| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 01.06.10 16:20l 1012 Lines 38175 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB5245
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V5 245
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 100601/1516Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:63283 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB5245
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Bruce)
2. Re: Standard C1208 (Clint Bradford)
3. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Greg D.)
4. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Art McBride)
5. 2M1EUB/P ACTIVE NEW GRID 25/JUNE (paul robinson)
6. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Alan P. Biddle)
7. UNITEC-1 in New Scientist (Trevor .)
8. College Satellite this Thursday evening (Dr. Jay Garlitz)
9. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Tim - N3TL)
10. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Alan)
11. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Adrian Engele)
12. Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question (Tim - N3TL)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:16:40 -0500
From: Bruce <kk5do@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: Gary Joe Mayfield <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <0CD3110B-05BD-41AA-8C49-ADE17594BD9C@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
me too. i do only manual tuning and experienced same problem. i also
prefer to manually move my rotor as crossing the end of rotation
always has it magically move 360 degrees at the time you either hear
the best or just went to work someone.
73...bruce
Sent from my iPhone
On May 31, 2010, at 9:05 PM, "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield"
<gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx
> wrote:
> 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.
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 19:48:12 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Standard C1208
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <2202692C-64F2-4E65-87E1-BD5A266030C1@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>> ... for sale ... Standard C1208 ... mic unit, a power cord, and the
manual ...
Great old rig ... and offering the manual is a PLUS!
>> ... $140 plus shipping and can take paypal/check/MO ...
OK, John, how much of this sale is going to AMSAT and the DARA Doubling(tm)
campaign???
I'll pay $125 plus reasonable shipping for the unit - if you donate $25 of
the sale to AMSAT - with doubling, that's a $50 donation to AMSAT!!!
Clint Bradford, K6LCS
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:36:55 -0700
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, <apbiddle@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
<jbelstner@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BLU133-W5BBA21E026A4202C96D29A9EF0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> From: n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
> To: APBIDDLE@xxxxxxx.xxxx jbelstner@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:42:09 -0400
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
>
>
> 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
>
>
Actually, I've been running 2.4 ghz manually since AO-40, and really haven't
had that much trouble. Just keep spinning the dial. Also, having an older
rig (736r), I don't bother with computer control when on the linear birds.
I do relax under full computer control for FM up through L-band, but there's
still something satisfying about manual tuning.
Greg KO6TH
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:
en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 22:17:07 -0700
From: "Art McBride" <kc6uqh@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: "'Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield'" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <93DC12E4319549C2868AD28BB33BC31D@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have seen it work with Sat PC 32 on VO52 Arm chair copy just move the
antenna once in a while. This was out doors, using a small ACER computer and
arrow antenna.
I would like to try it on my ICom 720, but the data port does not work just
like everything else that is satellite related to that radio.
When we get a HEO I will consider replacing the 720, until then no sense in
trying another radio with features that do not match the needs of the
operators.
Art,
KC6UQH
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Gary "Joe" Mayfield
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 7:05 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
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-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5158 (20100531) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5160 (20100531) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 06:57:44 +0000 (GMT)
From: paul robinson <pushbiker2004@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] 2M1EUB/P ACTIVE NEW GRID 25/JUNE
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <387482.31365.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hi group more info to follow but ill be active for just a few days from
northen Scotland ,from my converted VAN...yes thats right....im now able to
work the birds from the mountain tops....dates and new locator sq to
follow...but around 25/26/27 June,ill try and put photoes on qrz soon ...de
paul 2E1EUB.?? RSGB/AMSAT UK/NA
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 02:57:48 -0500
From: "Alan P. Biddle" <APBIDDLE@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: "'Greg D.'" <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <0BDA589B94EF4AB7BD5E9031C174F3BA@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Greg,
A good compromise, and I certainly understand the desire to remain in the
loop. It allows the other operator to take advantage of greater automation
or not, as suits them.
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg D. [mailto:ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxxx
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 11:37 PM
To: n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx apbiddle@xxxxxxx.xxxx jbelstner@xxxxx.xxxx
amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
> From: n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
> To: APBIDDLE@xxxxxxx.xxxx jbelstner@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:42:09 -0400
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
>
>
> 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
>
>
Actually, I've been running 2.4 ghz manually since AO-40, and really haven't
had that much trouble. Just keep spinning the dial. Also, having an older
rig (736r), I don't bother with computer control when on the linear birds.
I do relax under full computer control for FM up through L-band, but there's
still something satisfying about manual tuning.
