| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 03.05.10 05:06l 1002 Lines 35623 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB5199
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V5 199
Path: IZ3LSV<IW0QNL<IK6ZDE<VE3UIL<CX2SA
Sent: 100503/0400Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:57223 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB5199
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. ISS packet mode (Bob Bruninga )
2. Re: Hardware or software problems? (Larry Gerhardstein)
3. Re: Keyspan Acquired by TrippLite (Larry Gerhardstein)
4. Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting (John Meeks)
5. Re: Antenna question continued (Ted)
6. Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting (i8cvs)
7. FT847 vs TS-2000 (John)
8. Re: Antenna question continued (K8KFJ@xxx.xxxx
9. Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting (John Meeks)
10. Re: FT847 vs TS-2000 (Edward R Cole)
11. Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting (i8cvs)
12. Operator master list (Will Griffin)
13. Re: FT847 vs TS-2000 (James Duffey)
14. AO-51 update (Andrew Glasbrenner)
15. Re: AO-51 update (Greg D.)
16. Re: FT847 vs TS-2000 (Edward R Cole)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 15:18:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bob Bruninga " <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] ISS packet mode
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20100502151837.AEG57106@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>> wouldn't the path be rs0iss-4?
When you look at what others are using, you may see a lot of RS0ISS-4* but
do not be fooled. Remember, that when a user uses any of the GENERIC paths
on the uplink, that the ISS does callsign-substitution before digipeating on
the downlink. So you will see everyone with RS0ISS-4* in the dowlink even
though they used ARISS, or APRSAT, or whatever on the uplink. And you
cannot tell what they used!
But, If they use WIDEn-N on the uplink, then it will NOT do callsign
substitution and will only come back as WIDEn-N MINUS 1. AND those packets
will NOT SHOW UP ON ANY ARISS web page, because there is no way for the
global APRS system to know that it went via the ISS.
All of the other APRS satellites, PCSAT, PCSAT2, ANDE and RAFT all responded
to the ARISS and APRSAT aliases, and that is the beauty of the system.
Whichever satelltie digpeated, would substite its call so the global APRS
system could see what satellite digipeated it. Unfortunately, in its
degraded-state, PCSAT1 only recognizes ARISS when it is recoverd. All the
rest of the time, it ONLY responds to VIA W3ADO-1.
Hope that helps.
Bob, Wb4APR
Bob, WB4APR
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 14:12:26 -0600
From: Larry Gerhardstein <W7IN@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Hardware or software problems?
To: Glenn AA5PK <aa5pk@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BDDDCAA.1080705@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Glenn, Where do you see this? I went to
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/download.aspx and entered
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. Immediately came up "You are not
eligible to download Windows XP Mode. You must have Windows 7
Professional, Enterprise, or Ultimate to run Windows XP Mode. To upgrade
visit Windows 7 Anytime Upgrade
<http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/windows-anytime-upgrade>
.
" Clicked in there. Upgrades are $200 and more.
73, Larry W7IN
On 5/1/2010 9:10 PM, Glenn AA5PK wrote:
> It's a free download compatible with Home Premium 32- and 64-bit.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Gerhardstein"
> <gerhardstein@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: "Glenn AA5PK" <aa5pk@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> Cc: "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 8:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Hardware or software problems?
>
>
>> I have Windows 7 Home Premium. I believe I would need to upgrade to
>> something different in order to run XP virtual. If the $20 PCI card
>> works, that is cheaper.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>> On 5/1/2010 6:50 PM, Glenn AA5PK wrote:
>>> Larry,
>>>
>>> If you still suspect it's an OS issue, downloading XP Mode for
>>> Windows 7 may solve the problem.
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/download.aspx
>>>
>>> It may be worth having in any case.
>>>
>>> Glenn AA5PK
>>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 14:22:09 -0600
From: Larry Gerhardstein <W7IN@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Keyspan Acquired by TrippLite
To: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4BDDDEF1.9050907@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Since I am the one being quoted below, I feel compelled to reply to the
pseudo-flames. I don't give a rip about KeySpan's or Tripp-Lite's
market strategy; only whether they are going to continue support of
their legacy product. If you all wish to have a discussion about
"market strategy", let's talk about Microsoft's. That will _really_ get
some discussion going.
