N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:


(N2EY) wrote in message
...

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

is the ES 101 stuff. Actually doing it is very different. For example -
just what *are* all the facets of a given problem?.

I have no idea what "ES 101" is or was.


One of those intro engineering courses. Lays out basic concepts and

methods.

DIT didn't bless us with any of those. I guess we were expected to
pick it up on the fly during our industry periods. Which would be
typical. Like one of their standing policies; "Topics in the syllabus
not covered in class or by the homework will be covered in the final."


Different generation...


Seasoned technical types degreed and
otherwise learn out in the college of hard knocks how to plan and
execute projects in highly systematic manners because when money is
involved the project better be pulled off properly or yer outta work.

Which is not the same factor here.

In business if ya signed the contract to deliver X on date Y, you better do

it

or bad things will happen. In this balloon thing, a delay of weeks or

months is

no big deal if the result is success rather than failure.

I meant from the standpoint of organizing a project. Being nit-picky
about it "delivery dates" can matter in some hobby projects like when
one is faced with finishing up the job jar to get set for a specific
contest. I agree, in most cases nothing bad comes of slipped dates in
non-commercial efforts like it does out in the commercial world.


Point is it's still a different world.

It is an exceptionally different world. More on that in a minute


That's the incentive. Beyond that we is what we is and we don't

change

our stripes when we get involved in the planning of off-hours
volunteer efforts or our hobbies.

Maybe *you* don't.

Not when it comes to identifying and organizing the sequence of
project milestones, laying out a budget, identifying the unknowns to
the extent possible and listing the assets required and such I don't.
It all goes down on paper or in an MS Project file from square one
just like I do on the job. Which is the way I'd run Mike's balloon
project. And which I sense is not the way Mike is approaching it.


You don't know Mike...

The world of gathering a number of people that go out to do something
for the sheer love of it is not anything even close to the world of
having a number of people working at a place that get assigned to a
particular job because if they wanna get paid, they do what the boss
tells 'em. In addition they may be starting on a job that a proposal has
existed for some time. To have a meeting and plot out all the milestones
is great, and to have a firm grip on costs is wonderful.

I've pointed out that we are in the organizing stage right now.

Does it make good sense to define the exact projects and the launch
dates and make specific cost estimates when you are looking for the
people to do the job? This is NOT that world.

As I pick up the core group of people, I will then be finding out where
the project is going to go. I've picked up a programmer, some elementary
students and their teacher, A NOAA guy, a few others of general Ham
experience, and most recently, one of my collaborators from the Star
party I put together a few years ago. As soon as he came on board, the
whole early complexion of the project changed. The guy is a technical
whiz in several areas, and when he commits, things happen. He has some
specific projects in mind for this endeavor, and we're going to run with
several of them.

Had I been doing this Microsoft Project project and had firm dates and
costs as of yesterday morning, I would have wasted alomst 100 percent of
the time spent on it by yesterday afternoon. Only parts that would not
have been wasted time would have been the raw material costs. Big deal,
a couple hours and a couple phone calls.

The way that I have to run this sort of project is to first make the
pitch to people, then find out how many people are interested enough to
volunteer their time. At that point we separate into committees. I'm
pretty much at that point now, although I'm looking for a few more
volunteers to make committee placement easier. First we get some general
ideas of costs, time committments, possible launch dates, etc.

After that, we go off and do our initial research. Then we come back
and flesh out the plans. At the second meeting we start to map out the
plan of attack. We find out about anything that was unanticipated during
the organization meeting. Schedules are made, and construction begins
soon afterwards.

I've done it that way before, and it has worked very well.

There are many people that are not suited at all for this sort of
thing. If you are the sort of person that needs a perfectly clear path,
this is not the project for you. If you need everythnig spelled out for
you, this is not the project for you. When you are in a
multidisciplinary atmosphere where you have to have technical and
non-technical people mixing, and you are convinced that the only people
on the project that are worth anything are the technical people, this is
most *certainly* not the project for you.


