| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 04.07.15 20:41l 898 Lines 33066 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB10189
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V10 189
Path: IW8PGT<IZ3LSV<IW0QNL<JH4XSY<JM1YTR<JE7YGF<7M3TJZ<CX2SA
Sent: 150704/1836Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:23368 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB10189
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Working FOX-1A (Clint Bradford)
2. Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Michael)
3. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Paul Stoetzer)
4. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Steve Kristoff)
5. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Joe)
6. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (James Duffey)
7. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Paul Stoetzer)
8. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Joe)
9. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (John Becker)
10. Re: Signal on 145.825 (CW?) (Robert Bruninga)
11. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Joe)
12. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (Jim Jerzycke)
13. Re: Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al.... (R.T.Liddy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 09:52:55 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Working FOX-1A
Message-ID: <2B482AEB-9506-4F64-A6BE-864951F9CDEE@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>> ... the quote that is purely out of context ...
Pure nonsense. From the article ...
"Working Fox-1A"
"With a minimum power output of 400mW, Fox-1A should be
easy to work with an ordinary VHF/UHF handheld transceiver
and a dual-band handheld Yagi antenna. Most VHF/UHF
handhelds can only communicate in "half duplex." This means
they cannot receive simultaneously while transmitting. A half-
duplex rig will be adequate for the Fox satellites, but a "full
duplex" transceiver is even better. A full duplex transceiver
receives and transmits at the same time. This allows you to
monitor the quality of your signal through the satellite so that
you can make antenna and frequency adjustments as needed."
My quotation of ...
" ... a half-duplex rig will be adequate for the Fox satellites,
but a "full duplex" transceiver is even better ... "
... captures the "essence" properly.
Clint Bradford
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 13:02:44 -0400
From: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <559811B4.70909@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong
direction by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work
with a handheld antenna. I got into satellite communication because of
the technical challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down"
There should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be
used.
73,
Michael, W4HIJ
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 13:10:55 -0400
From: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
To: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID:
<CABzOSOry+roqWj=2mTqoxshAtLBEtpqSjdv=JsUT4n+aaTR0TQ@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Michael,
The idea is to get people hooked on satellite operating and then have
them "graduate" to more challenging aspects of satellite operating.
AMSAT is, of course, working on projects that be more of a technical
challenge than FM satellites, like Fox-1E with a linear transponder
and the geosynchronous P4B project.
73,
Paul, N8HM
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong direction
> by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work with a handheld
> antenna. I got into satellite communication because of the technical
> challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down" There
> should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be used.
> 73,
> Michael, W4HIJ
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 13:15:33 -0400
From: "Steve Kristoff" <skristof@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <9330911EFD9B4149AADAF709E20C5FB1@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
So, we should make them only available to the Amateur Radio elite who can
afford computer tracked rotors with separate yagis and all-mode full duplex
U/V radios? Keep out the riff-raff.
Steve AI9IN
Riff-raff@xxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2015 1:02 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong direction
> by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work with a
> handheld antenna. I got into satellite communication because of the
> technical challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down"
> There should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be
> used.
> 73,
> Michael, W4HIJ
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
Steve Kristoff
skristof@xxxxxxx.xxx
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 12:19:30 -0500
From: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <559815A2.4040502@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Funny how a linear bird is a technical challenge, wow, as a novice in
1975 I listened to Oscar 6 & 7 all the time. and once up graded used
them also all the time. Sad to think that 1970's technology is high tech
to anyone.
Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 7/4/2015 12:10 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
> Michael,
>
> The idea is to get people hooked on satellite operating and then have
> them "graduate" to more challenging aspects of satellite operating.
>
> AMSAT is, of course, working on projects that be more of a technical
> challenge than FM satellites, like Fox-1E with a linear transponder
> and the geosynchronous P4B project.
>
> 73,
>
> Paul, N8HM
>
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong direction
>> by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work with a
handheld
>> antenna. I got into satellite communication because of the technical
>> challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
>> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down"
There
>> should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be used.
