| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 10.01.17 05:40l 841 Lines 32314 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB127
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V12 7
Path: IW8PGT<IR2UBX<IZ3LSV<I0OJJ<GB7CIP<LU4ECL<CX2SA
Sent: 170110/0334Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:62254 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB127
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Friendship 7 details? (Scott)
2. Re: Friendship 7 details? (B J)
3. Re: AO-85 (Mark L. Hammond)
4. Re: AO-85 (skristof@xxxxxxx.xxxx
5. Re: Friendship 7 details? (Richard Tejera)
6. Re: Friendship 7 details? (Daniel Schultz)
7. Re: Friendship 7 details? (B J)
8. Re: Friendship 7 details? (Daniel Schultz)
9. Re: Friendship 7 details? (Jim White)
10. Setting up SatPC32 (Ken Alexander)
11. Re: Friendship 7 details? (D. Craig Fox)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 15:51:04 -0500
From: "Scott" <scott23192@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "AMSAT" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID: <58EB6CCB27B74F6084F5DD204187FBD9@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
Great questions, Bob.
I don't know how much of the following are as-built or how much detail was
for planning purposes only, but the following two links have a lot of very
interesting details:
http://www.angelfire.com/space2/sp425/26.html
http://www.angelfire.com/space2/sp425/21.html
-Scott, K4KDR
===================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Bruninga
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 3:24 PM
To: AMSAT
Subject: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
After seeing the great movie ?hidden figures? last night, I had lots of
questions from my faded memory of the time (it was the same year I got my
ham license and was 14 years old). This Wiki page has a lot? but the
questions lingering in my mind were:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury
1) Was his mission planned at 3 orbits? (I thought it was more and
then cut to three).
2) If #1, then they must have had to have recovery ships at a
different spot for every potential orbit since he could not maneuver
anything other than when to fire the retros. If it was 7 cut to three,
then I guess they only needed two ship areas?
3) What frequency was CAPCOM? Was it the 108 MHz? I think the
tracking stations all relayed the voice via HF?
4) Also related to #1, if something happened to the pilot, I assume
ground control could fire the retros.
_______________________________________________
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 21:02:43 +0000
From: B J <va6bmj@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID:
<CAP7QzkMGQaZHPZi9gjDQyZqnJ0kpDB9=kyg_QONvBD1gva5OWQ@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On 1/9/17, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> After seeing the great movie ?hidden figures? last night, I had lots of
> questions from my faded memory of the time (it was the same year I got my
> ham license and was 14 years old). This Wiki page has a lot? but the
> questions lingering in my mind were:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury
>
>
>
> 1) Was his mission planned at 3 orbits? (I thought it was more and
> then cut to three).
The comment by the capcom was that he was "good for 7 orbits", but the
plan was for only 3.
>
> 2) If #1, then they must have had to have recovery ships at a
> different spot for every potential orbit since he could not maneuver
> anything other than when to fire the retros. If it was 7 cut to three,
> then I guess they only needed two ship areas?
There were several potential landing sites during a mission in case
something went wrong.
Gemini VIII, with Neil Armstrong and Dave Scott, had to be cut short
after a few orbits because of the problem with one of the spacecraft's
manoeuvring thrusters. It splashed down in one of the auxiliary
recovery zones in the South China Sea and they were picked up by a USN
destroyer.
That didn't always work as NASA found out during the next Mercury
mission, Aurora 7. Carpenter apparently fired his retro thrusters a
bit late and landed some 400 km away from he was supposed to.
>
> 3) What frequency was CAPCOM? Was it the 108 MHz? I think the
> tracking stations all relayed the voice via HF?
I don't believe so. I think the ground stations might have connected
by telephone lines to Mission Control. The only signal fading would
be when the spacecraft was out of range of a tracking station.
>
> 4) Also related to #1, if something happened to the pilot, I assume
> ground control could fire the retros.
If I remember correctly, the spacecraft was entirely under control of
the pilot. During Shepard's mission, Freedom 7, the retros didn't
fire automatically so he had to light them manually.
