| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 01.06.10 03:29l 856 Lines 31510 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB5244
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V5 244
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<DK0WUE<7M3TJZ<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 100601/0223Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:63130 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB5244
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: HO-68 schedule for week? (i8cvs)
2. Gift Idea - AMSAT Benefits (Clint Bradford)
3. Canberra Write-up (Clint Bradford)
4. Doppler Tuning Convention Question (John Belstner)
5. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Alan P. Biddle)
6. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Tony Langdon)
7. EM37 & EM38 (Gail A Mcdaniel)
8. FS: Standard C1208DA FM radio-good for FM and packet sats
(John Geiger)
9. Update mailing address (Josh Smith)
10. Re: Update mailing address (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
11. Re: Update mailing address (Josh Smith)
12. Re: Update mailing address (Dave Webb KB1PVH)
13. Re: Update mailing address (Andrew Glasbrenner)
14. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Tim - N3TL)
15. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 22:35:22 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: HO-68 schedule for week?
To: "John Neeley" <w6zkh@xxx.xxx>, "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <004101cb0100$cacab0a0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Neeley" <w6zkh@xxx.xxx>
To: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 5:31 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] HO-68 schedule for week?
> Anyone heard from Alan about this weeks pass schedule? Havent seen
> anything pass through the BB yet..
>
> John W6ZKH
Hi John, W6ZKH
Today monday 31 may 2010 HO-68 was busy with the following activity
with children in China.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Chen" <michael.bd5rv@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "amsat-bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 8:18 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Chinese President Hu Jintao visited XW-1 (HO68)
specialevent station
> President Hu Jintao of China today visited the amateur satellite
> station set up in the China Science and Technology Museum in Beijing
> at around 10 A.M. Several children was operating HO68 while present
> was watching. He encouraged them for further activities and confirmed
> the positive effects of amateur satellites.
>
> BA1DU, BG1TTA, BA1EO, BG1HOB and BD5RV accompanies president's visit.
>
> Michael Chen, BD5RV/1
> AMSAT-China: http://www.camsat.cn
> Email: michael.bd5rv@xxxxx.xxx
> MSN: bd5rv@xxxxx.xxx
> Skype: michael-bd5rv
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 13:43:11 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Gift Idea - AMSAT Benefits
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <26FEC304-0853-4F5C-8182-11A5ADB9C2A6@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
For every order on my soy candles Web site between now and June 15, 2010, I
will donate $5 to AMSAT - which, with DARA Doubling(tm), becomes a $10
donation to AMSAT.
So ... Spend twenty bucks on a set of three fine, all-natural, clean-burning
candles - with soy flakes grown and processed in the United States - and ten
bucks goes to AMSAT. What a deal!
My candle site is at ... http://www.soytives.com
-Clint Bradford, K6LCS
P.S. - Yes, this is a commercial solicitation. But that five buck donation
eats all profit - so Clint really isn't benefitting financially from this
offer. Hopefully, though, you'll come back later in the year for
Christmas/Hanukkah candles ... (grin)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 13:50:28 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Canberra Write-up
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <EA0FD48C-1F1F-4ECF-A57A-A33A8888A9D6@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Jim, VK3PC's write-up of the Canberra ARISS project - on South Gate News ...
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/may2010/canberra_ariss_contact.htm
Clint, K6LCS
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 13:35:43 -0700
From: John Belstner <jbelstner@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <12E6906E-ED33-4A8A-8759-813665529B96@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I know there is a lot of discussion on this subject in the AMSAT archives,
but I've recently read a few posts to the BB that have me confused.
Just this weekend I got my Sat station on the air (FT-736R w/MacDoppler) and
I noticed that the MacDoppler program I use adjusts both the TX and RX
frequencies during the satellite pass. I'm assuming this is to keep my
signal located in the same place in the transponder. The program seemed to
work quite well. I was able to copy several QSO's on VO-52 and made a
couple contacts as well.
One thing I noticed is that about half the QSO's I copied did not require
any manual tuning on my part (MacDoppler adjusted the RX correctly) while
the other half did. According to MacDoppler, those that did require manual
tuning were moving around within the transponder passband.
I've read a few posts (one as recent as today) that suggested the convention
is to keep the RX frequency fixed and manually adjusting the TX frequency
while monitoring the downlink. Looking through the AMSAT archives this is
the old convention prior to the popularity of tracking software and CAT
control. So my question is, are there two conventions? or do I not have my
software configured correctly?
Sorry for what might seem like a stupid question, but I'm a newbie to this
facet of Ham Radio. BTW, I'm having a blast!
