| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 22.04.10 03:18l 948 Lines 26386 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB5183
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V5 183
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<ON0AR<7M3TJZ<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 100422/0214Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:55002 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB5183
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
2. SDO (Trevor .)
3. W1RJA EME event, Echoes of Apollo (Luc Leblanc)
4. CubeSat workshop (Bryan Klofas)
5. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations) (i8cvs)
6. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
7. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(tosca005@xxx.xxxx
8. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations) (i8cvs)
9. Re: W1RJA EME event, Echoes of Apollo
(n1jez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxx
10. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
11. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(Robert Bruninga)
12. Balloon launch now! (Robert Bruninga)
13. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
14. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(David - KG4ZLB)
15. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations) (Idle-Tyme)
16. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
(Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
17. Michigan Grid Activation; EN74 (Doug Papay)
18. N3FJP Amateur Contact Log and LoTW (Michae J. Wolthuis)
19. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations) (i8cvs)
20. Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations) (i8cvs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:07:24 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Fabio A <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BCF4CEC.9090001@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Of course, this ia all rubbish as the stated power of 243TeraWatts (READ
BELOW CAREFULLY) is clearly not true.
That would require an antenna gain of, in the regeon of, 120dB.
On 21-Apr-10 17:49, i8cvs wrote:
>
> The only official data given for Arecibo by WF1F are the following :
>
>> The 1,000 foot dish has 60 dBi on 432 mc and 400 watts.
>> That comes out to be approximately 243,902,443 Million Watts ERP.
>>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:33:35 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] SDO
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <811705.44266.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Some great SDO pics and videos at
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/news/briefing-materials-20100421.html
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:33:47 -0400
From: Luc Leblanc <lucleblanc6@xxxxxxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] W1RJA EME event, Echoes of Apollo
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Cc: eu-amsat@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4BCF28EB.21322.2C8DF5C@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
W1RJA EME event, Echoes of Apollo
Aside of the "Pickle dipole" did any one have an idea of their setup? (Amp
power and # of beam element) A linear amp and the beam stacking
is giving the required ERP on the TX side and the 3db stacking gain seems to
make the difference between reception just at the noise level
and something above the noise. This EME was a good overall satellite station
test. 50 watts and one single beam was too borderline to have
a decent 2 way contact but without the real Arecibo ERP TX figures it is
hard to say if a setup is below standard equal or above.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZutOfYLPIMY
"-"
Luc Leblanc VE2DWE
Skype VE2DWE
www.qsl.net/ve2dwe
DSTAR urcall VE2DWE
WAC BASIC CW PHONE SATELLITE
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:50:53 -0700
From: Bryan Klofas <bklofas@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] CubeSat workshop
To: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BCF652D.5030302@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hey Everybody--
The CubeSat workshop at Cal Poly is today through Friday. Presentations
are being streamed live, and archived for future viewing:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/CubeSatWorkshop/v3
More information:
http://cubesat.org/index.php/workshops/upcoming-workshops
Thanks!
--
Bryan Klofas, KF6ZEO
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 23:23:21 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Fabio A <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000701cae198$dea033c0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: "Fabio A" <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>; "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Mateusz"
<sq7dqx@xxxxxx.xxxx.xx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
> Of course, this ia all rubbish as the stated power of 243TeraWatts (READ
BELOW CAREFULLY) is clearly not true.
> That would require an antenna gain of, in the regeon of, 120dB.
>
> On 21-Apr-10 17:49, i8cvs wrote:
>
> >
> > The only official data given for Arecibo by WF1F are the following :
> >
> >> The 1,000 foot dish has 60 dBi on 432 mc and 400 watts.
> >> That comes out to be approximately 243,902,443 Million Watts ERP.