<snip>
73s
Bernhard VA6BMJ @ DO33FL
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 17:01:06 -0500
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-85
Message-ID:
<CAPRXzypgpJSA3TdLerJ=sm_Y730LiiL0HGHrqfTRMqhO=GD3LQ@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi Steve,
What OS and what virtual audio program are you using?
A few months ago, an automatic update to Win10 killed my audio stuff; I had
to do a reversion/back and it cleared it up...
Too many variables--but give us a few of yours!
I've been copying pretty well lately using SDR#, Airspy mini, and VB Audio.
Mark N8MH
From: skristof@xxxxxxx.xxx
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2017 6:01 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-85
I just tried to get telemetry from AO-85. The pass had max elevation of
76 degrees here. In the past I would get lots of data on a pass like
this, but lately I've been getting nothing. I can see the signal on the
"waterfall" (using SDR#) but the signal is too weak to decode. Is anyone
else having this problem? Is the signal normally low when the northern
hemisphere is dark? What's happening?
I've asked this before and didn't get any responses. Please send a
couple of responses so I have some idea if there is some problem in my
set up here.
Thanks!
Steve AI9IN
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 17:26:09 -0500
From: skristof@xxxxxxx.xxx
To: Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-85
Message-ID: <84c7a2cf1e732466b6277a74e58f54ef@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
I use Windows 10, SDR# and VB virtual audio cable. The dongle is an
RTL-SDR.
Steve AI9IN
On 2017-01-09 17:01, Mark L. Hammond wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> What OS and what virtual audio program are you using?
>
> A few months ago, an automatic update to Win10 killed my audio stuff; I had
> to do a reversion/back and it cleared it up...
>
> Too many variables--but give us a few of yours!
>
> I've been copying pretty well lately using SDR#, Airspy mini, and VB Audio.
>
> Mark N8MH
>
> From: skristof@xxxxxxx.xxx
> Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2017 6:01 PM
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-85
>
> I just tried to get telemetry from AO-85. The pass had max elevation of
> 76 degrees here. In the past I would get lots of data on a pass like
> this, but lately I've been getting nothing. I can see the signal on the
> "waterfall" (using SDR#) but the signal is too weak to decode. Is anyone
> else having this problem? Is the signal normally low when the northern
> hemisphere is dark? What's happening?
>
> I've asked this before and didn't get any responses. Please send a
> couple of responses so I have some idea if there is some problem in my
> set up here.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Steve AI9IN
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 09 Jan 2017 15:51:47 -0700
From: Richard Tejera <Saguaroastro@xxx.xxx>
To: B J <va6bmj@xxxxx.xxx>, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: 'AMSAT' <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID: <v7vnftnucjnvnqfeb0c44sgv.1484002307416@xxxxx.xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
IIIRC, it was planned for 6 orbits. But when telemetry showed the landing
bag deployed, it was cut to 3. Flight Director Kris Kraft was convinced,,
based on report from controllers and the spacecraft that it was a faulty
indication and wanted to go the full six. He was overruled by upper
management. During t-shirt they told Glenn to keep the retro package on
during re-entry, the idea being the straps would keep the heat shield
attached and thus the landing bag stowed.
After the flight, Kraft lobbied for and got the rule added to tall mission
profiles the "The Flight Director shall have the final authority for call
decisions pertaining to completion of mission objectives and crew safety",
essentially preventing management from interfering again.
Also IIRC there were two landing zones. In the event of an abort or, in this
case, a shortening of the mission, retro fire would be planned for one of
those. Now much after 6orbits, the rotation of earth, put the ground track
out of range of groundbreaking station s for extended times. They had
tracking stations on the Canadiens, Zanzibar Canberra, Hawaii & Goldstein,
can (there may more,but those come to mind right now), so even under optimal
conditions they were in direct contact with the spacecraft for about 10
minutes at a time maybe 4 or 5 times per orbit.
During Gemini VIII, when the spacecraft almost spun out of control due to a
stuck thruster, they had to abort since Armstrong had used their reentry
thrusters to recover. All that happened out of communication range. When
they came back in range the abort was called at the first opportunity. This
put them well away from the recovery area. The crew had to wait several
hours before recovery teams got to them not being a boat, the capsule bombed
around a lot. armstrong, being a Navy man rode it out, but Scott, who was
Air force, spent the time puking his guts out.
