| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 04.10.09 18:32l 932 Lines 31935 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB4515
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 515
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<PY1AYH<PY1AYH<CX2SA
Sent: 091004/1623Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:7143 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB4515
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. PDA tracking software (Howie)
2. Latest Keps - Newest Birds (Randy)
3. Re: FW: OFF grid solar system (Roger Kolakowski)
4. Re: Latest Keps - Newest Birds (Randy)
5. Re: Demo in Long Beach - With a Difference (David Maciel)
6. Re: Understanding ITAR (John B. Stephensen)
7. Re: AO-51 (Eric Knaps)
8. Re: Arrow Diplexer loss + Arrow v Elk (Jeff Yanko)
9. Re: Portable Tracking (Joe)
10. Re: Arrow Antennas - Horrible Performers (Charles Suprin)
11. Re: Latest Keps - Newest Birds (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
12. Sunday Morning AO-51 Pass (Joel Black)
13. AO-07 Doppler entry SatPC (joe barkley)
14. Re: Arrow Antennas - Horrible Performers (Clint Bradford)
15. Rotators (Clint Bradford)
16. NF (Fitri Rahmawati)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 22:28:01 -0400
From: "Howie" <HowieD231@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] PDA tracking software
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP1519C54A7133E48A7F3F60E7D00@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I have used SatME on my T-Mobile Dash and it works quite well. I like
runnung tracking software n my cellphone because you always have very
accurate time from the cell network. This program is a Java midlet, so your
cellhone or PDA needs to be able to run Java. You can find the program at:
http://www.k0sm.com/_mgxroot/page_10732.html
Howie
AB2S
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 23:04:09 -0400
From: "Randy" <RSwart1@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Latest Keps - Newest Birds
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <022601ca449f$57880020$0301a8c0@xxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Can someone email them to me?
Thanks..
Randy - N2CUA
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 23:24:51 -0400
From: "Roger Kolakowski" <rogerkola@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FW: OFF grid solar system
To: "Thomas McGrane" <n2oeq@xxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <004e01ca44a2$41403c80$0300a8c0@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Pat...
There is no reason to requote your entire thought process...you have done it
3 times...you are at the point of becoming obnoxious.
I find that it is more effective to restate original opinions in different
words so that others may better understand what I am trying to say. If
people don't understand you, you should try to address their concerns, not
just repeat the same tome.
You, yourself stated that you "try to write carefully to convey my meaning"
but trying is not always successful the first time. Address the issues , not
the personalities.
Roger
WA1KAT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas McGrane" <n2oeq@xxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:18 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] FW: OFF grid solar system
> Hi again, Nigel Gunn did a mercilous, malicious, propoganda hatchet job
> on my solar energy posting of this morning so I thought I would repost
> it to restore the original meaning if anyone wanted to know. When I
> write, I try to write carefully to convey my meaning. Unfortunately,
> creative trimming of my words changed the meaning so here it is again.
> If someone replies, please include the original in its original form
> and entirety so as not to confuse those I am trying to help.
> To you nigel, apparently, there are still tories and patriots here in
> America. We could use you in Afghanistan and if you go, please send
> home a young man who is still friendly.
> pat
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 00:03:56 -0400
From: "Randy" <RSwart1@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Latest Keps - Newest Birds
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <022e01ca44a7$b2041680$0301a8c0@xxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Looking for The last several new ones ..
Especially BEESAT ..
Thanks ..
Has Sumba been commissioned yet?
Randy - N2CUA ..
Slowly getting SAT PC32 to work for me ..
Had my first AO-07 contact today .. :)
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy [mailto:RSwart1@xxxxx.xx.xxxx
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 11:04 PM
To: 'amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx
Subject: Latest Keps - Newest Birds
Can someone email them to me?
Thanks..
Randy - N2CUA
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 22:50:16 -0500
From: "David Maciel" <xe3dx@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Demo in Long Beach - With a Difference
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <A022EBF77B354229BFFF6D158B6405DF@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
reply-type=response
Clint, was a pleasure to communicate with you, thanks for DM03 yesterday,
I was in EK36, was a good experience to participate at the show, thanks
also to the whole group. desire to hear soon.