As an example: (of those that replied in the thread)

Lenover21 is definitely not suitable for this sort of project, unless he
has a distinctly different off-keyboard persona.

I think Brian Burke would do okay on the project.

Brian Kelly would not. He prefers more structure than this type of
project can provide, and I would have problems with him in that I think
he has some issues with those he considers non-technical types. Not a
good mix there.

Leo? Hard to say...


Now you would probably do well on this sort of thing. I noticed that you
did some research, and came up with good suggestions. You've also
demonstrated interest in multiple areas, which is a big plus. When a
person understands what the other discipline id talking about, it is a
very good thing.

I suppose Leo would call it more mutual admiration, but that's how I
see it (does Leo hate it when people aren't arguing?)



Wherein come the clashes with the
non-technical types we get involved with on joint efforts. Pick any
mid-to-large scale Field Day planning session around here for a
perfect example.

You might wanna look up how the CP folks did...

Ya ducked the bullet.

I scanned the scores but I couldn't find 'em in 2/3/4/5A. I missed it?
They didn't submit an entry? Howcum there's two lists for 1B-2?


They ran something like 8A with a call you probably don't recognize.

Most of the categories are split into three lists: Battery, Emergency Power,
and Commercial Power.

He let his cat out of the bag at some point in past but it got past
you. He's a VE but I had him in the wrong province.

Didn't get past me. Leo sez he's a VE3. But no call, no last name, no
positive
ID, no website, no outside confirmation. Maybe he is, maybe he ain't.

I'm convinced he is a VE3 named Leo. Your mileage is obviously varying
for some mysterious reason.


I'm simply pointing out there's no proof one way or the other.


No way, changing writing styles like changing fingerprints, can't be
done.

Nonsense. Ghostwriters do it all the time. Len's done the pseudonym thing
here more than once - that we know of.

Sweetums is a patterned, unlettered compulsively combative fomer
military aerospace bench tech, professional ghostwriters are usually
talented journalists, historians, etc. .


Now that's a valid point!

73 de Jim, N2EY

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Seasoned technical types degreed and
otherwise learn out in the college of hard knocks how to plan and
execute projects in highly systematic manners because when money is
involved the project better be pulled off properly or yer outta work.

Which is not the same factor here.

In business if ya signed the contract to deliver X on date Y, you better
do

it

or bad things will happen. In this balloon thing, a delay of weeks or

months is

no big deal if the result is success rather than failure.

I meant from the standpoint of organizing a project. Being nit-picky
about it "delivery dates" can matter in some hobby projects like when
one is faced with finishing up the job jar to get set for a specific
contest. I agree, in most cases nothing bad comes of slipped dates in
non-commercial efforts like it does out in the commercial world.


Point is it's still a different world.

It is an exceptionally different world. More on that in a minute

My helium hose comment still applies.

That's the incentive. Beyond that we is what we is and we don't

change

our stripes when we get involved in the planning of off-hours
volunteer efforts or our hobbies.

Maybe *you* don't.

Not when it comes to identifying and organizing the sequence of
project milestones, laying out a budget, identifying the unknowns to
the extent possible and listing the assets required and such I don't.
It all goes down on paper or in an MS Project file from square one
just like I do on the job. Which is the way I'd run Mike's balloon
project. And which I sense is not the way Mike is approaching it.


You don't know Mike...

The world of gathering a number of people that go out to do something
for the sheer love of it is not anything even close to the world of
having a number of people working at a place that get assigned to a
particular job because if they wanna get paid, they do what the boss
tells 'em. In addition they may be starting on a job that a proposal has
existed for some time. To have a meeting and plot out all the milestones
is great, and to have a firm grip on costs is wonderful.

I've pointed out that we are in the organizing stage right now.

Does it make good sense to define the exact projects and the launch
dates and make specific cost estimates when you are looking for the
people to do the job? This is NOT that world.