> >>
Hi Nigel, G8IFF/W8IFF
I disagree with your numbars:
1 tera watt =1 TW = 1 x 10^12 watt or 1,000,000,000,000 watt
1 mega watt = 1MW = 1 x 10^6 watt or 1,000,000 watt or 1 million watt
So 243,902,443 million watt ERP = 243,902,443 MW ERP as WF1F
writes is CORRECT
By the way the gain of Arecibo is 60 dBi or 1.000.000 time in power
and not 120 dB = 1. x 10^12 or 1.000.000.000.000 time in power
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 21:37:30 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Fabio A <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BCF701A.7090008@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
What was written was (243 million, 902 thousand, 443 units) million watts.
That's 243 Terawatts.
On 21-Apr-10 21:23, i8cvs wrote:
>
> I disagree with your numbars:
>
> 1 tera watt =1 TW = 1 x 10^12 watt or 1,000,000,000,000 watt
>
> 1 mega watt = 1MW = 1 x 10^6 watt or 1,000,000 watt or 1 million watt
>
> So 243,902,443 million watt ERP = 243,902,443 MW ERP as WF1F
> writes is CORRECT
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: 21 Apr 2010 17:04:55 -0500
From: tosca005@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Fabio A <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <Gophermail.2.0.1004211704550.16555@xxxx.xx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8
Domenico: I suspect that the difference of opinion has to do with the
difference in punctuation (',' vs. '.') used with large numbers.
In typical American usage,
243,902,443 Million Watts = 243,902,443,000,000 watts = 243.9 trillion watts
243.902 443 million watts = 243,902,443 watts = 243.9 million watts
without the punctuation ->
243 902 443 million watts = 243 902 443 000 000 watts = almost 244 trillion
watts.
So, I think that if the comma is used as a 3-decade separator and not a
decimal point, that the original posting was in fact a million times
overstated. I hope that clarifies it.
If not, then think of it this way.
400 watts x 0 dB = 400 watts
400 watts x 10 dB = 4000 watts = 4 kilowatts
400 watts x 20 dB = 40000 watts = 40 kilowatts
400 watts x 30 dB = 400000 watts = 400 kilowatts
400 watts x 40 dB = 4000000 watts = 4000 kilowatts = 4 megawatts
400 watts x 50 dB = 40000000 watts = 40000 kilowatts = 40 megawatts
400 watts x 60 dB = 400000000 watts = 400000 kilowatts = 400 megawatts
They were nowhere close to 400 000 000 (400 million) megawatts of ERP.
400,000,000 million = 400 million million = 400 terawatts
400.000.000 million = 400 million = 400 megawatts
73 de W0JT
On Apr 21 2010, i8cvs wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
>To: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
> Cc: "Fabio A" <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>; "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>;
> "Mateusz"
><sq7dqx@xxxxxx.xxxx.xx>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 9:07 PM
>Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
>calculations)
>
>> Of course, this ia all rubbish as the stated power of 243TeraWatts (READ
>BELOW CAREFULLY) is clearly not true.
>> That would require an antenna gain of, in the regeon of, 120dB.
>>
>> On 21-Apr-10 17:49, i8cvs wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > The only official data given for Arecibo by WF1F are the following :
>> >
>> >> The 1,000 foot dish has 60 dBi on 432 mc and 400 watts.
>> >> That comes out to be approximately 243,902,443 Million Watts ERP.
>> >>
>
>Hi Nigel, G8IFF/W8IFF
>
>I disagree with your numbars:
>
>1 tera watt =1 TW = 1 x 10^12 watt or 1,000,000,000,000 watt
>
>1 mega watt = 1MW = 1 x 10^6 watt or 1,000,000 watt or 1 million watt
>
>So 243,902,443 million watt ERP = 243,902,443 MW ERP as WF1F
>writes is CORRECT
>
>By the way the gain of Arecibo is 60 dBi or 1.000.000 time in power
>and not 120 dB = 1. x 10^12 or 1.000.000.000.000 time in power
>
>73" de
>
>i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 00:22:07 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Fabio A <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <003a01cae1a1$1473d440$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: "Fabio A" <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>; "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Mateusz"
<sq7dqx@xxxxxx.xxxx.xx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 11:37 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
> What was written was (243 million, 902 thousand, 443 units) million watts.