XE3DX
David Maciel
xe3dx@xxxxx.xxx
www.qsl.net/xe3dx/
Amateur Ham Radio
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Clint Bradford" <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
> To: "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 1:27 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Demo in Long Beach - With a Difference
>
>
> Everything was proceeding marvelously last night at the Associated
> Radio Amateurs of Long Beach (CA) meeting. A few folks showed up early
> as we worked the 0053 GMT pass of AO-51 from outside the meeting room.
> We then moved inside for my presentation.
>
> Since my wife is in finishing a month-long trip to Tibet, I left my
> phone "on" in buzz mode in case she called or sent text messages. In
> the middle of my show, my phone buzzes. I calmly sneak a look at the
> phone, and was pleasantly surprised to see a QSL from XE3DX David
> Maciel - one of the contacts we made earlier!
>
> Oh, the audience was properly impressed!
>
> THANK YOU, David! And thanks to the others that made that demo a
> success.
>
> Clint Bradford, K6LCS
> http://www.work-sat.com
>
> P.S. - Upcoming AMSAT presentations in Southern California ...
>
> October 5 - WARA (Fullerton) meeting*
> October 8 - EchoLink ?SCARS? Node 96140 5:30PM PDT
> October 15 - West Coast ARC (Huntington Beach)*
> October 17 - Victor Valley ARC?s JOTA
> November 5 - Crest REACT (Corona)
> November 8 - QWCA Chapter 7 (Norwalk)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 6
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:53:28 -0000
From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Understanding ITAR
To: "Bill Ress" <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Wayne Estes"
<w9ae@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <B4C21FC21A34400F949AC717BEFCD4A1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
One purpose of ITAR is preventing technological advances useful to our
military (including satellites) from getting into enemy hands. Security
people always want regulations to be as broad as possible. Even if 99% of
the technology is available elsewhere they want it examined in order to
catch the 1% that could be a problem.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Ress" <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Wayne Estes" <w9ae@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 22:03 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Understanding ITAR
> Hi Wayne,
>
> The State Department defines what is considered a "munition" in the ITAR
> regulations. See: http://pmddtc.state.gov/
>
> The criteria is obviously determined by the State Department with
> direction from the Congress. The article just tries to describe some
> examples without trying to justify or explain why something is or isn't
> a munition.
>
> The main point of the article is that any communications satellite,
> whether it is an Amateur, a university or a commercial satellite is
> considered by ITAR to be a munition controlled by ITAR export
> regulations. That's a fact and to understand the criteria is to
> understand the thinking of the authors of the regulation (State
> Department and the Congress), which I can't do.
>
> To be sure, export regulations can be complicated and at times appear to
> us as being irrational. But the fact remains, ITAR is an export law that
> we at AMSAT have to comply with.
>
> Regards...Bil - N6GHz
>
> Wayne Estes wrote:
>> I just read the article about ITAR in the Jan/Feb 2009 AMSAT Journal. I
>> have to say that the article didn't help me understand ITAR at all. It
>> seems to have skipped the first several steps in the explanation.
>>
>> For example, what criteria are used to judge that a device has dual use
>> as a munition? It is not at all obvious to my feeble mind how a 23 GHz
>> amplifier or IHU-3 (computer) can be judged to have dual use as a
>> munition.
>>
>> What criteria does ITAR law use to EXCLUDE devices that have obvious
>> dual uses as munitions? For example, GSM cell phones have been used to
>> remotely control explosive devices that killed thousands of U.S.
>> servicemen. Are they not regulated because they are too ubiquitous to
>> control?
>>
>> Wayne Estes W9AE
>> Oakland, Oregon, USA, CN83ik
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 7
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 10:06:19 +0200
From: Eric Knaps <eric.knaps@xxxxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-51
Cc: BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4AC8577B.9070601@xxxxxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hello Tim,
I have the same problem here in Europe. Everybody making a zoo on the
usual transponder and nobody on the qrp transponder.
Calling cq during the entire pass and all I heard was myself with
amazing signals with only 2 watts on the uplink.
Maybe some operators in Europe read this and use the qrp transponder
while it is on.
73,
ON4HF.
Eric Knaps
Waterstraat 30
B-3980 Tessenderlo
Belgium
Tel. +32472985876 (mobile)
http://www.on4hf.be
Tim - N3TL schreef:
> In case anyone at all is interested - which doesn't appear to be the case
- the QRP pair on AO-51 remains active at 145.880 up and 435.150 (+/-
Doppler) down.
