Student CubeSat First-MOVE – Vacuum Test Video

First-MOVE_Students_with_Bob_Twiggs_KE6QMD_2560

First-MOVE team members with Bob Twiggs KE6QMD

First-MOVE is an amateur radio CubeSat being built by students at the Technical University of München.

MOVE stands for München Orbital Verification Experiment. The 1U CubeSat carries a CCD camera and has two deployable solar panels carrying a new generation of solar cell – triple junction GaAs / Ge.

The transceiver, supplied by ISIS, uses a UHF uplink and VHF downlink. The antennas are mounted on the ends of the deployable solar panels.

The frequencies for First-MOVE were coordinated by the IARU as:

Downlink: 145.970 MHz
Uplink:     435.520 MHz

This video shows First-MOVE preliminary vacuum test at the LRT facilities. The EQM model was tested in vacuum conditions and at medium/low temperatures (10°C).

Watch First-MOVE Vacuum Test

First-MOVE Vibration tests http://www.uk.amsat.org/6271

First-MOVE CubeSat Solar Panel Deployment Video http://www.uk.amsat.org/6199

First-MOVE website in Google English http://tinyurl.com/First-MOVE-CubeSat

First-MOVE Communications http://tinyurl.com/First-MOVE-Communications

Whistle-like signal in Amateur Radio 40m band

OZ9AEC has found a strange signal in the 7 MHz band using his AMSAT-UK FUNcube Dongle with an HF up-converter.

A strange whistle-like signal received on the 40 meter band using Gqrx software defined radio receiver and a Funcube Dongle equipped with a shortwave converter. The signal appears to be amplitude modulated with suppressed lower side band (just like UVB-76 😉 ) Is it an ionosonde or a numbers station?

Watch Mystery whistle signal on 40 meter band

Gqrx Software Defined Receiver Software http://www.oz9aec.net/index.php/gnu-radio/gqrx-sdr

How to receive and decode NOAA APT images with AMSAT-UK FUNcube Dongle and Gqrx
http://www.oz9aec.net/index.php/gnu-radio/gnu-radio-blog/451-howto-receive-and-decode-noaa-apt-images-with-funcube-dongle-and-gqrx

An HF Converter for FCD http://www.ct1ffu.com/site/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=178&Itemid=104

You can join the FUNcube Yahoo Group at http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/FUNcube/

ITAR and Amateur Radio – Progress Report

ITARSince the inception of The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) in 1999, all US-built satellites have been subject to the US Munitions List, including amateur radio, education and university satellite projects.

The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) under the Department of State (DoS) manages ITAR. ITAR has curtailed AMSAT’s collaboration with foreign nationals on Amateur Radio Satellite projects, as well as with universities that have foreign students enrolled as any technical exchanges concerning satellite technology with non-US citizens brought the potential for Federal prosecution.

On November 1, 2011, Congressman Howard L. Berman (D-CA) introduced H.R. 3288: “Safeguarding United States Satellite Leadership and Security Act.” In summary, this act would authorize the President to remove commercial satellites and related components from the United States Munitions List.  However, while AMSAT was pleased to see this draft bill, there were concerns that “commercial satellites” could be interpreted as not including amateur radio and education satellites.

Consequently, earlier this year AMSAT President Barry Baines, WD4ASW appointed AMSAT NY Area Coordinator Peter Portanova, WB2OQQ as AMSAT’s Congressional Liaison to establish relationships that would put AMSAT on the radar regarding H.R. 3288 to ensure that amateur radio and education satellites would be included in the final bill. Peter’s appointment was based in part on his success in leading a delegation to meet with Congressman Peter King on H.R. 607 in 2011 that resulted in the amendment of that bill to protect the amateur and amateur satellite frequencies that were being considered for auction. Peter was clearly qualified to lead AMSAT’s efforts to ensure that amateur radio and education satellites would be included in such a bill. Peter notes, “What we accomplished on 607 validates that ‘grass roots’ efforts can be successful”. Over the past few months, AMSAT, under Peter’s guidance has taken steps to meet with key personnel involved in the legislative process in Washington to make them aware of AMSAT, the importance of amateur radio satellites in the development of education outreach and potential for emergency communications.  All of these meetings have been successful in building awareness of the need to have amateur radio satellites (as well as education satellites) removed from the US Munitions List and placed under the Department of Commerce Control List.

While H.R. 3288 has been referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, this initiative was being held up pending a joint report from the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of State (DoS) required by Section 1248 of the FY2010 Defense Authorization Act wherein Congress directed DoD to assess whether national security would be negatively impacted by moving satellites from the US Munitions List (USML) to the Commerce Control List (CCL).  Clearly, the politicians were awaiting this report before deciding whether to support H.R. 3288.

On April 18, 2012 the long awaited “1248” report was released by DoD and DoS: “Risk Assessment of United States Space Export Control Policy,” that addresses the risks associated with removing satellites and related components from the United States Munitions List (USML).

