| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 17.12.10 07:17l 762 Lines 24290 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB5496
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V5 496
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<DB0OVN<DB0IUZ<DB0GOS<ON0AR<UA6ADV<CX2SA
Sent: 101217/0511Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:39557 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB5496
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. AO-7 Scheduling page (Scott Armstrong)
2. Horizontal stacking distance question (John Geiger)
3. Re: AO-7 Scheduling page (Bob- W7LRD)
4. Re: Will the FTM-350AR do full-duplex? (Clint Bradford)
5. Re: Horizontal stacking distance question (Edward R. Cole)
6. Educate the Manufacturers (Clint Bradford)
7. Re: Will the FTM-350AR do full-duplex? (Dave Tipton)
8. FTM-350 - Semantics (Clint Bradford)
9. A07 Mode-A (Edward R. Cole)
10. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Trevor .)
11. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
12. fyi AO-7 mode switch (Bob- W7LRD)
13. Semantics, Continued (Clint Bradford)
14. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Andrew Glasbrenner)
15. A07-A #65,136 (Edward R. Cole)
16. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Tony Langdon)
17. AO7 Post Script (Edward R. Cole)
18. Virgin Galactic's Plans For Orbital Spacecraft (B J)
19. LVB Tracker (H. Vordenbaum)
20. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Greg D.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:02:31 -0600
From: Scott Armstrong <aa5am@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-7 Scheduling page
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL116-W4124FAC5FA03681D2616B4C0150@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
There is a link off of the AO-7 resource page for a logger for scheduling
contacts but it doesn't work.
Does anybody know of a real time/near time reflector for scheduling more
specifically AO-7 contacts or even a general reflector covering all the
satellites?
Thanks in advance and 73,
Scott AA5AM
> From: kladuke1144@xxx.xxx
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:55:37 -0700
> Subject: [amsat-bb] UA0QJ
>
> All,
>
> Boris, UA0QJ (Asiatic Russia) is active on AO7 mode B. He has been
operating CW so far. He lists his qth as PP42TA in the online AO7 log.
>
> 73
> WC7V
> Kerry
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 2
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:21:02 -0600
From: John Geiger <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Horizontal stacking distance question
To: vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinVL1GvepAi3dFCXOkK83R-U85--x6XZKKhFcLY@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I know that when stacking antennas for different bands on the same mast, the
general rule of thumb is to space them at least 1/2 of the boom length for
the higher frequency antenna. Does this rule also hold true for stacking 2
antennas on a horizontal crossboom? If I want to put a 2m and 70cm yagi on
the same crossboom, how far apart should they be spaced?
73s John AA5JG
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 20:48:43 +0000 (UTC)
From: Bob- W7LRD <w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-7 Scheduling page
To: Scott Armstrong <aa5am@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<1535001318.807190.1292532523189.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx.xxxx
xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
You're right Scott.? I never checked that link out.? What I have done in the
past is either "float" a post on the AMSAT bb or try to track down the email
address of the person I am trying to contact via AO-7.? Some satellite
contacts do require advance notice, especially when the footprint time is in
seconds.? I'm still trying to work JA.? So any JA's reading this check out
AO-7 mode A to CN87.
73 Bob W7LRD
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Armstrong" <aa5am@xxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 12:02:31 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] ?AO-7 Scheduling page
?
?
There is a link off of the AO-7 resource page for a logger for scheduling
contacts but it doesn't work.
?
Does anybody know of a real time/near time reflector for scheduling more
specifically AO-7 contacts or even a general reflector covering all the
satellites?
?
Thanks in advance and 73,
?
Scott AA5AM
?
?
?
> From: kladuke1144@xxx.xxx
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:55:37 -0700
> Subject: [amsat-bb] UA0QJ
>
> All,
>
> Boris, UA0QJ (Asiatic Russia) is active on AO7 mode B. He has been
operating CW so far. He lists his qth as PP42TA in the online AO7 log.
>
> 73
> WC7V
> Kerry
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 4
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:56:33 -0800
From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Will the FTM-350AR do full-duplex?
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <151D9221-B347-4393-B143-4CA50741C44A@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
No, not what WE call a "full-duplex" radio.
But you can monitor the FMN broadcast band ion the left side, and have a ham
freq on the right side.
