| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 15.08.17 04:44l 1290 Lines 52245 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB12203
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V12 203
Path: IW8PGT<IR2UBX<DB0RES<DB0OVN<DB0GOS<ON0AR<VE2PKT<CX2SA
Sent: 170815/0236Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:16773 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB12203
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: best tripod for the arrow II handheld antenna (Mike Diehl)
2. Total Eclipse of the Sun Stamps (Tom Deeble - KA6SIP)
3. Re: Modulation levels on AO-85 (Frank Westphal)
4. Re: Modulation levels on AO-85 (Paul Stoetzer)
5. Re: Modulation levels on AO-85 (Frank Westphal)
6. Re: Modulation levels on AO-85 (Mike Diehl)
7. Re: Modulation levels on AO-85 (Matthew Stevens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:14:40 -0700
From: Mike Diehl <diehl.mike.a@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Laura Tunnell <drlnt@xxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] best tripod for the arrow II handheld antenna
Message-ID: <AFC7A7C0-6A54-48D3-BC27-8EB274E339B0@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On a more serious note there are advantages to hand holding the Arrow even
if it feels like you need to be an octopus to pull it off. There's a certain
hand ear coordination that seems to come naturally when matching polarity by
simply twisting your wrist. This advantage alone can be significant over
fixed polarity or polarity matching by some mechanical means. The only time
I would recommend a tripod is if there is some physical reason for not being
able to hold it.
Often times people go the tripod route because it seems like too many things
are going on at once. One common pitfall is trying to log while a pass is in
progress, usually on paper. A better solution is to record the audio for
playback later. A simple voice recorder or even a smartphone works great. If
using a voice recorder be sure to set the clock to UTC, timestamps will make
logging a lot easier.
Another way to free up a hand is to use a boom mic headset with a foot
switch for PTT. By doing this you free up your hand to operate the VFO(s).
Like Bryan pointed out, it can seem counterintuitive that holding the
antenna can make things easier but when you evaluate the rest of your
station you may find other ways to free yourself to aim.
If you find that there's just simply no way to operate without a tripod then
maybe you can describe the difficulties you face. I've seen many clever
designs, each with their own advantages and disadvantages making them each
suitable to a different crowd. Let us know what you're looking to get out of
a tripod setup, I'm sure there are plenty of people willing to share their
solutions.
73,
Mike Diehl
AI6GS
> On Aug 14, 2017, at 4:33 PM, Bryan KL7CN <bryan@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> Mike's being funny. :)
>
> I used to use a $10 tripod I got from the Goodwill. The main thing I
appreciated about it was its ability to do axial rotation -- think: camera
on its side. When the Arrow was attached, I would us that feature to rotate
the Arrow along its axis.
>
> Nowadays I do what Mike does: I hold the Arrow in my hand. It takes some
time to become comfortable with holding the antenna correctly while
adjusting for Doppler and pressing the mic button, but after some practice I
found it to be the most efficient way. It's counterintuitive, but using your
hand to orient the antenna is very fast and flexible.
>
> -- bag
>
> Bryan KL7CN/W6
> Location: CM98, usually
> E-Mail: bryan@xxxxx.xxx
> Telephone/SMS: 408-836-7279
>
>> On Aug 14, 2017, at 16:23, Mike Diehl <diehl.mike.a@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>>
>> I find a biped to work best with an arrow antenna. Works great for aiming
and polarity matching.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Mike Diehl
>> AI6GS
>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2017, at 1:55 PM, Laura Tunnell <drlnt@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> What is best tripod for the arrow II handheld antenna ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions expressed
>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 20:49:58 -0400
From: Tom Deeble - KA6SIP <ka6sip@xxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Total Eclipse of the Sun Stamps
Message-ID: <15de35e5707-18de-2503a@xxxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Greetings,
This is a little off-subject but might be of interest to some. I just found
out about these stamps by accident.
The Total Eclipse of the Sun stamp is the first U.S. stamp to use
thermochromic ink, which reacts to the heat of your touch. Placing your
finger over the black disc on the stamp causes the ink to change from black
to clear to reveal an underlying image of the moon. The image reverts back
to the black disc once it cools.
These stamps are really cool and I think may be a collectors item. They are
forever stamps and cost the standard 49 cents. There is also a special
sleeve available for 25 cents. Hopefully everyone has clear weather for the
eclipse - in just one week!