The report identifies several satellite types, and related items, that are not purely defense-related and should not be designated as defense articles on the USML or controlled under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).

The Departments recommended that the following items are more appropriately designated as dual-use items on the Commerce Control List (CCL) and controlled under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR):

(1) Satellites that do not contain technologies unique to military applications or critical for maintaining a military edge;
(2) Communications satellites (COMSATs) that do not contain classified components;
(3) Remote sensing satellites with performance parameters below certain thresholds; and
(4) Systems, subsystems, parts and components associated with those satellites.

From AMSAT’s perspective, this is certainly good news for the satellite industry from both a commercial and amateur radio/education perspective. In particular, placement of amateur radio satellites under EAR would remove the most onerous impacts of ITAR, allowing for example, free exchange of technical information with foreign nationals, allowing collaboration on satellite projects.

Actual export of hardware, however, would be controlled by the Department of Commerce. That said, it is too early to draw any conclusions as a 180-day review process has now begun. If the recommendations of the “1248 Report” are accepted, it could pave the way for H.R. 3288 or a bill drafted in response to the “1248 recommendations” to move forward. However, given the tendency of Congress to put off major decisions from May onward pending Fall elections, AMSAT President Barry Baines, WD4ASW believes that it is likely, based on the current Congress and other factors, very little will occur within the 112th Congress. In Barry’s words, “We are pleased with our initiatives to this point; however these activities are still a work in progress.” The AMSAT Board, along with AMSAT’s Congressional Liaison, will stay focused on these activities and report to the membership as information becomes available.

The 44 page “Department of Defense/Department of State Report to Congress Section 1248 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111 – 84): RISK ASSESSMENT OF UNITED STATES SPACE EXPORT CONTROL POLICY” is available on-line in PDF format at: http://tinyurl.com/DoD-1248-Report

Bloomberg Business Week article on ITAR:
http://tinyurl.com/BusinessWeek-ITAR (www.businessweek.com)

Source: AMSAT News Service (ANS)

Amateur Radio Party Balloon Success!

One of the 5 party balloons

Bob Bruninga WB4APR reports on the 2nd Party Balloon mission, carrying APRS and a 2.4 GHz wireless camera, that took place Friday, April 27.

Everything possible went wrong! A disaster of monstrous proportions.  But finally got it all working and just wanted it gone!  We released it about 1545 which means we missed getting off the academy before the afternoon’s formal parade and lost 30 minutes going out gate 1 and 3/4 of the way around the yard through Annapolis traffic.  But everything worked perfectly after release.  The balloon was just about making land over Kent Island 8 miles away before we even got onto Rt 50.

With Friday afternoon beach traffic we were chasing the whole time.  Thomasson was bragging about his altitude prediction when it reached his 6500′ altitude as we crossed the Bay bridge.  We were still 16 miles behind it at Easton with
Fick making time in all the traffic as the driver.   Several minutes later Thomasson ate crow as it passed through 8000′ and was speeding up to 45 MPH.

Headed south on 50 towards Easton we were still 16 miles behind it as it overflew Easton.  Then we noticed the altitude descending.  It was down to 6500 feet…

Since we were beyond the Choptank (last water body) and descending slowly we decided not to send the cut-loose command and ride it down.  When we got in about 4 miles range we began to see the wireless camera again and could see chicken coops below.  At 2000′ we turned on a farm road and told the other car to go to the next road and turn.  It passed over us and we got a solid visual.

Radioed to Mids in other car and they got a visual.  Ballester and Garcia got to within 100 yards at touchtown.

We did send the cut command at about 1000 feet just to see if it worked, and it was acknowledged but the payload remained attached.  It landed in a field and the bright red balloons flopping about 10 feet high in the breeze made it a walk in the park to get to.  The release had worked, but the parachute had gotten entangled in the one balloon that had burst and so they came down together.

Clearly one of the 5 balloons had burst at 8000′ and started the descent. With the balloon chards hanging down where the parachute was also hanging down, it is clear that entanglement was certain (bad planning).  Next time, we will
widely separate the balloons from the payload and chute to avoid this.

But all systems worked well and gave great proof of concept for the next one.  The payload was about 320 grams (0.6 lb)consisting of two Lithium 9v batteries a complete APRS digipeater and command/control/telemetry plus a 2.4 GHz wireless camera.  Mission duration was under 2 hours, distance about 50 miles just slightly within the attention span of a student 😉

You can see the track on the web page http://aprs.fi and enter the callsign W3ADO-11 and then ask for the appropriate number of hours of history.  The balloon landed at 2123z or 1723 EDT after a 98 minute flight.

Our joy and enthusiasm were destroyed, however, after a parking lot formed on the bay bridge returning.  All lanes were blocked for several hours.. doubling the time of the entire mission.  Yuk!

LESSONS LEARNED:

Having now flown two party-balloon missions, I am happy with the results compared to Latex balloons.  The missions are very different profiles, but they meet our educational goals quite well.  Here are some thoughts.  I am not a balloon expert (only my 3rd attempt in 20 years) so take these opinions with your own grains of salt.