Clint, K6LCS
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:59:50 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Horizontal stacking distance question
To: John Geiger <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201012162059.oBGKxtUQ073813@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 11:21 AM 12/16/2010, John Geiger wrote:
>I know that when stacking antennas for different bands on the same mast, the
>general rule of thumb is to space them at least 1/2 of the boom length for
>the higher frequency antenna. Does this rule also hold true for stacking 2
>antennas on a horizontal crossboom? If I want to put a 2m and 70cm yagi on
>the same crossboom, how far apart should they be spaced?
>
>73s John AA5JG
John,
For satellite use that is fine. I have my 2m and 70cm yagis
separated 5-feet horizontally.
The current setup (before high winds busted the mast) was with my
436CP42 mounted on a 4-foot vertical boom with 1268 loop yagi. The
70cm antenna is 18-foot long and loop yagi 12-foot long. This boom
was mounted at right angles to the 5-foot elevation cross boom with a
8-element 2m yagi (vertical pol) at the other end of the cross
boom. Not exactly conforming to the half-length rule.
Normally, If you are stacking linear-pol antennas the stacking
distance in the plane of polarization needs to be further apart than
if stacked in the direction right angles to polarization (e.g. two
horz pol antennas stacked horizontally need more separation to avoid
interaction, whereas, it they are vertical pol antennas stacked
horizontal you can stack them closer than the rule. If they are
circular pol stacking there is no difference what direction stacking is done.
4 to 5 foot separation on the elevation cross-boom of a B5400 az-el
is common for satellite.
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
======================================
BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com
EME: 144-1.4kw, 432-100w*, 1296-testing*, 3400-winter?
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@xxxxxxx.xxx
======================================
*temp not in service
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 13:02:46 -0800
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Educate the Manufacturers
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <6FF35F69-7E91-4682-BEF2-78F4EF2BFD31@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>> ... but Kenyeacomco Model XYZ-123 claims it is "full-duplex" ...
Several of us have tried for years to properly educate the manufacturers and
marketing departments of ham radio transceivers. What they term
"full-duplex" is usually a radio with two, independent VFOs - but the
"sub-band" can NOT be monitored while we key up on the other.
Clint, K6LCS
http://www.work-sat.com
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:04:12 -0700
From: Dave Tipton <dave@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Will the FTM-350AR do full-duplex?
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinBBh+kf0b3rv1x573Qk55F+=bj5_q5rxCQrR4X@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
He asked, if it would do V/U or U/V full duplex, and yes, it most certainly
does.
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Clint Bradford
<clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>wrote:
> No, not what WE call a "full-duplex" radio.
>
> But you can monitor the FMN broadcast band ion the left side, and have a
> ham freq on the right side.
>
> 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: 8
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 13:10:12 -0800
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FTM-350 - Semantics
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <FB95AA3A-04FC-4606-B714-C59BDC9E96DC@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>> ... He asked, if it would do V/U or U/V full duplex, and yes, it most
certainly does.
Not in what WE term, "full duplex," where we can monitor the sub-band while
keying up the other for the FM birds. The '350 will NOT do that.
If I answered his question wrong, I apologize.
Clint, K6LCS
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:52 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] A07 Mode-A
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201012162112.oBGLCthY074832@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
After a very long absence I have been invited to try A07 on
mode-A. Cognizant of the battery issue, I am asking some guidance:
Regarding uplink transmitting power:
I will be using my FT-847 with a Lindenblad for uplink, so with no
antenna gain what is recommended for power.
For reception I have two 10m antennas (3-elem triband yagi, or a
J-pole); easily switched with a coax switch.
no elevation of any antenna
What is the condition of the 29.520 CW beacon?
my directional array crashed in high winds Tuesday night so will only
have the "Lindys U/V" and 10m antenna for sat use until spring.
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
======================================
BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com
EME: 144-1.4kw, 432-100w*, 1296-testing*, 3400-winter?
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@xxxxxxx.xxx
======================================
*temp not in service
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:47:03 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <228606.43816.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Clint,
Can you name a specific manufacturer that claims their equipment is "Full
Duplex" when it isn't ?
I note Yaesu say the FTM-350 as well as being "Full Duplex" does:
"For emergency work, or to extend the range of a hand-held unit, the
FTM-350R includes Cross-Band Repeat capability."
Now it seems to me the Cross-Band Repeat facility wouldn't work if it wasn't
full duplex.
73 Trevor M5AKA
--- On Thu, 16/12/10, Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Educate the Manufacturers
> To: "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Date: Thursday, 16 December, 2010, 21:02
> >> ... but Kenyeacomco Model
> XYZ-123 claims it is "full-duplex" ...
