[hpsdr] The Basics (with updates)

[Robert McGwier]

Good question and the answer from my point of view is very straightforward.

When AMSAT builds stuff, it can and does buy that thing we collectively 
believe will work in space, and if it has to pay for expensive tools to 
get it to work, it does and if there are IP/licensing/etc. issues, we 
resolve them usually by the "we are building one  and not for resale" 
method.  We are using the TMS320C6723 and I believe an Actel part in 
Lyle's design for the SDX.  Frank has discovered some issues which might 
make use of the Actel part difficult, if not impossible, for the HPSDR 
project because of potential licensing/IP related issues which would be 
inconsistent with the "mission/vision" of this  group.  IF this reading 
of things turns to be accurate,  we will have to rethink it for HPSDR.

Bob
73
N4HY




Alex wrote:
> Bob,
> Why wouldn't we want to use a SDX HELAPS based design?
>
> (a) It helps the AMSAT effort by increasing the use of the design (more testing and more design review eyeballs)
> (b) It helps the SDR community out by using a common design to get to production quicker
>
> I've argued since my Lockheed Martin days that we ought to mass produce OSCARs so we don't have a single point of failure (nor have all eggs in one basket). Having commonalities with the HPSDR will only help to validate the design, performance, and reliability. SpaceQual hardware always cost more because they only want quantity ONE, mass production will bring the cost down.
>
> Alex, N3NP
>
>   


-- 
AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman
Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity.  Guilty as charged!


 1146799020.0