1) 3′ dia party balloon (unfilled.  On line) cost under $2 each.  Making a 5 balloon launch about $10 for the balloons.

2) Mylar Balloons have a high mass to lift ratio so these are all LOW ALTITUDE missions.  Even with zero payload, the MAX altitude is around 25,000′ where the full balloon can only support its own weight no matter how many balloons.

3) OUr first mission was an extremely small 50 gram payload with HF oscillator and some CW telemetry, attemting a 10 day around the world flight.  Since it went over the atlantic toward africa, who knows what happened to it.  You could only year the milliwatt XMTR within line-of sight (about 100 miles)…

4) Helium loss through Mylar appeared to be around 1% per day compared to higher rates through latex.

5) Mylar balloons are an order of magnitude less vulnerable to UV rays which will almost always burst laytex after several hours exposure at high altitude.

6) Mylar are fixed volume.  THey get to a fixed height, where they are over-pressure and remain there (unless they burst).

7) Below 10,000′ temperatures are not an issue with electronics compared to the -60C temps for the typical high altitude flights.

8) I use clear plastc bottles for the enclosure and the temp inside remains high (solar heating).   Even at 8000′ the temp never got below about 40C.  We must use water proof containers because of all the bay and waters around.

9) This second mission used a full APRS system, wtih GPS and 2.4 GHz wireless camera using the Byonics MT-TT4 all-in-one APRS circuit board all in under 0.6 lbs including waterproof botttle container and chute.

10) WIth these mylar constant-pressure designs, extreme care must be used in underfilling each balloon exactly the same.  Any balloon that is slightly higher than the others will rise to a HIGHER Pressure and will be the first to burst.

The jury is still out as to whether a long duration mission is possile.  Ours will always go immediately to the Atlantic and at the low altitude, will take days to reach anyone in Europe (Our last went headed for africa where no one was listening).

** A ballast release mechanism is reuired for long duration.  We attempted a clever block of Ice (sublimation mass loss), but dont know if it worked, because no one reported hearing it in Africa?)

11) The amount of over pressure at equilibrium altitude is equal to the amount of excess lift.  So it is a difficult balance.  Too little lift and you need an extremely large launch area.  Too much and you are sure to burst.

12)  IN fact, with a modest excess-lift on our intentional shout duration mission, maybe there will always be a FIRST TO POP as in our case.  This was perfect though.  The loss of one balloon gave an almost balanced up and down profile .  No need for a chute.

13) The bright red multiple balloons (all full, except the one shreaded one) make for a highly visible descent and recovery.  If we had cut the payload loose, the chances of finding a clear plastic bottle with nothing around it but a tiny chute woiuld have been 1% of the success of finding 4 waving balloons!

14) Observing this, we thought about maybe using multiple string cutters for our next mission to control descent by cutting loose balloons.  But cutting loose only eliminates about half the mass as letting one burst. When it bursts, it loses lift, but the mass (nearly half the total lift) remains with the payload making descent better.

SO, maybe the plan next time will be to slightly overfill one balloon to assure a first-to-pop, and therefore have an automatic descent!  Still we will have a payload cutter just to make sure we can release before the Atlantic!

FINALLY, The abuse these party balloons can tolerate are an order of magnitude greater than Latex.  We launched in a 20 MPH wind!  After walking all 5 balloons from the classroom, across a road and through a narrow chain-link fence gate in that 20 MPH wind (3 times!) they survived.  Just prior to release, I noticed it was still transmitting all 3 packets at a 10 second rate!  We had to bring it all back indoors, cut loose the payload, go reprogram it, and then re-assemble  and go do it all again!

With multiple balloons, we fill a spare, so that if we busrt one, we can quickly tie in a replacemet in the field.  If they all survive getting to the launch point, then we release the spare to see exatly where the winds are going, so we can find the best spot to clear the 100′ high light posts surrounding the field.

Photos of this last mission will eventually make it to the http://aprs.org/balloons.html page.

But right now, I’m burned out.

Bob, WB4APR

March 2012 – First Party Balloon Launch http://www.uk.amsat.org/6163

TEDxKiruna Presentation – Human Exploration of Space

Lopez-Alegria is a former NASA astronaut, International Space Station commander and test pilot. A four-time astronaut he holds three NASA records incl longest spaceflight; 215 days! Michael will share his extraordinary story and gaze into the future of spaceflight as the new President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation.

Watch TEDxKiruna – Michael E. Lopez-Alegria – Human Exploration of Space

BBC Report on the UK Skylon Spaceplane

Skylon in Orbit 640BBC News report on Skylon, designed to be an unpiloted spaceplane by the UK company Reaction Engines Limited (REL). It uses a combined-cycle, air-breathing rocket engine to reach orbit in a single stage.

The report by BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos along with a video report by BBC science editor David Shukman on Skylon engine tests and audio interviews with both Alan Bond, REL managing director, and Dr. Mark Ford are available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17864782

Reaction Engines Ltd (REL) http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/