| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 26.09.09 03:58l 954 Lines 32316 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB4498
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 498
Path: IZ3LSV<IQ3GO<SR1BSZ<OK4PEN<OK2PEN<CX2SA
Sent: 090926/0146Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:5201 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB4498
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: All Satellites (Rocky Jones)
2. Re: All Satellites (Trevor .)
3. Re: All Satellites (Trevor .)
4. Out of the office (Martha)
5. Re: All Satellites (Alan P. Biddle) (Mark VandeWettering)
6. Re: All Satellites (Alan P. Biddle)
7. Re: All Satellites (G0MRF@xxx.xxxx
8. Re: All Satellites (James Craig)
9. Re: All Satellites (Tony Langdon)
10. Sat status - new feature (Andrew Rich)
11. Re: All Satellites (Mark VandeWettering)
12. Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE (i8cvs)
13. Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
(Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
14. Re: All Satellites (Alan VE4YZ)
15. Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE (Joe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:32:35 -0500
From: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: <andres@xxx.xxx>, Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL106-W54F8A5AB857464F55E97D4D6D90@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
> From: andres@xxx.xxx
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:05:09 -0400
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
>
> I don't see it that way.
>
> Every project is a set of people who have participated in what is
> at first something technical, then magical. I have never talked
> with someone who has worked on something going into space
> that hasn't set back at some point and marveled at it. How many
> folks have we all done demos for, and heard "Wow......!" ?
>
>
> --STeve Andre'
> wb8wsf en82
>
Steve...hope you are correct.
Very few almost none of the astronauts that get their US license to go up on
the space station do anything with amateur radio afterwards... I am sure
"the magic" of space is there...and who knows it might translate into a
resurgence of amateur radio among "the youth"...but I'll bet dollars that it
wont.
few of these sats are doing anything even remotely related to amateur radio
or even communications in general. the payload is "something else" and the
amateur freqs are just used for telemetry. and since the number of payloads
that actually do "communications" is dwindling at somepoint my guess is that
telemetry outright, without even the pretext of amateur radio is going to be
seriously considered as a allocation for the band.
the good news is that most of them "crib death" and thats that. Of course I
still listen to Prospero everytime it goes beeping overhead...actually if
one has the telem mask...it is still actually doing coherent stuff...and it
is beeping on a band where telemetry is authorized...
Robert WB5MZO
_________________________________________________________________
Bing? brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it
now.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MLOGEN&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_ML
OGEN_Core_tagline_local_1x1
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:38:13 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <650540.65260.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
--- On Fri, 25/9/09, Alan P. Biddle <APBIDDLE@xxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> At a SmallSat conference I attended on behalf of AMSAT this summer,
> I was amused at the casual assumption by a researcher that 50,
> Five Oh, cubesats could be launched as part of an upper atmosphere
> project using ham frequencies for the downlinks.?
Was this the Von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics (VKI) proposal ?
Much as I hate to point it out the Primary User of the frequencies proposed
are the Military.
Regretably neither the Amateur or Amateur Satellite services has any Global
Primary allocations between 146 MHz and 24 GHz. A point which as I recall
was raised about a decade ago on this list.
Perhaps the problem is that Amateur Satellite users do not lobby their
National Societies to get them to push for some Global Primary Amateur and
Amateur Satellite allocations in the UHF and Microwave bands.
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:56:24 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <6435.21302.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
--- On Fri, 25/9/09, Bill Ress <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> While it's likely a real stretch for a 1U CubeSat, in a 3U
> CubeSat with up to 2U Cubes worth dedicated to ion
> propulsion, we might have something practical. While many I
> talk with say it isn't practical, I have no doubt it will
> happen in the not too distant future. I wonder who will take
> the lead and be first?
Hi Bill,
You're right, the potential is there for a 3U CubeSat that can achieve an
apogee > 1400 km.
We'd need 1U of that to house the linear transponder but as you say the rest
could be used for the propulsion system.
As yet, as far as I'm aware, no-one has actually demonstrated a working
propulsion mechanism that can fit in 2U but I'm convinced this is possible.
The launch costs for a 3U CubeSat into 700 km LEO are well within the reach
of the Amateur community, our challenge is to develop a means of raising the
apogee.
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:07:19 -0400
From: Martha <martha@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Out of the office
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<956751cf0909251507p5f2511f4ga490ef19603b9a04@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I will be out of the office on Monday.
