Amateur satellites

Considering that last year amateurs launched a rocket to 70 miles, what
would you think the probability of them launching an amateur satellite
within 5 yrs?

In article . com,
wrote:

Considering that last year amateurs launched a rocket to 70 miles, what
would you think the probability of them launching an amateur satellite
within 5 yrs?

Well, considering that the first amateur satellite (OSCAR 1) was
launched in 1961, with dozens more launched since then, I think the odds
are pretty good.

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'

Joe Strout wrote:

Well, considering that the first amateur satellite (OSCAR 1) was
launched in 1961, with dozens more launched since then, I think the odds
are pretty good.



Considering the size of some of the rockets that hobbyists have come up
with, I could see them taking a crack at it.
I don't think the FAA is going to approve of this though- you'd probably
have to launch it from a ship in international waters.
Let's see now stage one- 1000 "F" engines... ;-)

Pat

In article , Joe Strout
says...

In article . com,
wrote:

Considering that last year amateurs launched a rocket to 70 miles, what
would you think the probability of them launching an amateur satellite
within 5 yrs?

Well, considering that the first amateur satellite (OSCAR 1) was
launched in 1961, with dozens more launched since then, I think the odds
are pretty good.

The first amateur satellite, and all amateur satellites to date, were
built by amateurs but launched by professionals.

An actual launch by amateurs within five years would probably be feasible,
but would require a strong effort starting about now. I'm not aware of
anything that would qualify, though some of the amateur X-prize contenders
could retask their vehicles as the first stage of a microsat launcher if
they were so inclined.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *

I obviously meant amateur built and amateur launched on amateur launch
vehicles. Why do I have to waste time on obviousness?

In article .com,
wrote:

I obviously meant amateur built and amateur launched on amateur launch
vehicles. Why do I have to waste time on obviousness?

You should try saying what you mean; it's a real time-saver.

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'

wrote:

I obviously meant amateur built and amateur launched on amateur launch
vehicles. Why do I have to waste time on obviousness?

Why? Because not everyone is a mindreader, and what is obvious from
behind your eyeballs is not necessarily so obvious from the other side.

So you're talking about an amateur launch vehicle putting something in
orbit, right? That wouldn't be much of a stretch from SpaceShipOne,
actually; it had just about enough spare payload to carry an upper stage
that could put something in orbit starting at altitude.

On 2005-06-15, Alan Anderson wrote:
wrote:

I obviously meant amateur built and amateur launched on amateur launch
vehicles. Why do I have to waste time on obviousness?

Why? Because not everyone is a mindreader, and what is obvious from
behind your eyeballs is not necessarily so obvious from the other side.

So you're talking about an amateur launch vehicle putting something in
orbit, right? That wouldn't be much of a stretch from SpaceShipOne,
actually; it had just about enough spare payload to carry an upper stage
that could put something in orbit starting at altitude.

Indeed. I believe the numbers talked about were taking a ~100kg upper
stage to 100-120km, possibly more if you gutted the inside a bit, but
that has to be balanced against the weight of modifications to *mount*
the damn thing. (The obvious solution of "top-mount it" is rendered
impractical by having White Knight buckling on there). Nothing
impossible if they decide it's what they want to do, though.

It'd take a bit of money and wouldn't put very much payload in orbit -
it'd quite possibly be more efficient to buy a dedicated small launch,
or piggyback on an existing launch with payload space - but the
possiblity is certainly there, and a system designed with it in mind
could be quite surprisingly efficient (if it got a market).

--
-Andrew Gray

wrote:
I obviously meant amateur built and amateur launched on amateur launch
vehicles. Why do I have to waste time on obviousness?

Because we get people with all levels of understanding (and lack of
education in some cases) in here, and we can't read your mind and
tell that you were trying to say 'the right thing'...

It's good to see that you did, in fact, understand something
there, but we couldn't tell that from that first post.

It's nothing personal; until you're a known quantity we
regulars can't assume that you do know what you are talking
about and that little slips are just that, and not some
gap in understanding or education.


-george william herbert
/

wrote:

I obviously meant amateur built and amateur launched on amateur launch
vehicles. Why do I have to waste time on obviousness?


Um, because it's *not* as obvious as you seem to think?

The satellites referred to by Joe were built by the Amateur (Ham)
Radio community, and their rules are clear, among other things, they
(actually we: KA2WQA) can't accept any form of compensation for passing
messages over the air. That should not be a auprise, as being paid for
the activity is *usually* the standard for amateur vs. professional
activity.

It's somewhat less clear with rockets. Are you referring to an
extension of high-power amatuer rocketry? Is someone like Armadillo
Aerospace 'amateur' until someone actually pays them for the use of the
results of their labor? Or are they 'professional' already, because
that's their ultimate goal? (some posters here have already likened
their activities to hobbyists)

Oh, and there's the matter of what Radio Service your communication
with your satellite falls under. For an amateur radio satellite,
*that's* obvious. For someone else, it's a different story, different
set of rules.


--

You know what to remove, to reply....