>
> Several of us have tried for years to properly educate the
> manufacturers and marketing departments of ham radio
> transceivers. What they term "full-duplex" is usually a
> radio with two, independent VFOs - but the "sub-band" can
> NOT be monitored while we key up on the other.
>
> Clint, K6LCS
> http://www.work-sat.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 11
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 22:03:31 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4D0A8CB3.7050502@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Full Duplex means that you can both receive and transmit simultaneously.
Half Duplex means that you can both receive and transmit but only one at a
time.
Simplex means that you can either receice or transmit but not both.
Frequency and bands are irrelevent to the definitions.
On 16-Dec-10 21:47, Trevor . wrote:
> Clint,
>
> Can you name a specific manufacturer that claims their equipment is "Full
Duplex" when it isn't ?
>
> I note Yaesu say the FTM-350 as well as being "Full Duplex" does:
>
> "For emergency work, or to extend the range of a hand-held unit, the
FTM-350R includes Cross-Band Repeat capability."
>
> Now it seems to me the Cross-Band Repeat facility wouldn't work if it
wasn't full duplex.
>
> 73 Trevor M5AKA
>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 23:27:44 +0000 (UTC)
From: Bob- W7LRD <w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] fyi AO-7 mode switch
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<1234483516.816789.1292542064413.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx.xxxx
xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
FYI-AO-7 switched over from B to A at exactly 2324Z.? Seems to keep fairly
good time, for an old bucket of bolts!
73 Bob W7LRD
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:44:04 -0800
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Semantics, Continued
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <EEE2D785-4CC8-4149-9CB4-5732600BFF34@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>> ... can you name a specific manufacturer that claims their equipment is
"Full Duplex" when it isn't ?
MY definition of "full duplex" is met only by two or three individual RADIOS
currently on the market.
I was hoping there'd be little or no argument here - the AMSAT-BB - on this
point.
When AMSAT wants a radio to work the FM birds to be "full-duplex," the
definition of "full duplex" is: Able to monitor 440 on one VFO while keying
up on 2M on another.
I know this to be true - 'cause Drew counters me every time I mention that
it isn't mandatory to work the FM sats in full-duplex, but preferable.
So ... Every manufacturer that claims "full duplex" to us SHOULD raise
eyebrows. "Cross-band repeat" is not OUR definition of "full duplex,"
either. A unit that cross-bands doesn't necessarily allow the monitoring of
the RX band while transmitting.
Why is there ANY debate on this??? This has been AMSAT gospel since at least
1993 or 1994 when I started getting involved.
Clint, K6LCS
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 20:11:11 -0500
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4D0AB8AF.30606@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 12/16/2010 4:47 PM, Trevor . wrote:
>
> Now it seems to me the Cross-Band Repeat facility wouldn't work if it
wasn't full duplex.
>
> 73 Trevor M5AKA
Spot on. It has to be full duplex for cross band repeat to work, whether
the guys who write the manual, marketing literature, or QST review
realize it.
I've never seen a radio advertised as full duplex, that wasn't. Even the
G7 is, it just goes half-deaf. Non- full duplex rigs capable of
reception of two bands at once are usually labeled as "dual receive".
Half-duplex is fine for getting your feet wet, but the increasing number
of ops not moving up to full-duplex is having a real impact on the FM
satellites over densely populated areas. Expense is no excuse. I've
bought suitable uplink transmitters as cheap as $5 (IC-2AT), and the
difference in an Arrow with and without diplexer is nearly the cost of a
new simple 2m HT.
73, Drew KO4MA
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:32:47 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] A07-A #65,136
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201012170132.oBH1Wshs097013@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Heard you fine, Scott. Nice loud 559. MY signal with full was quite
a bit lower and faded out the last ten minutes of the pass for some
reason. Of course only PNW-CA-AK and Siberia in view.
Took me some time to find myself - rusty! I started with SSB
-oops! All I hear is CW. No problem but lost a couple more minutes
getting set up. The sub-tune knob on the FT-847 tunes too slow to
move very far. I swapped VFO's to speed that after I found myself
several KHz low. There was a way to tune the Tx with the VFO, but I
forgot how that goes.
looks like there is a common window with Moscow western Russia,
Finland and Sweden at the end of the pass.
My guess without a yagi I will be limited to the center of the pass.
Ready to try again on Saturday (Dec.19 0100 utc). Tnx I forgot how
much fun this is!