>
> >From here, it's a shame to hear the chaos on the other V/U frequency
pair, but not have a single station respond to calls on the QRP pair during
a 54-degree pass up the east coast of North America. This has proven to be
the case on multiple passes this week.
>
> Maybe someone will show up later tonight or in the morning. Or ... I'll
keep talking to myself .... hihi.
>
> 73 to all,
>
> Tim - N3TL
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 8
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 02:22:06 -0700
From: "Jeff Yanko" <wb3jfs@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow Diplexer loss + Arrow v Elk
To: "KI6RRQ" <ki6rrq@xxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <3E40CBB045F14526B7D4A3DCB4F7BB2E@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hi Rich,
Technically the coax is the same. It's the same brand, Intercom, and model,
2482 RG-58C/U, coax. Had about 13 feet or so rolled in a coil so I cut it
and made two pieces, one for 144 the other for 440. BNC's on both ends.
The only difference now is the length is a little longer, by a couple feet,
for both instead of the single shorter piece supplied by Arrow.
There very well could be problems with the soldering connections on the
diplexer itself or the BNC connectors. However, I'm not seeing anything
that indicates a short or open anywhere on the diplexer board or connectors.
However, it's still possible. I don't have an Elk antenna, just the Arrow
so I'm not comparing or working with 2 different antennas.
As for additional variables, as I mentioned in the first post i was using a
TH-D7A(G) HT with the Arrow. I've purchased a TM-D710 mobile rig and use it
for the sats. The HT has a problem with the headphone jack, but the speaker
works fine so there's no problem with the receive audio. My comparisons are
using both rigs, not on the same pass obviously, with the Arrow diplexer and
the Comet diplexer. Even with the HT, there is a considerable difference in
what is copied compared to before.
You mention about the Elk's F/B ratio. I've noticed the same thing on the
Arrow. A while back, before the new diplexer, I contacted a local about 15
miles away, he was running about 2 watts and no matter which direction I
turned the beam, the signal strength never changed. Hmmm.
I wholehearted agree with you that both antennas are very well assembled.
There has never been any questions about the quality of the material or
workmanship of either. However, there is one thing that most people get
drawn into and that is the statement you made "both antennas work pretty
darn good." Just about anything will "work" if it happens to be close
enough to its sweet spot. What needs to be focused on is how efficiently is
it performing? Let's get it in the sweet spot. I would rather have any
object, including an antenna, to not only work, but work at its best
efficiency. Let me make my point using a popular antenna in today's HF
communication. This is the 43 vertical antenna. Don't get me wrong, there
is absolutely nothing wrong with the 43 foot vertical. The antenna performs
well on the lower bands, 40, 30, 20 and 17 meters. 80 meters requires a
loading coil but that's no big deal. The problem lies in the performance
above 17 meters. Sure, you can make some contacts but the radiation pattern
is so poor you'd wonder how you ever made the contact.
Let me make another analogy pertaining to work and working efficiently. I
had a Pontiac 1996 Grand Am with a 3.1 liter V-6 engine. It put out 175
horsepower at 5200RPM with 195 F/P of torque. I now have a 2008 Toyota RAV4
with a 3.5 liter V-6 engine that put's out 269 horsepower at 5200RPM with
248 F/P torque. The kicker, the RAV4 weighs 800 pounds more and gets better
gas mileage than the Grand Am. I know what everybody is thinking, "geez,
there's 12 years difference between the two so the technology has changed so
there should be an improvement." To a degree, your correct in thinking
that. However, over that amount of time it was designed, tested,
redesigned, retested, to work efficiently, not just work.
73,
Jeff WB3JFS
----- Original Message -----
From: "KI6RRQ" <ki6rrq@xxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 2:49 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Arrow Diplexer loss + Arrow v Elk
> Jeff, you said; "The antenna and coax remain the same, the difference, the
> diplexer."
