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

Wed Jul 31 18:14:32 UTC 2019

John,

Ah, like I said a different Bacon's Law.  With very different implications.

John

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 1:49 PM John Brier <johnbrier at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>