73 - Tom
Tom Deeble - KA6SIP, ka6sip@xxx.xxx
Mt. Diablo Amateur Radio Club Membership Chairman
MDARC, PO Box 23222, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523-0222
PACIFICON - Oct 20-22, 2017, San Ramon
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 18:27:41 -0700
From: Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
Message-ID: <b1194309-49ec-f17a-b169-7995500bd247@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
I use LOGIC 9 and it uploads the downlink frequency. I enter both
uplink and downlink frequencies into the logging program LOCIC 9. I
receive lots of matches and that seems to be the accepted convention. I
know ARRL suggests uploading the uplink frequency in their
documentation. LOGIC 9 does not follow that recommendation and from my
experience most other sat operators are not either.
YMMV
73,
Frank
K6FW
On 8/14/17 10:27 AM, jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx wrote:
> Spending some time here by telling several times on AO-85 passes about bad
modulation to the same stations, but they DON'T listen.
>
> Just ignoring them, because i cannot understand them on my
TS-790/FT-847.No narrow FM and no PL tone. Never got a problem.
>
> And please...why do some stations upload logs with DWNlink freq on sat
qso's instead of the UPlink freq?
> Always having some rejected qsl's because qso's don't match due to wrong
band. I log with VQlog, uplink and dwnlink freq etc, so i think the TX-freq
is most important for logging sat'qso's and not the RX-freq?
>
> 73's
>
> Jerry,ON4CJQ
>
>
>
>
> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
> Van: "R.T.Liddy" <k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> Aan: "Matthew Stevens" <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Joe" <nss@xxx.xxx>
> Cc: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Verzonden: Maandag 14 augustus 2017 02:33:37
> Onderwerp: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>
> "...food in the mic hole, etc."!!! LOL!!! - Bob K8BL
> From: Matthew Stevens <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 7:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>
> Like Jerry said, its more an issue with mic gain or poor mic technique
than anything else.
>
> - Matthew nj4y
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Aug 13, 2017, at 19:18, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>
>> Plus a LOT of people are running Narrow Modulation now.
>> Joe WB9SBD
>> Sig
>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
>> Idle Tyme
>> Idle-Tyme.com
>> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>>> On 8/13/2017 6:14 PM, Jerry Buxton wrote:
>>> 5 kHz is the nominal "wide" setting for ham radio equipment on the
>>> VHF/UHF bands. So a rig set to 5 kHz is what we all usually expect.
>>> 5 kHz deviation with 3 kHz audio (the usual top for most voice) would be
>>> about 16 kHz bandwidth. The deviation number alone is not equal to
>>> bandwidth. ("Carson's Rule")
>>> Low audio is usually just that, not talking loud enough, not talking
>>> into the mic properly, mic gain setting too low, food in the mic hole,
etc.
>>>
>>> Jerry Buxton, N?JY
>>>
>>>> On 8/13/2017 17:55, Ronald G. Parsons wrote:
>>>> I?ve noticed lately that many stations on AO-85 have barely audible
modulation. Yet other stations have clear audio with good quieting. I have
heard the some manufacturers of hand-held and mobile rigs are setting their
maximum deviation to 5 kHz or even less. I have noticed the same effect on
local repeaters. Has anyone done any tests of the deviation required for
reasonable quieting on AO-85? Or are more stations using lower power than in
the past?
>>>>
>>>> Ron W5RKN
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions expressed
>>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
of AMSAT-NA.
>>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
>>>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions expressed
>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
>
>
> | | Virus-free. www.avast.com |
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 21:30:32 -0400
From: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
To: Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
Message-ID:
<CABzOSOryY73riagUd3HRtj_bEkLb1=Xsh+4OTy0ohbxW3bj9Hg@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
The convention in logging split band or mode QSOs is to use what band or
mode you're transmitting on.
That said, LoTW doesn't care about the frequencies if the propagation mode
is set to 'SAT'
73,
Paul, N8HM
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> I use LOGIC 9 and it uploads the downlink frequency. I enter both uplink
> and downlink frequencies into the logging program LOCIC 9. I receive lots
> of matches and that seems to be the accepted convention. I know ARRL
> suggests uploading the uplink frequency in their documentation. LOGIC 9
> does not follow that recommendation and from my experience most other sat
> operators are not either.
>
> YMMV
>
> 73,
> Frank
> K6FW
>
>
> On 8/14/17 10:27 AM, jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx wrote:
>
>> Spending some time here by telling several times on AO-85 passes about
>> bad modulation to the same stations, but they DON'T listen.