As I pick up the core group of people, I will then be finding out where

the project is going to go. I've picked up a programmer, some elementary
students and their teacher, A NOAA guy, a few others of general Ham
experience, and most recently, one of my collaborators from the Star
party I put together a few years ago. As soon as he came on board, the
whole early complexion of the project changed. The guy is a technical
whiz in several areas, and when he commits, things happen. He has some
specific projects in mind for this endeavor, and we're going to run with
several of them.

And you've been at this how many days?

Had I been doing this Microsoft Project project and had firm dates and
costs as of yesterday morning, I would have wasted alomst 100 percent of
the time spent on it by yesterday afternoon. Only parts that would not
have been wasted time would have been the raw material costs. Big deal,
a couple hours and a couple phone calls.

Indeed.

There's even the issue of not knowing what you don't kknow you need to know.

For example, when is the best time of year to launch? Midsummer looks good from
a thermal standpoint but as you noted the humidity may override that. Early
spring, while the trees are still bare, may be better - or maybe not.

The way that I have to run this sort of project is to first make the
pitch to people, then find out how many people are interested enough to
volunteer their time. At that point we separate into committees. I'm
pretty much at that point now, although I'm looking for a few more
volunteers to make committee placement easier. First we get some general
ideas of costs, time committments, possible launch dates, etc.

There's also a quiet analysis of who will actually deliver the goodies and who
will not, for a pile of reasons.

After that, we go off and do our initial research. Then we come back
and flesh out the plans. At the second meeting we start to map out the
plan of attack. We find out about anything that was unanticipated during
the organization meeting. Schedules are made, and construction begins
soon afterwards.

I've done it that way before, and it has worked very well.

There are many people that are not suited at all for this sort of
thing. If you are the sort of person that needs a perfectly clear path,
this is not the project for you. If you need everythnig spelled out for
you, this is not the project for you. When you are in a
multidisciplinary atmosphere where you have to have technical and
non-technical people mixing, and you are convinced that the only people
on the project that are worth anything are the technical people, this is
most *certainly* not the project for you.

As an example: (of those that replied in the thread)

Lenover21 is definitely not suitable for this sort of project, unless he
has a distinctly different off-keyboard persona.

I think Brian Burke would do okay on the project.

Brian Kelly would not. He prefers more structure than this type of
project can provide, and I would have problems with him in that I think
he has some issues with those he considers non-technical types. Not a
good mix there.

Leo? Hard to say...

Now you would probably do well on this sort of thing. I noticed that you
did some research, and came up with good suggestions. You've also
demonstrated interest in multiple areas, which is a big plus. When a
person understands what the other discipline id talking about, it is a
very good thing.

tnx! Too bad I'm so far away.

I suppose Leo would call it more mutual admiration, but that's how I
see it (does Leo hate it when people aren't arguing?)

If so, he's just like Len....

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:45:23 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:


(N2EY) wrote in message
...

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:
snip

I suppose Leo would call it more mutual admiration, but that's how I
see it (does Leo hate it when people aren't arguing?)

Actually, Leo would prefer that you and Jim end the mutual admiration
and compliment exchange phase of the project, and go do it!

I certainly don't prefer arguing - civil discourse would be nice
indeed - but....you may well note that your always-supportive pal Jim
has been using the last few rounds of these exchanges to promote his
own agenda (ie demonstrate how incorrect his nemesis Len is) - your
project, or most any topic on this group, always takes a back seat to
this goal. In fact, you seem to be following the example of your
mentor here a bit, joining him in the return fire. Are you trying to
keep the arguement alive, or are you really interested in ballooning?
And, what would you like from us? - encouragement, ideas, assistance -
or just phony and gratuitous praise and accolades? You posted this
here for a reason - please advise.

Perhaps you're thread is being hijacked......?


- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo

On 24 Nov 2004 11:31:58 GMT, PAMNO (N2EY) wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Now you would probably do well on this sort of thing. I noticed that you
did some research, and came up with good suggestions. You've also
demonstrated interest in multiple areas, which is a big plus. When a
person understands what the other discipline id talking about, it is a
very good thing.

tnx! Too bad I'm so far away.

LOL! The old 'Oh, that's a very interesting project, and I'd love to
help, but I can't....." routine. Hams drive all night to get to
places like Dayton to fish through piles of junk that they don't need
(been there, done that, impressed the wife to no end when I returned
with a trunk full of stuff!). If you were as interested as you say,
you'd find a way!

More BS, I suspect.....not on your agenda.


I suppose Leo would call it more mutual admiration, but that's how I
see it (does Leo hate it when people aren't arguing?)

If so, he's just like Len....

(sigh) - You sure live in a small world, Jim - all who agree with your
Pollyanna-like views are OK, and everyone who sees through the BS and
calls you on it must be 'Len'.

Back to your armchair, Jim - I think Mike needs more of your 'help'!

Sky Pilot.


73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,



(Brian Kelly) writes:



(N2EY) wrote in message
...


In article ,



(Brian Kelly) writes:


Seasoned technical types degreed and
otherwise learn out in the college of hard knocks how to plan and
execute projects in highly systematic manners because when money is
involved the project better be pulled off properly or yer outta work.

Which is not the same factor here.

In business if ya signed the contract to deliver X on date Y, you better

do

it


or bad things will happen. In this balloon thing, a delay of weeks or

months is


no big deal if the result is success rather than failure.

I meant from the standpoint of organizing a project. Being nit-picky
about it "delivery dates" can matter in some hobby projects like when
one is faced with finishing up the job jar to get set for a specific
contest. I agree, in most cases nothing bad comes of slipped dates in
non-commercial efforts like it does out in the commercial world.


Point is it's still a different world.

It is an exceptionally different world. More on that in a minute


My helium hose comment still applies.


That's the incentive. Beyond that we is what we is and we don't

change


our stripes when we get involved in the planning of off-hours
volunteer efforts or our hobbies.

Maybe *you* don't.

Not when it comes to identifying and organizing the sequence of
project milestones, laying out a budget, identifying the unknowns to
the extent possible and listing the assets required and such I don't.
It all goes down on paper or in an MS Project file from square one
just like I do on the job. Which is the way I'd run Mike's balloon
project. And which I sense is not the way Mike is approaching it.


You don't know Mike...

The world of gathering a number of people that go out to do something
for the sheer love of it is not anything even close to the world of
having a number of people working at a place that get assigned to a
particular job because if they wanna get paid, they do what the boss
tells 'em. In addition they may be starting on a job that a proposal has
existed for some time. To have a meeting and plot out all the milestones
is great, and to have a firm grip on costs is wonderful.

I've pointed out that we are in the organizing stage right now.

Does it make good sense to define the exact projects and the launch
dates and make specific cost estimates when you are looking for the
people to do the job? This is NOT that world.

As I pick up the core group of people, I will then be finding out where


the project is going to go. I've picked up a programmer, some elementary
students and their teacher, A NOAA guy, a few others of general Ham
experience, and most recently, one of my collaborators from the Star
party I put together a few years ago. As soon as he came on board, the
whole early complexion of the project changed. The guy is a technical
whiz in several areas, and when he commits, things happen. He has some
specific projects in mind for this endeavor, and we're going to run with
several of them.


And you've been at this how many days?

My first pitch was November 9th, so it has been only a couple weeks. At
this time, I have an operable core. I want more people though, to lessen
the load on individuals.



Had I been doing this Microsoft Project project and had firm dates and
costs as of yesterday morning, I would have wasted alomst 100 percent of
the time spent on it by yesterday afternoon. Only parts that would not
have been wasted time would have been the raw material costs. Big deal,
a couple hours and a couple phone calls.


Indeed.

