| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 17.12.10 21:40l 706 Lines 21593 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB5497
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V5 497
Path: IZ3LSV<IW0QNL<VE2PKT<F1BBI<CX2SA
Sent: 101217/1933Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:39690 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB5497
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Andrew Glasbrenner)
2. Re: FTM-350 - Semantics (Clint Bradford)
3. Re: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question (Russ Pillsbury)
4. Re: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question (Carl)
5. Re: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question (Russ K2TXB)
6. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Greg D.)
7. Re: Educate the Manufacturers (Edward R. Cole)
8. Re: AO7 Post Script (Edward R. Cole)
9. Yaesu FTM-350 (Clint Bradford)
10. UO11 (PY5LF)
11. Re: LVB Tracker (Joe)
12. Sara Lily and Emma (PY5LF)
13. Call For AMSAT Ideas Worth Stealing (JoAnne Maenpaa)
14. Re: LVB Tracker (Stefano Simonetti)
15. Is there software to decode packet without a TNC?
(vtnn43e@xxxxxxx.xxxx
16. Re: Is there software to decode packet without a TNC?
(Peter Portanova)
17. Re: Is there software to decode packet without a TNC?
(Dave Webb KB1PVH)
18. Re: Is there software to decode packet without a TNC?
(D. Craig Fox)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 00:40:56 -0500
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4D0AF7E8.9000507@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 12/17/2010 12:09 AM, Greg D. wrote:
>
>
> 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
>
The 610 was definitely full duplex; see the second bullet at
http://www.alinco.com/Products/DR-610T.shtml. I used a 605 extensively
on satellite, and a friend has a 610 still.
Just think about how a cross band repeater works, and you'll realize
that any radio that does that must by design be capable of full duplex.
73, Drew KO4MA
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:32:27 -0800
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FTM-350 - Semantics
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <B78ADC3D-26B7-419E-BF9D-36E47164FE4A@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>> ... It cross-band repeats, which means it will receive on on band while
transmitting on the other, doesn't it?
But the AMSAT mantra for working the FM birds has been "work 'em full
duplex, so you can monitor the downlink as you transmit." Being able to
"cross-band repeat" does not necessarily include the ability to monitor the
downlink on one band while keying up an another band.
Clint
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:53:39 -0500
From: "Russ Pillsbury" <russk2t@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question
To: "'John Geiger'" <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <0C5991180B73468AB54BF424C859787A@xx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi John. That old rule of thumb does not apply for modern antennas (and
never did except for fairly short antennas). You need to know the aperture
size of the antenna, and stack them at half of that measurement - for
maximum gain, but somewhat closer if you are interested in a better pattern
(less side lobes), at the expense of some gain.
Most modern antenna manufacturers have done this for you and will specify
the horizontal and vertical stacking distances. You can also look up the
antenna lists maintained by VE7BQH and it shows the stacking information for
most antennas. There are other sources on the web as well.
Generally the stacking distance will be wider than it is high. IIRC the
difference is about 1 foot for my ~4 wavelength 2 meter antennas.
The above information is for stacking two identical antennas. For stacking
different band antennas, to completely avoid interference between them, the
stacking distance should be the same as for the antenna with the larger
aperture (normally the lowest band). However if you need to stack them
closer, be aware that the greatest interference will be to the lower
frequency antenna. The higher band antenna will not be affected until the
lower antenna is close enough to be inside of it's aperture.
Basically you can think of aperture as a three dimensional oval shape that
surrounds the antenna. The idea is to keep other objects outside of that
oval as much as possible.
All the above said, the major problem with too close spacing is pattern
distortion - not gain reduction. So if you have to stack closer, don't be
afraid to do so - the antennas will still work reasonably well unless you
are working EME with them.
73, Russ K2TXB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> [mailto:owner-vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxxx On Behalf Of John Geiger
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:21 PM
> To: vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question
>
> 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
> ------
> Submissions: vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> Subscription/removal requests: vhf-request@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> Human list administrator: vhf-approval@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> List rules and information: http://www-w6yx.stanford.edu/vhf/
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:24:42 -0500
From: "Carl" <km1h@xxxxxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question
To: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <00d501cb9d67$a9595f30$6401a8c0@xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
This might give some insight John
http://www.directivesystems.com/STACKING.htm
It would be better if the other antenna was anything but 432.
Carl
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:21 PM
Subject: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question
>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
> ------
> Submissions: vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> Subscription/removal requests: vhf-request@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> Human list administrator: vhf-approval@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> List rules and information: http://www-w6yx.stanford.edu/vhf/
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:58:47 -0500
From: "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question
To: "'John Geiger'" <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <5D1053DF9B794A88BC5713FE33B5031F@xx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi again John and all.