>>
>> Just ignoring them, because i cannot understand them on my
>> TS-790/FT-847.No narrow FM and no PL tone. Never got a problem.
>>
>> And please...why do some stations upload logs with DWNlink freq on sat
>> qso's instead of the UPlink freq?
>> Always having some rejected qsl's because qso's don't match due to wrong
>> band. I log with VQlog, uplink and dwnlink freq etc, so i think the TX-freq
>> is most important for logging sat'qso's and not the RX-freq?
>>
>> 73's
>>
>> Jerry,ON4CJQ
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
>> Van: "R.T.Liddy" <k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
>> Aan: "Matthew Stevens" <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Joe" <nss@xxx.xxx>
>> Cc: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
>> Verzonden: Maandag 14 augustus 2017 02:33:37
>> Onderwerp: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>>
>> "...food in the mic hole, etc."!!! LOL!!! - Bob K8BL
>> From: Matthew Stevens <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
>> To: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
>> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 7:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>> Like Jerry said, its more an issue with mic gain or poor mic
>> technique than anything else.
>>
>> - Matthew nj4y
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Aug 13, 2017, at 19:18, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Plus a LOT of people are running Narrow Modulation now.
>>> Joe WB9SBD
>>> Sig
>>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
>>> Idle Tyme
>>> Idle-Tyme.com
>>> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>>>
>>>> On 8/13/2017 6:14 PM, Jerry Buxton wrote:
>>>> 5 kHz is the nominal "wide" setting for ham radio equipment on the
>>>> VHF/UHF bands. So a rig set to 5 kHz is what we all usually expect.
>>>> 5 kHz deviation with 3 kHz audio (the usual top for most voice) would be
>>>> about 16 kHz bandwidth. The deviation number alone is not equal to
>>>> bandwidth. ("Carson's Rule")
>>>> Low audio is usually just that, not talking loud enough, not talking
>>>> into the mic properly, mic gain setting too low, food in the mic hole,
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Jerry Buxton, N?JY
>>>>
>>>> On 8/13/2017 17:55, Ronald G. Parsons wrote:
>>>>> I?ve noticed lately that many stations on AO-85 have barely audible
>>>>> modulation. Yet other stations have clear audio with good quieting. I
have
>>>>> heard the some manufacturers of hand-held and mobile rigs are setting
their
>>>>> maximum deviation to 5 kHz or even less. I have noticed the same
effect on
>>>>> local repeaters. Has anyone done any tests of the deviation required for
>>>>> reasonable quieting on AO-85? Or are more stations using lower power
than
>>>>> in the past?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron W5RKN
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>>>>> Opinions expressed
>>>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
>>>>> of AMSAT-NA.
>>>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>>>> program!
>>>>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>>>> Opinions expressed
>>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
>>>> of AMSAT-NA.
>>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>>> program!
>>>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>>> Opinions expressed
>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>>> AMSAT-NA.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>> program!
>>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>>
>>
>> | | Virus-free. www.avast.com |
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 18:42:06 -0700
From: Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
Message-ID: <b2b67c84-3b47-aefb-0b54-4684bd0dda60@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
My experience with LOTW and SAT QSO's is the frequency does matter. I
have had to fool my logging program to upload the uplink frequency to
get a match on a rare occasion. N5JB's guide to LOTW and satellite
QSO's says 7 items must match to get a satellite verification in LOTW.
Only 5 items need to match for a non-satellite QSO.
73,
Frank
K6FW
On 8/14/17 6:30 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
> The convention in logging split band or mode QSOs is to use what band
> or mode you're transmitting on.
>
> That said, LoTW doesn't care about the frequencies if the propagation
> mode is set to 'SAT'
>
> 73,
>
> Paul, N8HM
>
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx
> <mailto:k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>> wrote:
>
> I use LOGIC 9 and it uploads the downlink frequency. I enter both
> uplink and downlink frequencies into the logging program LOCIC 9.
> I receive lots of matches and that seems to be the accepted
> convention. I know ARRL suggests uploading the uplink frequency
> in their documentation. LOGIC 9 does not follow that
> recommendation and from my experience most other sat operators are
> not either.
>
> YMMV
>
> 73,
> Frank
> K6FW
>
>
> On 8/14/17 10:27 AM, jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx
> <mailto:jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx> wrote:
>
> Spending some time here by telling several times on AO-85
> passes about bad modulation to the same stations, but they
> DON'T listen.