There's even the issue of not knowing what you don't kknow you need to know.

And that is a big issue.


For example, when is the best time of year to launch? Midsummer looks good from
a thermal standpoint but as you noted the humidity may override that. Early
spring, while the trees are still bare, may be better - or maybe not.

All the seasons present some problems. I was surprised at a number of
mid-winter launches.

I've been thinking about a rapid response sort of launch during solar
storms, auroral activities, etc.


The way that I have to run this sort of project is to first make the
pitch to people, then find out how many people are interested enough to
volunteer their time. At that point we separate into committees. I'm
pretty much at that point now, although I'm looking for a few more
volunteers to make committee placement easier. First we get some general
ideas of costs, time committments, possible launch dates, etc.


There's also a quiet analysis of who will actually deliver the goodies and who
will not, for a pile of reasons.


The bane of my existence at times! Some are great at yakking, and not
so great at doing.....


After that, we go off and do our initial research. Then we come back
and flesh out the plans. At the second meeting we start to map out the
plan of attack. We find out about anything that was unanticipated during
the organization meeting. Schedules are made, and construction begins
soon afterwards.

I've done it that way before, and it has worked very well.

For people that have the required flexibility, it is the fastest way to
work.



There are many people that are not suited at all for this sort of
thing. If you are the sort of person that needs a perfectly clear path,
this is not the project for you. If you need everythnig spelled out for
you, this is not the project for you. When you are in a
multidisciplinary atmosphere where you have to have technical and
non-technical people mixing, and you are convinced that the only people
on the project that are worth anything are the technical people, this is
most *certainly* not the project for you.

As an example: (of those that replied in the thread)

Lenover21 is definitely not suitable for this sort of project, unless he
has a distinctly different off-keyboard persona.

I think Brian Burke would do okay on the project.

Brian Kelly would not. He prefers more structure than this type of
project can provide, and I would have problems with him in that I think
he has some issues with those he considers non-technical types. Not a
good mix there.

Leo? Hard to say...

Now you would probably do well on this sort of thing. I noticed that you
did some research, and came up with good suggestions. You've also
demonstrated interest in multiple areas, which is a big plus. When a
person understands what the other discipline id talking about, it is a
very good thing.


tnx! Too bad I'm so far away.


I suppose Leo would call it more mutual admiration, but that's how I
see it (does Leo hate it when people aren't arguing?)


If so, he's just like Len....

I don''t think he is, but the MAS comments caught me a bit off guard.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Leo wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:45:23 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:



(N2EY) wrote in message
...


In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

snip

I suppose Leo would call it more mutual admiration, but that's how I
see it (does Leo hate it when people aren't arguing?)


Actually, Leo would prefer that you and Jim end the mutual admiration
and compliment exchange phase of the project, and go do it!

1. Then we could get back to discussing Morse code testing, and
eliminate the distractions keeping us from paying attention to Steve and
Brian's war of words.

2. If people would allow the project to be discussed in terms of
policy, it would be germane to the list. Instead, there is a lot of
simply incorrect "facts" regarding myself being incapable of doing this
thing, and that such a thing is even possible.

While others eventually adjust their positions to grudgingly admit that
such things are possible, that doesn't change their earlier posts.

3. I hope you don't mind, but if Jim and I continue to discuss the
post, we will do just that. If you do mind, then you are free to not
participate. If you want to participate, then please do.


I certainly don't prefer arguing - civil discourse would be nice
indeed - but....you may well note that your always-supportive pal Jim
has been using the last few rounds of these exchanges to promote his
own agenda (ie demonstrate how incorrect his nemesis Len is) - your
project, or most any topic on this group, always takes a back seat to
this goal.

Len is a big boy, and seems to return the favors.

In fact, you seem to be following the example of your
mentor here a bit, joining him in the return fire.

Hehe, and Len's always been so *nice* to me!