>
> My Arrow diplexer has three factory fixed wires coming out of it, one for
> the radio and two that go to BNC connectors on the Arrow antenna. So,
> you
> cannot say; the coax remains the same! The coax on your diplexer or the
> connections to it, can be at fault as well. These coax wires and how well
> they are connected to the Arrow diplexer, are another variable that you
> have
> not considered in your statement because they are removed from the mix
> when
> using the Elk, unless you are trying to use the Arrow diplexer on the Elk
> Log Periodic antenna, Which I doubt because I am assuming you used the
> same
> one radio configuration on the Elk as you did the Arrow with your diplexer
> but if you are that could be presenting some other variables to produce
> the
> results your experiencing. You have to use different cables for your
> Comet
> Duplexer on the Arrow, from the Comet, to the antenna connection.
>
> Although, I agree that the Arrow seems to pick up the signal a little
> later
> then my Elk antenna, both antennas work pretty darn good, IMO. I like
> them
> both and recommend them both. I do not have a technical background so my
> comments here, are all anecdotal in nature but the other thing I have
> noticed between the two antennas, is that when I make terrestrial contacts
> with them, the Elk appears to radiate almost as well toward the back, as
> toward the front. I have been told this is called front to back ratio.
> If
> I point north, a guy from the south calls back and I tell him, wow I am
> pointed north, let me turn and point it toward you.......any better....
> And
> usually there is little if any improvement, while on the Elk and what
> blows
> my mind is, there is also a fair bit of response from people even 90
> degrees
> from the business end of the Elk. I have tried the same with the Arrow
> and
> gotten much different reports. This is only a general statement; I think
> the Arrow has a better front to back ratio, more energy going out the
> front
> end but I know there are other variables such as; hand held or up on the
> tripod I use to hold them each up (at times) and perhaps the ground under
> me, or the moisture in the ground during the different attempts, etc.
> (4-5'
> above the ground on tripod and me not always right behind it, so plenty of
> variables but in general, that is my experience in the field)
>
> Nevertheless, I have mentioned this to several on the board who have the
> Elk's and no one has responded that they have tested there's in this
> regard,
> so take this with a grain of salt for now. To others, I would love to
> hear
> your experience in this regard. I have asked a capable HAM friend to
> help
> me figure this out, properly, so one day I will have more then anecdotal
> info.
>
> I think both antennas are very well built and work well for satellite and
> emergency communications! I have often pulled one of them out, with
> success, when band conditions would not allow an Omni to get the job done
> on
> my VX-7R. I found the Elk a little cheaper to buy unless you do not
> purchase the Arrow diplexer. For others I will point out that, you can
> use
> the Arrow with two radios without a duplexer, with same two radio
> configuration, you will need a duplexer for the Elk and of course the
> reverse is true if you are using one radio for dual band work, as I do,
> the
> Arrow will require a duplexer and the Elk will not. Also as many of you
> know the Arrow diplexer is only rated for 10 watts but without it both
> antennas will handle much more.
>
> 73 de Rich
> KI6RRQ
>
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 23:26:38 -0700
> From: "Jeff Yanko" <wb3jfs@xxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
> To: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "'Charles
> Suprin'" <hamaa1vs@xxxxx.xxx>
>
> Could very well be.
>
> 73,
>
> Jeff WB3JFS
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary "Joe" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: "'Jeff Yanko'" <wb3jfs@xxx.xxx>; "'Charles Suprin'"
> <hamaa1vs@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
>
>
>> We are missing the easy answer. He had diplexer that was off spec. It
>> happens.
>>
>> 73,
>> Joe kk0sd
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
>> Behalf Of Jeff Yanko
>> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 4:28 PM
>> To: Charles Suprin
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow antenna reconfiguration results - UPDATE
>>
>> Hi Charles and the group,
>>
>> FB on the numbers. Interesting to say the least and thanks for taking
>> the
>> time to look further into this topic.
>>
>> Questions? I have a few after looking at these numbers and performing
>> more
>> observations.
>>
>> First, are you testing just the diplexer and not the diplexer and the
>> antenna combined? This could result in an overall number and not just
>> the
>> diplexer alone. How could there be a large discrepency between
>> preliminary
>> reports, 2.65dB and .5dB now. Could be equipment calibration, human
>> error,
>> etc. from previously tested, or attempted testing of the device. I don't
>> believe any improvements have been made to the Arrow diplexer, but who
>> knows?
>>
>> Second, I switched back to the Arrow diplexer and made another comparison
>> with the Comet diplexer. Again, no comparison, the Comet outperformed.
