| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 06.06.20 17:29l 714 Lines 31674 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB15185
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V15 185
Path: IW8PGT<IU4DTL<HB9CSR<IK6IHL<IZ3LSV<DB0ERF<DB0RES<ON0AR<OZ5BBS<CX2SA
Sent: 200606/1521Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:33037 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB15185
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Alpha Spid Rotator (Ryan Butler)
2. Re: Alpha Spid Rotator (Leffke, Zachary)
3. Next Rocket Lab launch (Wendy and Terry Osborne)
4. Re: Skewplane antennas (gw1fky@???.????
5. Re: Antenna Location (Rich Gopstein)
6. Doppler.SQF (David Worboys)
7. Re: Doppler.SQF (Mark L. Hammond)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:27:47 -0500
From: Ryan Butler <rbutler@????.???>
To: "Leffke, Zachary" <zleffke@??.???>
Cc: "AMSAT-BB@?????.???? <AMSAT-BB@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Alpha Spid Rotator
Message-ID:
<CAGkenmf6aiUeL12en7fCOqdDoUouw6tecXfQZiUaa0Z9rbxbUg@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
What's everyone using for rotor cable to feed the Alpha Spid?
Ryan, NF0T
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 1:45 PM Leffke, Zachary via AMSAT-BB <
amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> We use a lot of the RAS/HR and Big-RAS/HRs at VT in our ground station and
> on other projects. My biggest recommendation is if you don't absolutely
> need the resolution, don't get the high resolution variants (0.2 deg
> resolution). It uses a quadrature encoder feedback mechanism that is
> highly susceptible to EMI corruption leading to 'dropped counts' and a
> general slew of problems related to calibration and reliable pointing
> knowledge. We have constantly battled this problem since day 1 of the VTGS
> and still don't have reliable resolution for the problem (but enough
> band-aid solutions to keep limping along and periodic trips out to the
> tracking station to recalibrate). The smaller Ras/HRs seem to generally do
> better on the feedback front (still high resolution with the quadrature
> feedback) for some reason, but we typically use those in 'deployable'
> scenarios and the feedback cabling is much shorter (maybe 20ft or so)....so
> not necessarily an apples to apples comparison with the perm
> anently installed Big-RAS/HRs that have longer feedback cables (roughly
> 100-200 ft depending on which antenna stack we're talking about) and
> generaly seem to be more prone to issues. I also personally own a Ras/HR
> (smaller one) with the high res feedback and a 2.4m solid dish mounted on
> it. It can handle the load just fine with proper counterweighting and so
> far I haven't had any feedback issues (roughly 50ft feedback
> cable)....knock on wood.
>
> The 'non high resolution' (low resolution?...its still accurate to about 1
> deg) variants use plain ol' potentiometer feedback. I don't have direct
> experience with them, but have reports from some colleagues that they
> haven't had any serious or repetitive issues with pointing calibration
> (some radio astronomers in Physics dept are using one with a 2m dish). (I
> think that one uses a different controller than the MD-01 that we use, but
> I think the MD-01 or MD-02 could handle either type of feedback).
>
> Other 'warnings' include realizing they have no mechanical stops in
> azimuth (they do in elevation, roughly at 180 deg limits). That said, it
> isn't really a problem as most controllers work reliably with 'software
> limits' and the MD-01s at least have timeouts that help if things 'go
> wonky' with feedback. There are some cases though that result in the
> perfect storm of corrupted feedback that goes undetected by the MD-01 that
> could lead to a bad azimuth situation; in our case we monitor antenna
> motion on a camera, so are able to mitigate that scenario with human
> intervention (and our custom control software looks for 'impossible speeds'
> as reported by the MD-01 positions that further helps mitigate that when
> the feedback goes awry).