Here's how I look at it. In my group of social and work friends, we
take little digs at each other from time to time. Little jokes that are
harmless and usually funny. My friends take shots at my occasional
legendary messiness in my office, and I take shots at one guys neatness
neatness, and another's occasional grumpiness. Big deal. We're friends,
and enjoy each other's company.

My making a leg pulling reference about naming the first payload
package "LEN" is about as innocent and cute a dig as a person could
make. If that is "return fire", and a bad thing, than why do you chide
me when I take exception to someone calling me incompetent?

It goes both ways.


Are you trying to
keep the arguement alive, or are you really interested in ballooning?
And, what would you like from us? - encouragement, ideas, assistance -
or just phony and gratuitous praise and accolades? You posted this
here for a reason - please advise.

I already explained why I started posting on this subject, from the
first post, and at least once during the ensuing thread. I'll do it again:

Hans started the thread by noting that Hams are being marginalized by
their own activities, or lack of them, substituting political action for
innovation.

Then in his post that elicited my response:

Hans wrote in part:

Then a couple of weeks later FCC Special Counsel for Amateur
Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth, K4ZDH, made some
chillingly similar comments in a public speech.

"Take nothing for granted. Bill Gates can't, and you can't either."

"You're at a crossroads now. An old Chinese philosopher (or my
grandmother--I can never remember which!) said, "Be careful what
you wish for. You may get it." Seize the moment, and make this
your finest hour. Ham radio has been at a crossroads before and
has thrived. Continue that tradition."

"Make sure that, on your watch, Amateur Radio never becomes
obsolete."

From those two FCC speeches, it ought to be clear to all of us that
Amateur Radio does *not* have a "free pass" to spectrum, not will our
current allocations be "protected" when other applications come looking
for a place to operate.

The handwriting is on the wall --- the FCC isn't much interested in what
we used to do, but is intensely watching our current stewardship of the
resources that are so highly coveted by other services. Regretably I
think we've been found, in Riley's words, "obsolete", and financing a
rearguard legal and political maneuvering by Haynie and Imlay is pretty
much ****ing money down a rathole.

end Hans quote
After another post by Jim, I noted that:

Quote by me:

Funny you should ask!

I have started to put together a "Near Space Science" group. I made
initial calls for interest a few months ago, and made my pitch at our
club meeting this week.

The response was excellent, both at the meeting and afterward in
private. At the moment it looks like we are going to make this happen.

The likely scenario is that we will be working with local schools and
other interested parties as well as among fellow Hams to launch
experiments - both ARS and Educational - to the shores of space at
around 100,000 feet above the earth, and then return them safely.

This is a ripe field for experimentation and innovation. There are
groups that are already doing this, and I see many innovations to be
made, and improvements in technique that may be possible.

The efforts are a public relations windfall if they are done correctly.
It is a great way to get our name out in the community, both locally and
nationally.

This can all be accomplished for a surprisingly low cost. It is also a
cross-interest project where people of many different interests and
disciplines can contribute. It isn't just Hams.

Outside of a gvt/university environment, Ham radio is the most
practical way to go. We have licenses, methods, and applicable
frequencies to use.

Don't know if any of you folks in the PA and local area are interested
in getting involved, but if so, we can discuss it here or by private email.

So there you are Jim. A way to innovate, experiment, and have fun at
the same time. Also a great P.R. effort that gets our message out to the
public in a way that they can understand as a "hi-tech" endeavor.

End my quote....

This project is in my opinion is intimately connected to amateur radio
policy. It is a highly visible project that would be likely to have
public support and generate positive p.r. for Amateur radio.

I was hoping that we might discuss this project as it applies to
Amateur Radio policy. Instead we got into how it was not possible for me
to even do such a project.


Perhaps you're thread is being hijacked......?


All threads here eventually become Steve versus Brian! 8^)


- Mike KB3EIA -


73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On 23 Nov 2004 08:26:11 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote:


(N2EY) wrote in message ...

