[amsat-bb] HEO/Elliptical [was: AMSAT-NA solution: DX (HEO) to attract more interest and revenue]

Wed Jul 31 17:48:54 UTC 2019

Bacon's law here means everyone is no more than six people away from
someone who personally knows Kevin Bacon. He is saying we all know a
lot of people, enough people that we might be able to do impressive
things with them.

Also, surely he doesn't mean AMSAT should drop everything for this
idea. I think you're reading into Ev's message too much.

73, John Brier KG4AKV

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:26 AM John Kludt via AMSAT-BB
<amsat-bb at amsat.org> wrote:
>
> Ev,
>
> The orbital debris regulations are a huge barrier.  See Jerry's post on
> this reflector.  It is not the case that AMSAT is not looking very hard at
> the issue.  Everything has an opportunity cost associated with it.  AMSAT
> has limited resources both in terms of people and dollars.  Are you
> suggesting AMSAT drop everything they are working on and pursue your pet
> option?
>
> Bacon's Law was passed by the Virginia Legislature June 23, 1676, after
> Nathaniel Bacon *invaded* Jamestown and *forced* the legislature to grant
> him a charter to go fight Indians.  *That* Bacon's Law?  So you are
> suggesting we *invade* AMSAT HQ and *force* the Board of Director's to
> authorize this project?
>
> Maybe you are referring to a different Bacon's Law.  Sounds kind of over
> the top to me.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:12 AM Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
> wrote:
>
> >  Somewhere in AMSAT there is someone who has "Project Managed" long enough
> > (or has access to process-flow diagrams) and can publish a generic work
> > breakdown of both the steps and resources needed to put a highly elliptical
> > (presumably less expensive) or Geostationary (presumably more expensive)
> > bird into orbit and manage it.
> >
> > If that person (or people) could publish that along with a "checkmark"
> > next to the items that are "already in place", "in active progress", and
> > "needs sponsor/enthusiast" then we are more likely to fill-in the gaps.
> >
> > Remember the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" game (a.k.a. "Bacon's Law")?
> > Let's play it out here!
> > Ev, W2EV
> >
> >     On Tuesday, July 30, 2019, 6:15:19 PM EDT, Jerry Buxton via AMSAT-BB <
> > amsat-bb at amsat.org> wrote:
> >
> >  On 7/28/2019 18:46, Ev Tupis via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> > > What are the top barriers to revisiting highly elliptical and AO-40 type
> > goals?
> > Actually, from my perspective right now the top barrier is orbital
> > debris regulations.  GOLF-1 isn't going where I wanted to go because the
> > enforcement has become stringent and a hot topic worldwide.  We can't
> > license or launch anything that doesn't de-orbit within 25 years and a
> > HEO orbit (GTO actually, keeping it simple for this point) is likely to
> > last "too long" by itself.  There are options available for deorbit BUT
> > the kicker right now is that they have to be proven and approved by the
> > FCC.  In that we know of no such device(s) available at this time,
> > keeping within the current expectations of 3U.  A change in size (6U)
> > might yield some possibilities but I know of none there either, right
> > now.  We have been discussing and working with both NASA and FCC for
> > possibilities.  If something is available whether drag or propulsion,
> > then we get into the cost issue not to mention the price of a launch to
> > a GTO which is currently around $900k MSRP.  If we had a million bucks
> > and approved device(s) were available right now that fit within a $1
> > million budget then we would be pursuing that.
> >
> > Another option is to find a launch with a low enough perigee to
> > naturally decay in 25 years, but whether earning an ELaNa launch or
> > buying one, we will always be secondary payload and don't have a lot of
> > say in specific orbit parameters.
> >
> > One more option is rideshare, and that is also in active discussion.
> > The point there would be that the onus of orbital debris compliance is
> > on the satellite we hitch a ride with, although that also goes into not
> > having a lot of say on the final orbit not to mention satisfying a
> > primary payload that everything will be just fine if they take us
> > along.  And then again, there's likely cost there too...  We have some
> > options that wouldn't necessarily require lots of money, they just won't
> > be happening today.
> >
> > Other possibilities?  As far as I know we are pursuing the current
> > options available per NASA and FCC, but that doesn't mean that there
> > aren't other possibilities.  If you have any, keep in mind that building
> > a good case for use of whatever the possibility might be is key to
> > gaining any approval.  And 90% probability that whatever will get you
> > back in less than 25 years is a tough challenge.
> >
> > We are bucking a trend, general CubeSat missions are happy with going
> > lower or from ISS, and bucking the trend not new with AMSAT but it is
> > new in this world today because of the regulation and stakes as well as
> > the fact that most everyone we deal with has no knowledge of AMSAT
> > beyond the record the we have created and grown in the last 4 years of
> > launches.  We are not magically known just because we launched some
> > pretty cool satellites in the past.  Hopefully we will be known by more
> > through our continued contact, cooperation, and "by the book" production
> > and delivery of CubeSats with NASA, FCC, launch integrators, and others
> > who we look to for these launch opportunities.
> >
> > Or get a bunch of money because that probably is the second biggest
> > barrier...
> >
> > Jerry Buxton, NØJY
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> > expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> > AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> > expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> > AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb