| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 12.01.11 07:04l 613 Lines 21926 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB619
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V6 19
Path: IZ3LSV<IW0QNL<VE2PKT<CX2SA
Sent: 110112/0557Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:44821 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB619
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Sat protocol (Andrew Glasbrenner)
2. Re: Protocol (mlolmsted@xxxx.xxxx
3. FS Kuhne 23Cm 0.7 dB, 35 dB gain preamp (David A. B. Johnson)
4. Re: Protocol (Edward R. Cole)
5. Re: Mode-S uplinks (Mark L. Hammond)
6. Re: Sat protocol (John Neeley)
7. Re: Sat protocol (Joe)
8. Re: AMSAT-UK Front cover (Trevor .)
9. Humor or is it (Howard Kowall)
10. Re: SAT Protocol (Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
11. Re: SASI Satellite Tracker Software (Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
12. Re: Ao51 Protocol ? (Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
13. Re: IR3UEF D-Star repeater 145.800 (!) (Alain De Carolis)
14. Re: Sat protocol (Marvin Tamez)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 15:28:23 -0500
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Sat protocol
To: Joe <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4D2CBD67.3050908@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 1/11/2011 2:36 PM, Joe wrote:
> I am new to the satellite world as of 3 years ago. I have read all the
> posts on the
> thread/s and I am wondering if there is a ACTUAL satellite protocol or
> etiquette
> that could be referenced.
> I just the common courtesy I have learn over the years of working the bands
> Or at least I hope I do. If I am offending please let me know as I will
> others.
> I try and get on the early passes on the FM birds when it is not so crowded
> and can a 2 or 3 sentence conversation with guys I have worked before and
> guys I have not. It is much easier on the linear birds to do that at
> most any pass.
> Just my 2 nickles worth but it would be nice to refer someone to a
> "protocol"
> when you feel they are not operating in a manner befitting the hobby rather
> than them just thinking you should mind your own business and butt out..
>
> 73,
> Joe
> KI4TZ
This article is a good one: http://www.innismir.net/article/26 I've
emailed it to bad apples and newbies several times in the past.
That being said, all the high power FM satellites have always had the
capacity to be a mess. UO-14 was worse than AO-51, partially because it
was 4 watts and you could truly work it on an HT antenna. There were
passes of UO-14 that sounded like Field Day from beginning to end.
More and more operators are using half duplex systems on the FM
satellites, and this really has an impact when things get busy. Listen
to enough passes and when things jam up, and you'll figure out who is
full duplex, and who can hear well too. All of us need to encourage, by
education and example, full duplex operation as soon as possible in an
operators station evolution. Equipment is getting harder to find new,
but you can find used 2m uplink rigs for dirt cheap used, and almost as
much new as you'd save by forgoing the Arrow diplexer!
We should also self-limit our QSOs when it gets busy. Sometimes it can
be hard to do. Personally, I tend to get dogpiled a little bit when I
get on. I'll answer someone if they call me (usually) but won't initiate
more than one or two QSOs, and those are usually new guys I hear. I also
often ignore stations who exhibit poor manners and QRM other stations or
QSOs. A little passive-aggressive, but it often gets the point across.
73, Drew KO4MA
AMSAT-NA VP Operations
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 15:53:37 -0500
From: <mlolmsted@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Protocol
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <12291004.1294779217257.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Having been a ham for over fifty years and having worked most modes of
operation, including chasing DX and even satellite back in 1979, I totally
agree that working AO-51 can get frustrating. However, if you think the
mess on AO-51 is bad, try working a rare dx expedition sometime. Talk about
pile-ups!
As for protocols, I think I've read this same protocol discussion in just
about
every ham mag. and no one has come up with a workable solution that solved
the problem. People are individuals and they tend to do what they want to do.
I really wish I had a workable, amiable solution, but I don't, sorry.
However, I
don't recommend the Frequency Policemen idea, they generally just tend to
make everyone more upset and the confusion gets even worse
Now I'll get off my soap-box.
Thanks,
Merle, AA4QE
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 21:02:47 +0000
From: "David A. B. Johnson" <david.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FS Kuhne 23Cm 0.7 dB, 35 dB gain preamp
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx Moon-net@xxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4D2CC577.1040408@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi,
Never been used.
MKU LNA 232 A2 Selective preamplifier, NF typ. 0.7 dB, Gain >35 dB,
incl. 23cm notch (1250 MHz notch)
N-Type connectors
Please contact off-line for details.