>
> Just ignoring them, because i cannot understand them on my
> TS-790/FT-847.No narrow FM and no PL tone. Never got a problem.
>
> And please...why do some stations upload logs with DWNlink
> freq on sat qso's instead of the UPlink freq?
> Always having some rejected qsl's because qso's don't match
> due to wrong band. I log with VQlog, uplink and dwnlink freq
> etc, so i think the TX-freq is most important for logging
> sat'qso's and not the RX-freq?
>
> 73's
>
> Jerry,ON4CJQ
>
>
>
>
> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
> Van: "R.T.Liddy" <k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx <mailto:k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>
> Aan: "Matthew Stevens" <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
> <mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>, "Joe" <nss@xxx.xxx
> <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>>
> Cc: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>>
> Verzonden: Maandag 14 augustus 2017 02:33:37
> Onderwerp: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>
> "...food in the mic hole, etc."!!! LOL!!! - Bob K8BL
> From: Matthew Stevens <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
> <mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>
> To: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>>
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 7:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
> Like Jerry said, its more an issue with mic gain or poor
> mic technique than anything else.
>
> - Matthew nj4y
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Aug 13, 2017, at 19:18, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx
> <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>> wrote:
>
> Plus a LOT of people are running Narrow Modulation now.
> Joe WB9SBD
> Sig
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>
> On 8/13/2017 6:14 PM, Jerry Buxton wrote:
> 5 kHz is the nominal "wide" setting for ham radio
> equipment on the
> VHF/UHF bands. So a rig set to 5 kHz is what we all
> usually expect.
> 5 kHz deviation with 3 kHz audio (the usual top for
> most voice) would be
> about 16 kHz bandwidth. The deviation number alone is
> not equal to
> bandwidth. ("Carson's Rule")
> Low audio is usually just that, not talking loud
> enough, not talking
> into the mic properly, mic gain setting too low, food
> in the mic hole, etc.
>
> Jerry Buxton, N?JY
>
> On 8/13/2017 17:55, Ronald G. Parsons wrote:
> I?ve noticed lately that many stations on AO-85
> have barely audible modulation. Yet other stations
> have clear audio with good quieting. I have heard
> the some manufacturers of hand-held and mobile
> rigs are setting their maximum deviation to 5 kHz
> or even less. I have noticed the same effect on
> local repeaters. Has anyone done any tests of the
> deviation required for reasonable quieting on
> AO-85? Or are more stations using lower power than
> in the past?
>
> Ron W5RKN
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
> <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA makes this
> open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without
> requiring membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect
> the official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the
> amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings:
> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
> <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA makes this open
> forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
> membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
> official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the
> amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings:
> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
> membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
> official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> satellite program!
> Subscription settings:
> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
> membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
> official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> satellite program!
> Subscription settings:
> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>
>
>
> | | Virus-free. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com> |
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
> membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
> official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> satellite program!
> Subscription settings:
> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
> membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
> official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> satellite program!
> Subscription settings:
> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA
> makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official
> views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> Subscription settings:
> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 19:14:02 -0700
From: Mike Diehl <diehl.mike.a@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Paul Stoetzer
<n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
Message-ID: <B6682CC7-6DF1-49C2-BC8E-4105F24FA310@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I'm not entirely convinced of that. I have at least a dozen QSLs in LOTW
that have no frequency for both the up and downlink. However, as we all
know, LOTW does have some "undocumented features". Maybe there's some corner
case where it does matter but I haven't ran into it yet.
73,
Mike Diehl
AI6GS
> On Aug 14, 2017, at 6:42 PM, Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> My experience with LOTW and SAT QSO's is the frequency does matter. I
have had to fool my logging program to upload the uplink frequency to get a
match on a rare occasion. N5JB's guide to LOTW and satellite QSO's says 7
items must match to get a satellite verification in LOTW. Only 5 items need
to match for a non-satellite QSO.
>
> 73,
> Frank
> K6FW
>
>> On 8/14/17 6:30 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>> The convention in logging split band or mode QSOs is to use what band or
mode you're transmitting on.
>>
>> That said, LoTW doesn't care about the frequencies if the propagation
mode is set to 'SAT'
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul, N8HM
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx
<mailto:k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>> wrote:
>>
>> I use LOGIC 9 and it uploads the downlink frequency. I enter both
>> uplink and downlink frequencies into the logging program LOCIC 9.