>
> Mechanically, they have done very well for us with the double-worm gear
> design, imperceptible gear slip (if any). I've heard of folks having
> mechanical failures, but I don't know the details, and that hasn't been my
> experience. As an example, at the height of 'performance' I was able to
> reliably track multiple S-Band downlinks with a 3m mesh dish antenna with
> no discernible negative effects due to point errors or 'jiggle' in the
> system (part of that is the ramp up, also part the counterweighting). In
> the 5 or so years we've been running them, we haven't had any major
> mechanical malfunctions (knock on wood), and part of that is probably due
> to periodic maintenance (re-greasing and such), which I've done at least
> once (can't remember exactly, maybe twice in that 5 year window). Part of
> that is also the fact that we tend to use the yagi stacks with a lighter
> load a lot more than the larger dish systems, I might be singing a
> different tune if the dishes were used daily.
>
> The MD-01 controller (and MD-02s as well for non-rackmount variants) does
> have some nice ramp-up/ramp-down features, particularly useful for larger
> systems (like our 4.5m dish). I do wish the API documentation for the
> MD-01 command interface was a little better...but we've been able to work
> through it (for example, they changed the protocol a bit in a relatively
> recent firmware update that broke compatibility with our software and
> presumably things like rotctl in hamlib, but I think that has all been
> fixed/updated). The API issue might not be a problem for most folks not
> interested in writing their own software, or if you are using a different
> controller. The overall documentation situation is a little 'meh' in
> general as there have been a lot of versions and such released and they are
> on different websites run by different folks.....but at least there is
> documentation at all and a little reading and experimentation is usually
> enough to get what you need, and the basics such as th
> e wiring diagram hasn't really changed over the years.
>
> I can't directly speak to the SatPC32 question because we don't use it.
> Other than that firmware update hiccup, I'd be willing to bet it works fine.
>
> Bottom Line: When they work, they seem to work well, at least in my
> experience. If I were going to buy one today for personal use, I'd get one
> with the potentiometer feedback if the intended use is for something like a
> few Yagis and if I were planning a more permanent installation. If I were
> going to buy something for VT/work with a better funding source than my
> 'hobby budget' I'd probably look for something better, like M2 products
> (pretty significant jump in price point though).
>
> I hope this helps.
> -Zach, KJ4QLP
>
> --
> Research Associate
> Aerospace & Ocean Systems Lab
> Ted & Karyn Hume Center for National Security & Technology
> Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
> Work Phone: 540-231-4174
> Cell Phone: 540-808-6305
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb-bounces@?????.???> On Behalf Of Dave via AMSAT-BB
> Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 1:20 PM
> To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Alpha Spid Rotator
>
> Is anyone using an Alpha Spid az/el rotor? If so how do you like it? Would
> you recommend it over the Yaesu's and are there any issues using it with
> SatPC32?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
> N2OA
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 02:08:13 +0000
From: "Leffke, Zachary" <zleffke@??.???>
To: Ryan Butler <rbutler@????.???>
Cc: "AMSAT-BB@?????.???? <AMSAT-BB@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Alpha Spid Rotator
Message-ID:
<MN2PR05MB703710BA0E57AD8C885E220CDF870@?????????????.????????.????.???????.??
?>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
We have tried multiple kinds at VT, with varying amounts of success for the
quadrature encoder feedback.
For the motor cabling, we use standard unshielded, multiconductor rotator
cable. I don?t have the specific specs, but it was something like typical
14AWG or 16 AWG wires in an 8 conductor bundle. If memory serves I believe
we got some spools from The RF Connection (therfc.com?.highly recommend them
for all things cable related, particularly coax). The unused conductors we
break out in a junction box under the rotator to perform other functions
(like pol switch selection and/or LNA power, PTT control, etc.).
So far, running the motor signals in an unshielded cable, along with other
signals for the overall antenna stack (not the rotator feedback) hasn?t been
an issue. PWM is used during ramp up/down, on fairly high current carrying
lines, so we were a little worried about self-induced EMI, but it turned out
to not be an issue. we have not noticed any correlation between motor
motion and the feedback EMI issues (we spent countless hours testing this,
and sometimes the EMI issues were so bad the controller would ?count pulses?
and increment/decrement the feedback position even when the motors weren?t
active). This has also not caused any noticeable degradation in the RF
systems (the internal LNA power conditioning appears to suppress any EMI on
the supply line very well?.go Advanced Receiver Research! Please start
building mast mount, bypassable, LNAs again?..).