--
73- Martha
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:15:57 -0700
From: Mark VandeWettering <kf6kyi@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites (Alan P. Biddle)
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<d8eb7a910909251515u148159dbk17895a07b66f678b@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> At a SmallSat conference I attended on behalf of AMSAT this summer, I was
> amused at the casual assumption by a researcher that 50, Five Oh, cubesats
> could be launched as part of an upper atmosphere project using ham
> frequencies for the downlinks. ?(They would have a lifetime of only 3-4
> months.) ?Jan King, W3GEY/VK4GEY, who does coordination of satellite
> frequencies, gently but firmly brought them down to earth a bit.
>
> On the one hand, we get new hams with interests in space communications from
> these projects, but on the other we need to prevent the de facto
> appropriation of needed frequencies. ?A fine line to walk.
>
> Alan
> WA4SCA
The thing that worries me the most is that the de facto appropriation of
our amateur satellite frequencies seems very likely if we continue along a
path which keeps us from filling those slots with payloads of our own. All
this complaining about cubesats and the use of amateur frequencies for
telemetry is kind of pointless if we aren't using those frequencies and have
no prospect of using those frequencies in the foreseeable future.
It seems to me that coordinating 50 cubesats for four months could be
a tractable
problem, depending on the precise nature of the signals and their orbital
spacing. It's not like there is a huge number of operational amateur
satellites
that they'd have to avoid.
Mark K6HX
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 17:20:48 -0500
From: "Alan P. Biddle" <APBIDDLE@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: "'Trevor .'" <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <505F3F4A2B8D44F7A1796CDE7B3F345E@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Trevor,
Bill is right on about propulsion systems. There are several types of
thrusters being worked on. Most are being pitched to extend the life of LEO
cubesats, but in principle they could get us to MEO. As always, cost is a
huge factor. When the Boeing rep says after a vendor presentation, "You
what HOW MUCH for that?!" you know there are cost issues. ;)
Alan
WA4SCA
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:34:55 EDT
From: G0MRF@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <cf1.5f10f029.37ee9f8f@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 25/09/2009 22:10:17 GMT Standard Time, m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx
writes:
Hi Bill,
You're right, the potential is there for a 3U CubeSat that can achieve an
apogee > 1400 km.
We'd need 1U of that to house the linear transponder but as you say the
rest could be used for the propulsion system.
As yet, as far as I'm aware, no-one has actually demonstrated a working
propulsion mechanism that can fit in 2U but I'm convinced this is possible.
The launch costs for a 3U CubeSat into 700 km LEO are well within the
reach of the Amateur community, our challenge is to develop a means of
raising
the apogee.
73 Trevor M5AKA
Hi Trevor.
There is a propulsion system being developed for cubesats using a hydrazine
mono propellant that uses catalytic decomposition to produce a large
volume of hot gaseous products.
If initial claimed results can be repeated in production, then that unit
can be propelled from typical LEO up to 1400km circular or 2000km eliptical.
It's based on a 3U structure. It's not MEO, but its a lot more fun than
500km
David G0MRF
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:04:12 +0930
From: James Craig <davenbeck.engineering@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: John W Lee <k6yk@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BFC16CBE-9BFD-49EA-BB2D-AC77EF7C5D9C@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Good point. Not everybody is interested in monitoring the one way
downlinks on the majority of these more recent birds. Why is it that
there is no problem getting large numbers of these types of satellites
into orbit, yet good old fashioned two way linear and FM transponder
birds are relatively far and few between?
Regards and 73,
James - ZL4JM/VK5JC
Sent from my iPod
On 26/09/2009, at 5:01, John W Lee <k6yk@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> I wonder how many of those 50 are able to handle
> ham radio 2-way contacts ?
>
> K6YK
>
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:09:43 +0000 Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF
> <nigel@xxxxx.xxx> writes:
>> Here's a list of all (known to me) satellites still in orbit with
>> some designed in (but not necessarily operational)
>> amateur band functionality.
>>
>> For those that think nothing has been happening recently, there have
>> been 26 (so far) satellites launched this year, 13
>> in 2008 and 11 in 2007. Thats 50 birds in less than the past 3
>> years.