>> 73,
>> Michael, W4HIJ
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 6
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 11:46:27 -0600
From: James Duffey <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <36C08225-5105-458F-BA3C-62F89239DE57@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Joe - Before FM birds came into being, Mode A was the easysat mode, although
that term was not used. The 10M downlink doppler was easy to deal with and
the 144 MHz uplink not much harder. The RS birds in particular had huge
signals on the downlink, sensitive receivers, consistent 20+ minute passes,
and could be heard with the gear most hams had; an HF transceiver. To get
started, many hams used their 2M rig as a CW rig by keying the PTT. It
sounded pretty chirpy, but those guys made a lot of contacts and generally
graduated to a 2M CW or SSB rig.
The problem in those days was getting the Mode A easysat guys to move up to
Mode B or Mode J, with better performance. It is a problem very similar to
what we have today of getting the FM easysat guys to move up to the linear
birds.
I have no problem with the entry level to satellite communication being
easy. I do have problems when the entry level guys don?t move up, either
because they are satisfied with the status quo, don?t get encouragement from
experienced ops, or because the resources are not there.
I don?t mean to denigrate Steve?s article, but rather to respond to Cliff?s
comments and its implications. - Duffey KK6MC
On Jul 4, 2015, at 11:19 AM, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Funny how a linear bird is a technical challenge, wow, as a novice in 1975
I listened to Oscar 6 & 7 all the time. and once up graded used them also
all the time. Sad to think that 1970's technology is high tech to anyone.
> Joe WB9SBD
> Sig
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
> On 7/4/2015 12:10 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>> Michael,
>>
>> The idea is to get people hooked on satellite operating and then have
>> them "graduate" to more challenging aspects of satellite operating.
>>
>> AMSAT is, of course, working on projects that be more of a technical
>> challenge than FM satellites, like Fox-1E with a linear transponder
>> and the geosynchronous P4B project.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul, N8HM
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>>> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong direction
>>> by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work with a
handheld
>>> antenna. I got into satellite communication because of the technical
>>> challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
>>> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down"
There
>>> should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be used.
>>> 73,
>>> Michael, W4HIJ
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: 7
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 13:48:25 -0400
From: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
To: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID:
<CABzOSOq9Y0n1sRqxu_2ADy5YEt009Pa3tkvaDFn=q=nXWKwstw@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Well, you are partially right. With OSCAR 6 and 7 and their strong ten
meter downlinks, it was just a matter of adding two meter transmit
capability to an HF station. Now it does take a little more work to
receive and transmit at VHF and UHF with SSB or CW and the prevalence
of man-made noise on VHF and UHF these days generally requires a beam.
I am quite certain that many of the people that worked OSCARs, 6, 7,
8, and the RS birds never graduated from Mode A. Just like many of the
FM satellite users never graduate from FM.
People tend to think it's more difficult than it is. I've made over
2,000 linear transponder contacts with nothing more than two Yaesu
FT-817s (for a few hundred of those I used an Icom IC-R10 receiver)
and an Arrow antenna handheld.
The radios for operating via a linear transponder are widely available
and inexpensive. A Yaesu FT-100, FT-817, FT-857, FT-897, FT-991 or an
Icom IC-706MkII(g), Icom IC-7000, or any of those plus a FUNcube
dongle and computer to receive the downlink are all the radio you need
and an Arrow or Elk antenna will get you going.
73,
Paul, N8HM
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Funny how a linear bird is a technical challenge, wow, as a novice in 1975 I
> listened to Oscar 6 & 7 all the time. and once up graded used them also all
> the time. Sad to think that 1970's technology is high tech to anyone.
> Joe WB9SBD
> Sig
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>
> On 7/4/2015 12:10 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>>
>> Michael,
>>
>> The idea is to get people hooked on satellite operating and then have
>> them "graduate" to more challenging aspects of satellite operating.
>>
>> AMSAT is, of course, working on projects that be more of a technical
>> challenge than FM satellites, like Fox-1E with a linear transponder
>> and the geosynchronous P4B project.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul, N8HM
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong
>>> direction
>>> by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work with a
>>> handheld
>>> antenna. I got into satellite communication because of the technical
>>> challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
>>> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down"
>>> There
>>> should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be used.
>>> 73,
>>> Michael, W4HIJ
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: 8
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 13:07:51 -0500
From: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
To: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <559820F7.3050403@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Why don't they have mode "A" anymore? even the single channel FM could
be mode a true?