> That's 243 Terawatts.
>
> On 21-Apr-10 21:23, i8cvs wrote:
>
> >
> > I disagree with your numbars:
> >
> > 1 tera watt =1 TW = 1 x 10^12 watt or 1,000,000,000,000 watt
> >
> > 1 mega watt = 1MW = 1 x 10^6 watt or 1,000,000 watt or 1 million watt
> >
> > So 243,902,443 million watt ERP = 243,902,443 MW ERP as WF1F
> > writes is CORRECT
Hi Nigel, G8IFF/W8IFF
Wath make confusion in the WF1F statements are the comma he writes
between numbars.
He writes "That comes out to be approximately 243,902,443 Million Watts
ERP."
Since the gain of Arecibo is 60 dBi = 1000000 time in power it is more
correct to write 243902443 watt ERP or 243,902443 million watt ERP or
243,902443 MW ERP or better approximate to 244 MW ERP
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:32:59 -0400
From: <n1jez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: W1RJA EME event, Echoes of Apollo
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <D80E467849CD4E01A5FDD1BCBE7D1A0C@xxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Luc,
2 x 31 el K1FO yagis with a preamp on the splitter and an 8938 running ~ 1
KW.
73,
Mike, N1JEZ
AMSAT 29649
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Luc Leblanc" <lucleblanc6@xxxxxxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] W1RJA EME event, Echoes of Apollo
> W1RJA EME event, Echoes of Apollo
>
> Aside of the "Pickle dipole" did any one have an idea of their setup?
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:45:13 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BCF7FF9.7050201@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Agreed.
The only thing, other than for times and dates, that I write between numbers
is a decimal point.
Commas and dots to split numbers into groups of three have no use.
OK, I might write 5 megawatts as 5E6 watts.
On 21-Apr-10 22:22, i8cvs wrote:
>
> Wath make confusion in the WF1F statements are the comma he writes
> between numbars.
>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:57:20 -0400
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BA1CCD7D7A74C359C52A0EED4325D2B@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
People need to learn engineering significance. Just because a
calculator spits out 9 digits of precision, using them all shows
a lack of understanding. The value is 244 million watts. The
significance of all the other digits is absolutely meaningless!
The original post was about 400 watts and 60dBi gain. Neither
of those numbers has more than 3 significant digits, Throw in
the gain of a dipole over isotropic which is also a round number
of about 2.14 therefore the answer CANNOT HAVE MORE THAN 3
digits of precision or it is WRONG. The answer given implies a
precision that does not exist.
And if you ask me, the 400 Watts is probably only significant to
maybe 2 digits and from their experience with their Power Amp,
I'd say that they only knew their TX power to ONE significant
digit. So I would not even use the number 244. I would say
"about 200 million Watts" because that is all the precision we
can know from the inputs.
When an engineering student gives me such an answer I shoot them
down hard! Numbers convey not only VALUE but PRECISION. And
implying PRECISION where it does not exist is wrong.
Sorry, but everyone else has given their opinion, so I may as
well say mine ;-)
Bob, Wb4aPR
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:07:05 -0400
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Balloon launch now!
To: "'TAPR APRS Mailing List'" <aprssig@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <843952BEB20C44DF9D14307ABA5A54E2@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
APRS Balloon?
I got an email to an anonomyous list about an APRS balloon
launch any minute now from Oswego New York. Donno if anyone on
APRS or AMSAT also got it, but here is a link to the launch site
twitter account:
The scientific transport that was launched at 1832 EDT can be
tracked at
http://aprs.fi/?call=KB3HCY-11 3 minutes ago via web
All ? PBH-10, our test flight, was successful and we plan to
launch
our first mission at 1800 EDT (2200 UTC) 21 April 2010! Be sure
to
check our Twitter feed <http://www.twitter.com/PBH3> to for the
latest
updates.
