Proposal for an Internet Remote Base station (IRB) in the footprint of QO-100.

  • Ha ha ! It shows that AMSAT USA is not interested and can't be bothered to tell it's subscribers that it was even working. I won't be renewing my subscription. The USA can be so insular.

    The Apogee View column in the November/December 2018 edition of The AMSAT Journal included our President's congratulations on the launch of the satellite:


    "The Es’hail-2 satellite with AMSAT-DL’s Phase-4A transponder was launched successfully on Thursday, November 15 from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. I applaud the joint Qatar Amateur Radio Society (QARS) and AMSAT-DL’s achievement, the result of six years of work. To be a first at something in space is indeed a rare honor. It is this type of honor that AMSATs around the world work on every day. I spoke with Peter Gülzow, DB2OS on November 17th and wished AMSAT-DL success with the next part of their mission to be the first amateur radio linear transponder in geostationary orbit."


    The January/February 2019 edition went to print before the transponders were opened for use. We will consider printing any QO-100 articles that are submitted for publication (article submissions may be sent to journal@amsat.org). We do recognize that we have many members within its footprint and that technical details about station construction are interesting to members outside the footprint in anticipation of future microwave satellites. However, given that a large majority of our membership is located outside the satellite's footprint, generating content about this satellite will likely not be a major focus of our editorial team.


    Anyone interested in writing about their station construction and/or experiences or experiments with the QO-100 narrowband and wideband transponders are encouraged to submit their articles for publication in The AMSAT Journal by email at journal@amsat.org.

  • Ha ha ! It shows that AMSAT USA (NA ?) is not interested and can't be bothered to tell it's subscribers that it was even working. I won't be renewing my subscription. The USA can be so insular.

    As this thread seems to have turned into an attack at AMSAT NA it's probably worth noting that just because an article has yet run that doesn't they are disinterested, gaining an article might well be harder due to the fact North America isn't in the footprint.


    Journals are always looking for content and I know from experience it can be hard work, if they merely gave it a paragraph some would have been upset over that.


    Cubesats won't just disappear now QO-100 is now available, AMSAT-NA have more cubesats in the pipeline waiting to launch thus some focus will be on this, just like AMSAT-UK content will be a mixed with QO-100 and Cubesats.


    This threads become quite off-topic and heated and isn't helping really.


    Peter, 2M0SQL

  • thanks for the answer Clayton.

    I have no elements to reply to your post.

    I can only observe that currently the AMSAT promotes/operates some mono-channel FM satellites and an old disused military satellite that allows you to do things that I did almost 30 years ago.

    These are the facts. This pains me.

    My gratitude to Amsat remains intact for all I received in the past. I cannot say that today Amsat promotes and stimulates my knowledge.

    with respect

    Lucio, I0LYL


  • Lucio,


    I appreciate and respect your point of view.


    The classic approach of AMSAT in developing large, complex satellite systems was forced to change. The availability of affordable launches for large payloads has been significantly impacted. We continue to explore and investigate new opportunities.


    The launch affordability problem has grown more complex over the past twenty years. A new approach requires miniaturization, re-thinking our complex systems of the past, and integrating them into much smaller payloads. There is also the complexity of law (USA and International) regarding orbital debris mitigation and satellite lifetime.


    It is a common misconception that AMSAT is only interested in single channel FM, but I can understand why some people believe this. AMSAT was forced to reconsider and redesign systems from the path set forward in the 1970's.


    I believe that AMSAT has a vision to grow technologically. It will take time and a tremendous effort by many volunteers to succeed.


    Sincerely,


    Clayton

    W5PFG

  • Actually David G0MRF did this study many years ago:


    No DX on LEO's ???


    Bottom line: you need some powerful propulsion to get from A to B.


    Now here is the catch: launch providers are more and more unwilling to accept non-paying secondary customers (hamradio) with a high-energy detonation device (propulsion) just next to their multi-million dollar main customer. Both AMSAT-NA and AMSAT-DL (and others!) have tried to overcome these and other problems in the past decades with little success.

  • :(



  • It's entirely fair to say that AMSAT-NA is opposed to Phase 4. The AMSAT-NA President and members of the board of directors deliberately "de-emphasized" Phase 4 Ground, Phase 4B, and Phase 4 Space (open source GEO, with guidance from Libre Space).

    These projects were repeatedly mischaracterized, our mailing lists deleted without warning, the ASCENT mailing list we were using for conference calls deleted on the day of an important conference call, our views on Phase 4 related videos on the AMSAT-NA YouTube account mysteriously reset, accounts on social media blocked, our news failed to be reported, and our volunteers threatened - by our own board members! - over email and in person at events. Some of these interactions were recorded.

    Yes, the engineering study went well. Since then it has not been the greatest volunteer experience. Not a single board member bothered to visit our demo, with several huge steps forward shown live and fully documented, at the 2017 Symposium. No board members asked any questions, or expressed any interest or curiosity. By December, Joe Spier was calling this demonstration "illegal", and demanding that I delete *everything*. What nonsense. It's embarrassing.

    The volunteers and students that did the truly excellent work for the engineering study for Phase 4B are the same ones AMSAT-NA has squandered or driven off. The inaction, secrecy, and personal attacks on the authors of quality open source work for AMSAT-NA have repercussions.

    On the question of ignoring QO-100 in the -NA Journal. I have some insight here. I edited a 50-60 page amateur radio monthly newsletter for 12 years. There is no freaking way I would let the issue after a long-scheduled and widely-known-about launch of a GEO amateur payload whoosh by with absolutely no mention. Are you kidding? Then AMSAT-NA board members decide to come up in here and neg on AMSAT-DL forum members to write those articles? "Maybe it can be you"? C'mon that's arrogant at best. I can't believe I read that here. You should take it down. They don't owe you articles about a significant achievement. We should be covering it from our perspective without sour grapes or delay.

    Maybe I'm just old-fashioned here, but wouldn't this have been a great opportunity to at least plan a reprint or reprise of what Peter presented at the US Symposium? This is really very easy editing. Obviously the staff at the Journal is capable, and they had access to materials ready-made.

    Change is coming, and I believe AMSAT-NA will improve. The members and the mission deserve at least basic fairness. Members should be getting the best of the open source satellite world. They currently are NOT, and it is due to policies and decisions made by the current board.

    Fortunately, there is a growing number of us dedicated to bringing this about, and I'm optimistic we will succeed.

  • Dear All,


    this thread is going completely "off topic" now...


    I also think it's not fair to discuss organizational matters of another AMSAT organization here in this Forum.


    I think most of us (including me) are not able to judge and discuss who is right and who is wrong...


    However, I have respect for both sides and I really hope someone within AMSAT-NA is able to bring the opponents back on a round table for an open and fair discussion, which allows both sides to exchange their views, ideas and feelings.. Sometimes a little misunderstanding could result in big fights.. This would definitely be a waste of energy and talented people!


    Therefor this topic will be closed.

    Peter Gülzow | DB2OS | AMSAT-DL President | member since 1983 | JO42VG

  • DB2OS

    Closed the thread.