>>
>> Catalog Number Common Name International
>> Designator Comments
>> 1293 OSCAR 3 1965-016F
>> 6236 OSCAR 6 1972-082B
>> 7530 OSCAR 7 1974-089B
>> 10703 OSCAR 8 1978-026B
>> 14129 OSCAR 10 1983-058B
>> 14781 OSCAR 11 (UoSAT 2) 1984-021B
>> 16909 JAS 1 (FUJI 1) 1986-061B
>> 20437 OSCAR 14 (UoSAT 3) 1990-005B
>> 20438 OSCAR 15 (UoSAT 4) 1990-005C
>> 20439 OSCAR 16 (PACSAT) 1990-005D
>> 20440 OSCAR 17 (DOVE) 1990-005E
>> 20441 OSCAR 18 (WEBERSAT) 1990-005F
>> 20442 OSCAR 19 (LUSAT) 1990-005G
>> 20480 JAS 1B (FUJI 2) 1990-013C
>> 21039 SL-12 R/B(1) 1990-116B
>> 21087 INFORMATOR 1 1991-006A
>> 21089 COSMOS 2123 1991-007A
>> 21575 OSCAR 22 (UoSAT 5) 1991-050B
>> 22825 KITSAT B 1993-061C
>> 22826 POSAT 1 1993-061D
>> 22828 ITAMSAT 1993-061F
>> 22829 EYESAT A 1993-061G
>> 23439 RADIO ROSTO 1994-085A
>> 24278 JAS 2 1996-046B
>> 24305 UNAMSAT 1996-052B
>> 25396 TMSAT 1998-043C
>> 25397 TECHSAT 1B 1998-043D
>> 25509 SEDSAT 1 1998-061B
>> 25520 PAN SAT 1998-064B
>> 25544 ISS (ZARYA) 1998-067A
>> 25636 SUNSAT 1999-008C
>> 25693 OSCAR 36 (UoSAT 12) 1999-021A
>> 25756 KITSAT 3 1999-029A
>> 26063 OPAL 2000-004C
>> 26545 SAUDISAT 1A 2000-057A
>> 26548 TIUNGSAT 1 2000-057D
>> 26609 AMSAT OSCAR 40 2000-072B
>> 26931 PCSAT 2001-043C
>> 26932 SAPPHIRE 2001-043D
>> 27605 RUBIN 2 2002-058A
>> 27607 SAUDISAT 1C 2002-058C
>> 27842 DTUSAT 2003-031C
>> 27844 CUTE-1 2003-031E
>> 27845 QUAKESAT 2003-031F
>> 27847 CANX-1 2003-031H
>> 27848 CUBESAT XI-IV 2003-031J
>> 27939 MOZHAYETS 4 2003-042A
>> 28375 AMSAT ECHO 2004-025K
>> 28650 HAMSAT 2005-017B
>> 28890 BEIJING 1 (TSINGHUA) 2005-043A
>> 28891 TOPSAT 2005-043B
>> 28892 UWE-1 2005-043C
>> 28893 SINAH 1 2005-043D
>> 28894 SSETI-EXPRESS 2005-043E
>> 28895 CUBESAT XI-V 2005-043F
>> 28897 SSETI-EXPRESS DEB 2005-043H
>> 28898 MOZ.5/SAFIR/RUBIN 5/SL-8 2005-043G
>> 28941 CUTE 1.7 2006-005C
>> 29252 GENESIS 1 2006-029A
>> 29479 HINODE (SOLAR B) 2006-041A
>> 29655 GENESAT 2006-058C
>> 29712 PEHUENSAT 1 2007-001D
>> 31117 EGYPTSAT 1 2007-012A
>> 31122 CSTB 1 2007-012F
>> 31126 MAST 2007-012K
>> 31128 LIBERTAD 1 2007-012M
>> 31129 CP3 2007-012N
>> 31130 CAPE 1 2007-012P
>> 31132 CP4 2007-012Q
>> 31135 AGILE 2007-013A
>> 31140 NFIRE 2007-014A
>> 31789 GENESIS 2 2007-028A
>> 32781 GIOVE-B 2008-020A
>> 32783 CARTOSAT 2A 2008-021A
>> 32784 CANX-6 2008-021B
>> 32785 CUTE 1.7 & AOD 2 2008-021C
>> 32786 IMS-1 2008-021D
>> 32787 COMPASS 1 2008-021E
>> 32788 AAUSAT CUBESAT 2 2008-021F
>> 32789 DELFI C3 2008-021G
>> 32790 CANX-2 2008-021H
>> 32791 SEEDS 2008-021J
>> 32792 RUBIN 8/PSLV 2008-021K
>> 32794 AMOS 3 2008-022A
>> 32953 YUBILEINY 2008-025A
>> 33492 GOSAT (IBUKI) 2009-002A
>> 33493 PRISM (HITOMI) 2009-002B
>> 33494 SPRITE-SAT (RISING) 2009-002C
>> 33495 KAGAYAKI 2009-002D
>> 33496 SOHLA-1 (MAIDO-1) 2009-002E
>> 33498 STARS (KUKAI) 2009-002G
>> 33499 KKS-1 (KISEKI) 2009-002H
>> 33595 EXPRESS AM-44 2009-007A
>> 34808 ANUSAT 2009-019B
>> 34941 PROTOSTAR 2 2009-027A
>> 35002 PHARMASAT 2009-028B
>> 35003 HAWKSAT 1 2009-028C
>> 35004 CP6 2009-028D
>> 35005 AEROCUBE 3 2009-028E
>> 35008 MERIDIAN 2 2009-029A
>> 35690 DRAGONSAT 2009-038B
>> 35693 ANDE POLLUX SPHERE 2009-038E
>> 35694 ANDE CASTOR SPHERE 2009-038F
>> 35866 OBJECT B 2009-049B
>> 35867 FREGAT/IRIS 2009-049C
>> 35868 OBJECT D 2009-049D
>> 35869 OBJECT E 2009-049E
>> 35870 SUMBANDILA 2009-049F
>> 35871 BLITS 2009-049G