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

snip
I'm convinced he is a VE3 named Leo. Your mileage is obviously varying
for some mysterious reason.


I ham, therefore I am


snip


I'm *outta* this goofy thread, I'm done with Mike, I'm bored, I gotta
go find somebody else to gnaw on.


Good idea - it seems to have degraded now into a mutual admiration and
backslapping society of our two intrepid near-space explorers....one
heavily involved, and one armchair QB-type....

Perhaps, when they're done with the fantasy phase of the project,
we'll see some rubber hit the sky? Stay tuned....

You will probably be able to watch the thing via APRS (possibly) or
even hit a repeater that we might send aloft. Toronto is surprisingly
close to Central PA as the crow flies. But if you want to "see" rubber
hitting the sky, you have to be here! 8^)



"CQ, CQ, CQ RRAP, no lids no kids . . "


"..no near space cadets.." ....sorry, couldn't resist again!

Ha!


I like it! 8^)



Your Near-Space Cadet.... - Mike KB3EIA -

Update on Near Space Science project.

Today, I got my Packet person!

Two latex balloons have also been donated to the cause.

We now have a fair portion of the core personnel put together.

A launch experienced person.

A payload generalist.

Integration and visualization.

Packet communications.

Programming.

First meeting will probably be this weekend to set priority, protocol,
and financial, and to set a target date for first launch. Payload form
factor and size to be set.


likely scenario - to be settled at meeting.

A tethered shakedown flight will be scheduled for late winter 2005.

First free flight is anticipated in early spring 2005.

First flights will be simple. GPS and digital imaging, along with Packet
of course.

Terminal altitude of first free flight will need to be assessed. That
will have an impact on payload design. It may be easier to simply let
the thing rise until burst instead of going for a lower altitude, which
may necessitate design of a burst mechanism.

Further approaches to Educational facilities will likely take place
after the first free flight, so that there is a proof of performance re
launching/retrieving these things.


- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Leo
writes:

On 23 Nov 2004 08:26:11 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
snip
I'm convinced he is a VE3 named Leo. Your mileage is obviously varying
for some mysterious reason.

I ham, therefore I am


Excellent. High philosophic potential...almost as if Voltaire wrote it.

Except Voltaire didn't...Leo's phrase is current.

It's all so complex and there is an impedance to humor shown by
others. They resist humor and show negative reactance to it,
oddly demonstrating a lack of capacity to appreciate humor...and
all its inductive reasoning...standing in the waves but enjoying not.

RMS: These serious folks are Rutting around Meanly, the Source
for their displeasure. Their frequency varies, no stability.

Watts new, Leo? :-)

["when puns are outlawed, only outlaws will have puns..."]

In article , Leo
writes:

On 21 Nov 2004 13:13:12 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote:

Leo wrote in message
...
On 20 Nov 2004 01:57:21 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote:
snip

I ran into a great blonde in the Toronto airport terminal who was a
Mountie. Told her didn't look much like Sergeant Preston to me and
asked her where her horse was. She asked me when I was going back
where I came from.

Heh - I can picture that! Bet she never heard that one before..... :0

Seriously, though, in downtown Toronto in the 70s, I frequently had
tourists stop me and ask where they could see an igloo (2,500 miles
north would be a great place to start!) and where all of the trees
were (!).

Doesn't seem to happen much anymore - maybe the Internet fixed that!.

Blame the motion picture business. All the trees and igloos got
moved to Vancouver where a "new Hollywood" is growing. :-)

Or, all the trees were stolen by the western Washington state
folks and planted all over Puget Sound area. Folks in eastern
Washington state were too honest and that's why that part of
the state seems like open prarie... :-)

Or, blame the "space aliens" who got out of Area 51 and went up
to Vancouver to work in the Stargate and Atlantis productions. :-)

Hmmm...maybe if Kelly had purchased some Viagra from Canada
he could have made out better with Amanda Tapping? :-)

"The world wonders..."