73, Larry W7IN
On 5/2/2010 12:26 PM, Clint Bradford wrote:
>>> ... as I can tell they DO NOT have a Windows 7 driver for the KeySpan ...
>>>
> Keyspan seemed optimistic when they were acquired in May, 2008 by TrippLite:
>
> "We at Keyspan have created a strong brand name associated with high
quality products," said Mike Ridenhour, Keyspan President. "We're pleased
that Tripp Lite will continue providing Keyspan's customers with the
reliable products they expect, world-class service and support and unmatched
channel loyalty. The combination of the Tripp Lite and Keyspan brands under
the umbrella of Tripp Lite will provide increased efficiency by streamlining
production, distribution and shipping."
>
> I have no idea if the Keyspan development team is still working on their
old product line or not.
>
> Clint, K6LCS
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sun, 02 May 2010 17:17:56 -0400
From: John Meeks <jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting
To: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BDDEC04.6070605@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
i8cvs wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Meeks" <jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 11:22 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] G-5500 Troubleshooting
>
>
>> One more thing... Given that the cable tested OK, what does the open
>> reading from 6 to 4 suggest? My reading of the schematic diagram is
>> sketchy at best.
>>
>> Any and all help will be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> John Meeks
>> KC8ZFN
>>
>
> Hi John, KC8ZFN
>
> After the carefull troubleshooting you did and described the actual open
> reading from 6 to 4 in the az. motor suggests two possible autcomes.
>
> 1 ) The limit switch SW6 inside the rotator is defective and is an open
> circuit
>
> 2) The winding of the motor connected to limit switch SW6 is open
> so that the motor cannot run nor left and nor right
>
> Since 6 and 4 are an open circuit the electrolitic unpolarized capacitor
> inside the motor appears to be not involved in this type of problem.
>
> Please let me know just for curiosity the result of your investigation
> but I believe that you have to open the azimuth rotator.
>
> Best 73" de
>
> i8CVS Domenico
>
>
Thanks for confirming my conclusions so far, Dom.
I've Got the Az rotator on the bench. It looks and smells new. The limit
switches present a closed circuit until the swtich is activated when
they open as expected.
Looking for continuity between the pin corresponding to to A6 (black
wire) and one of the limit switches (red wires) shows 3.7 ohms, and to
the other switch (green wires) is an open circuit. I'm thinking this
should be continuous also. If this is the case, what are my options?
Has anyone had success repairing this motor?
Thanks for the help.
John Meeks
KC8ZFN
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 15:26:34 -0700
From: "Ted" <k7trkradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna question continued
To: "'Jacob Tennant'" <k8jwt@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000001caea46$86fa2070$94ee6150$@xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Jacob, for what it is worth, I built the 'eggbeater' and it was so 'noisy'
tossed it. Built the dual Moxon out of brass tubing from the hobby shop and
just love it !!! (I'm a big Moxon fan as you can tell)
The Moxi works for me. But, since you already have the KLM's, not sure you
will do better for LEO omni than that.
73, Ted
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Jacob Tennant
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 6:27 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Antenna question continued
OK so to continue my antenna question further, I have seen plans for the
K5OE Eggbeater antenns, dual moxons for LEO's, as well as the EZ-Lindenblad
antennas for small satellite antennas.
Of these what is the general consensus as to the better of them? I am
looking for something small and easy to setup for Field Day, portable
operation where a dual beams and rotator setup would be cumbersome to use.
I already have plans for the beams I have to be setup here at the house.
Thank you everyone for indulging my curiousity...
Jacob Tennant - K8JWT
_______________________________________________
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: Mon, 3 May 2010 00:30:11 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting
To: <jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <003301caea47$08ba86e0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: John Meeks
To: i8cvs
Cc: AMSAT-BB
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] G-5500 Troubleshooting
i8cvs wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Meeks" <jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 11:22 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] G-5500 Troubleshooting
One more thing... Given that the cable tested OK, what does the open
reading from 6 to 4 suggest? My reading of the schematic diagram is
sketchy at best.