I receive lots of matches and that seems to be the accepted
>> convention. I know ARRL suggests uploading the uplink frequency
>> in their documentation. LOGIC 9 does not follow that
>> recommendation and from my experience most other sat operators are
>> not either.
>>
>> YMMV
>>
>> 73,
>> Frank
>> K6FW
>>
>>
>> On 8/14/17 10:27 AM, jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx
>> <mailto:jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx> wrote:
>>
>> Spending some time here by telling several times on AO-85
>> passes about bad modulation to the same stations, but they
>> DON'T listen.
>>
>> Just ignoring them, because i cannot understand them on my
>> TS-790/FT-847.No narrow FM and no PL tone. Never got a problem.
>>
>> And please...why do some stations upload logs with DWNlink
>> freq on sat qso's instead of the UPlink freq?
>> Always having some rejected qsl's because qso's don't match
>> due to wrong band. I log with VQlog, uplink and dwnlink freq
>> etc, so i think the TX-freq is most important for logging
>> sat'qso's and not the RX-freq?
>>
>> 73's
>>
>> Jerry,ON4CJQ
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
>> Van: "R.T.Liddy" <k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx <mailto:k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>
>> Aan: "Matthew Stevens" <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>, "Joe" <nss@xxx.xxx
>> <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>>
>> Cc: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>>
>> Verzonden: Maandag 14 augustus 2017 02:33:37
>> Onderwerp: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>>
>> "...food in the mic hole, etc."!!! LOL!!! - Bob K8BL
>> From: Matthew Stevens <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>
>> To: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>>
>> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 7:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>> Like Jerry said, its more an issue with mic gain or poor
>> mic technique than anything else.
>>
>> - Matthew nj4y
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Aug 13, 2017, at 19:18, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx
>> <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>> wrote:
>>
>> Plus a LOT of people are running Narrow Modulation now.
>> Joe WB9SBD
>> Sig
>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
>> Idle Tyme
>> Idle-Tyme.com
>> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>>
>> On 8/13/2017 6:14 PM, Jerry Buxton wrote:
>> 5 kHz is the nominal "wide" setting for ham radio
>> equipment on the
>> VHF/UHF bands. So a rig set to 5 kHz is what we all
>> usually expect.
>> 5 kHz deviation with 3 kHz audio (the usual top for
>> most voice) would be
>> about 16 kHz bandwidth. The deviation number alone is
>> not equal to
>> bandwidth. ("Carson's Rule")
>> Low audio is usually just that, not talking loud
>> enough, not talking
>> into the mic properly, mic gain setting too low, food
>> in the mic hole, etc.
>>
>> Jerry Buxton, N?JY
>>
>> On 8/13/2017 17:55, Ronald G. Parsons wrote:
>> I?ve noticed lately that many stations on AO-85
>> have barely audible modulation. Yet other stations
>> have clear audio with good quieting. I have heard
>> the some manufacturers of hand-held and mobile
>> rigs are setting their maximum deviation to 5 kHz
>> or even less. I have noticed the same effect on
>> local repeaters. Has anyone done any tests of the
>> deviation required for reasonable quieting on
>> AO-85? Or are more stations using lower power than
>> in the past?
>>
>> Ron W5RKN
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA makes this
>> open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without
>> requiring membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect
>> the official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the
>> amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA makes this open
>> forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the
>> amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>>
>>
>> | | Virus-free. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com> |
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA
>> makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official
>> views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 22:27:04 -0400
From: Matthew Stevens <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Paul Stoetzer
<n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
Message-ID: <58B7F739-C77F-46C0-B7AE-7A504C5BE39B@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I've had a few match even though I accidentally uploaded a "20m" SAT qso
because my logger autofilled the band field incorrectly lol.
In the few cases I couldn't get a match because of some unknown hiccup in
LOTW, I have just changed the qso time by a minute or two (so lotw
recognized it as a different qso record), reuploaded and got a match.
Most of the satellite lotw info I've read online has mentioned several adif
fields that don't seem to make a difference. In my experience, only the
callsign,gh SAT mode, satellite name, time, and mode (FM, SSB etc) have to
match. Ymmv.