Rick Tejera K7TEJ
Saguaro Astronomy Club
www.SaguaroAstro.org
Thunderbird Amateur Radio Club
www.w7tbc.org
On January 9, 2017, at 14:02, B J <va6bmj@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
On 1/9/17, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> After seeing the great movie ?hidden figures? last night, I had lots of
> questions from my faded memory of the time (it was the same year I got my
> ham license and was 14 years old). This Wiki page has a lot? but the
> questions lingering in my mind were:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury
>
>
>
> 1) Was his mission planned at 3 orbits? (I thought it was more and
> then cut to three).
The comment by the capcom was that he was "good for 7 orbits", but the
plan was for only 3.
>
> 2) If #1, then they must have had to have recovery ships at a
> different spot for every potential orbit since he could not maneuver
> anything other than when to fire the retros. If it was 7 cut to three,
> then I guess they only needed two ship areas?
There were several potential landing sites during a mission in case
something went wrong.
Gemini VIII, with Neil Armstrong and Dave Scott, had to be cut short
after a few orbits because of the problem with one of the spacecraft's
manoeuvring thrusters. It splashed down in one of the auxiliary
recovery zones in the South China Sea and they were picked up by a USN
destroyer.
That didn't always work as NASA found out during the next Mercury
mission, Aurora 7. Carpenter apparently fired his retro thrusters a
bit late and landed some 400 km away from he was supposed to.
>
> 3) What frequency was CAPCOM? Was it the 108 MHz? I think the
> tracking stations all relayed the voice via HF?
I don't believe so. I think the ground stations might have connected
by telephone lines to Mission Control. The only signal fading would
be when the spacecraft was out of range of a tracking station.
>
> 4) Also related to #1, if something happened to the pilot, I assume
> ground control could fire the retros.
If I remember correctly, the spacecraft was entirely under control of
the pilot. During Shepard's mission, Freedom 7, the retros didn't
fire automatically so he had to light them manually.
<snip>
73s
Bernhard VA6BMJ @ DO33FL
_______________________________________________
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: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 18:30:09 -0500
From: "Daniel Schultz" <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID: <441VaiXdJ2864S08.1484004609@xxxxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Bob,
According to my coffee table book "The History of Manned Space Flight" by
David Baker (1982), the Mercury capsule was initially designed to support only
a three orbit mission, and both John Glenn and Scott Carpenter's flights were
planned to last only that long. Page 137 of this book describes extensive
modifications that were made to Wally Schirra's Sigma-7 spacecraft to allow it
to fly a six orbit mission. This leads to the interesting question of why
Glenn was told that he was "Go for at least seven orbits" by his capcom (page
118) when there was absolutely no possibility of his flight lasting that long.
The Navy had 24 ships including three aircraft carriers spread out across the
Atlantic to cover possible launch aborts and reentry after one, two or three
orbits (page 113). There was no mention of any recovery plans for more than
three orbits.
The book also describes the flight of Enos the Chimp (page 105) in which
ground control was responsible for firing the retros (since the chimp had not
been trained on retrofire procedures). I don't know if that remote firing
capability was also carried on the manned flights. During Enos' flight the
telephone line between mission control at the Cape and the Point Arguello
tracking station was cut when a farmer in Arizona plowed up a telephone cable,
but Chis Kraft was able to reestablish voice contact to order Point Arguello
to transmit the retrofire command just seconds before the deadline.
This very excellent book is marred only by the fact that it describes rocket
thrust in kilograms (one of my pet peeves), no doubt caused by English majors
in the publisher's editorial department who never took a physics course.
Dan Schultz N8FGV
-------Original Message-------
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 15:24:51 -0500
From: Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
After seeing the great movie ?hidden figures? last night, I had lots of
questions from my faded memory of the time (it was the same year I got my
ham license and was 14 years old). This Wiki page has a lot? but the
questions lingering in my mind were:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury
1) Was his mission planned at 3 orbits? (I thought it was more and
then cut to three).
2) If #1, then they must have had to have recovery ships at a
different spot for every potential orbit since he could not maneuver
anything other than when to fire the retros. If it was 7 cut to three,
then I guess they only needed two ship areas?
