| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 30.11.09 22:06l 282 Lines 9658 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB4635
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 635
Path: IZ3LSV<IW0QNL<F4BWT<F4DUR<CX2SA
Sent: 091130/2003Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:21633 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB4635
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Icom 910H vs Kenwood TS2000 (Jeff Moore)
2. Re: Icom 910H vs Kenwood TS2000 (Tom)
3. Re: morning pass AO-51 (OZ1MY)
4. Re: Interference in Spain (Clint Bradford)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:15:38 -0800
From: "Jeff Moore" <tnetcenter@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Icom 910H vs Kenwood TS2000
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BFE1D4E6967C46E799B14B396CD2AB59@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
The IC-910H is officially discontinued by Icom. It's being replaced by the
IC-9100 which is a "dc to light" "all-in-one" box like the TS-2000. The
IC-9100 isn't yet available in the US - still awaiting FCC approval.
According to Icom, the IC-9100 is a combination of the 746Pro (also
discontinued) and the 910H. No pricing yet either, but I wouldn't be
surprised if it comes out substantially more expensive that the TS-2000.
Icom plans to debut the IC-9100 at next years Dayton Hamvention. If it's
significantly more expensive than the TS-2000, I'll buy the Kenwood rig.
Jeff Moore -- KE7ACY
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom" <k0tw@xxx.xxx>
I plan to purchase a new home transceiver in the next few months and I've
narrowed my choices between a 910H and a TS2000. Thinking only of satellite
operation (ignoring the HF capability of the TS2000), is there a general
preference in the Amsat community of one over the other? Reasons?
Thanks for your opinions.
Tom, K?TW
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:38:41 -0700
From: "Tom" <k0tw@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Icom 910H vs Kenwood TS2000
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <213BB602D0E3413595A7A919BC179BFB@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thanks for all of the great information. Since both the TS2000 and IC910H
have been around a while I believe that most of their 'problems' have been
at least discovered. So, in that respect, I'm leaning away from the "still
to be debugged" IC-9100. Also new rigs always are priced high in the
beginning of their life, as we all know. I know that some of the ham dealers
are offering "Closeout" prices on the 910H but I didn't see much difference
from previous pricing.
Not to prolong this thread but Jerry's append (below) brings up another
question. How much antenna is "too much" for satellite operation. Someone
earlier mentioned that an 11 element yagi might have a beam width too narrow
to closely follow an LEO bird. I had planned on using yagis with 13 elements
on 2M and 18 els on 70cm. Is that a bad plan?
Thanks again.
Tom, K?TW
> Hi; I have owned the Ft-736 R and the Ft-847, which I am using now.
> No matter which rig you decide to buy the most important thing
> is the antenna system.
> I use KLM,s with switchers and pre amps.
> I switch my pre amps off and on from the shack.
> My 847 has a pre amp built in too.
> Nothing is better than MAST MOUNTED PRE AMPS THOUGH.
> If my 847 goes bad I will replace it with another used 847.
> I also work a lot of HF too.
> I run barefoot on HF all the time.
> I also get through all the pile ups because I have a good
> antenna
> with gain.
> Through the years I have made over 15,000 satellite
> contacts alone.
> 73,s Jerry w0sat
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:51:06 +0100
From: "OZ1MY" <oz1my@xxxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: morning pass AO-51
To: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000e01ca71f6$7b037c80$6501a8c0@xxxxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Domenico,
Thanks for the correction.
It is not so often Italian radio amateurs that are
the problem.
I too would like a HEO - in the meantime I will
use whatever satellite we have :-)
73 OZ1MY
Ib
----- Original Message -----
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
To: "OZ1MY" <oz1my@xxxxxx.xx>; "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: <sq7dqx@xxxxxx.xxxx.xx>
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: morning pass AO-51
> Hi ib, OZ1MY
>
> The accent of the interfering station on AO-51 is from Sardinia Island
> and the person speaking is a radioamateur discussing about a 50 ohm
> impedance with another Ham.