Cheers,
John Belstner
w9en@xxxx.xxx
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 17:06:59 -0500
From: "Alan P. Biddle" <APBIDDLE@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: "'John Belstner'" <jbelstner@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4521676DBE534AA19A3CDFAA9D0C8EF1@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
John,
MacDoppler, SATPC32, Ham Radio Deluxe, and other programs all support what
has been called the One True Rule. The usual name for the implementation is
Full Doppler Tuning. You are doing it right. When everyone does this, it
provides a very pleasant opportunity to talk instead of tune. It also keeps
from drifting all over another QSO, though the transponders are seldom full
these days.
However, that is not to say that people not using this are doing it wrong,
exactly. There are still many rigs in use which do not have the capability
for computer frequency control. In the old days, the rule was to tune the
highest frequency, whether uplink or downlink, since this is where the
Doppler shift is greatest. Take a look at KB5MU's original article and
updates here:
http://www.amsat.org/amsat/features/one_true_rule.html
My suggestion is to use full tuning until you find that the other operator
isn't. Then adapt, usually by turning off the updating for the lower
frequency. It isn't worth getting doctrinaire about it. However, by using
the One True Rule as the default, you set a good example and encourage the
movement of other operators in this direction. As you will find, it is
truly painful to do it the manual way after getting used to automagic
tuning. As we move above 70 cms, full tuning truly becomes necessary.
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of John Belstner
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 3:36 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning Convention Question
I know there is a lot of discussion on this subject in the AMSAT archives,
but I've recently read a few posts to the BB that have me confused.
Just this weekend I got my Sat station on the air (FT-736R w/MacDoppler) and
I noticed that the MacDoppler program I use adjusts both the TX and RX
frequencies during the satellite pass. I'm assuming this is to keep my
signal located in the same place in the transponder. The program seemed to
work quite well. I was able to copy several QSO's on VO-52 and made a
couple contacts as well.
One thing I noticed is that about half the QSO's I copied did not require
any manual tuning on my part (MacDoppler adjusted the RX correctly) while
the other half did. According to MacDoppler, those that did require manual
tuning were moving around within the transponder passband.
I've read a few posts (one as recent as today) that suggested the convention
is to keep the RX frequency fixed and manually adjusting the TX frequency
while monitoring the downlink. Looking through the AMSAT archives this is
the old convention prior to the popularity of tracking software and CAT
control. So my question is, are there two conventions? or do I not have my
software configured correctly?
Sorry for what might seem like a stupid question, but I'm a newbie to this
facet of Ham Radio. BTW, I'm having a blast!
Cheers,
John Belstner
w9en@xxxx.xxx
_______________________________________________
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: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 09:14:55 +1000
From: Tony Langdon <vk3jed@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: APBIDDLE@xxxxxxx.xxxx "'John Belstner'" <jbelstner@xxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4c0442fa.11ed8c0a.141e.6604@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 08:06 AM 6/1/2010, Alan P. Biddle wrote:
>My suggestion is to use full tuning until you find that the other operator
>isn't. Then adapt, usually by turning off the updating for the lower
>frequency. It isn't worth getting doctrinaire about it. However, by using
>the One True Rule as the default, you set a good example and encourage the
>movement of other operators in this direction. As you will find, it is
>truly painful to do it the manual way after getting used to automagic
>tuning. As we move above 70 cms, full tuning truly becomes necessary.
I agree with this suggestion. I'm setting up for full Doppler tuning
myself on 2m and 70cm. Got the radio (FT-736R) and the interface
cables in, but have to install some antennas and the PC for Doppler
control. Looking forward to giving the SSB birds a try without
having to fiddle with the VFO all the time (I have worked the Fujis
in the past with manual tuning, it can be a pain LOL).
73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 16:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gail A Mcdaniel <gmcdanl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] EM37 & EM38
To: AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <806138.70283.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
May 26th and 27th I was in training at Tan-Tar-A at Osage Beach Missouri.? I
knew I would have some free time so I took my HT's and Arrow antenna and
worked some passes.? Most of the passes I worked was from one of the parking
lots at Tan-Tar-A Resort (EM38), I worked 2 passes from the EM37/EM38 grid
boundary on US-54? and I worked one pass from Ha-Ha-Tonka State Park
(EM37).? If you would like to have a QSL card from any of the grids I worked
please send me an email for the contact/grid(s) and I will get it out to you
asap.
And as always... I had a blast!