>> Why
>> would this happen if the two are pretty close to one another in numbers.
>> The Comet has .25db loss at VHF and .26 at UHF.
>>
>> Third, with the Arrow diplexer I wouldn't begin to receive the birds
>> until
>> almost 3 minutes after AOS, with the Comet diplexer a minute to 1.5
>> minutes
>> after AOS. Yes, watch calibrated to WWV and multiple times of acquiring
>> the
>> birds. I've tried both setups with the HT and D710 and they both show the
>> same results respectively, Arrow diplexer vs. Comet diplexer. The
>> antenna
>> and coax remain the same, the difference, the diplexer. May not be test
>> lab
>> quality but something is proving itself. What is it?
>>
>> Finally, is it just my Arrow diplexer? Doesn't appear to be shorted or
>> any
>> defects to it. Actually looks great and assembled very well. I've
>> encountered others saying the same thing. However, a very noticable
>> difference to the overall performance.
>>
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Jeff WB3JFS
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:24:47 -0400
From: Joe <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Portable Tracking
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4AC885FF.40209@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Thanks for all the comments. Looks like the
cheap way to go is an old Palm and the high end would be
the a Netbook of some type or iphone.
Most recommended software was PocketSat, Sat Me and the apps for the
smart phones.
Having neither of the above mentioned, I will stay on the cheap
and pick up a color Palm at the Melbourne hamfest this weekend and give
PocketSat a try, or maybe look at my local pawn shop here.
Thanks All,
Joe
KI4TZ
joe barkley wrote:
> Hi All,
> I am looking for opinions and idea on a PDA or device and software or
> application I can take with me to show the satellite pass predictions
> when I travel.
> Thanks
> Joe
> KI4TZ
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 10
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:45:40 -0400
From: Charles Suprin <hamaa1vs@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow Antennas - Horrible Performers
To: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4AC88AE4.4040807@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Clint,
What do you have against the anritsu equipment I used to counter the
2.65dB claim?
I found UHF to be about a half dB and VHF to be better than that and
when I checked the calibration it was within a tenth of a dB.
Charles
Clint Bradford wrote:
> >> ... from what I have read, a 2.65db loss of signal using Arrow's
> crappy duplexer ...
>
> Unless an Arrow Antenna performance report beings with, "My Motorola
> test equipment - certified within the last year - indicates ... [such-
> and-such performance characteristics] ... " - this that post is
> worthless to me.
>
> And should be worthless to anyone demanding the best-available
> information.
>
> And such mis-information shouldn't be passed on to anyone else. And
> messagegroup moderators should delete such undocumented tripe.
>
> Needless to say, I haven't read much of the recent "Arrow Performance"
> threads. Just aren't worth my time.
>
> Just my opinion, of course. I have been wrong.
>
> I couldn't ask for - nor imagine - better performance from my Arrow
> Antennas than what I am enjoying now. They prove themselves pass after
> pass, demo after demo ....
>
> Clint Bradford
> West coast curmudgeon
> http://www.work-sat.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 11
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:08:09 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Latest Keps - Newest Birds
To: RSwart1@xxxxx.xx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4AC89029.9050706@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
There ya go!
They were all on the internet.... all the time.