The original installation used the manufacturer recommended shielded cable
for each feedback pair (a dedicated shielded pair for az, a completely
separate one for el, and a completely separate one for the 15V supply to the
rotator feedback electronics (over the MIC-8 feedback connector). This
worked reliably without a single glitch for over a few years now on 1 of our
4 rotators (our 3m dish system). The other 3 systems exhibited all kinds of
intermittent issues. We played all kinds of games with noise suppression
capacitors, grounding the shields on one end or the other (leaving the other
end floating) or grounding both ends, all with minimal effect. Not sure
what makes the one system so special (my ?golden child?) as nearly
everything about it is identical to the other systems, they are so similar
they are only one or two digits away from each other in the manufacturer
serial numbers?..
We then moved to a 6 pair multiconductor shielded cable, not twisted pair
(again can?t remember the specifics, I think we ordered it on
mouser/digikey). This performed just about as good as the individual
feedback twisted pairs (not well?.but sometimes OK). I?ve also used simple
shielded Cat5 (Ethernet) cable with some success for the feeback lines. The
trick is getting the twisted pair combinations correct for each axis of
rotation. This really only worked reliably for shorter runs (maybe 50 ft or
less) and I?ve only relied on it for the ?deployable? systems (I wouldn?t
recommend this for long runs or permanent installs).
The most reliable feedback setup we?ve achieved so far was the use of custom
designed differential encoders/decoders. These encoders convert each of the
quadrature signals ( two per axis) into a pair of differential signals at
the tower just under the rotator (so 8 signals total, 2 per quadrature
signal, one ?positive? one ?negative?). Each differential signal is sent
over a shielded cat5 cable (rated for water and UV protection, obtained from
DX Engineering) with each of the twisted pairs assigned to each differential
pair (we use standard RJ45 connectors on the boards / cables). In the
shack, next to the control box, we convert the differential signal back to a
quadrature signal with the differential decoder board for injection into the
feedback port of the MD-01 (which expects the quadrature signal). The 15V
supply signal for this board and for the feedback circuitry of the rotator
is routed over the general ?bundles? that are also used for the motor supply
lines (and LNA powe
r, ptt, pol switch, etc.).
The differential encoder/decoder technique has nearly 100% removed our EMI
issues. Super clean, perfect square waves, with almost 0 ripple on the
output of the decoder (As measured on an oscope between the differential
decoder and the MD-01 feeback port)??I wish they would directly include it
in the rotator and controller feedback circuitry and highly recommend it for
anyone out there cooking up new designs (like the ORI openRotor project).
We are certainly not the first to use this technique (we got the idea from
hams that have already done it, we just made our own boards). This has NOT
removed all of our feedback issues, but has removed the feedback EMI issues.
The remaining issues we?ve isolated to the rotator itself and we?re still
limping along trying to figure it out, seems to be related to the hall
effect sensor itself or maybe the tiny magnet coupled to the motor
shaft?.not sure??then COVID-19 hit??.no more troubleshooting for a while?..
Hope this helps!
-Zach, KJ4QLP
--
Research Associate
Aerospace & Ocean Systems Lab
Ted & Karyn Hume Center for National Security & Technology
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
Work Phone: 540-231-4174
Cell Phone: 540-808-6305
From: Ryan Butler <rbutler@????.???>
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 9:28 PM
To: Leffke, Zachary <zleffke@??.???>
Cc: AMSAT-BB@?????.???
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Alpha Spid Rotator
What's everyone using for rotor cable to feed the Alpha Spid?