73 from KC
Gail - KB0RZD
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 16:32:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Geiger <aa5jg@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FS: Standard C1208DA FM radio-good for FM and
packet sats
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <759625.4088.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I have for sale a Standard C1208 2m radio with wideband receive. It will
receive on the 70cm ham band, as well as 800mhz for public service, and
plenty of other frequencies. It does 50 watts out on 2m and will do dual
receive. This is the model that has the display and controls on the
microphone. It also has a data in and out jack to use for packet and APRS.
It comes with the mic unit, a power cord, and the manual.
THe dual receive and 70cm receive makes it very good for satellite use and
it will do full duplex. The data jacks also make it very user friendly for
the packet satellites.
Those of you familiar with Standard radios know that they were by far the
best FM rigs on the market, with a price to match that. I am asking $140
plus shipping and can take paypal/check/MO.
73s John AA5JG
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 20:41:13 -0400
From: Josh Smith <juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Update mailing address
To: "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikRWIDLIhI6o2d3kZdAWu7IoztA_XGt97JEWGrP@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I recently moved and need to update my address with AMSAT. I can't find
anywhere on the website to do this. Am I missing something? If so where is
it on the site and if not what is the best procedure for doing so?
Thanks,
Josh Smith
KD8HRX
email/jabber: juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx
phone: 304.237.9369(c)
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 00:51:42 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Update mailing address
To: Josh Smith <juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4C04599E.3080507@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
You probably need to go to the address at the end of every message,
unsubscribe from the list and subscribe under your
new address.
On 01-Jun-10 00:41, Josh Smith wrote:
> I recently moved and need to update my address with AMSAT. I can't find
> anywhere on the website to do this. Am I missing something? If so where is
> it on the site and if not what is the best procedure for doing so?
>
> Thanks,
> Josh Smith
> KD8HRX
> email/jabber: juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx
> phone: 304.237.9369(c)
> _______________________________________________
>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 20:56:46 -0400
From: Josh Smith <juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Update mailing address
To: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimW-yvXZIboyk5ylChiMdafXp09rnUS38EFeFzO@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Nigel,
Just to clear up any confusion, i mean my physical mailing address that the
amsat journal and etc ship to not the email address I am registered on the
list with.
Thanks,
Josh Smith
KD8HRX
email/jabber: juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx
phone: 304.237.9369(c)
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF
<nigel@xxxxx.xxx>wrote:
> You probably need to go to the address at the end of every message,
> unsubscribe from the list and subscribe under your new address.
>
>
>
> On 01-Jun-10 00:41, Josh Smith wrote:
>
>> I recently moved and need to update my address with AMSAT. I can't find
>> anywhere on the website to do this. Am I missing something? If so where
>> is
>> it on the site and if not what is the best procedure for doing so?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Josh Smith
>> KD8HRX
>> email/jabber: juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx
>> phone: 304.237.9369(c)
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 20:58:44 -0400
From: Dave Webb KB1PVH <kb1pvh@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Update mailing address
To: Josh Smith <juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTim4DZn6kOFT4oB_3EEebwPSxTkYEc6uhehC0vvU@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Josh,
I would say that your best bet is to call Martha 888-322-6728. She can help
you out.
Dave - KB1PVH
Sent from my Verizon Wireless DROID
On May 31, 2010 8:52 PM, "Josh Smith" <juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
I recently moved and need to update my address with AMSAT. I can't find
anywhere on the website to do this. Am I missing something? If so where is
it on the site and if not what is the best procedure for doing so?
Thanks,
Josh Smith
KD8HRX
email/jabber: juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx
phone: 304.237.9369(c)
_______________________________________________
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: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:24:17 -0400
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Update mailing address
To: Josh Smith <juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx>, Amsat-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4C046141.2040706@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Josh Smith wrote:
> Nigel,
> Just to clear up any confusion, i mean my physical mailing address that the
> amsat journal and etc ship to not the email address I am registered on the
> list with.
>
> Thanks,
> Josh Smith
> KD8HRX
> email/jabber: juicewvu@xxxxx.xxx
> phone: 304.237.9369(c)
>
>
>
>
>
Just call Martha tomorrow at the phone number in the top right
corner...she will fix you up right away. Thanks for being a member.
73, Drew KO4MA
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:42:09 -0400
From: "Tim - N3TL" <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: <APBIDDLE@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "'John Belstner'" <jbelstner@xxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <377830.22725.qm@xxxxxxx.xxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Alan, John and all,
There is no question that computer-controlled Doppler tuning makes working
the linear satellites easier. That being said, I am glad that my lack of a
computer to dedicate to ham radio forced me to learn and use manual tuning
by following the one true rule of always tuning the higher frequency.
