.net>; <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:05 AM
>> > Subject: Re: AMSAT UK P3E Lecture HEO vs GEO. and AMSAT-NA Priorities
>> >
>> >
>> >> >
>> >>> It appears that leadership is allowing realities of
>> >>> a rare, expensive launch opportunity drive the mission rather than the
>> >>> mission driving the launch method,  it's a bit like the tail wagging the
>> >>> dog
>> >>> don't you think?
>> >>>
>> >> AO-40 was the case of a rare launch opportunity driving the mission. The
>> >> AMSAT BoD has stated that the purpose of creating a relelationship with
>> >> Intelsat would be to provide multiple launch opportunities. It seems to 
>> >> me
>> >> that finding an affordable launch method should be the first step rather
>> >> than the last step.
>> >>
>> >> 73,
>> >>
>> >> John
>> >> KD6OZH
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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 
>> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>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