Ryan, NF0T
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 1:45 PM Leffke, Zachary via AMSAT-BB
<amsat-bb@?????.???<???????????????@?????.???>> wrote:
Hi Dave,
We use a lot of the RAS/HR and Big-RAS/HRs at VT in our ground station and
on other projects. My biggest recommendation is if you don't absolutely
need the resolution, don't get the high resolution variants (0.2 deg
resolution). It uses a quadrature encoder feedback mechanism that is highly
susceptible to EMI corruption leading to 'dropped counts' and a general slew
of problems related to calibration and reliable pointing knowledge. We have
constantly battled this problem since day 1 of the VTGS and still don't have
reliable resolution for the problem (but enough band-aid solutions to keep
limping along and periodic trips out to the tracking station to
recalibrate). The smaller Ras/HRs seem to generally do better on the
feedback front (still high resolution with the quadrature feedback) for some
reason, but we typically use those in 'deployable' scenarios and the
feedback cabling is much shorter (maybe 20ft or so)....so not necessarily an
apples to apples comparison with the perm
anently installed Big-RAS/HRs that have longer feedback cables (roughly
100-200 ft depending on which antenna stack we're talking about) and
generaly seem to be more prone to issues. I also personally own a Ras/HR
(smaller one) with the high res feedback and a 2.4m solid dish mounted on
it. It can handle the load just fine with proper counterweighting and so
far I haven't had any feedback issues (roughly 50ft feedback cable)....knock
on wood.
The 'non high resolution' (low resolution?...its still accurate to about 1
deg) variants use plain ol' potentiometer feedback. I don't have direct
experience with them, but have reports from some colleagues that they
haven't had any serious or repetitive issues with pointing calibration (some
radio astronomers in Physics dept are using one with a 2m dish). (I think
that one uses a different controller than the MD-01 that we use, but I think
the MD-01 or MD-02 could handle either type of feedback).
Other 'warnings' include realizing they have no mechanical stops in azimuth
(they do in elevation, roughly at 180 deg limits). That said, it isn't
really a problem as most controllers work reliably with 'software limits'
and the MD-01s at least have timeouts that help if things 'go wonky' with
feedback. There are some cases though that result in the perfect storm of
corrupted feedback that goes undetected by the MD-01 that could lead to a
bad azimuth situation; in our case we monitor antenna motion on a camera, so
are able to mitigate that scenario with human intervention (and our custom
control software looks for 'impossible speeds' as reported by the MD-01
positions that further helps mitigate that when the feedback goes awry).
Mechanically, they have done very well for us with the double-worm gear
design, imperceptible gear slip (if any). I've heard of folks having
mechanical failures, but I don't know the details, and that hasn't been my
experience. As an example, at the height of 'performance' I was able to
reliably track multiple S-Band downlinks with a 3m mesh dish antenna with no
discernible negative effects due to point errors or 'jiggle' in the system
(part of that is the ramp up, also part the counterweighting). In the 5 or
so years we've been running them, we haven't had any major mechanical
malfunctions (knock on wood), and part of that is probably due to periodic
maintenance (re-greasing and such), which I've done at least once (can't
remember exactly, maybe twice in that 5 year window). Part of that is also
the fact that we tend to use the yagi stacks with a lighter load a lot more
than the larger dish systems, I might be singing a different tune if the
dishes were used daily.
The MD-01 controller (and MD-02s as well for non-rackmount variants) does
have some nice ramp-up/ramp-down features, particularly useful for larger
systems (like our 4.5m dish). I do wish the API documentation for the MD-01
command interface was a little better...but we've been able to work through
it (for example, they changed the protocol a bit in a relatively recent
firmware update that broke compatibility with our software and presumably
things like rotctl in hamlib, but I think that has all been fixed/updated).
The API issue might not be a problem for most folks not interested in
writing their own software, or if you are using a different controller. The
overall documentation situation is a little 'meh' in general as there have
been a lot of versions and such released and they are on different websites
run by different folks.....but at least there is documentation at all and a
little reading and experimentation is usually enough to get what you need,
and the basics such as th
e wiring diagram hasn't really changed over the years.
I can't directly speak to the SatPC32 question because we don't use it.
Other than that firmware update hiccup, I'd be willing to bet it works fine.