Any and all help will be greatly appreciated.
John Meeks
KC8ZFN
Hi John, KC8ZFN
After the carefull troubleshooting you did and described the actual open
reading from 6 to 4 in the az. motor suggests two possible autcomes.
1 ) The limit switch SW6 inside the rotator is defective and is an open
circuit
2) The winding of the motor connected to limit switch SW6 is open
so that the motor cannot run nor left and nor right
Since 6 and 4 are an open circuit the electrolitic unpolarized capacitor
inside the motor appears to be not involved in this type of problem.
Please let me know just for curiosity the result of your investigation
but I believe that you have to open the azimuth rotator.
Best 73" de
i8CVS Domenico
Thanks for confirming my conclusions so far, Dom.
I've Got the Az rotator on the bench. It looks and smells new. The limit
switches present a closed circuit until the swtich is activated when they
open as expected.
Looking for continuity between the pin corresponding to to A6 (black wire)
and one of the limit switches (red wires) shows 3.7 ohms, and to the other
switch (green wires) is an open circuit. I'm thinking this should be
continuous also. If this is the case, what are my options? Has anyone had
success repairing this motor?
Thanks for the help.
John Meeks
KC8ZFN
Hi John, KC8ZFN
Disconnect momentarely the electrolitic capacitor C34
If the rotator is into an intermediate angular position the limit switches
SW6 and SW7 are not activated and so they are in a normally close condition
and must show a close circuit or zero ohm
Looking for continuity between the common of the motor winding A6 and
directly to each end of both motor windings you must measure the same
continuity with a resistance of 3.6 ohm
In addition you must measure the continuity and 3.6 ohm between A6 and
both at the input and at the output of each limit switch SW6 and SW7
Measuring the resistance across each limit switch when the rotor is into
an intermediate angular position you must measure zero ohm if SW6 and SW7
are OK since they are normally closed.
If the limit switches SW6 and SW7 are OK then the motor winding showing an
open circuit must be rewired because of a possible interruption somewere
into the winding.
Since you have the rotor over the working banch it should non be
difficult to locate the interruption.
If one motor windind must be rewired it is possible to rewind it by hand
because there are not a great numbar of turns for 24 volt AC
Please let me know.
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 18:49:06 -0500
From: "John" <jcrowell@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FT847 vs TS-2000
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <E302A218BB0043E2B794F228F5FE603B@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have owned the FT-847 for five years and tried the TS2000 extensively.
Both are excellent rigs. The only downside I see with the TS2000 is the
birdie. However, it has a more sensitive and quieter receiver, has an
antenna tuner and dual receive. On the other hand, the FT847 is probably the
most used and reliable sat radio, from my observations working other people
on the sats. Probably because it came out first and can be bought a little
cheaper, now. If I was starting over and had to choose, it would be REALLY
tough to choose between them. I probably would go with the TS2000 because it
is a little more refined, quieter, and has a few more features. But the
FT847 is solid, I love the rig, and you would have to pry it out of my cold
dead hands. You can't go wrong either way. The FT847 is great IF you get a
newer one in really good condition. Some of the early runs had some
problems. The TS2000 wins on bells and whistles. Man.I'm no help at all!
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 20:19:30 EDT
From: K8KFJ@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna question continued
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <56b66.6e70fa93.390f7092@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 5/2/2010 6:46:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
k7trkradio@xxxxxxx.xxx writes:
> I already have plans for the beams I have to be setup here at the house
I wish you the best of luck Jacob with your setup. I did quite
a bit of outdoor operation with a handheld sat antenna which
was fun (3 VHF elements & 7 UHF elements). Nice to be able to
adjust elevation, azimuth, and polarization with just a twist
of the wrist for best reception. Looking forward to hearing
you on the birds.
