[Ground-station] Experimental Channels

[Ron Economos]

Isn't WFOV (AFSPC 12) scheduled to be launched next month?

Ron W6RZ

On 2/13/20 22:47, Leffke, Zachary via Ground-Station wrote:
>
> While I agree with Phil and Kent on this, do remember we got pretty 
> close to success on a number of those fronts with the Air Force on the 
> WFOV attempt.  In that case, AMSAT and other benefactors cut the 
> checks to cover the study and VT researcher time that lead to a PDR 
> level design and addressed a number of Kent’s points including 
> overall/center of mass, mechanical mating, electrical mating, 
> outgassing, thermal constraints, EMI/RFI, even security type issues 
> (like TEMPEST), etc, etc, etc.  We generally got the ‘no impact to 
> primary mission’ result (which is a ‘go’) from the integrators 
> (Millennium Space Systems) which they formally delivered to the Air 
> Force, who responded with a thumbs up (I remember that review, it was 
> a good day).  In fairness, that was a relatively easier set of 
> constraints due to the experimental nature and relatively short 
> duration of the primary mission (lots of margin in power, propellant, 
> etc.) compared to say a 20-30 year $100M+ operational system.
>
> Had the prime contractors delivered the primary sensor, and had we 
> found a ‘measly’ $5M dollars or so (for the launch costs, a bit more 
> for the actual payload build, which was actually two payloads to have 
> an identical ground copy), and had we met all the design constraints, 
> we would have had a launch and a GEO payload over NA.  We had even 
> begun talks on integration schedule and the initial plans for travel 
> to California for integration and compatibility testing of the payload 
> with the bus (which was scary timeline wise, because we had only 
> gotten to PDR level, and would have only had about a year to get past 
> CDR, build it, bolt it on, and complete the integration testing).
>
> All this to say that while it is a huge challenge (the engineering is 
> ‘almost’ easier than the political/bureaucratic/legal wrangling) it is 
> an achievable goal, and we got pretty close.  And yes, 100% agree that 
> the devil is in the details…..and there are many, many details to cover.
>
> In my opinion, it’s all about confidence.  As I learned from Bob, 
> N4HY, ‘Amateur’ in the sense we’re doing it because we love it, but we 
> can present ourselves as professionals.  We have to be confident in 
> ourselves and our ‘product’ which instills confidence in the people we 
> need to convince such as the vehicle owners (our junk won’t short your 
> bus…), the benefactors that help with funding (it’s worth your time 
> and $...), and the all the rest.  Incremental ‘wins’ are a way to 
> build that confidence...CatSat is a prime example: AstroSDR flight 
> heritage (or should I say more flight heritage), channelizers, DVB-S2 
> processing, X-band downlink.  Even though it’s a 6U LEO bird, it helps 
> build confidence towards the end goal as it demonstrates what’s 
> possible (no pressure for the folks in Arizona :-) ).  Same same, but 
> different for AMSAT’s GOLF series: SDRs on amateur spacecraft, 
> microwave links, etc.  We have a lot of great people doing a lot of 
> great things and our collective successes get us closer to the goal.
>
> Keep the faith, we can find a way, just need to be ready to take 
> advantage of the opportunities when they present themselves, and be 
> confident that we can do it……and a few more Hams strategically 
> positioned at Intelsat, Inmarsat, dish network, directv, Viasat, 
> Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed, Northrop, NOAA, Air Force, Space Force, 
> NASA, SpaceX, Blue Origin and/or Amazon, ULA, and various three, four, 
> and five letter agencies, etc. couldn’t hurt (and maybe a few Texas 
> oil barons as well….also, anyone have a friend of a friend of a friend 
> that plays golf with Musk or Bezos?).
>
> As always, just my two cents…
>
> -Zach, KJ4QLP
>
> -- 
>
> Research Associate
>
> Aerospace & Ocean Systems Lab
>
> Ted & Karyn Hume Center for National Security & Technology
>
> Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
>
> Work Phone: 540-231-4174
>
> Cell Phone: 540-808-6305
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openresearch.institute/pipermail/ground-station-openresearch.institute/attachments/20200213/312e6880/attachment.html>