73
- Matthew nj4y
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 14, 2017, at 21:42, Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> My experience with LOTW and SAT QSO's is the frequency does matter. I
have had to fool my logging program to upload the uplink frequency to get a
match on a rare occasion. N5JB's guide to LOTW and satellite QSO's says 7
items must match to get a satellite verification in LOTW. Only 5 items need
to match for a non-satellite QSO.
>
> 73,
> Frank
> K6FW
>
>> On 8/14/17 6:30 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>> The convention in logging split band or mode QSOs is to use what band or
mode you're transmitting on.
>>
>> That said, LoTW doesn't care about the frequencies if the propagation
mode is set to 'SAT'
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul, N8HM
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Frank Westphal <k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx
<mailto:k6fw1@xxxxxxx.xxx>> wrote:
>>
>> I use LOGIC 9 and it uploads the downlink frequency. I enter both
>> uplink and downlink frequencies into the logging program LOCIC 9.
I receive lots of matches and that seems to be the accepted
>> convention. I know ARRL suggests uploading the uplink frequency
>> in their documentation. LOGIC 9 does not follow that
>> recommendation and from my experience most other sat operators are
>> not either.
>>
>> YMMV
>>
>> 73,
>> Frank
>> K6FW
>>
>>
>> On 8/14/17 10:27 AM, jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx
>> <mailto:jerry.tuyls@xxxxxxx.xx> wrote:
>>
>> Spending some time here by telling several times on AO-85
>> passes about bad modulation to the same stations, but they
>> DON'T listen.
>>
>> Just ignoring them, because i cannot understand them on my
>> TS-790/FT-847.No narrow FM and no PL tone. Never got a problem.
>>
>> And please...why do some stations upload logs with DWNlink
>> freq on sat qso's instead of the UPlink freq?
>> Always having some rejected qsl's because qso's don't match
>> due to wrong band. I log with VQlog, uplink and dwnlink freq
>> etc, so i think the TX-freq is most important for logging
>> sat'qso's and not the RX-freq?
>>
>> 73's
>>
>> Jerry,ON4CJQ
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
>> Van: "R.T.Liddy" <k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx <mailto:k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>
>> Aan: "Matthew Stevens" <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>, "Joe" <nss@xxx.xxx
>> <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>>
>> Cc: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>>
>> Verzonden: Maandag 14 augustus 2017 02:33:37
>> Onderwerp: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>>
>> "...food in the mic hole, etc."!!! LOL!!! - Bob K8BL
>> From: Matthew Stevens <matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>>
>> To: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>>
>> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 7:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85
>> Like Jerry said, its more an issue with mic gain or poor
>> mic technique than anything else.
>>
>> - Matthew nj4y
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Aug 13, 2017, at 19:18, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx
>> <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>> wrote:
>>
>> Plus a LOT of people are running Narrow Modulation now.
>> Joe WB9SBD
>> Sig
>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
>> Idle Tyme
>> Idle-Tyme.com
>> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>>
>> On 8/13/2017 6:14 PM, Jerry Buxton wrote:
>> 5 kHz is the nominal "wide" setting for ham radio
>> equipment on the
>> VHF/UHF bands. So a rig set to 5 kHz is what we all
>> usually expect.
>> 5 kHz deviation with 3 kHz audio (the usual top for
>> most voice) would be
>> about 16 kHz bandwidth. The deviation number alone is
>> not equal to
>> bandwidth. ("Carson's Rule")
>> Low audio is usually just that, not talking loud
>> enough, not talking
>> into the mic properly, mic gain setting too low, food
>> in the mic hole, etc.
>>
>> Jerry Buxton, N?JY
>>
>> On 8/13/2017 17:55, Ronald G. Parsons wrote:
>> I?ve noticed lately that many stations on AO-85
>> have barely audible modulation. Yet other stations
>> have clear audio with good quieting. I have heard
>> the some manufacturers of hand-held and mobile
>> rigs are setting their maximum deviation to 5 kHz
>> or even less. I have noticed the same effect on
>> local repeaters. Has anyone done any tests of the
>> deviation required for reasonable quieting on
>> AO-85? Or are more stations using lower power than
>> in the past?
>>
>> Ron W5RKN
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA makes this
>> open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without
>> requiring membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect
>> the official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the
>> amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
>> <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA makes this open
>> forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the
>> amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>>
>>
>> | | Virus-free. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com> |
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>.
>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring
>> membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
>> official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>. AMSAT-NA
>> makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official
>> views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx.
AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide
without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 12, Issue 203
*****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