Bottom Line: When they work, they seem to work well, at least in my
experience. If I were going to buy one today for personal use, I'd get one
with the potentiometer feedback if the intended use is for something like a
few Yagis and if I were planning a more permanent installation. If I were
going to buy something for VT/work with a better funding source than my
'hobby budget' I'd probably look for something better, like M2 products
(pretty significant jump in price point though).
I hope this helps.
-Zach, KJ4QLP
--
Research Associate
Aerospace & Ocean Systems Lab
Ted & Karyn Hume Center for National Security & Technology
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
Work Phone: 540-231-4174
Cell Phone: 540-808-6305
-----Original Message-----
From: AMSAT-BB
<amsat-bb-bounces@?????.???<???????????????????????@?????.???>> On Behalf Of
Dave via AMSAT-BB
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 1:20 PM
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???<???????????????@?????.???>>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Alpha Spid Rotator
Is anyone using an Alpha Spid az/el rotor? If so how do you like it? Would
you recommend it over the Yaesu's and are there any issues using it with
SatPC32?
Thanks,
Dave
N2OA
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???<???????????????@?????.???>. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???<???????????????@?????.???>. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 16:41:16 +1200
From: Wendy and Terry Osborne <wandtosborne@?????.???>
To: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>, Roger Bould
<rogannbould@?????.???>, "Selwyn ZL2BJO@?????.???? <ZL2BJO@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Next Rocket Lab launch
Message-ID: <07a50d3d-2601-6db5-506f-a5777c9dfad3@?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Hi Folks,
The next Rocket Lab launch window starts next Thursday 11th June at
04:43 UTC.
See: https://www.rocketlabusa.com/missions/next-mission/
Since it's winter there may be some delays.
For updates, check the twitter feed: https://twitter.com/rocketlab
The launch should be streamed from the www.rocketlabusa.com web site
from about 04:30 UTC.
Since New Zealand is now at Covid19 level 2 and possibly level 1 by the
launch date, people can travel to the launch site with few restrictions.
73,
Terry Osborne ZL2BAC
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 08:51:41 +0000 (UTC)
From: gw1fky@???.???
To: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Skewplane antennas
Message-ID: <1197036803.158005.1591433501216@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi,Regarding the posts on the subject of "Skewplane Antennas"? - Some
interesting reading and details may be found on the following web site :?
?www.vk6ysf.com/skew_planar_wheel_antenna.htmYou might also like to follow
up the many studies and publications available in respect of the uses for
aircraft, satellites and of course rovers on interplanetary missions.Ken
EatonGW1FKY??
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 10:55:11 -0400
From: Rich Gopstein <rich@????????????.???>
To: Floyd Rodgers <kc5qbc@??????.???>
Cc: "AMSAT-BB@?????.???? <AMSAT-BB@?????.???>, satop
<satop@??????????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Antenna Location
Message-ID:
<CANsNeap6jr+De1GnqF8OaAH-DR2UURBfriWd6p7ZL6gMD9j7ug@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Yeah, I was wondering about that. I guess I could do a simple RF
attenuation test.
Rich
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:27 PM Floyd Rodgers via AMSAT-BB <
amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Many newer houses have foil backed plywood decking to block heat transfer.
> That also blocks rf.
>
> Floyd KC5QBC
>
> > On Jun 5, 2020, at 7:02 PM, Burns Fisher via AMSAT-BB <
> amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> >
> > Rich, the attic has always seemed like an attractive location to me, but
> > I'd suggest before you go that route, do some reception checking. For
> > example, see how well you receive one of the Foxes on an HT on the
> ground
> > outside, and then go to the attic and see how similar it is.
> >
> > For reasons unknown, the last time I tried this I was totally unable to
> get
> > ANYTHING in the attic, although I know some people have done well there..
> > I wonder if it relates to the spacing of the nails compared to the
> > wavelength, or something about the particular mixture of material used in
> > the shingles?
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 4:44 PM Bob Hammond via AMSAT-BB <
> amsat-bb@?????.???>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I use a fiberglass mast by MGS for my M2 LEO antennas and G5500 rotator.
> >> Works fine.