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 7/4/2015 12:48 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
> Well, you are partially right. With OSCAR 6 and 7 and their strong ten
> meter downlinks, it was just a matter of adding two meter transmit
> capability to an HF station. Now it does take a little more work to
> receive and transmit at VHF and UHF with SSB or CW and the prevalence
> of man-made noise on VHF and UHF these days generally requires a beam.
>
> I am quite certain that many of the people that worked OSCARs, 6, 7,
> 8, and the RS birds never graduated from Mode A. Just like many of the
> FM satellite users never graduate from FM.
>
> People tend to think it's more difficult than it is. I've made over
> 2,000 linear transponder contacts with nothing more than two Yaesu
> FT-817s (for a few hundred of those I used an Icom IC-R10 receiver)
> and an Arrow antenna handheld.
>
> The radios for operating via a linear transponder are widely available
> and inexpensive. A Yaesu FT-100, FT-817, FT-857, FT-897, FT-991 or an
> Icom IC-706MkII(g), Icom IC-7000, or any of those plus a FUNcube
> dongle and computer to receive the downlink are all the radio you need
> and an Arrow or Elk antenna will get you going.
>
> 73,
>
> Paul, N8HM
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>> Funny how a linear bird is a technical challenge, wow, as a novice in
1975 I
>> listened to Oscar 6 & 7 all the time. and once up graded used them also all
>> the time. Sad to think that 1970's technology is high tech to anyone.
>> Joe WB9SBD
>> Sig
>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
>> Idle Tyme
>> Idle-Tyme.com
>> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>>
>> On 7/4/2015 12:10 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>>> Michael,
>>>
>>> The idea is to get people hooked on satellite operating and then have
>>> them "graduate" to more challenging aspects of satellite operating.
>>>
>>> AMSAT is, of course, working on projects that be more of a technical
>>> challenge than FM satellites, like Fox-1E with a linear transponder
>>> and the geosynchronous P4B project.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Paul, N8HM
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>>>> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong
>>>> direction
>>>> by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work with a
>>>> handheld
>>>> antenna. I got into satellite communication because of the technical
>>>> challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
>>>> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down"
>>>> There
>>>> should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be used.
>>>> 73,
>>>> Michael, W4HIJ
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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: 9
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 13:20:44 -0500
From: John Becker <w0jab@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <559823FC.2070307@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
in the voice of Jack Benny, "well I'll be" I'm a elitist now.
My Elmer when I got into this hobby (1967) said "this is not a poor
man's hobby.
Still holds true today as far as I know. Got to pay to play.
22 elements on VHF crossed
44 on UHF on UHF crossed
and the S band dish is still up from the days of AO 40.
John
On 7/4/2015 12:15 PM, Steve Kristoff wrote:
> So, we should make them only available to the Amateur Radio elite who
> can afford computer tracked rotors with separate yagis and all-mode
> full duplex U/V radios? Keep out the riff-raff.
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 14:22:38 -0400
From: Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Signal on 145.825 (CW?)
Message-ID: <b3741569bac9a278269fbaa71c90bed5@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> I was hearing ... "sewing machine" on 145.825 MHz FM.
ANS: AO-11.
NEW QUESTION: Which one sends CW? I hear it in FM, but am on the other
side of the lab and haven?t gotten across to switch to SSB to copy it. Been
too busy. Bob
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 13:22:46 -0500
From: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
To: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <55982476.1050804@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
tape measure dipole worked in the past.
Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 7/4/2015 1:10 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
> Because of the difficulty of putting an adequate antenna for a 10m
> downlink on a cubesat.
>
> 73.
>
> Paul, N8HM
>
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Joe <nss@xxx.xxx <mailto:nss@xxx.xxx>>
> wrote:
>
> Why don't they have mode "A" anymore? even the single channel FM
> could be mode a true?
>
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
> On 7/4/2015 12:48 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>> Well, you are partially right. With OSCAR 6 and 7 and their strong ten
>> meter downlinks, it was just a matter of adding two meter transmit
>> capability to an HF station. Now it does take a little more work to
>> receive and transmit at VHF and UHF with SSB or CW and the prevalence
>> of man-made noise on VHF and UHF these days generally requires a beam.