Greg KO6TH
________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox. See how.
<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:
WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 08:57:21 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] UNITEC-1 in New Scientist
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <502061.36401.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
See
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/june2010/unitec1_in_new_scientist.htm
73 Trevor M5AKA
Daily Amateur Radio Email/RSS News: http://www.southgatearc.org/
Email Your News To: editor at southgatearc.org
Or Upload Using Form At: http://www.southgatearc.org/news/your_news_1.htm
----
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 07:26:00 -0400
From: "Dr. Jay Garlitz" <drjay@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] College Satellite this Thursday evening
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<201006011125.o51BPxNM016273@xxxxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
It's time for another College Satellite night! We hope to see you on the
birds Thursday evening June 3rd from 22:00 UTC to 0500 UTC (June 4).
College Satellite nights are a monthly event held the first Thursday of the
month. Mark your calendar and spread the word to college hams/club stations
that you know!
College club stations plan on being on birds AO51, SO50, AO7, VO52, HO-68
and more. Please give these stations a call and work them.they will
identify their college club identity along with their call sign.
73, Dr. Jay Garlitz, AA4FL
Gator ARC Faculty Advisor at UF, W4DFU trustee
www.gatorradio.org <http://www.gatorradio.org/>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 05:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tim - N3TL <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, apbiddle@xxxxxxx.xxxx
jbelstner@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <858148.79116.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Greg,
Thanks for this reply. It's nice to know that even the highest of
currently-in-use satellite frequencies are do-able without computer aid. I'm
pleased to hear that, and will rethink my position on things above 70 cm.
To Joe and Bruce - Here, I have noticed particular challenges with VO-52,
whose Doppler tends to move more quickly near mid-pass than the computer and
software routinely seem able to keep up with. The Mode J satellites and AO-7
Mode B haven't really been too troublesome. At the end of the day, however,
tuning manually remains a very viable option for any of us, in my opinion.
73 to all,
Tim - N3TL
________________________________
From: Greg D. <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx apbiddle@xxxxxxx.xxxx jbelstner@xxxxx.xxxx
amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 12:36:55 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
> From: n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
> To: APBIDDLE@xxxxxxx.xxxx jbelstner@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:42:09 -0400
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
>
>
> 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
>
>
Actually, I've been running 2.4 ghz manually since AO-40, and really haven't
had that much trouble. Just keep spinning the dial. Also, having an older
rig (736r), I don't bother with computer control when on the linear birds.
I do relax under full computer control for FM up through L-band, but there's
still something satisfying about manual tuning.
Greg KO6TH
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:
en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
_______________________________________________
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: 10
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 08:31:36 -0500
From: "Alan" <ve4yz@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BAY110-DS2436F37A8E6BA8A7C6D702EBEF0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Folks I've been patiently silent reading this d?j? vu annual discussion and
I'm getting a brain crap.
- comments that tuning the highest frequency is the "One True Method"
Yikes! Why is that? So you can leap frog down the pass band and eventually
stomp all over a QSO where folks are tuning both TX and RX to maintain a
single constant frequency at the satellite?
I've read the " Doppler tends to move more quickly near mid-pass than the
computer and software routinely seem able to keep up". Mid pass is when the
sat is moving most tangentially to you at which point Doppler shift is nil.
I've read statements from many taking pride in their lack of use of current
technology.
I've read that working tight SSB sats is easier than the wide band FM where
the satellite is very forgiving of your sloppy tuning.
I've read advise to someone using an FT 736r that your shouldn't tune the RX
and ignore the use of the NOR/REV feature, again so you can eventually stomp
on other QSO's as you slide down the pass band.
Have I just been transported into a Bizarro World?
73, Alan VE4YZ
EN19kv
AMSAT LM 2352
http://www.wincube.ca
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 06:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Adrian Engele <aa5uk@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <387091.12684.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Joe,
I have used both manual tuning over the years and automated Doppler tuning
since last year using SatPC. As Tim N3TL mentioned, I was on a recent
Dxpedition working portable satellite from KH6 using an FT857D for transmit
and an FT817 for receive. I used the automated tracking on the linear and FM
satellites with complete success. This allowed me to concentrate on logging
and manually tuning the antenna on my tripod during each pass. I am very
happy with SatPC and it works like a charm as designed. I and many other
users have had great support by the author.
What program are using? What radios are you using? Do your radios have CAT
interfaces? I can help you with getting the settings properly set so you can
make Doppler tracking work properly with minimal effort. I know there is a
little bit of a leaning curve with SatPC, but once you have it up and
running it works like a charm. I can attest to that having used it in the
field in half duplex and full duplex mode during my DXpeditions. I usually
just give the receive knob a small nudge once in a while to be on downlink
frequency.
