| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 22.11.09 22:05l 179 Lines 6807 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB4620
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 620
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<PY1AYH<F4BWT<JH4XSY<JM1YSB<7M3TJZ<CX2SA
Sent: 091122/2002Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:19763 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB4620
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: adding UX-910 to radio (w4upd)
2. SO-67_22Nov2009_154455z audio (John Papay)
3. Re: adding UX-910 to radio (Edward Cole)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 13:07:58 -0500
From: w4upd <updwrb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: adding UX-910 to radio
To: Jack Barbera <barberaalderwood@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat Reflector <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4B097DFE.1020202@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I concur with all of the comments that have been forth coming. I
recently bought my IC-910H not knowing that the unit was going out of
production. However, its replacement appears to be a Kenwood TS2000 type
which includes HF as well as the satellite bands. Since I already have
multiple HF capabilities, I wanted something that would be more
satellite specific. I also have the old Kenwood TS711/811 units that I
might sell but I have found them still good units even being over 25
years old.
I have seen more and more 1.2Ghz activities in satellites and
terrestrial and suspect that it will continue. In the meantime, HRO (Ham
Radio Outlet) has reduced the price of the IC-UX910 unit to a nice
value, and with their free shipping and no sales tax, I found it to be a
good deal and bought one. It only took less than 5 minutes to install. I
doubt if you would go wrong in the additional investment.
Reid, W4UPD
Jack Barbera wrote:
> I've been thinking about adding the 1200 MHz band unit to my 910 radio.
My dilemma is foremost that will this band be used on any of the new
satellites? The rumor is that the 910 radio may be discontinued. The
question I have is whether to quickly obtain the module in the event that
this is also discontinued. I would really appreciate any thoughts on what
action I should take. I do like ICOM products but find it difficult to get
information about this type of situation. Thanks for any input. Jack WA1ZDV
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:02:49 -0500
From: John Papay <john@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] SO-67_22Nov2009_154455z audio
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <132181.96811.qm@xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Here is the recording of SO-67 22November2009
at 1545z. This was a 15 degree pass for me. I
was trying to work the bird mobile but was not
making it through enough for a qso.
The signal was very readable on the mobile using a
3/4 wave whip on 435 with a preamp right at the
antenna. Transmit antenna was a dual band Larsen on
the roof. Radio was a TS2000 running 50 watts.
The recording was made at the home station, unattended.
http://www.papays.com/SO-67_22Nov2009_154455z.mp3
There was no window on the 1717z pass. Hope someone
else recorded that one.
73,
John K8YSE
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:15:05 -0900
From: Edward Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: adding UX-910 to radio
To: "Stan, W1LE" <stanw1le@xxxxxxx.xxx>, Jack Barbera
<barberaalderwood@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat Reflector <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <200911221915.nAMJF6p1066987@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Another consideration for installing 1296 into a radio that will be
desk located is the feedline loss at 1296. If your antenna is a long
coax run from the radio, you may lose too much RF power and suffer
too much deterioration of noise figure using an inside unit. The
advantage of separate 1296 units is that one can run the IF over the
coax to the tower-mounted 1296 converter/amplifier and only a short
run to the antenna for 1296.
I have one of the very rare DEMI 144/1268 Tx converters (15w out) and
will be mounting it on the crossboom of my satellite array. This
means I can run cheap RG-213 on 144 from my radio and about 10-foot
of 1/2-inch hardline from the DEMI to the antenna (losing only 1-2w
of output). For AO-51 this is way more than needed power, but for a
MEO or HEO one needs much more power than 1-2w. I should have about
1300w ERP. My satellite tower is 150-feet from the shack. You
would need 1-5/8 inch hardline to get any useful RF on 1296 over that
long a run.
In fact I have just installed a 120-foot run of 1-5/8 inch hardline
for my eme tower and I have a 1296 loop-yagi (for terrestrial use)
that I feed with 60w. I will be lucky to get 30w to the 1296 antenna
with this hardline (coupled to 45-foot of 7/8 hardline running up the
50-foot tower). I have a GasFet preamp at the antenna so that coax
losses don't affect receiver NF.
The trick that many mw hams use is to locate the mw equipment close
to the antenna and avoid coax line losses.
73, Ed
At 08:07 AM 11/22/2009, Stan, W1LE wrote:
>In addition:
>
>A transverter is always possible to get on the 1.2 GHz band.
>Use a IC-706 MK2/G or similar radio as a 28 MHz IF.
>
>Transverters are available from DEMI and DB6NT and others, or homebrew
>ala W1GHZ.ORG
>
>Use the building block approach instead of the one box doing all.
>
>Of course, integrating your system with different building blocks is
>more complex than a "one box does all" approach.
>
>Stan, W1LE
>
>
>Jack Barbera wrote:
> > I've been thinking about adding the 1200 MHz band unit to my 910
> radio. My dilemma is foremost that will this band be used on any
> of the new satellites? The rumor is that the 910 radio may be
> discontinued. The question I have is whether to quickly obtain the
> module in the event that this is also discontinued. I would really
> appreciate any thoughts on what action I should take. I do like
> ICOM products but find it difficult to get information about this
> type of situation. Thanks for any input. Jack WA1ZDV
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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 member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 620
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