> >> You may not have enough room for the guy lines? I have expired HOA
> >> covenants, the best kind!
> >> Mine is up about 30-35 feet. PM me for details if you're interested.
> >>
> >> Bob W7OTJ
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:08 PM Rich Gopstein via AMSAT-BB <
> >> amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks. I've gotten a number of responses ranging from:
> >>> Put up a tower
> >>> Put it in the attic
> >>> Put it on a tripod on the roof
> >>> And - yours - put it somewhere reasonable and don't freak out about the
> >>> attenuation.
> >>>
> >>> The garage and the house both have 8/12 pitch roofs, so that's my
> concern
> >>> with mounting on the roof. I've done it before but I'm happy about it.
> >>> The garage is lower, so less of a fall, but still steep.
> >>>
> >>> I might be able to get a small AZ/EL setup inside the attic above the
> >>> garage. The issue there is my shack is on the exact opposite side of
> the
> >>> house. So, I'd most likely need to move the shack to the garage attic.
> >>> There's power up there, but no insulation. Maybe I could put the
> IC-9700
> >>> there and remotely control it?
> >>>
> >>> I've thought about a tower... But there are so many tower options,
> it's a
> >>> little daunting. If I put the tower just outside where the shack is,
> I'd
> >>> need about 38' to clear the highest peak of the house roof. I could go
> >>> lower and just live with a little extra attenuation from the house
> roof.
> >>> And I assume any tower would come with the need to deal with the local
> >>> zoning/permit guys. If I go that route, I'd want the tower to be high
> >>> enough to use as the center of a dipole also.
> >>>
> >>> Too many options...
> >>>
> >>> Rich
> >>> KD2CQ
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 2:18 PM satop <satop@??????????.???> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Rich, my last location was worse than yours I believe. I lived in an
> >>>> large city two story home with 9' ceilings and a large peak roof,
> think
> >>>> 1903 style. There was a three story home on the east side and a three
> >>>> story church on the west. Three very large oak trees in the front and
> >>> very
> >>>> poor aim points to the north. I mounted my tripod on a one story wood
> >>> shed
> >>>> on the north end of the home. I had about a 60' run of hardline to
> the
> >>>> shack and used high gain yagi antennas for vhf/uhf. This setup worked
> >>>> fantasy and always was amazing to me. I even pre purchased a
> Super-Amp
> >>>> SP-7000 for UHF but never found that I needed it. Use some antennas
> >> with
> >>>> some gain and I'll bet you'll be just fine mounting on the garage or
> >>> lower
> >>>> build.
> >>>>
> >>>> Gary/N8AYY
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 10:56:25 -0400
From: David Worboys <kg4zlb@??????.???>
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler.SQF
Message-ID: <8699FBC4-6AB8-46DB-9E70-21D383AECD39@??????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Morning all,
Would anyone be kind enough to send me a copy of their up to date
Doppler.SQF file for SatPC32 ? I have a funny feeling that I am more than
likely to ?fat-finger? the manual input of the satellites that are not
already loaded and would like to avoid that headache if at all possible!
Many thanks
David
KG4ZLB
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:14:30 -0400
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@?????.???>
To: David Worboys <kg4zlb@??????.???>
Cc: Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Doppler.SQF
Message-ID:
<CAPRXzyppjteOALk4jMYGv1qeQr-jv4bNh7ziLEW=BjQgPFp5qA@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi David,
Here is a link worth bookmarking! Thanks to Mineo JE9JPL.
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/hamradio/je9pel/Doppler.sqf
73,
Mark N8MH
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 11:03 AM David Worboys via AMSAT-BB <
amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Morning all,
>
> Would anyone be kind enough to send me a copy of their up to date
> Doppler.SQF file for SatPC32 ? I have a funny feeling that I am more than
> likely to ?fat-finger? the manual input of the satellites that are not
> already loaded and would like to avoid that headache if at all possible!
>
> Many thanks
>
> David
> KG4ZLB
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. 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: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
--
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@?????.???.
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!
https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 15, Issue 185
*****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