3) What frequency was CAPCOM? Was it the 108 MHz? I think the
tracking stations all relayed the voice via HF?
4) Also related to #1, if something happened to the pilot, I assume
ground control could fire the retros.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 23:33:03 +0000
From: B J <va6bmj@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Richard Tejera <Saguaroastro@xxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID:
<CAP7QzkNRhm4jkTXEV9D1qryd64s8OmEyLPnhSxVF1LqK-2TCGw@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On 1/9/17, Richard Tejera <Saguaroastro@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> IIIRC, it was planned for 6 orbits. But when telemetry showed the landing
> bag deployed, it was cut to 3.
I've heard different accounts about that. Some say 7, others say 3.
I don't know if it was mentioned in the mission transcripts. Maybe I
should check my copies.
Flight Director Kris Kraft was convinced,,
> based on report from controllers and the spacecraft that it was a faulty
> indication and wanted to go the full six.
Had the landing bag been deployed, it wouldn't have mattered how long
Glenn had stayed in orbit.
He was overruled by upper
> management. During t-shirt they told Glenn to keep the retro package on
> during re-entry, the idea being the straps would keep the heat shield
> attached and thus the landing bag stowed.
>
> After the flight, Kraft lobbied for and got the rule added to tall mission
> profiles the "The Flight Director shall have the final authority for call
> decisions pertaining to completion of mission objectives and crew safety",
> essentially preventing management from interfering again.
>
> Also IIRC there were two landing zones. In the event of an abort or, in this
> case, a shortening of the mission, retro fire would be planned for one of
> those.
You might be right, but the Mercury astronauts were trained for
landing anywhere, just in case.
Now much after 6orbits, the rotation of earth, put the ground track
> out of range of groundbreaking station s for extended times. They had
> tracking stations on the Canadiens, Zanzibar Canberra, Hawaii & Goldstein,
> can (there may more,but those come to mind right now), so even under optimal
> conditions they were in direct contact with the spacecraft for about 10
> minutes at a time maybe 4 or 5 times per orbit.
I believe the Indian Ocean tracking ships came later, starting with Gemini.
>
> During Gemini VIII, when the spacecraft almost spun out of control due to a
> stuck thruster, they had to abort since Armstrong had used their reentry
> thrusters to recover.
That was part of the mission rules. Once Armstrong activated them,
the flight was over and the crew had to return as soon as possible.
All that happened out of communication range. When
> they came back in range the abort was called at the first opportunity. This
> put them well away from the recovery area.
I believe that the flight director on duty at the time, John Hodges,
selected the South China Sea site. It was an auxiliary location, so
there wouldn't have been a full recovery force on hand, but it was
within reach of any ships in the area. Part of that might have been
because the base at Subic Bay, plus the presence of the USN in the
Gulf of Tonkin.
The crew had to wait several
> hours before recovery teams got to them not being a boat, the capsule bombed
> around a lot. armstrong, being a Navy man rode it out, but Scott, who was
> Air force, spent the time puking his guts out.
One thing that nobody counted on was the sea state. The account I
heard was that even Armstrong became queasy.
<snip>
73s
Bernhard VA6BMJ @ DO33FL
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 20:47:46 -0500
From: "Daniel Schultz" <n8fgv@xxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID: <780VaJBUU6560S04.1484012866@xxxxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Further research indicates that the "Go for at least seven orbits" line from
capcom was to inform Glenn that the Atlas rocket had injected him into an
orbit that would be stable for at least seven orbits, not that he was approved
to stay up that long. This has led to an often repeated but historically
inaccurate notion that Glenn's flight had been cut short by a problem, when in
fact he was never intended to stay up for more than three orbits. The fact
that Scott Carpenter's flight was also for only three orbits should indicate
that the first two manned orbital flights were only intended to fly for three
orbits, being our first initial baby steps into the cosmos.
see http://www.thespacereview.com/article/550/1
and
http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/space-flight-history/our-spaceflight-heritag
e-the-odyssey-of-friendship-7/
Dan Schultz N8FGV
------ Original Message ------
Received: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 06:30:09 PM EST
> This leads to the interesting question of why
> Glenn was told that he was "Go for at least seven orbits" by his capcom
(page
> 118) when there was absolutely no possibility of his flight lasting that
long.