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
======================================
BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com
EME: 144-1.4kw, 432-100w*, 1296-testing*, 3400-winter?
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@xxxxxxx.xxx
======================================
*temp not in service
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:46:50 +1100
From: Tony Langdon <vk3jed@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Trevor ."
<m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4d0ac111.9c4de50a.13fe.24de@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 12:11 PM 12/17/2010, Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
>On 12/16/2010 4:47 PM, Trevor . wrote:
> >
> > Now it seems to me the Cross-Band Repeat facility wouldn't work
> if it wasn't full duplex.
> >
> > 73 Trevor M5AKA
>
>Spot on. It has to be full duplex for cross band repeat to work, whether
>the guys who write the manual, marketing literature, or QST review
>realize it.
That's correct, except that the radio doesn't need to be able to use
the mic or speaker while in crossband receive mode, so it is
theoretically possible to have a crossband repeat capable radio
without being able to make use of the duplex capability otherwise.
>I've never seen a radio advertised as full duplex, that wasn't. Even the
>G7 is, it just goes half-deaf. Non- full duplex rigs capable of
>reception of two bands at once are usually labeled as "dual receive".
Neither have I. The manufacturers have been honest in this regard.
>Half-duplex is fine for getting your feet wet, but the increasing number
>of ops not moving up to full-duplex is having a real impact on the FM
>satellites over densely populated areas. Expense is no excuse. I've
>bought suitable uplink transmitters as cheap as $5 (IC-2AT), and the
>difference in an Arrow with and without diplexer is nearly the cost of a
>new simple 2m HT.
Agreed. Once you go full duplex, you won't want to go back. I've
always done full duplex simply by using two separate radios. That
also makes tuning easier in the event you need to tune the uplink for
Doppler correction.
73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:56:29 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO7 Post Script
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201012170156.oBH1uUPK001962@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Few more comments:
Running 50w into the "Lindy" works the middle of the pass, OK on
AO7-mode A. I need my 8-element 2m yagi to do better. Since the
support tower is out of commission until spring, I could move the
B5400 and 2m/70cm antennas to a tripod mounted mast that I have used
temporarily when roving or other things. I could mount the UHF part
of the Arrow and the 8-element M2 2m yagi for a low impact set up
that would probably still work mode O/V and mode-A OK. I will think
about setting this up in the next couple weeks.
This would resemble my old satellite setup at the old house on the
flat roof (in a minimalist fashion). I will not set up the 1268
loop-yagi or 33-inch dish (KISS). I could set up the 2.4GHz panel
antenna with LNA and drake converter.
I'm back!
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
======================================
BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com
EME: 144-1.4kw, 432-100w*, 1296-testing*, 3400-winter?
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@xxxxxxx.xxx
======================================
*temp not in service
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:20:25 -0800 (PST)
From: B J <top_gun_canada@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Virgin Galactic's Plans For Orbital Spacecraft
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <300029.9774.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1012/16virgingalactic/
73s
Bernhard VA6BMJ @ DO33FL
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:12:38 -0600
From: "H. Vordenbaum" <tower2@xxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] LVB Tracker
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAI0qOvzY0LdKpnn+wEwUEvbCgAAAEAAAAG0I7QykYRlCjhYtubVQue
ABAAAAAA==@xxx.xx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
LVB Tracker with KR-5400A Controller.
EEPROM does not hold calibration after Controller is turned off for a while.
Do I have to go thru the calibration procedure every time it is turned on?
Am I missing something here?
73, Harvey
K5HV
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:09:18 -0800
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: <vk3jed@xxxxx.xxx>, <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>,
<m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BLU133-W9B2960717445AB2A050CDA9160@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> >Spot on. It has to be full duplex for cross band repeat to work, whether
> >the guys who write the manual, marketing literature, or QST review
> >realize it.
>
> That's correct, except that the radio doesn't need to be able to use
> the mic or speaker while in crossband receive mode, so it is
> theoretically possible to have a crossband repeat capable radio
> without being able to make use of the duplex capability otherwise.
>
I believe this is the operative statement. I haven't tried it in a while
(years), but I recall that my Alinco DR-610T mobile rig was not able to
receive on 70cm while I was keyed up on 2m for a satellite contact. I
remember this because it's frustrating when you can't hear what's going on.
Haven't tried V/U satellite mobile since (and that was while parked in my
driveway).
The DR-610T is definitely capable of Cross-band Repeat, however.
Greg KO6TH
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 496
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