>> 35931 OCEANSAT 2 2009-051A
>> 35932 OBJECT B 2009-051B
>> 35933 OBJECT C 2009-051C
>> 35934 OBJECT D 2009-051D
>> 35935 OBJECT E 2009-051E
>> 35936 RUBIN 9.1/RUBIN 9.2/PSLV 2009-051F
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nigel A. Gunn, 1865 El Camino Drive, Xenia, OH 45385-1115, USA.
>> tel +1 937 825 5032
>> Amateur Radio G8IFF W8IFF (was KC8NHF), e-mail nigel@xxxxx.xxx
>> www http://www.ngunn.net
>> Member of ARRL, GQRP #11396, QRPARCI #11644, SOC #548, Flying Pigs
>> QRP Club International #385,
>> Dayton ARA #2128, AMSAT-NA LM-1691, AMSAT-UK 0182,
>> MKARS, ALC, GCARES, XWARN.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the
>> author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Wanna lose weight? Weight Loss Programs that work. Click here.
>
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTFoYeubv8jWc2J01x17RB9rxqy1z
ST4lZx1CiCzVbXPBOexmuqUO8/
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the
> author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:27:54 +1000
From: Tony Langdon <vk3jed@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: James Craig <davenbeck.engineering@xxxxx.xxx>, John W Lee
<k6yk@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4abd6015.1608c00a.71e2.19cd@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 09:34 AM 9/26/2009, James Craig wrote:
>Good point. Not everybody is interested in monitoring the one way
>downlinks on the majority of these more recent birds. Why is it that
>there is no problem getting large numbers of these types of satellites
>into orbit, yet good old fashioned two way linear and FM transponder
>birds are relatively far and few between?
I for one was never a SWL, so I tend not to follow the one way
satellites, unless there's a compelling reason (e.g. for test
signals, or telemetry decoding - had fun decoding telemetry on AO-40
when it was first launched).
73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:47:18 +1000
From: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Sat status - new feature
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <047D7267D33A401A8C18EC4ED643F559@xxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Added a panel display
http://vk4tec.no-ip.org/sat_status/
Any other sats that make it onto the APRS_IS let me know and I can add
----------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Rich
Airways Technical Officer Grade 4
Surveillance - RADAR ADS-B
Amateur Radio Callsign VK4TEC
email: vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
web: www.tech-software.net
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 17:49:38 -0700
From: Mark VandeWettering <kf6kyi@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<d8eb7a910909251749w255ec9c8p251bdc79421e013f@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Good point. Not everybody is interested in monitoring the one way
> downlinks on the majority of these more recent birds. Why is it that
> there is no problem getting large numbers of these types of satellites
> into orbit, yet good old fashioned two way linear and FM transponder
> birds are relatively far and few between?
> Regards and 73,
> James - ZL4JM/VK5JC
Well, after the launch of AO-51 here in the U.S., the AMSAT membership
seemed to think that they should concentrate their efforts on a HEO launch.