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 19:54:12 -0700
From: Jim White <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID:
<7c23c819-0a7b-f2f7-49b3-a3146e8b5adc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
I worked Apollo comms from late 67 until 71 in Hawaii and on Eniwetok
Atoll. As I recall prior to Apollo there were astronauts deployed to
all the ground stations who were sort of local CAPCOMs. They talked
back to the Cape and later Houston by land line, some by 4 wire land
line. If there was any HF involved it would have been to places like
the Seychelles via commercial links or to the tracking ships.
It was with the advent of the ARIA aircraft that we started using HF
between them and shore stations, and using them, shore stations and
ships to connect the astronauts back to the single Houston CAPCOM. The
ARIA filled in the over-the-ocean gaps between the shore stations. We
built an elaborate system of multiple HF links to assure good comm
through as many as 8 aircraft during the first few orbits and at
recovery. One of the innovations we worked out was cross patching the
AGC from a tone in one sideband of an HF receiver to the other channel
to suppress the white noise when no one was talking. That let us do very
effective double HF hops, plus S band. For example from Hawaii to
Eniwetok on HF, Eniwetok to the ARIA on HF, S band via the dish in the
nose of the ARIA to the Apollo capsule - with no more white noise than a
phone line. There are some very good web sites about how all that
worked. One is
http://honeysucklecreek.net/other_stations/ARIA/index.html There are
also some great stories on flyaria.com
The most challenging part of the HF piece of this was that the launches
almost all occurred as dawn was happening over the Pacific, and that was
where they fired the engine to leave earth orbit (TLI) so we had to have
ARIA comms to them for those first orbits. Imagine the challenge of
establishing full duplex quite HF comms with 4 aircraft taking off
before dawn from a couple of Pacific islands, then leap frogging
frequencies up the bands until the Apollo capsule came over a couple of
times in late morning. This was pretty much the height of the cycle so
we might go from 5 MHz to 22 MHz freqs in a couple of hours with perhaps
5 or 6 frequency changes. It was actually much more complicated than
I'm describing here with 5 ground stations around the Pacific and as
many as 30 HF frequencies in use at once. All wonderful fun for us hams
in the program, building these complex HF networks in changing
conditions under great pressure not to mess up. And great fun using
10KW to 40KW transmitters and huge fields of Rhombics, giant rotatable
log periodics, vertical logs, 400' tall discones and pretty much every
other HF antenna you can think of.
Jim
On 1/9/2017 1:24 PM, Robert Bruninga wrote:
> After seeing the great movie ?hidden figures? last night, I had lots of
> questions from my faded memory of the time (it was the same year I got my
> ham license and was 14 years old). This Wiki page has a lot? but the
> questions lingering in my mind were:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury
>
>
>
> 1) Was his mission planned at 3 orbits? (I thought it was more and
> then cut to three).
>
> 2) If #1, then they must have had to have recovery ships at a
> different spot for every potential orbit since he could not maneuver
> anything other than when to fire the retros. If it was 7 cut to three,
> then I guess they only needed two ship areas?
>
> 3) What frequency was CAPCOM? Was it the 108 MHz? I think the
> tracking stations all relayed the voice via HF?
>
> 4) Also related to #1, if something happened to the pilot, I assume
> ground control could fire the retros.
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 10
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:18:56 -0500
From: Ken Alexander <k.alexander@xxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Setting up SatPC32
Message-ID: <68b28ade-7a59-27f5-3b54-0cd44de8b4c0@xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
I'm trying to set up SatPC32 to run two FT-817s, one for transmit and
one for receive.
The instructions say "with the FT-817/857/897 set the CAT delay to 110"
How?
The Radio Setup dialog box has a small box where the following appears:
COM-Port (0 - 99)
CAT Delay
A box to the right of that has:
10
20
and a box to the right of that simply has
10
What are those? COM Ports or CAT Delay numbers?
