[Space] Debriefing Notes

Christie Dudley longobord at gmail.com
Fri Feb 12 03:52:01 UTC 2010

I'm not sure why you're suggesting inversion.  We definitely want to be in
communication with this both on the way up and down...

Antennas really are cheap enough that if it gets destroyed when it hits the
ground we can afford to replace it.  I probably over payed the $12 I spent
on the last one, and to replace it, we probably could get away with a
straight bit of metal about as thick as a coat hanger (although I'd be
reluctant to use an actual coat hanger because of the kinks of unbending
it).  It's the base and mounting that are the expensive part and they won't
get damaged.

"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." -- W. Blake.

The outer bounds is only the beginning.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 4:34 AM, Jonathan Moore <moore at eds.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Well, pointing down is obviously fairly important.  I'm with you on
> concern
> > for the size of the ideal ground plane.  I don't see any reason not to at
> > least try the dipole.  Isn't that what we're all about?  Trying new
> things?
> You know we could also have the antina point down and then have the
> payload invert for landing and point upon the way down.
> -Jonathan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/space/attachments/20100212/a90c57d5/attachment.html>

More information about the Space mailing list