>
> www.enduro.idl.pl/audio_sat/AO51_30_11_09_0754UTC.mp3
>
> You cannot solve the problem existing as well in Spain shooting down
> all taxi drivers that are using 2 meters for their communications.
>
> The only cure is to make the LEO satellite receivers less sensitive and
use
> more EIRP at the ground station.........no HT's my friend !
>
> The above problem was not existing on HEO satellites like OSCAR-10
> OSCAR-13 and AO40 because the EIRP necessary to access the transponder
> was almost 20 dB greater than the power radiated by a taxi driver or by
the
> Sardinian station.
>
> The second cure don't sell a tranceiver covering the amateur band to
> everybody without an amateur licence is against the commercial purposes
> i.e. it is unviable.
>
> I know that you will complain with my statement and the Spanish autorities
> but if you don't like the Spanish or Sardinia interference over AO-27,
AO-52
> and SO-50 you must pull for only one HEO and not for many supersensitive
> LEO's
>
> 73" de
>
> i8CVS Domenico
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "OZ1MY" <oz1my@xxxxxx.xx>
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 5:05 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: morning pass AO-51
>
> > Hi Mateusz,
> > It sounds like Spanish to me. I heard it during the pass
> > also.
> > In Spain some people use the 2 meter band for privat
> > talk. They are not necessarily radio amateurs.
> > It is an old story :-(
> >
> > I tried to contact the Spanish authorities - but
> > they do not do anything.
> >
> > It is often worse on the AO-27 uplink at 145.850 MHz.
> > Sometimes they block SO-50 - but you can not hear it -
> > however they make it drop out.
> >
> > 73 OZ1MY
> > Ib
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mateusz" <sq7dqx@xxxxxx.xxxx.xx>
> > To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 9:32 AM
> > Subject: [amsat-bb] morning pass AO-51
> >
> >
> > > Hallo
> > >
> > > Today morning I recorded signals from AO51 downlink with my call and a
> > > station in background:
> > > www.enduro.idl.pl/audio_sat/AO51_30_11_09_0754UTC.mp3
> > > Elevation was 3 deg and lower.
> > > Station heard in background probably doesn't know that transmits
within
> > > satellite part of 2m band, maybe it is not amateur?
> > >
> > > Matt SQ7DQX
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 4
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:56:26 -0800
From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Interference in Spain
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BDB6BF19-21A2-490F-8C95-F3EF49DDF6F0@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>> ... You cannot solve the problem existing as well in Spain
shooting down
all taxi drivers that are using 2 meters for their communications ...
I'll wager that I have more (a) licensed amateurs and (b) unlicensed
abusers of ham and commercial bands here in Southern California than
you do in your immediate area. The potential for illegal use and abuse
is greater here - but (knock on wood) we have very little problems.
I feel your frustration ... but I believe it can be solved with a
methodical education campaign. I've contacted several illegal dispatch
operations personally. I am not one to simply complain to our FCC and
think my job is done. I'd rather visit and explain to someone why
their ops are illegal, what the potential fines are (they range from US
$3,000 to US$10,000 a day, plus confiscation of all equipment), and
then show them how to get legal ... sometimes even using the equipment
they already own.
My methodology has worked on "problems" as large as a large commercial
air carrier to small, mom-and-pop dispatchers. I have solved several
problems in this manner.
>> ... The only cure is to make the LEO satellite receivers less
sensitive and use more EIRP at the ground station.........no HT's my
friend !
I think you are joking. I HOPE you are joking. One of my favorite ways
to get fellow amateurs interested in AMSAT and satellite operations is
to show them just how easy it is to work our LEO birds - with
equipment most hams already own (dual-band HT and a better antenna).
LEOs have a wonderful amateur radio public relations purpose.
I am not sure how your country's department of telecommunications
respects amateur radio. Contact them at ...
http://www.cmt.es/cmt_ptl_ext/SelectOption.do
... and see how they would like you to work on/with illegal operations.
Clint Bradford, K6LCS
http://www.work-sat.com
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 635
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