The problem is that there really aren't any viable launch options for HEO
satellites. We aren't alone either: P3E is considerably further along than
any of the AMSAT-NA projects, and yet has no hint of how it might get
boosted to orbit.
Cubesats are being launched for one simple reason: people have figured
out how to fund low mass sats to low earth orbit. We could probably
launch a couple dozen LEO cubesats (or more) for what it would cost
to put just one payload into HEO, but nobody seems to really be interested
in doing that, since it won't give anyone the DX that they want. I think
there have been some interesting developments in micro propulsion
technologies, but it is still challenging to get a cubesat in orbit that can
serve as a transponder within the weight and space limitations that
cubesats have.
Perhaps when commercial vehicles like the Falcon 9 begin launching,
we'll see a sufficient reduction in payload boosting costs to make
raising the money for a HEO satellite with significant mass reasonable.
We shall have to see.
Mark K6HX
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:52:10 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
To: "Bruce Robertson" <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>, "Jeff Yanko"
<wb3jfs@xxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <007d01ca3e43$94abd2e0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Robertson" <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "Jeff Yanko" <wb3jfs@xxx.xxx>
Cc: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 3:53 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
Jeff --
<snip>
2. If I'm correct, your replacement duplexer is rather larger than the
one it is replacing. It would be a great topic for a Journal article
if someone with the necessary equipment and expertise were to design a
replacement with less loss.
73, Bruce
VE9QRP
Hi Bruce, VE9QRP
See QEX March/April 2002 page 47 "A Low-Loss VHF/UHF Diplexer"
by Pavel Zanek OK1DNZ
Loss = 0.15 dB at VHF and 0.40 dB at UHF
Insulation VHF/UHF = 70 dB
Max RF power at VHF or UHF or VHF/UHF = 100 watt CW at 25?
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:15:53 -0500
From: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
Cc: "'AMSAT-BB'" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL114-DS239C7FF3C139A9A125DE238AD80@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Has anyone played with Kent's idea of insulating the elements from the boom?
73,
Joe kk0sd
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Bruce Robertson
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:53 AM
To: Jeff Yanko
Cc: AMSAT-BB
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
Jeff --
I really appreciate you doing this research for us. Two additional
ideas come to mind:
1. Those of us with FT-817s could configure its two RF ports to use
different bands and connect the rig directly to the beam's antenna
connectors, bypassing the duplexer. For this purpose, higher-quality
bnc terminated cable would be useful.
2. If I'm correct, your replacement duplexer is rather larger than the
one it is replacing. It would be a great topic for a Journal article
if someone with the necessary equipment and expertise were to design a
replacement with less loss.
73, Bruce
VE9QRP
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:10 AM, Jeff Yanko <wb3jfs@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A quick update to my new project to improving the Arrow antenna,
efficiency
> wise. ?I wanted to see how well it would perform on gaining and losing
> access during AOS and LOS. ?AO-27 is not a good choice since the timer is
> turned on when it is well above the AOS horizon and it is switched off
> before it reaches its LOS horizon. ?That leaves a dependable AO-51 to test
> it out.
>
> With the last setup, the OEM diplexer provided by Arrow Antenna, I would
> copy AO-51 about 3 minutes after AOS and lose it about 3 to 4 minutes
before
> LOS. ?Not bad, but people were saying they worked the birds when they were
1
> degree off of the horizon. ?I have some pine trees that could be an issue
> but they are spaced far enough apart that I can work between them and I
also
> have to deal with the McCollough Range to the SSE of me here in Las Vegas,
> NV. ?Today, there were 2 passes of AO-51, one at 12 degrees elevation, the
> other at 74 degrees. ?During both passes, I began to copy the downlink
about
> a 1.25 minute after AOS. ?A considerable difference from 3 minutes. ?The
> downlink also improved down to about minute before LOS. ?On the last pass
I
> worked KG6NUB at 0124z and LOS was 0125z and my downlink sounded fairly
> good, though I was fighting desense. ?(That's another issue I need to
> resolve.) ?Also, on both passes, I never once lost the downlink. ?No
> dropouts or fades. ?I'm still amazed.
>
> Another issue I came across was how wide the beamwidth is of the Arrow
> Antenna between the Arrow diplexer and the new diplexer. ?I was wondering
if
> this was going to happen and it did. ?The reason that this happened was
with
> the old diplexer, the signal attenuated so much that you had to be pointed
> right smack dab on the bird, a few degrees off and you lost the signal.
