Re: ATM Amateur Space Telescope, (AST)

[akelly@ghgcorp.com (Albert F. Kelly)]

>Speaking of "pushing the envelope"...
>
>Amateur radio operators, commonly known as "Hams" have built and talked
>NASA and several other countries into launching, amateur communications
>satellites.
>
>Now, a steerable space telescope is a far cry from an orbiting
>transponder but the idea of doing it is not totally without merit.
>We all know that the Hubble cost about a Billion but considering it's 
>monstrous size and more importantly, it was built by the government and  
>government contractors, there just may be a little fat in there that 
>amateurs working pro bono might be able to skim off.
>
>I can't think of anything more exciting amateur astronomers could do
>than to build a 12 or 16 inch space telescope and if it could be done 
>for a million dollars, I suspect we could find a way to raise the money.
>
>What do you all think?
>
>Let's keep the discussion public.  I do not want to be burried in email
>unless it is subscriptions.  Just think, 1000 amateurs, subscribing
>$1000 ea, would get us a million before the long weekend is over.  
>That's the price of a modest backyard scope these days.  
>
>Just think of logging on the AST Web site and saying, "to hell with the 
>street lights and this crappy weather, let's see what Jupiter really 
>looks like".

Jack,
        
It is a very romantic idea and I would love to have access to an AST.  In
fact, for a variety of reasons it is worth the effort to push back the next
layer of onion skin on the concept:

        1.  Since launch services by any space-faring nation or business
entity for such a large and complex payload would cost more than the
$1,000,000 you propose (figure at least $2000 per pound, including high
orbit circularization and stabilization boost), there would have to be a
much higher "subscription fee" or sponsorship by some Government entity for
the project to "get off the ground" (much more sponsorship than that
required for amateur communications satellite capability).

        2.  Additional annual funding of at least $500,000 per year (my
conservative estimate) would be required to maintain and operate management,
communications, and command and control systems, even assuming a high degree
of volunteerism.

        3.  Occasional maintenance and/or reboost systems would have to be
planned and funded, unless a relatively short vehicle lifetime (a few years)
is a design criterion.  Such "lively" vehicles, requiring constant
commanding and pointing, employ complex, active systems and the use of some
expendables.

Without going into further considerations, let me say that this is not to
just throw cold water on a fun concept....it is interesting to contemplate
the required struggle to see how much the result is worth!

Al Kelly

p.s.  There should be many "lessons learned" available from the original AST
project, which entailed an orbiting 18" scope, as I remember.  The whole
thing fell through at some point, but I don't remember how far it got....anyone?