- - - I'm located near Charleston. Glad to see another
West Virginian here on the list.
73, Gary -K8KFJ-
Sat VUCC #125
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 20:55:00 -0400
From: John Meeks <jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting
To: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BDE1EE4.9040701@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Ok Here's the reason for the apparent open winding in the AZ rotator motor.
http://picasaweb.google.com/vanagon/YaesuG5500AntennaRotator
The burned trace is severed, thus the open readings seen between Azimuth
6 and 4.
I'm pretty sure there were no snags or obstructions that could have
stopped rotation while powered.
I'm really lucky though, the fuse in the control box is undamaged ;-)
Thanks to Dom i8cvs for all the troubleshooting tips below. I will try
my hand at rebuilding this motor and use these tips to verify the work.
Thanks as always for the great information.
John Meeks
KC8ZFN
i8cvs wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* John Meeks <mailto:jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> *To:* i8cvs <mailto:domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
> *Cc:* AMSAT-BB <mailto:amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 02, 2010 11:17 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [amsat-bb] G-5500 Troubleshooting
>
> i8cvs wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "John Meeks" <jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
>> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
>> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 11:22 PM
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] G-5500 Troubleshooting
>>
>>
>>> One more thing... Given that the cable tested OK, what does the open
>>> reading from 6 to 4 suggest? My reading of the schematic diagram is
>>> sketchy at best.
>>>
>>> Any and all help will be greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> John Meeks
>>> KC8ZFN
>>>
>>
>> Hi John, KC8ZFN
>>
>> After the carefull troubleshooting you did and described the actual
open
>> reading from 6 to 4 in the az. motor suggests two possible autcomes.
>>
>> 1 ) The limit switch SW6 inside the rotator is defective and is an open
>> circuit
>>
>> 2) The winding of the motor connected to limit switch SW6 is open
>> so that the motor cannot run nor left and nor right
>>
>> Since 6 and 4 are an open circuit the electrolitic unpolarized
capacitor
>> inside the motor appears to be not involved in this type of problem.
>>
>> Please let me know just for curiosity the result of your investigation
>> but I believe that you have to open the azimuth rotator.
>>
>> Best 73" de
>>
>> i8CVS Domenico
>>
>>
> Thanks for confirming my conclusions so far, Dom.
>
> I've Got the Az rotator on the bench. It looks and smells new. The
> limit switches present a closed circuit until the swtich is
> activated when they open as expected.
>
> Looking for continuity between the pin corresponding to to A6
> (black wire) and one of the limit switches (red wires) shows 3.7
> ohms, and to the other switch (green wires) is an open circuit.
> I'm thinking this should be continuous also. If this is the case,
> what are my options? Has anyone had success repairing this motor?
>
> Thanks for the help.
> John Meeks
> KC8ZFN
>
>
> Hi John, KC8ZFN
>
> Disconnect momentarely the electrolitic capacitor C34
>
> If the rotator is into an intermediate angular position the limit
> switches SW6 and SW7 are not activated and so they are in a
> normally close condition and must show a close circuit or zero ohm
>
> Looking for continuity between the common of the motor winding A6
> and directly to each end of both motor windings you must measure
> the same continuity with a resistance of 3.6 ohm
>
> In addition you must measure the continuity and 3.6 ohm between A6
> and both at the input and at the output of each limit switch SW6
> and SW7
>
> Measuring the resistance across each limit switch when the rotor
> is into an intermediate angular position you must measure zero ohm
> if SW6 and SW7 are OK since they are normally closed.
>
> If the limit switches SW6 and SW7 are OK then the motor winding
> showing an open circuit must be rewired because of a
> possible interruption somewere into the winding.
>
> Since you have the rotor over the working banch it should non be
> difficult to locate the interruption.
>
> If one motor windind must be rewired it is possible to rewind it
> by hand because there are not a great numbar of turns for 24 volt AC
>
> Please let me know.
