[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: alternatives

On 23 Feb 2004 at 15:54, Werner H. Berli wrote:

> I am an engineer myself and my experience is that one mark of a good
> design team is that whenever they finish a job, they come up with
> several ideas on how to improve their design. But in a commercial
> environment there must be a kind of a stopping organization, which tells
> the designers that it is time to go into production and earn some money
> (in order that they again could do what they like to do so much:
> designing new stuff)
Good stuff but on Columbia accident investigation board they wrote the following lines:

"Because small foam losses have occurred on every mission, Columbia managers 
wrongly assumed the damage was minor. Efforts by lower ranking engineers to
 inspect for damage were ignored."

 I wrote:

Is it a good idea to called up an "INDEPENDENT" AO-40 accident investigating board (AOAIB-40) not to find 
culprits but to learn from experience and cleared up the real facts about the whole AO-40 venture. 
Whats it was written in the past by others as a reminder.

17 dec 2000

With all due respect to the amsat P3D team....

After reading the status reports on the amsat web site it looks like P3D was
launched with known problems, ie. critical valves not opening and closing,
software glitches, rounding errors large enough that the spin of the bird
couldn't be changed.  I wonder if the launch team put the complaints of the
amateur community over launch delays ahead safety and reliability of the
bird, eh?

(flame suit on)

Kevin, WB5RUE

Kevin Muenzler WB5RUE wrote:on 17 dec 2000
> But you'd think that something like this would have not been sent
> up with known problems.  Especially something like a fuel control
> valve that failed during testing.  I guess enough bending and
> hammering got it to work for the test.  They called it "nominal"
> which I guess was enough for the "stock holders" (YOU AND ME.)
> http://www.amsat.org/amsat/news/ans2000/ans00348.html

Kevin, I'm confused.  I looked at the URL you provided, and THIS is
what caught my eye:

  "We experienced a similar problem during the test phase of
   P3D, and one of the helium valves was repaired as a

In case it isn't clear to you why this caught my eye, let me repeat
a part of that quote with a little emphasis:

   "...and one of the helium valves WAS REPAIRED"

The bird was tested.  A part failed.  It was repaired.  And you
consider that "...sending it up with a known problem..." ??????

A lot of parts failed during testing.  AFIK, all the known problems
were fixed before launch.  What evidence do you have that the bird
was launched with any "known problems"?

Or are you taking the position that because a part failed, such a part
must never be used again, or that the flight should never occur?
That's kind of like saying that rubber automobile tires are known to
occasionally fail, and failure sometimes leads to serious injury or
death of the driver or passengers.  Therefore all automobile
manufacturers must immediately stop building cars that depend on the
defective technology of pneumatic rubber tires.   Seeeshh!!!!!!

> So my question is: Why keep designing new satellites for a basic service
> such as worldwide communication? Why not use a proven design and build
> many equal communication satellites, which e.g. have such a great 
> transponder as the AO-40 has(had)? 
> It must be less expensive and faster to build and launch many of the
> same kind then many different ones.

Greath idea. A solution has been already formulated partly by someone else:

>WHAT IF: After Echo is on station, AMSAT-NA scraped the Eagle

>project and approached AMSAT-DL with the offer of the Eagle resources

>in an effort to accelerate the P3-E launch?

> All this costs money! How can we (the AMSAT) get the necessary revenues?
> Here is my way (to justify to myself donations of a certain size):

My comments:

1-Yes get rid of ECHO ASP by launching it
2- Merge "if possible" the already existing funds of ALL OTHERS worldwide LEO sat projects. AMSAT-UK already 
merge a part of his money to echo. (see item 1)
3-Put on hold all others LEO projects until a new HEO will be in space called it the way you want AO-40 MKII, 
 P3E, or an HEO model as suggested by Werner.

In any sales pitch it is incredibly hard to get $$$ when not presenting a project containing  clear 
objectives and steps; well articulated, verified details and goals all resulting from a widely shared 
concensus. To added on this,  if we have doubts about the funding eg:organisations manadgement it is hard for 
some individuals to send their hardly earned $$$.

As i already wrote i'm not convince againt any resonable doubts if i donate in the present context in view of 
what i wrote above. Try to convince me and probably some others that i'm faulty in my reasonning. When i said 
convince it is with proof and facts. 
Even with some complaints about some messages on AMSAT-BB there is BRILLIANT ideas coming out. IT IS 

As Jim Towler ZL1TYF wrote about one of my previous post "Not sure if I understood everything Luc wrote, and 
for that matter, just what his main point was"  There is only one simple  point... I try to give my opinion 
hoping to make others opinions coming out. I always believe in an open ideas sharing and debated on a forum 
as AMSAT-BB. I know some ideas and comments will not be shared by every one but is it not a way to behave in 
a real democracy?  Accepting that some individual can have different ideas and opinions!

I'm frighten to think how some "demokracy" defenders and promoters act sometimes. I probably have a wrong 
definition on the word democracy when reading some post here. I know someone said this BB is a private board 
and the freedom of speech rights does not applied eg: it is moderated in some sort (kind of minimal control ) 
that's exactly whats frighten me when i applied this on a larger scale.

There is no perfect world and humanity is imperfect knowing this how can we not agravated our flaws?

Luc Leblanc VE2DWE
Coordonnateur AMSAT pour le Québec
Quebec AMSAT coordinator
Sites web sites: www.qsl.net/ve2dwe

Echolink node 115340 VE2DWE-L
Echolink node 101810 VE2DWE

P.O. Box 341
Sorel-Tracy  QC.
J3P 5T6

Due to spam mail proliferation The following extensions are automaticly killed before reading

En raison de la prolifération des "pourriels" les extensions suivantes sont détruites automatiquement avant 


Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org