what regulations exactly
I am wondering what use case is added by this mission for the amateur radio community!
Could you describe that?
Hi Patrick,
Well, it’s stated clearly on its IARU Amateur Satellite Frequency Coordination Status page.
-
After the scientific mission has been completed, a digipeater service on board the satellite will be activated, which is open to all radio amateurs.
-
We have specifically designed a novel UHF antenna that will enable reliable uplink and downlink.
-
All telemetry and all beacons from the satellite will be receivable by amateur radio (…)
Daniel, dl7ndr
2 Likes
I’m just guessing, and not trying to be rude, but the uncertain life of satellites and a long mission to then possibility to enable a payload that fits the spectrum usage. If these were enabled at the same time, I think it would be much easier to get it accepted.
Hope the team is able to solve this issue.
8 Likes
This is one point I wanted to know when I asked Hans about the meaning of his words mainly and problems.
Unfortunately, he refused to answer to me, to us, the satellite community.
Since he didn’t come back to the forum, I wrote Hans by email on this matter.
His reply to it in the end was:
In my view the “community" is happy with the general explanation that I gave and think that it is just you who wants more information on this individual case.
At least the likes on the regarding post and the following fact show that his view is wrong.
Hans also refused to respond to the team’s calls for help, after they got his decline on frequency coordination in 2021.
Unfortunately, the team is not able to solve this issue alone.
.
In my email contact with Hans it became obvious that he doesn’t want to discuss this matter on the forum with the satellite community. Instead he wrote:
I am happy to invite DO4ROL
(the responsible radio amateur)
However, after asking him why he then just don’t put his email address into the CC field to do the invitation, his answer was:
I will not waste more time on it.
Looking at a discussion of such a problem as a waste of time can neither be in the interest of the amateur radio nor its satellite community.
By this behaviour he not only endangers the amateur radio, but also ignores his tasks as the satellite advisor according to the resolutions and policies of the administrative council (…) of the IARU
to consult with and liaise with the satellite Community as appropriate (page 32)
And in addition and what I really miss here since this is also about the behaviour of the advisor:
A co-ordination and advisory role requiring (…) good interpersonal skills (…) (page 31)
.
.
If this was the only unplausible decision from the IARU Amateur Satellite Frequency Coordination:
-
ONDOSAT-OWL-1 and -2
“Main mission provides a message store-and-forward capability to the amateur operators on amateur UHF band” (and more)
→ In the absence of an amateur radio mission coordination has been declined -
KAFASAT
“mission is to photograph the Earth using on-board camera and transmit the images to a ground station”
In their article about KAFASAT you can read:
“image recognition of battlefield in accordance with the aspect of future-war-environment.”
coordinated -
OOV Cube
No amateur mission at all stated on the coordination website.
The operators write on the satellite page besides the receiving and decoding of the telemetry beacons, about trainings for students.
coordinated
The QUBE team does that too, among other benefits for the community.
.
.
Looking at all these decisions, stricter rules cannot explain them just as little as they can explain such behaviour.
.
.
Does it make sense to you to derive consequences for us from those intransparent decisions?
Do you want to take over decisions from someone who’s not willing to explain them if asked for, and not answering to the responsible’s calls for help?
.
The merge request of SatNOGS decoder for QUBE (built by the team itself) has already been approved and merged by @DL4PD.
You may wonder why the data tab of QUBE’s SatNOGS DB entry shows No Decoders Found.
It’s because the satellite’s transmitter is tagged as IARU Declined.
=> Currently, the decoder is of no use for us not even to build a dashboard.
This all together is why I’m now asking everyone of this community to decide whether you want to leave the coordination status as it is or to show the QUBE team our appreciation and in the end give us all a chance and open up possibilities with this satellite.
.
.
I want the SatNOGS IARU coordination status for QUBE’s transmitter to be
- left as it is (IARU Declined)
[=> decoder, dashboard and data exports are not usable/possible] - set to “N/A”
[=> decoder, dashboard and data exports are usable/possible]
0
voters
.
This poll ends 2024-11-19 at 20:00 UTC.
The results will be shown after the poll has ended.
Daniel, dl7ndr
1 Like
This is not true and I just fixed it.
This still applies following Spectrum Management - SatNOGS Wiki
Well, thanks for clarification.
I based it on @fredy 's statement:
“in the previous similar cases, we have accepted the MR but not use it in DB”
Exactly! We don’t decode the data because of the violation status. But the decoder can be present and also shown as it is a part of the satellite’s DB entry. We just “pause” the decoding…
Understood.
Then, the poll’s text is still correct.