PBH-11 ? Duration record
VHF(APRS): 144.390 MHz (North American Frequency)
APRS Callsign: KB2ZWZ (Kilo-Bravo-Two-Zulu-Whisky-Zulu)
Monitor APRS location at <http://aprs.fi/?call=KB2ZWZ>
Downlink is on APRS 144.39 and also some HF:
HF: 7.1028 MHz (CW)
HF Callsign: K2RAM
Monitor periodic status transmissions every 10 minutes at :05,
:15,
:25, :35, :45, :55 UTC
Bob, WB4aPR
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 23:12:24 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: bruninga@xxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4BCF8658.8050308@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
And, as usual, your opinion is absolutely true.
Only needs to be to the precision that you can measure or the nearest
"preferred value".
On 21-Apr-10 22:57, Robert Bruninga wrote:
> People need to learn engineering significance. Just because a
> calculator spits out 9 digits of precision, using them all shows
> a lack of understanding. The value is 244 million watts. The
> significance of all the other digits is absolutely meaningless!
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:14:32 -0400
From: David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4BCF86D8.9010507@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
That because we English do it that way. The rest of the Europe, Germany
and France for instance, seem to like inserting a comma instead!
:-D
David
KG4ZLB
On 4/21/2010 18:45, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote:
> Agreed.
>
> The only thing, other than for times and dates, that I write between
numbers is a decimal point.
> Commas and dots to split numbers into groups of three have no use.
>
> OK, I might write 5 megawatts as 5E6 watts.
>
>
>
> On 21-Apr-10 22:22, i8cvs wrote:
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
--
David
KG4ZLB
www.kg4zlb.com
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:28:02 -0500
From: Idle-Tyme <nss@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4BCF8A02.5050508@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Comma or no comma, shouldn't matter
1000 mega watts or 1,000 Mega watts is still one thousand million
watts! NOT one thousands watts. true?
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 4/21/2010 6:14 PM, David - KG4ZLB wrote:
> That because we English do it that way. The rest of the Europe,
> Germany and France for instance, seem to like inserting a comma instead!
>
> :-D
>
> David
> KG4ZLB
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/21/2010 18:45, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote:
>> Agreed.
>>
>> The only thing, other than for times and dates, that I write between
>> numbers is a decimal point.
>> Commas and dots to split numbers into groups of three have no use.
>>
>> OK, I might write 5 megawatts as 5E6 watts.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21-Apr-10 22:22, i8cvs wrote:
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 16
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 00:08:36 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: Idle-Tyme <nss@xxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4BCF9384.30304@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Is it the original?
I had a mass produced plastic one (with a 50Hz motor) back in the early
1980's (or earlier).
Unfortunately, your web site doesn't appear to give dates.
On 21-Apr-10 23:28, Idle-Tyme wrote:
>
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:59:06 -0400
From: Doug Papay <doug.papay@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Michigan Grid Activation; EN74
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<y2vbd4c36b71004211759m3c76c186gce729a4fa449e160@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
All,
I will be active this Thursday-Saturday from the northern lower
peninsula of Michigan--primarily grid square EN74. Despite the fact
that Traverse City is located within EN74, this is a rarely activated
grid on satellite. I plan to operate as many passes as my schedule &
time permits to give the opportunity for those who don't have this
grid to put it in their logbook.
Since I will only have the capability to operate FM voice satellite,
my operations will be limited to AO-27 and SO-50, as AO-51 is in mode
V/S until Sunday evening & HO-68 is not scheduled for FM operation
this weekend.
My tentative schedule is as follows:
Thursday 22-Apr-2010
AO-27 18:48z - 19:03z (from wherever I am at the time, most likely
EN63; possibly EN64)
Friday 23-Apr-2010
SO-50 04:04z - 04:18z (upon request)
SO-50 12:35z - 12:48z
AO-27 18:21z - 18:34z*
AO-27 20:00z - 20:13z*
Saturday 24-Apr-2010
SO-50 04:34z - 04:47z (upon request)
SO-50 11:24z - 11:37z
AO-27 17:53z - 18:05z*
AO-27 19:31z - 19:45z (maybe; EN63)
*If there is significant interest, I will consider activating EN64 on
Friday and/or Saturday afternoon. Send me an email off-list if you
need EN64, if I have significant interest I will make an effort to
activate this grid as well during my trip.