ANDE POLLUX SPHERE
1 35693U 09038E 09277.00326558 .00031788 00000-0 15038-3 0 651
2 35693 051.6386 104.4779 0003171 253.4555 106.6054 15.82708267 10335
ANDE CASTOR SPHERE
1 35694U 09038F 09275.76672611 +.00016724 +00000-0 +86189-4 0 00612
2 35694 051.6407 111.2356 0002897 257.4411 102.6233 15.81318149010134
STERKH 2
1 35866U 09049B 09275.70958850 +.00000178 +00000-0 +10000-3 0 00176
2 35866 098.7997 325.8597 0003900 037.3414 322.8003 14.22296815002136
FREGAT/IRIS
1 35867U 09049C 09276.69687497 .00002264 00000-0 10000-3 0 282
2 35867 097.3721 326.4748 0008908 231.8134 128.2150 15.22717154 2434
TATIANA 2
1 35868U 09049D 09275.71181197 +.00000177 +00000-0 +10000-3 0 00169
2 35868 098.7990 325.8524 0004806 027.2956 332.8440 14.22085658002133
UGATUSAT
1 35869U 09049E 09277.19059161 .00000176 00000-0 10000-3 0 157
2 35869 098.7993 327.3226 0004792 039.3299 320.8169 14.21977444 2341
SUMBANDILA
1 35870U 09049F 09277.22936124 .00000647 00000-0 30627-4 0 450
2 35870 097.3719 326.9888 0010420 232.8713 169.4526 15.22798787 2515
BLITS
1 35871U 09049G 09277.19491029 .00000174 00000-0 10000-3 0 117
2 35871 098.8008 327.3202 0004210 027.5858 332.5495 14.21538851 1730
OCEANSAT 2
1 35931U 09051A 09277.20293765 .00005986 00000-0 15388-2 0 205
2 35931 098.3387 011.8102 0001610 195.6557 164.3976 14.50530447 1583
SWISSCUBE
1 35932U 09051B 09276.98665178 .00005220 00000-0 12986-2 0 179
2 35932 098.3324 011.6128 0008081 257.4980 102.4855 14.52124526 1552
UWE-2
1 35933U 09051C 09275.67377788 +.00007801 +00000-0 +19109-2 0 00117
2 35933 098.3320 010.3162 0007029 275.1649 084.8658 14.52708989001378
BEESAT
1 35934U 09051D 09276.29342586 .00003303 00000-0 81574-3 0 147
2 35934 098.3281 010.9203 0005505 277.5231 082.4994 14.52722575 1461
ITUpSAT1
1 35935U 09051E 09275.95299435 +.00001930 +00000-0 +48744-3 0 00139
2 35935 098.3372 010.5918 0007826 258.7460 101.2731 14.52122994001418
Randy wrote:
> Looking for The last several new ones ..
> Especially BEESAT ..
> Thanks ..
> Has Sumba been commissioned yet?
--
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.
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:39:12 -0500
From: Joel Black <jbblack@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Sunday Morning AO-51 Pass
To: Amsat Reflector <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4AC89770.5000706@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I finally have my rotor and coax connected into the shack and just
listening right now. Heard W7JPI this morning on AO-51, sounded great.
73,
Joel, W4JBB
-------------- next part --------------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2412 - Release Date: 10/03/09
18:34:00
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 10:59:30 -0400
From: joe barkley <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-07 Doppler entry SatPC
To: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4AC8B852.203@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi All,
Fairly new at all this and
I believe I hit something wrong in my CAT menu for AO-07 and changed the
Doppler settings.
What are the proper values for the Doppler file now for it to properly
track.
Thanks
Joe
KI4TZ
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 08:22:07 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow Antennas - Horrible Performers
To: Charles Suprin <hamaa1vs@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <D8890CF0-F05E-407F-91AC-EF8E749B67BC@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>> ... What do you have against the Anritsu equipment ...
Absolutely nothing. They make excellent test and measurement equipment.
>> ... I used to counter the 2.65dB claim?
Excuse me for missing your post!
>> ... I found UHF to be about a half dB and VHF to be better than
that and when I checked the calibration it was within a tenth of a
dB ...
THAT is much closer to reality. And THANK YOU for adding sanity and
"measured" results to this conversation.
Charles - I had a customer return an Arrow antenna, ranting and raving
that it wasn't working. What I discovered was that he "accidentally"
sent about 100W into the duplexer, burning out its first inductor. VHF
performance was miserable ... UHF seemed OK. But the Arrow - in HIS
mind - failed.
And so it goes ....
Clint, K6LCS
http://www.work-sat.com
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 09:07:26 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Rotators
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <382542BA-ABA2-4AC2-A07D-D4AAA9A778C3@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Besides the Yaesu G-5500 and its GS-232A interface, what other rotator/
computer controllers are reliable performers?
I am rotator-knowledge-clueless ... I only have expeience with the
'5500.
Clint, K6LCS
http://www.work-sat.com
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 01:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Fitri Rahmawati <fitri_9979@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] NF
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <998515.20595.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
hi,
sorry I'm new
?
how exactly NF at Yaesu FT-847 transceiver for UHF 437,325 mhz ( 69 cm ) ?
?
Thank's
Fitri Rahmawati - Indonesia
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 515
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