>
> 73" de
>
> i8CVS Domenico
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 17:38:20 -0800
From: Edward R Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FT847 vs TS-2000
To: "John" <jcrowell@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <201005030138.o431cKfb070893@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 03:49 PM 5/2/2010, John wrote:
>I have owned the FT-847 for five years and tried the TS2000 extensively.
>Both are excellent rigs. The only downside I see with the TS2000 is the
>birdie. However, it has a more sensitive and quieter receiver, has an
>antenna tuner and dual receive. On the other hand, the FT847 is probably the
>most used and reliable sat radio, from my observations working other people
>on the sats. Probably because it came out first and can be bought a little
>cheaper, now. If I was starting over and had to choose, it would be REALLY
>tough to choose between them. I probably would go with the TS2000 because it
>is a little more refined, quieter, and has a few more features. But the
>FT847 is solid, I love the rig, and you would have to pry it out of my cold
>dead hands. You can't go wrong either way. The FT847 is great IF you get a
>newer one in really good condition. Some of the early runs had some
>problems. The TS2000 wins on bells and whistles. Man.I'm no help at all!
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
Just to stir the mud a little: I decided to keep my FT-847 for
satellite operation and casual FM/SSB. Instead of the TS2000x I
bought a Elecraft K3/10 (10w version) and am adding the new design
DEMI 28/144 xvtr (ordered to arrive in June). Eventually sw will be
developed for the K3 for doing cross-band full-duplex and then I
might part with the grand ole FT-847 (circa 1998). I will have to
add a DEMI 28/432 xvtr for that.
But in my opinion K3 (dual Rx) + DEMI is far above the TS2000x for
near the same money.
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
======================================
BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com
EME: 144-600w, 432-100w, 1296-60w, 3400-fall 2010
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@xxxxxxx.xxx
======================================
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 03:55:13 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 Troubleshooting
To: <jmeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000001caea64$063bec20$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: John Meeks
To: i8cvs
Cc: AMSAT-BB
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 2:55 AM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] G-5500 Troubleshooting
Ok Here's the reason for the apparent open winding in the AZ rotator motor.
http://picasaweb.google.com/vanagon/YaesuG5500AntennaRotator
The burned trace is severed, thus the open readings seen between Azimuth 6
and 4.
I'm pretty sure there were no snags or obstructions that could have
stopped rotation while powered.
I'm really lucky though, the fuse in the control box is undamaged ;-)
Thanks to Dom i8cvs for all the troubleshooting tips below. I will try my
hand at rebuilding this motor and use these tips to verify the work.
Thanks as always for the great information.
John Meeks
KC8ZFN
Hi John, KC8ZFN
Now you have to find out why the trace over the PCB was severed burned
out. The fuse F-1 in the control box is undamaged because it is a 2 A
delayed type at 220 volt.
If you got a net short circuit as seen by the 24 volt AC secondary winding
of the power transformer T-1 probably the current preferred to burn out the
trace instead of the fuse.
Check if the value of the ohmic resistance of both motor winding are the
same value and check also if the electrolitic AC capacitor C 34 is shorted
out or not.
Have fun
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 22:10:16 -0400
From: "Will Griffin" <kj4psu@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Operator master list
To: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4bde308e.c6c1f10a.4efb.668a@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I am working on my WAS award and wanted to know if there is a master list of
amsat members or operators for the various states. This way I can schedule
contacts if I don't hear them on the birds. Any idea?
Will
KJ4PSU
From: K8KFJ@xxx.xxx
Date: May 2, 2010 8:38 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna question continued
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
In a message dated 5/2/2010 6:46:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
k7trkradio@xxxxxxx.xxx writes:
> I already have plans for the beams I have to be setup here at the house
I wish you the best of luck Jacob with your setup. I did quite
a bit of outdoor operation with a handheld sat antenna which
was fun (3 VHF elements & 7 UHF elements). Nice to be able to
adjust elevation, azimuth, and polarization with just a twist
of the wrist for best reception. Looking forward to hearing
you on the birds.
- - - I'm located near Charleston. Glad to see another
West Virginian here on the list.
