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 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

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 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'.

I am (in their views) "in hatred of all amateur radio" because I
don't agree with their views on morse code testing. :-)

Anyone who disagrees with these gods of radio and morsemanship
are all named "Len" (de facto if not de jure).

Ergo, any and all postings not yielding immediate gratuitous praise
and high-fives for a "concept" NOT yet done are "in error" and do
not deserve to share the same atmosphere...because all are named
"Len." :-)

Sigh...

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

Sky Pilot.

:-) [haven't heard that term in a while]

On 24 Nov 2004 20:34:03 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article , Leo
writes:

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'.

I am (in their views) "in hatred of all amateur radio" because I
don't agree with their views on morse code testing. :-)

Anyone who disagrees with these gods of radio and morsemanship
are all named "Len" (de facto if not de jure).

Ergo, any and all postings not yielding immediate gratuitous praise
and high-fives for a "concept" NOT yet done are "in error" and do
not deserve to share the same atmosphere...because all are named
"Len." :-)

Sigh...

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

Sky Pilot.

:-) [haven't heard that term in a while]

It's way back in my past too - fits quite well here on at least two
levels!





73, Leo

Leo wrote in message . ..

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

Sky Pilot.


73, Leo

Sky Pilot, huh?

Rev Jim just doesn't suit him anymore.

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 -