These days, I often use SatPC 32 for computer control when I use my two
FT-817 QRP rigs for the satellites. But last year, right after Field Day,
the CAT plug on my FT-857D stopped working. Because of the choices I've made
about my station setup (i.e., a totally portable station that I can set up
and operate anywhere at any time), I need to use the 857 as a transmit radio
in order to work the DX into Europe and Africa that I have on AO-7 Mode B.
And without its higher power on 2 meters, I would not have gotten Hawaii
into the log earlier this year on FO-29 from Adrian, AA5UK/KH6. Since the
CAT plug died on the 857, I have been manually tuning on every pass during
which I use that radio.
I really like being able to do it, even if I don't have to. I hope new
satellite operators will take the time to at least develop the basic ability
to effectively use manual tuning. But then - dinosaur that I am - I also
wish more amateurs in general would at least learn Morse Code at slow speeds
... hihi.
And since we're on the topic ... has anyone else noticed that the latest
edition of "The ARRL Satellite Handbook" uses VO-52 as the example for
Doppler tuning - and that it suggests that newcomers who are manually tuning
for Doppler park their transmit frequency on the UHF uplink and tune the VHF
downlink (i.e., the exact opposite of the One True Rule)? That is really
mystifying and disappointing.
Alan, I have no doubt that you're right about the necessity for Doppler
control above Mode B satellites. Having always preferred the KISS approach
whenever possible, I suppose that's why I haven't been able to get myself
very excited for L- and S-band opportunities. I definitely enjoy the
benefits of computer control for Doppler. I just don't much care for having
no choice in using it (or not) to effectively work a satellite.
73 to all,
Tim - N3TL
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Alan P. Biddle
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 6:07 PM
To: 'John Belstner'; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
John,
MacDoppler, SATPC32, Ham Radio Deluxe, and other programs all support what
has been called the One True Rule. The usual name for the implementation is
Full Doppler Tuning. You are doing it right. When everyone does this, it
provides a very pleasant opportunity to talk instead of tune. It also keeps
from drifting all over another QSO, though the transponders are seldom full
these days.
However, that is not to say that people not using this are doing it wrong,
exactly. There are still many rigs in use which do not have the capability
for computer frequency control. In the old days, the rule was to tune the
highest frequency, whether uplink or downlink, since this is where the
Doppler shift is greatest. Take a look at KB5MU's original article and
updates here:
http://www.amsat.org/amsat/features/one_true_rule.html
My suggestion is to use full tuning until you find that the other operator
isn't. Then adapt, usually by turning off the updating for the lower
frequency. It isn't worth getting doctrinaire about it. However, by using
the One True Rule as the default, you set a good example and encourage the
movement of other operators in this direction. As you will find, it is
truly painful to do it the manual way after getting used to automagic
tuning. As we move above 70 cms, full tuning truly becomes necessary.
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of John Belstner
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 3:36 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning Convention Question
I know there is a lot of discussion on this subject in the AMSAT archives,
but I've recently read a few posts to the BB that have me confused.
Just this weekend I got my Sat station on the air (FT-736R w/MacDoppler) and
I noticed that the MacDoppler program I use adjusts both the TX and RX
frequencies during the satellite pass. I'm assuming this is to keep my
signal located in the same place in the transponder. The program seemed to
work quite well. I was able to copy several QSO's on VO-52 and made a
couple contacts as well.
One thing I noticed is that about half the QSO's I copied did not require
any manual tuning on my part (MacDoppler adjusted the RX correctly) while
the other half did. According to MacDoppler, those that did require manual
tuning were moving around within the transponder passband.
I've read a few posts (one as recent as today) that suggested the convention
is to keep the RX frequency fixed and manually adjusting the TX frequency
while monitoring the downlink. Looking through the AMSAT archives this is
the old convention prior to the popularity of tracking software and CAT
control. So my question is, are there two conventions? or do I not have my
software configured correctly?
Sorry for what might seem like a stupid question, but I'm a newbie to this
facet of Ham Radio. BTW, I'm having a blast!
Cheers,
John Belstner
w9en@xxxx.xxx
_______________________________________________
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: 15
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:05:09 -0500
From: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL114-DS42F8DBAA1B2B092B116E68AEF0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Tim,
Speak for yourself :-) In the 20+ years I have been a satellite
operator, I have never gotten computer doppler control to work right on the
linear birds. It works great on FM, but I always wind up fighting it on the
linear birds. As soon as I tune the other guy in the computer moves me off
frequency. It's so much easier to just listen and adjust on the fly.
Maybe there is some secret, but I have yet to be clued in... If
someone wants to write a "Dummies Guide" for this I would be willing to be
your test subject.