73, Gary -K8KFJ-
Sat VUCC #125
_______________________________________________
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: 13
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 20:51:10 -0600
From: James Duffey <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FT847 vs TS-2000
To: Edward R Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: John <jcrowell@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, James Duffey
<jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>, AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <084649AD-5AF3-4F9E-8F07-A6EF2CDA5CA3@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On May 2, 2010, at 7:38 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:
>
> But in my opinion K3 (dual Rx) + DEMI is far above the TS2000x for
> near the same money.
>
While I understand the K3 performance being above the TS-2000X, I don't
understand the "near the same money" comment?
A K3/10, with sub receiver, K144XVK for 2 meters, KRX3 subreceiver, KXVA3A
transverter interface, preamp for 6M, a DEM 432/28 transverter (or Elecraft
$32 Transverter), a DEM 144/1296 transverter, will run you $3400 or more.
It is hard to get an exact number as the DEM transverters are not currently
available. Throw in a 100 W 2M linear and you are close to $3700. A TS2000X
with the same capabilities is $1850, nearly half. The TS-2000X has full
duplex capability for satellites now. The K3 full duplex capability is not
available now and it is not clear to me that Elecraft is working on it,
particularly as they have openly stated that it is hard to do in a single
box. I hope they do succeed in this, and when they do, I shall purchase one.
Now, granted the performance of the K3 is better than the TS-2000,
particularly in strong signal handling capability and the DSP performance,
but the price differential is a lot greater than you imply. And the K3, even
outfitted with 432 and 1296 transverters will not do full duplex satellites
out of the box.
I am not an Elecraft basher, I have a K1, K2, and XV222, and am reasonably
happy with them, but the capability of working satellites with the K3 is a
ways down the road and the cost will be roughly twice the TS-2000X.
I bought a TS-2000X primarily for my VHF roving activities and satellite
work. It is nice to have all the capabilities in one box and I was aware of
the shortcomings going in and they are not overwhelming in roving. I
considered a K3 and associated transverters, but it is, as they used to say,
not quite ready for prime time as far as satellites go. And the 100W on 2M
vs the 10W on 2M for the K3 is a real deal swinger when it comes to roving.
- Duffey
--
James Duffey KK6MC
DM65tc
Cedar Crest NM
< jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx >
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 23:08:15 -0400
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 update
To: Amsat-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, AO51 Modes <ao51-modes@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4BDE3E1F.2000700@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
AO-51 has now reentered a period of eclipses that will reach almost 20
minutes by July. Since we've been in an extended period of continuous
illumination and very warm spacecraft temperatures, the next few weeks
will be spent determining what the batteries capacities are now.
Currently we are running 1.01 watt on 435.300 only, with the new PL mode
on. For this summer eclipse season, we are fortunate that the eclipsed
periods are while AO-51 is over mostly unoccupied Antarctica and
surrounding areas. This means when the batteries alone are supporting
the transmitter, there are not likely to be any users.
We have a downlink power management routine that we'll be implementing
over the next week or so. Downlink power may range from 2 watts in
illumination, to maybe as low as 300 milliwatts in eclipse. Using this,
combined with the PL, should mean we can protect the batteries from
over-discharge, while still providing the strongest possible downlink.
I'd like to encourage everyone to use the excellent reporting resource
at http://oscar.dcarr.org/ . I check this page at least 4 times a day to
check the status of AO-51. If the eclipse periods get too long faster
than we can adjust, the repeater may shut off due to a low battery
voltage watchdog. If this happens, please email me directly at
ko4ma@xxxxx.xxxx or for those that have my cell phone number already,
please feel free to text me a warning that the satellite repeater is off.
Additionally, the AO51-modes group would like your input on the desired
Field Day mode. We will likely be limited to one transmitter operation.
With AO-27, SO-50, and possibly SO-67 and HO-68 on V/U FM, S band or L/U
operation is looking very promising to provide some variety.
73,
Drew KO4MA
AMSAT-NA VP Operations
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 20:29:24 -0700
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-51 update
To: <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>,
<ao51-modes@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BLU133-W28AD17F1DA362A64025FCEA9F20@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I'd vote for either L/U or L/S, which ever is easier on the batteries.