Sorry, I made an error in my description. For minimum interference (or max
gain) you need to stack so the apertures just 'touch'. So for two identical
antennas, if the aperture is 9 feet then the 'edge' of that aperture is 1/2
the aperture diameter, or 4.5 feet. That was what I was thinking of - but
of course the other antenna also needs 4.5 feet, so the correct stacking
distance is the actual diameter of the aperture of a single one (or 9 feet
in this example).
In the case of two different band antennas, then the best stacking distance
would be 1/2 the aperture of the smaller antenna plus 1/2 the aperture of
the larger one.
Regarding the experiments carried out by Kent Britian, I have not discussed
it with him or heard his presentation. I am fairly sure he is right when
you do not take into account the pattern distortion. So if your objective
is to work fairly strong signals, and if you are in a quiet environment,
then very close stacking will work OK.
But if you are trying to hear very weak signals and you have significant man
made noise to reject, then you need as tight a pattern from your array as
you can get. In that case close stacking will create all kinds of what are
called 'grating lobes', that will pick up noise from random directions and
mask those weak signals.
It is particularly bad for EME because you are pointed up, where there is no
(or a lot less) noise, but those grating lobes still pick up noise from your
neighbors house, electric poles and wires, etc.
Thanks to Alan Larson, WA6AZP for catching my error.
73, Russ K2TXB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> [mailto:owner-vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxxx On Behalf Of Russ Pillsbury
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:54 PM
> To: 'John Geiger'; vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: RE: [VHF] Horizontal stacking distance question
>
> Hi John. That old rule of thumb does not apply for modern
> antennas (and never did except for fairly short antennas).
> You need to know the aperture size of the antenna, and stack
> them at half of that measurement - for maximum gain, but
> somewhat closer if you are interested in a better pattern
> (less side lobes), at the expense of some gain.
>
> Most modern antenna manufacturers have done this for you and
> will specify the horizontal and vertical stacking distances.
> You can also look up the antenna lists maintained by VE7BQH
> and it shows the stacking information for most antennas.
> There are other sources on the web as well.
>
> Generally the stacking distance will be wider than it is
> high. IIRC the difference is about 1 foot for my ~4
> wavelength 2 meter antennas.
>
> The above information is for stacking two identical antennas.
> For stacking different band antennas, to completely avoid
> interference between them, the stacking distance should be
> the same as for the antenna with the larger aperture
> (normally the lowest band). However if you need to stack
> them closer, be aware that the greatest interference will be
> to the lower frequency antenna. The higher band antenna will
> not be affected until the lower antenna is close enough to be
> inside of it's aperture.
>
> Basically you can think of aperture as a three dimensional
> oval shape that surrounds yx.stanford.edu/vhf/
> ------
> Submissions: vhf@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> Subscription/removal requests: vhf-request@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> Human list administrator: vhf-approval@xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx
> List rules and information: http://www-w6yx.stanford.edu/vhf/
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 22:56:18 -0800
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <blu133-w2388BAB1919D7401008F7FA9160@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 00:40:56 -0500
From: glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx
To: ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx
CC: vk3jed@xxxxx.xxxx m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
On 12/17/2010 12:09 AM, Greg D. wrote:
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
The 610 was definitely full duplex; see the second bullet at
http://www.alinco.com/Products/DR-610T.shtml. I used a 605
extensively on satellite, and a friend has a 610 still.
Just think about how a cross band repeater works, and you'll realize
that any radio that does that must by design be capable of full
duplex.
73, Drew KO4MA
Hi Drew,
Well, I need to try it again, then, because I definitely recall that the
operation was difficult. Have you or anyone had problems with desense?
Maybe that was it. I was using the mobile setup, with the radio and a
Larsen 2/70 glass-mount antenna. I think I was trying AO-27 at the time.
Greg KO6TH
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 22:50:19 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Educate the Manufacturers
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Greg D."
<ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201012170750.oBH7oJ39014619@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 08:40 PM 12/16/2010, Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
>On 12/17/2010 12:09 AM, Greg D. wrote:
> >
> >
> > 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 washin a couple hours of each other, I have been told that the Yaesu FTM-350
can NOT receive on 440 while simultaneously keying up on 2M (1) - and that
it WILL do that (2).
I thought calling Yaesu tech support for my answer would be sufficient. They
haven't disappointed me in the past.
I apologize if what I posted in the '350 is incorrect. I went to "the
source" for the info.
Clint, K6LCS
SOURCES:
(1) Personal call to Yaesu tech support Thursday.