> Now, with the new diplexer, you can point the beam in the general
direction
> and still copy the bird. ?In most cases I had to turn the beam 90 degrees
> before I completely lost the downlink! ?Twisting the antenna to make
> polarization changes makes absolutely no difference now. ?This also
> attributes to the fact that now I'm copying the entire pass without
dropouts
> or fades. ?Makes sense. ?What I've regained over the lossy diplexer makes
up
> for any polarization differences, etc. for a better copiable signal.
>
> Next weekend I will have to try more passes and get a feel of how much
this
> system has changed.
>
>
> 73,
>
> Jeff ?WB3JFS
> Las Vegas, NV
> DM26
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:05:12 -0500
From: "Alan VE4YZ" <ve4yz@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: All Satellites
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <B1A8CD67A4274A8EB14DDE49D46AE8CC@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Isn't it neat that Amateur Radio allows you to have a very narrow interest
and get enjoyment out of it. From HF to multi GHz. From terrestrial to EME.
One subset is amateur satellites. Further subsets within amateur satellite
includes those who love to work the FM Grid Sats, others like the "beep"
Sats while others explore the old dead birds looking for a Phoenix a la
AO-7.
To complain about the use of spectrum by one group or another is nuts. In
the last day I've read such nonsense as "use of amateur frequencies for
telemetry". Duh? Was it being used for something else? Did anyone notice
that the "beep" Sats for the most part do their beeping on UHF. Those are
not exclusive amateur frequencies. We, as amateurs, are the SECONDARY user
of a shared frequency.
In the meantime, instead of complaining, get involved with your local
CubeSat project to make sure that a FM or linear transponder is part of the
spec. I think Delfi is a perfect model for us to pursue. Post science,
post amateurs assisting with near whole earth orbit data acquisition, the
satellite is turned over for amateur use. What a wonderful model of
collaboration and win-win Delfi set for all of us.
Which leads me to my final comment on this Friday night rant... I don't
expect to see another HEO or MEO in my life time. I think there is a better
chance to see a constellation of LEO picosats running a mesh-like network.
A network built up gradually over time by the CubeSat community 2 or 3 cubes
at a time over many years costing no one group an arm and a leg to move
toward that goal. No one launch failure jeopardizing the big picture. No
one satellite failing in the constellation putting down the whole network or
our enjoyment of it use.
Step'n off the soap box...
73, Alan VE4YZ
EN19kv
AMSAT LM 2352
http://www.wincube.ca
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:42:44 -0500
From: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
To: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: 'AMSAT-BB' <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4ABD7194.8070008@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
as in the texts below, there is something else going on here.
That Diplexor can not be all that bad. two reasons.
How many db down is the front to side of that antenna?
and I can not imaging someone would sell a diplexor that has greater
than 20 db of losses.
because of the statement that how criticalpolarity was with the
original, and now the antenna has to be nearly 90 degrees cross
polarized to make it drop out uhh
that close to 30 db,
at least 20,,
something else is going on here
Gary "Joe" Mayfield wrote:
>>
>>Another issue I came across was how wide the beamwidth is of the Arrow
>>Antenna between the Arrow diplexer and the new diplexer. I was wondering
>>
>>
>if
>
>
>>this was going to happen and it did. The reason that this happened was
>>
>>
>with
>
>
>>the old diplexer, the signal attenuated so much that you had to be pointed
>>right smack dab on the bird, a few degrees off and you lost the signal.
>>Now, with the new diplexer, you can point the beam in the general
>>
>>
>direction
>
>
>>and still copy the bird. In most cases I had to turn the beam 90 degrees
>>before I completely lost the downlink! Twisting the antenna to make
>>polarization changes makes absolutely no difference now. This also
>>attributes to the fact that now I'm copying the entire pass without
>>
>>
>dropouts
>
>
>>or fades. Makes sense. What I've regained over the lossy diplexer makes
>>
>>
>up
>
>
>>for any polarization differences, etc. for a better copiable signal.
>>
>>Next weekend I will have to try more passes and get a feel of how much
>>
>>
>this
>
>
>>system has changed.
>>
>>
>>73,
>>
>>Jeff WB3JFS
>>Las Vegas, NV
>>DM26
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.416 / Virus Database: 270.13.113/2395 - Release Date: 09/25/09
17:52:00
>
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 498
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