>>
>> I am quite certain that many of the people that worked OSCARs, 6, 7,
>> 8, and the RS birds never graduated from Mode A. Just like many of the
>> FM satellite users never graduate from FM.
>>
>> People tend to think it's more difficult than it is. I've made over
>> 2,000 linear transponder contacts with nothing more than two Yaesu
>> FT-817s (for a few hundred of those I used an Icom IC-R10 receiver)
>> and an Arrow antenna handheld.
>>
>> The radios for operating via a linear transponder are widely available
>> and inexpensive. A Yaesu FT-100, FT-817, FT-857, FT-897, FT-991 or an
>> Icom IC-706MkII(g), Icom IC-7000, or any of those plus a FUNcube
>> dongle and computer to receive the downlink are all the radio you need
>> and an Arrow or Elk antenna will get you going.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul, N8HM
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Joe<nss@xxx.xxx>
<mailto:nss@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>> Funny how a linear bird is a technical challenge, wow, as a novice
in 1975 I
>>> listened to Oscar 6 & 7 all the time. and once up graded used them
also all
>>> the time. Sad to think that 1970's technology is high tech to anyone.
>>> Joe WB9SBD
>>> Sig
>>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
>>> Idle Tyme
>>> Idle-Tyme.com
>>> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>>>
>>> On 7/4/2015 12:10 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>>>> Michael,
>>>>
>>>> The idea is to get people hooked on satellite operating and then have
>>>> them "graduate" to more challenging aspects of satellite operating.
>>>>
>>>> AMSAT is, of course, working on projects that be more of a technical
>>>> challenge than FM satellites, like Fox-1E with a linear transponder
>>>> and the geosynchronous P4B project.
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>>
>>>> Paul, N8HM
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Michael<Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
<mailto:Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>>>>> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong
>>>>> direction
>>>>> by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to work with a
>>>>> handheld
>>>>> antenna. I got into satellite communication because of the technical
>>>>> challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
>>>>> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing
down"
>>>>> There
>>>>> should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS be
used.
>>>>> 73,
>>>>> Michael, W4HIJ
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Sent viaAMSAT-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
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sent viaAMSAT-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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent viaAMSAT-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
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 18:28:07 +0000
From: Jim Jerzycke <kq6ea@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID: <559825B7.5060704@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
You're missing the point, Steve.
This is supposed to be an *educational* activity, not "Gee Look how
*EASY* it is".
If you can afford one Baofeng HT, then you can afford TWO so you can run
full duplex.
The FM satellites are a zoo 90% of the time. People just don't want to
admit it......
Jim KQ6EA
On 07/04/2015 05:15 PM, Steve Kristoff wrote:
> So, we should make them only available to the Amateur Radio elite who
> can afford computer tracked rotors with separate yagis and all-mode
> full duplex U/V radios? Keep out the riff-raff.
>
> Steve AI9IN
> Riff-raff@xxxx
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael" <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2015 1:02 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
>
>
>> Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong
>> direction by trying to convince everyone how easy a "sat" is to
>> work with a handheld antenna. I got into satellite communication
>> because of the technical challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
>> This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of "dumbing down"
>> There should never be any question on it. Full duplex should ALWAYS
>> be used.
>> 73,
>> Michael, W4HIJ
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> Steve Kristoff
> skristof@xxxxxxx.xxx
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 13
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 18:34:14 +0000 (UTC)
From: "R.T.Liddy" <k8bl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Message-ID:
<571440769.2528612.1436034854408.JavaMail.yahoo@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Yuri, UT1FG/MM has worked many stations half-duplex and givenout a ton of
rare grids. Maybe he should be educated about how "dumb"his operating
technique is? ? ? ? ?
Bob K8BL
From: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 4, 2015 1:02 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Fox, "Easy Sats"....et al....
Once again I feel the need to say that we have gone in the wrong
direction by trying to convince everyone how easy a? "sat"? is to work
with a handheld antenna. I got into satellite communication because of
the technical challenge involved, not by how "easy it was".
? This whole half or full duplex issue is a symptom of? "dumbing down"
There should never be any question on it.? Full duplex should ALWAYS be
used.
73,
Michael, W4HIJ
_______________________________________________
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 10, Issue 189
*****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