73,
Joe kk0sd
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Tim - N3TL
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 8:42 PM
To: APBIDDLE@xxxxxxx.xxxx 'John Belstner'; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
Alan, John and all,
There is no question that computer-controlled Doppler tuning makes working
the linear satellites easier. That being said, I am glad that my lack of a
computer to dedicate to ham radio forced me to learn and use manual tuning
by following the one true rule of always tuning the higher frequency.
These days, I often use SatPC 32 for computer control when I use my two
FT-817 QRP rigs for the satellites. But last year, right after Field Day,
the CAT plug on my FT-857D stopped working. Because of the choices I've made
about my station setup (i.e., a totally portable station that I can set up
and operate anywhere at any time), I need to use the 857 as a transmit radio
in order to work the DX into Europe and Africa that I have on AO-7 Mode B.
And without its higher power on 2 meters, I would not have gotten Hawaii
into the log earlier this year on FO-29 from Adrian, AA5UK/KH6. Since the
CAT plug died on the 857, I have been manually tuning on every pass during
which I use that radio.
I really like being able to do it, even if I don't have to. I hope new
satellite operators will take the time to at least develop the basic ability
to effectively use manual tuning. But then - dinosaur that I am - I also
wish more amateurs in general would at least learn Morse Code at slow speeds
... hihi.
And since we're on the topic ... has anyone else noticed that the latest
edition of "The ARRL Satellite Handbook" uses VO-52 as the example for
Doppler tuning - and that it suggests that newcomers who are manually tuning
for Doppler park their transmit frequency on the UHF uplink and tune the VHF
downlink (i.e., the exact opposite of the One True Rule)? That is really
mystifying and disappointing.
Alan, I have no doubt that you're right about the necessity for Doppler
control above Mode B satellites. Having always preferred the KISS approach
whenever possible, I suppose that's why I haven't been able to get myself
very excited for L- and S-band opportunities. I definitely enjoy the
benefits of computer control for Doppler. I just don't much care for having
no choice in using it (or not) to effectively work a satellite.
73 to all,
Tim - N3TL
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Alan P. Biddle
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 6:07 PM
To: 'John Belstner'; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
John,
MacDoppler, SATPC32, Ham Radio Deluxe, and other programs all support what
has been called the One True Rule. The usual name for the implementation is
Full Doppler Tuning. You are doing it right. When everyone does this, it
provides a very pleasant opportunity to talk instead of tune. It also keeps
from drifting all over another QSO, though the transponders are seldom full
these days.
However, that is not to say that people not using this are doing it wrong,
exactly. There are still many rigs in use which do not have the capability
for computer frequency control. In the old days, the rule was to tune the
highest frequency, whether uplink or downlink, since this is where the
Doppler shift is greatest. Take a look at KB5MU's original article and
updates here:
http://www.amsat.org/amsat/features/one_true_rule.html
My suggestion is to use full tuning until you find that the other operator
isn't. Then adapt, usually by turning off the updating for the lower
frequency. It isn't worth getting doctrinaire about it. However, by using
the One True Rule as the default, you set a good example and encourage the
movement of other operators in this direction. As you will find, it is
truly painful to do it the manual way after getting used to automagic
tuning. As we move above 70 cms, full tuning truly becomes necessary.
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of John Belstner
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 3:36 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning Convention Question
I know there is a lot of discussion on this subject in the AMSAT archives,
but I've recently read a few posts to the BB that have me confused.
Just this weekend I got my Sat station on the air (FT-736R w/MacDoppler) and
I noticed that the MacDoppler program I use adjusts both the TX and RX
frequencies during the satellite pass. I'm assuming this is to keep my
signal located in the same place in the transponder. The program seemed to
work quite well. I was able to copy several QSO's on VO-52 and made a
couple contacts as well.
One thing I noticed is that about half the QSO's I copied did not require
any manual tuning on my part (MacDoppler adjusted the RX correctly) while
the other half did. According to MacDoppler, those that did require manual
tuning were moving around within the transponder passband.
I've read a few posts (one as recent as today) that suggested the convention
is to keep the RX frequency fixed and manually adjusting the TX frequency
while monitoring the downlink. Looking through the AMSAT archives this is
the old convention prior to the popularity of tracking software and CAT
control. So my question is, are there two conventions? or do I not have my
software configured correctly?
Sorry for what might seem like a stupid question, but I'm a newbie to this
facet of Ham Radio. BTW, I'm having a blast!
Cheers,
John Belstner
w9en@xxxx.xxx
_______________________________________________
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-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 5, Issue 244
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