Let me and the group know if you would like some assistance to make it work
for you. Collectively we can provide lots of feedback.
73,
Adrian AA5UK
________________________________
From: "Gary "Joe" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Mon, May 31, 2010 9:05:09 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
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-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 07:49:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tim - N3TL <n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
To: Alan <ve4yz@xxxxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <559372.21021.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hi Alan,
Your comments suggest that I'm the one in Bizarro World.
Regarding the One True Rule - I operate under the impression (which, I
thought, has been backed by science) that regardless of the frequency pair,
Doppler always will have a more pronounced effect (in relative terms, of
course, based on the frequencies being used) on the higher of the two. In a
perfect world, ever operator will be tuning for Doppler the same way.
reality, of course, is that some people either can't use computer-aided
Doppler tuning (my situation for the first several months that I worked the
linear satellites) or they choose not to - as I still often do. And when I
do, I will continue to compensate - most - for the frequency being most
affected by Doppler, which is the higher frequency.
Regarding mid-pass - My experience suggests that, while your statement about
mid-pass Doppler shift is accurate, it does not take into account that
mid-pass occurs for only a moment in time during any orbit. My experience
has been that the lower a satellite's orbit, the more significant Doppler
movement will be. VO-52 is the prime example, in my opinion. And here, for
me, the time just before and just after (say, 20-30 seconds on each side)
mid-pass is when Doppler affects the uplink frequency the most. The computer
and software I use often have not been able to adjust my radio's frequency
as quickly as they need to in order to compensate for Doppler. Others may
not have that problem with their computer-tuning system, but I believe the
more-rapid Doppler effect is consistent for VO-52 regardless of how one is
tuning. I'm confident (and, actually hope) that others will correct me if
I'm wrong about the relative speed of Doppler correlating to the relative
height of a satellite's orbit.
Regarding pride associated with the decision to not use current technology -
Any measure of pride I take from knowing how to routinely tune for Doppler
manually comes from the knowledge that circumstances and situations may
arise when I will be asked to communicate effectively through the satellites
without access to everything associated with current technology. My station
is founded in that concept. I don't have an all-mode, full-duplex radio. I
use two radios with a diplexer connecting them to one antenna. I don't have
an az/el rotator; well, actually I do. It has three parts - shoulder, elbow
and wrist. I don't have two very large, high-gain antennas. The only
satellite antenna I own and use (other than some whips for the HTs) is the
Elk dual-band log periodic. All of that being said, I am proud to say that I
can use the gear I have to work any of the current fleet of
single-channel-FM and linear-transponder satellites from anywhere - even
without
access to a computer or even to power. In that regard, Patrick - WD9EWK -
has been an inspiration and mentor. His station is similar to mine.
I can't comment on your last two statements (about SSB vs. FM satellites and
how to appropriate use a Yaesu FT-736r) because I didn't comment initially
on either one. Personally, I find the FM satellites easier to work than the
birds with linear transponders - but the latter are easier to make contacts
on because they never attract nearly the number of operators on a single
pass as the FM satellites. NONE of them are as difficult to work as I
believed. They represent the most fun and satisfying operation I've ever
done in amateur radio.
73 to all ... from the EM84 chunk of Bizarro World....
Tim - N3TL
________________________________
From: Alan <ve4yz@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 9:31:36 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
Folks I've been patiently silent reading this d?j? vu annual discussion and
I'm getting a brain crap.
- comments that tuning the highest frequency is the "One True Method"
Yikes! Why is that? So you can leap frog down the pass band and eventually
stomp all over a QSO where folks are tuning both TX and RX to maintain a
single constant frequency at the satellite?
I've read the " Doppler tends to move more quickly near mid-pass than the
computer and software routinely seem able to keep up". Mid pass is when the
sat is moving most tangentially to you at which point Doppler shift is nil.
I've read statements from many taking pride in their lack of use of current
technology.
I've read that working tight SSB sats is easier than the wide band FM where
the satellite is very forgiving of your sloppy tuning.
I've read advise to someone using an FT 736r that your shouldn't tune the RX
and ignore the use of the NOR/REV feature, again so you can eventually stomp
on other QSO's as you slide down the pass band.
Have I just been transported into a Bizarro World?
73, Alan VE4YZ
EN19kv
AMSAT LM 2352
http://www.wincube.ca
_______________________________________________
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 245
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