Greg KO6TH
>
> Additionally, the AO51-modes group would like your input on the desired
> Field Day mode. We will likely be limited to one transmitter operation.
> With AO-27, SO-50, and possibly SO-67 and HO-68 on V/U FM, S band or L/U
> operation is looking very promising to provide some variety.
>
> 73,
> Drew KO4MA
> AMSAT-NA VP Operations
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with
Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326
::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 19:55:39 -0800
From: Edward R Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FT847 vs TS-2000
To: James Duffey <jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: John <jcrowell@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, James Duffey
<jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>, AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201005030355.o433teuC015735@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 06:51 PM 5/2/2010, James Duffey wrote:
>On May 2, 2010, at 7:38 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:
>
> >
> > But in my opinion K3 (dual Rx) + DEMI is far above the TS2000x for
> > near the same money.
> >
>While I understand the K3 performance being above the TS-2000X, I
>don't understand the "near the same money" comment?
>
>A K3/10, with sub receiver, K144XVK for 2 meters, KRX3 subreceiver,
>KXVA3A transverter interface, preamp for 6M, a DEM 432/28
>transverter (or Elecraft $32 Transverter), a DEM 144/1296
>transverter, will run you $3400 or more. It is hard to get an exact
>number as the DEM transverters are not currently available. Throw in
>a 100 W 2M linear and you are close to $3700. A TS2000X with the
>same capabilities is $1850, nearly half. The TS-2000X has full
>duplex capability for satellites now. The K3 full duplex capability
>is not available now and it is not clear to me that Elecraft is
>working on it, particularly as they have openly stated that it is
>hard to do in a single box. I hope they do succeed in this, and when
>they do, I shall purchase one.
>
>Now, granted the performance of the K3 is better than the TS-2000,
>particularly in strong signal handling capability and the DSP
>performance, but the price differential is a lot greater than you
>imply. And the K3, even outfitted with 432 and 1296 transverters
>will not do full duplex satellites out of the box.
>
>I am not an Elecraft basher, I have a K1, K2, and XV222, and am
>reasonably happy with them, but the capability of working satellites
>with the K3 is a ways down the road and the cost will be roughly
>twice the TS-2000X.
>
>I bought a TS-2000X primarily for my VHF roving activities and
>satellite work. It is nice to have all the capabilities in one box
>and I was aware of the shortcomings going in and they are not
>overwhelming in roving. I considered a K3 and associated
>transverters, but it is, as they used to say, not quite ready for
>prime time as far as satellites go. And the 100W on 2M vs the 10W on
>2M for the K3 is a real deal swinger when it comes to roving. - Duffey
>
>
>--
>James Duffey KK6MC
>DM65tc
>Cedar Crest NM
>< jamesduffey@xxxxxxx.xxx >
OK, James.
I was under the impression that the TS2000 ran about $2500 without
1.2 GHz. So you are right I have $2800 in my K3/10 with KRX3,
KXV3. Add $79 for the ARR 50-MHz preamp and $479/ea. for the
assembled DEMI 144/28 and DEMI 432/28 xvtrs. If one can buy a new
TD2000x with 2m/70cm/23cm for $1850 then it is clearly
cheaper. Without 432 I will have nearly $3800 in my radio+xvtrs.
But the K3 has way better weak signal specs due to the low phase
noise LO's and a huge lack of birdies due to its simple dual down
conversion architecture. Although it will not do satellite at this
time I suspect sw changes coming for that, given enough VHF operators
buying one. The K3 is rapidly becoming the microwave operators radio
of choice.
To be fair, I did not purchase it with satellite in mind. My prime
objective was for a super IF for VHF-microwave and eme. I am
building a 300w HF PA kit for only $150. I am hoping that it will
operate near 100w on 6m, but that remains to be seen.
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
======================================
BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com
EME: 144-600w, 432-100w, 1296-60w, 3400-fall 2010
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@xxxxxxx.xxx
======================================
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 199
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