I must say that in one hand i support the LSF decision about following the IARU regulation, that makes sense to me, but in the other hand, i didn’t know about those sats flagged as coordinated with no ham radio missions at all (despite telemetry for OOV Cube), that’s seems wrong to me. Mostly the KAFASAT case that is coordinated with no ham radio mission but with a war oriented one, that’s politic ! ham radio don’t do politic, so the IARU decision here is really problematic to me, and so yes, this is making me a little bit interrogative regarding on how the IARU is taking these decisions …
So i have a simple question, if KAFASAT is coordinated … well why QUBE is not …
Maybe there is a good reason, but i must say that in regards with the information i have right now … i m interrogative.
5 Likes
Quite a tough decision… to participate in the proposed vote and justify your decision to yourself.
- The first concern is the attitude of IARU. KAFASAT is not a singular example. I have seen many cases of coordination decisions approved only on the basis of a written commitment. Or entities of questionable origin. So, from this point of view, it is difficult for me to adopt the attitude of obedience towards some decisions of IARU.
- SATNOGS has its own policy. He proposed to respect the decisions of the IARU. SATNOGS has no obligation to correct any mistakes or abuses of IARU.
3a. Is it right to apply the result of a poll? Because SATNOGS is a small group of people (contributors) who make efforts (time, work, money, etc) to keep the system working. To this group is added a somewhat larger group of enthusiasts who also participate (with work, time, money) in obtaining the information necessary for the operation of the system. No one is forcing us to participate.
3b. How fair is it to impose on a small group of founders and more than active participants, the decision of a larger group of participants, sometimes sporadically and narrowly involved? - I decided to participate in the voting, but I would like my opinion to be indicative only, not to be an element of constraint for the group of founders and/or contributors.
YO4DFT - Cristian
2 Likes
Hi Cristian,
The problem you are speaking about seems a general problem of democratic decisions.
I guess the policy of SatNOGS was written in good faith that IARU would adheres to its own rules when making decisions.
It might be true, that SatNOGS has no obligation to correct mistakes or abuses of IARU.
However, to apply decisions that obviously arose from mistakes or abuses is certainly not the intention of SatNOGS.
This is why there has to be exceptions from rules and chances to think and decide for ourselves.
Prior to the poll, I was asking @fredy if “such a poll is ok and we can afterwards set or leave the transmitter’s iaru setting according to the most voted option”.
His answer was “looks good”.
Daniel
1 Like
Hi Daniel,
I am “new entry” in Satnogs family, so, I would like my vote to be considered advisory, not imperative.
My opinion, Yes, sometimes is better to allow exceptions from the rules.
YO4DFT -Cristian
1 Like
Hi Cristian,
Well, in your case, I guess it would be better to just not vote.
The poll’s two options clearly say what someone wants to be done by taking part and voting.
Daniel
Thank you all 14 voters for participating in this poll.
The result: 10 out of 14 voters want the SatNOGS IARU coordination status for QUBE’s transmitter to be set to “N/A”.
This will make the decoder, dashboard and data exports usable/possible.
7 Likes
I just decode this message 
ˆž´Œ¨ˆ d¢ªaðHL0%š‘gc bI“ <<< Thank you SatNOGS! >>>” dxž
5 Likes
Voting makes no difference to me.
The IARU coordination determines whether a spectrum user ultimately abuses the ham radio frequencies or not.
And that is why I stick to my first reaction, the satellite team must ultimately convince the IARU coordination team and it should not be the case that SatNOGS offers functionality to satellites that have been rejected and thus supports frequency abuse.
I hope that a solution is found between the satellite team and the IARU, I am a great supporter of bringing students and the amateur radio community together.
Maybe it would be an idea that amateur radio representatives could offer there knowledge to teams/universities and being an intermediate to overcome rejection and more in general disappointment.
Jan - PE0SAT
10 Likes
I agreed with this at first.
But this position assume that IARU is taking fair, impartial and argumented decisions. If so i would also agree to stick to the position to follow IARU decision.
Of course the sat team has to convince the IARU team, but IARU also has to convince the community of the fairness of its decision when some interrogations are raised.
In this case honestly, i’m not convicted at all, especially when you see a sat mission like KAFASAT being coordinated, to me that makes no sense. QUBE has many more "ham radio services/missions’', or whatever we want to call it and whatever definition we put on it, than KAFASAT or OOV Cube…
It seems fair and healty to me to raise concerne when a situation seems not fair or wrong. Is it the right way to do ? i don’t now. That said i like your idea and i think IARU decisions being more transparent and clear would be a good thing to everybody.
2 Likes