I will QSL upon request, just send me an email and I will send you a
card. No SASE needed, but always appreciated.
73,
Doug KD8CAO
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 21:14:36 -0400
From: "Michae J. Wolthuis" <wolthui3@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] N3FJP Amateur Contact Log and LoTW
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <02e001cae1b9$2cf67870$86e36950$@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Is anyone else having problems downloading data from LoTW for N3FJP's AC
Log?? I have not been able to download data for about 2 weeks. I can
upload.
I get an error saying:
The data file did not complete normally. Please try downloading the file
again.
I have tried about 25 times.
Any ideas? It has been working so well!
Mike
Kb8zgl
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 03:25:05 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: "Idle-Tyme" <nss@xxx.xxx>, "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <005601cae1ba$a3d396c0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Idle-Tyme" <nss@xxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 1:28 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some calculations)
> Comma or no comma, shouldn't matter
> 1000 mega watts or 1,000 Mega watts is still one thousand million
> watts! NOT one thousands watts. true?
>
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>
Hi Idle-Tyme
I don't agree with your statement:
1000 mega watt are one thousand million watt
1,000 mega watt or 1.000 mega watt is only one million watt because
zero after the comma means nothing like 1,0000000000000 is still
one million watt or 1 MW
In addition writing the measuring units the plural must not be used
as an example:
1 watt is correct
2 watt is correct
2 watts is wrong
The same for Ampere, ohm and so on.
1 ampere is correct
2 ampere is correct
2 amperes is wrong
In addition writing the measuring units be careful with the
capital letters
1 watt is correct
1 W is correct
1 Watt is wrong
1 ampere is correct
1 A is correct
1 Ampere is wrong
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 03:58:54 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
To: <tosca005@xxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Fabio A <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <006001cae1bf$5d6e6700$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
----- Original Message -----
From: <tosca005@xxx.xxx>
To: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>; "AMSAT-BB"
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Fabio A" <iw8qku@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 12:04 AM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Arecibo on 432 MHz Moon Bounce (some
calculations)
> Domenico: I suspect that the difference of opinion has to do with the
> difference in punctuation (',' vs. '.') used with large numbers.
>
> In typical American usage,
> 243,902,443 Million Watts = 243,902,443,000,000 watts = 243.9 trillion
> watts
> 243.902 443 million watts = 243,902,443 watts = 243.9 million watts
>
> without the punctuation ->
>
> 243 902 443 million watts = 243 902 443 000 000 watts = almost 244
> trillion watts.
>
> So, I think that if the comma is used as a 3-decade separator and not a
> decimal point, that the original posting was in fact a million times
> overstated. I hope that clarifies it.
>
> If not, then think of it this way.
>
> 400 watts x 0 dB = 400 watts
> 400 watts x 10 dB = 4000 watts = 4 kilowatts
> 400 watts x 20 dB = 40000 watts = 40 kilowatts
> 400 watts x 30 dB = 400000 watts = 400 kilowatts
> 400 watts x 40 dB = 4000000 watts = 4000 kilowatts = 4 megawatts
> 400 watts x 50 dB = 40000000 watts = 40000 kilowatts = 40 megawatts
> 400 watts x 60 dB = 400000000 watts = 400000 kilowatts = 400 megawatts
>
> They were nowhere close to 400 000 000 (400 million) megawatts of ERP.
>
> 400,000,000 million = 400 million million = 400 terawatts
> 400.000.000 million = 400 million = 400 megawatts
>
> 73 de W0JT
>
Hi , W0JT
I agree with you that the difference of opinion has to do with the
difference in punctuation (',' vs. '.') used respectively in typical
American and
European usage with large numbers so that
400,000,000 million = 400 million million = 400 terawatt in American usage
400.000.000 million = 400 million = 400 megawatt in European usage
like in Germany France and Italy
Tanks and
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 5, Issue 183
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