I tried entering 110 (the CAT Delay for the FT-817) in the right-most
box and got an error message. How do you tell it you want to enter the
Com-Port, and then the CAT Delay?
That's for Radio 1. There doesn't seem to be a way to specify the CAT
Delay for Radio 2. What if it's a different radio?
Finally, How do I tell SatPC32 I want to transmit on Radio 1 and receive
on Radio 2, or vice versa?
Any help would be gratefully accepted.
Thanks and 73,
Ken Alexander
VE3HLS
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 19:31:29 -0800
From: "D. Craig Fox" <DFox@xxxxxx.xxx>
To: 'Jim White' <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
Message-ID:
<FE3B26F42CA36A4B976024BC0C5C57D61A0CACFA65@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Great one Jim. Write a book! Don't let your personal experiences be forgotten.
Just my two cents.
Craig
N6RSX
(novice license in '63, general the next year- big space fan the whole time)
-----Original Message-----
From: AMSAT-BB [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 6:54 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Friendship 7 details?
I worked Apollo comms from late 67 until 71 in Hawaii and on Eniwetok Atoll.
As I recall prior to Apollo there were astronauts deployed to all the
ground stations who were sort of local CAPCOMs. They talked back to the
Cape and later Houston by land line, some by 4 wire land line. If there was
any HF involved it would have been to places like the Seychelles via
commercial links or to the tracking ships.
It was with the advent of the ARIA aircraft that we started using HF between
them and shore stations, and using them, shore stations and ships to connect
the astronauts back to the single Houston CAPCOM. The ARIA filled in the
over-the-ocean gaps between the shore stations. We built an elaborate
system of multiple HF links to assure good comm through as many as 8
aircraft during the first few orbits and at recovery. One of the
innovations we worked out was cross patching the AGC from a tone in one
sideband of an HF receiver to the other channel to suppress the white noise
when no one was talking. That let us do very effective double HF hops, plus
S band. For example from Hawaii to Eniwetok on HF, Eniwetok to the ARIA on
HF, S band via the dish in the nose of the ARIA to the Apollo capsule - with
no more white noise than a phone line. There are some very good web sites
about how all that worked. One is
http://honeysucklecreek.net/other_stations/ARIA/index.html There are also
some great stories on flyaria.com
The most challenging part of the HF piece of this was that the launches
almost all occurred as dawn was happening over the Pacific, and that was
where they fired the engine to leave earth orbit (TLI) so we had to have
ARIA comms to them for those first orbits. Imagine the challenge of
establishing full duplex quite HF comms with 4 aircraft taking off before
dawn from a couple of Pacific islands, then leap frogging frequencies up the
bands until the Apollo capsule came over a couple of times in late morning.
This was pretty much the height of the cycle so we might go from 5 MHz to 22
MHz freqs in a couple of hours with perhaps
5 or 6 frequency changes. It was actually much more complicated than
I'm describing here with 5 ground stations around the Pacific and as many as
30 HF frequencies in use at once. All wonderful fun for us hams in the
program, building these complex HF networks in changing conditions under
great pressure not to mess up. And great fun using 10KW to 40KW
transmitters and huge fields of Rhombics, giant rotatable log periodics,
vertical logs, 400' tall discones and pretty much every other HF antenna you
can think of.
Jim
On 1/9/2017 1:24 PM, Robert Bruninga wrote:
> After seeing the great movie ?hidden figures? last night, I had lots
> of questions from my faded memory of the time (it was the same year I
> got my ham license and was 14 years old). This Wiki page has a lot?
> but the questions lingering in my mind were:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury
>
>
>
> 1) Was his mission planned at 3 orbits? (I thought it was more and
> then cut to three).
>
> 2) If #1, then they must have had to have recovery ships at a
> different spot for every potential orbit since he could not maneuver
> anything other than when to fire the retros. If it was 7 cut to
> three, then I guess they only needed two ship areas?
>
> 3) What frequency was CAPCOM? Was it the 108 MHz? I think the
> tracking stations all relayed the voice via HF?
>
> 4) Also related to #1, if something happened to the pilot, I assume
> ground control could fire the retros.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
(If this message is spam, please report it to IT Dept. Thank you.)
------------------------------
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 7
***************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