(2) Dave, W5DMT
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:37:27 -0200
From: "PY5LF" <py5lf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] UO11
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <006c01cb9e00$4f969b90$eec3d2b0$@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi
Signal heard of UO11 today over GG54.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU6mF79zTls
73
PY5LF
LUCIANO FABRICIO
CURITIBA-PR-BRAZIL
GG54JM
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 05:42:05 -0500
From: Joe <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LVB Tracker
To: "H. Vordenbaum" <tower2@xxx.xx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4D0B3E7D.3040000@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Harvey,
Mine has held for almost a year now.
It lost data after a power failure one time
in the middle of tracking,
but it seems to hold most of the time.
73,
Joe
KI4TZ
H. Vordenbaum wrote:
> LVB Tracker with KR-5400A Controller.
>
> EEPROM does not hold calibration after Controller is turned off for a while.
>
> Do I have to go thru the calibration procedure every time it is turned on?
>
> Am I missing something here?
>
> 73, Harvey
>
> K5HV
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:52:27 -0200
From: "PY5LF" <py5lf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Sara Lily and Emma
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: sat-fm@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Message-ID: <007d01cb9e0a$ca009b10$5e01d130$@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello
Signal of FAST 1 and FAST 2 over Brazil :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9j_42bB2I
You can see the "girls" talking to each other after the third beacon
transmission (7:30) .
73
PY5LF
LUCIANO FABRICIO
CURITIBA-PR-BRAZIL
GG54JM
<http://www.qrz.com/db/py5lf> http://www.qrz.com/db/py5lf
<http://www.falautomation.com.br/> www.falautomation.com.br
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:20:59 -0600
From: "JoAnne Maenpaa" <k9jkm@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Call For AMSAT Ideas Worth Stealing
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <001301cb9e0e$c6b1c160$54154420$@xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello Everyone,
In a recent ARRL Illinois Section Newsletter, Section Manager
Tom Ciciora, KA9QPN listed several "Ideas Worth Stealing" which
describes activities that have worked well for Illinois clubs
and amateur radio operators.
In keeping with the spirit, the idea of an "Idea Worth Stealing"
is in itself worth stealing. Got that?
This is a call for "AMSAT Ideas Worth Stealing" which we plan
to include in the ANS bulletins when they pop up.
Please send your "Idea Worth Stealing" to me: k9jkm@xxxxx.xxx
--
73 de JoAnne K9JKM
k9jkm@xxxxx.xxx
Editor, AMSAT News Service
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:45:04 +0000 (GMT)
From: Stefano Simonetti <iw1rdz@xxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LVB Tracker
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <564667.94127.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I would say try to program another PIC and change it.
I keep mine turned off for days and it does not loss the calibration.
73, Steve - Iw1RDZ
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Joe <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
A: H. Vordenbaum <tower2@xxx.xx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Inviato: Ven 17 dicembre 2010, 11:42:05
Oggetto: [amsat-bb] Re: LVB Trackessage-ID: <F55F19EC226A4891BBE21D1A514DDFD5@xxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=utf-8;
reply-type=original
Zack,
Yes, there is software available that can decode packet without a TNC, visit
this site, I believe it will answer your questions.
http://www.kc2rlm.info/soundcardpacket/
73- Pete
WB2OQQ
www.massapequanyweather.com
http://www.qrz.com/db/WB2OQQ?
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:29:28 -0500
From: Dave Webb KB1PVH <kb1pvh@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Is there software to decode packet without a
TNC?
To: vtnn43e@xxxxxxx.xxx
Cc: AMSAT <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinQ09+w+MbrxE477S13Nf4waiW-uBYoo26dfdUS@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I use AGWPE along with UISS.
http://www.sv2agw.com/ham/agwpe.htm
http://users.belgacom.net/hamradio/uiss.htm
Dave - KB1PVH
Sent from my VerizonWireless DROID
On Dec 17, 2010 2:24 PM, <vtnn43e@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
>
> Is there software to decode packet without a TNC?
>
> I would like to decode transmissions from the satellites but don't have a
need to transmit and was wondering if such a program exists.
>
>
> Zack
>
> N8FNR
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 18
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:30:07 -0800
From: "D. Craig Fox" <DFox@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Is there software to decode packet without a
TNC?
To: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<3D18A6B1AAE35841854398A9AA36CDC8018E514565@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sure, UISS and AGWPE with a sound card interface like a Signalink USB or a
homebrew interface. Works like a champ.
http://www.kc2rlm.info/soundcardpacket/
Craig
N6RSX
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of vtnn43e@xxxxxxx.xxx
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 11:10 AM
To: AMSAT
Subject: [amsat-bb] Is there software to decode packet without a TNC?
Is there software to decode packet without a TNC?
I would like to decode transmissions from the satellites but don't have a
need to transmit and was wondering if such a program exists.
Zack
N8FNR
_______________________________________________
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
NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, or
an employee or agent responsible for delivering this communication to the
intended recipient, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately
delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the
contents. Thank you.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 497
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