73
- Dave, G4DPZ
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 12:17:04 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Protocol
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201101112117.p0BLH41A086755@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
A satellite with 25 channels would probably help. LOL This is why
a lot of the old guard satellite ops wish for the translator days
with 100-KHz of bandwidth and CW/SSB. But I do NOT want to start up
a RANT on this -everyone knows this.
Single channel FM repeater satellites will always be saddled with
this problem - too many users/one channel. Goes with the
territory. that is reality. Another reality: lots of unused
satellites while everyone is on a single satellite - why?
73, Ed
when I get my rotating array QRV I will be on VO-52 and AO-7.., any
maybe HO-68 ocassionally. On AO-51 I will be trying mode-VS
At 11:53 AM 1/11/2011, mlolmsted@xxxx.xxx wrote:
>Having been a ham for over fifty years and having worked most modes of
>operation, including chasing DX and even satellite back in 1979, I totally
>agree that working AO-51 can get frustrating. However, if you think
>the mess on AO-51 is bad, try working a rare dx expedition
>sometime. Talk about pile-ups!
>
>As for protocols, I think I've read this same protocol discussion in
>just about
>every ham mag. and no one has come up with a workable solution that
>solved the problem. People are individuals and they tend to do what
>they want to do.
>
>I really wish I had a workable, amiable solution, but I don't,
>sorry. However, I
>don't recommend the Frequency Policemen idea, they generally just
>tend to make everyone more upset and the confusion gets even worse
>
>Now I'll get off my soap-box.
>Thanks,
>Merle, AA4QE
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
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: 5
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 16:29:02 -0500
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Mode-S uplinks
To: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <uMVD1f00C56cfur05MVDRF@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Ed,
Drew's reply covered it well. The 435-IF would be my first recommendation,
and his thought about putting a preamp outside, downconverter inside is a
fine one.
73!
Mark N8MH
At 10:12 AM 1/11/2011 -0900, Edward R. Cole wrote:
>In the process of re-building my wind-damaged satellite antenna array and
got thinking about the mode-S sats.
>
>I will be installing a 8dBic (RHCP) patch antenna (bought from L-Com) and
have two different Drake downconverters to chose from depending on what the
uplink band is. I am guessing that AO-51 is the only S-band sat available,
currently. I have 435 and 123 MHz IF's for S-band converters depending on
whether the uplink is VHF or UHF, respectively.
>
>So the question is whether mode-US or mode-VS is the norm on AO-51. I can
install both downconverters with a coax switch and run two IF coax lines,
but it would be simpler to have only one. Especially, since installation is
at a current +3F temperature.
>
>I am installing a downsized array from what I had up: using 2/3 of my
436CP42 which I call my "436CP26", a M2-2m7 yagi, and the patch. I am not
re-installing the 33-inch S-band dish or the 1268 loop-yagi this winter.
The dish was probably what caused the support mast to bend over (65mph winds
get some credit).
>
>
>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
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 13:45:53 -0800 (PST)
From: John Neeley <w6zkh@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Sat protocol
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Joe
<jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <708117.79744.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I second that last paragraph, Drew...
John W6ZKH
________________________________
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Joe <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Tue, January 11, 2011 12:28:23 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Sat protocol
On 1/11/2011 2:36 PM, Joe wrote:
> I am new to the satellite world as of 3 years ago. I have read all the
> posts on the
> thread/s and I am wondering if there is a ACTUAL satellite protocol or
> etiquette
> that could be referenced.
> I just the common courtesy I have learn over the years of working the bands
> Or at least I hope I do. If I am offending please let me know as I will
> others.
> I try and get on the early passes on the FM birds when it is not so crowded
> and can a 2 or 3 sentence conversation with guys I have worked before and
> guys I have not. It is much easier on the linear birds to do that at
> most any pass.
> Just my 2 nickles worth but it would be nice to refer someone to a
> "protocol"
> when you feel they are not operating in a manner befitting the hobby rather
> than them just thinking you should mind your own business and butt out..
>
> 73,
> Joe
> KI4TZ
This article is a good one: http://www.innismir.net/article/26 I've
emailed it to bad apples and newbies several times in the past.
That being said, all the high power FM satellites have always had the
capacity to be a mess. UO-14 was worse than AO-51, partially because it
was 4 watts and you could truly work it on an HT antenna. There were
passes of UO-14 that sounded likx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Very Good info Drew, I had not seen this before and will keep it
bookmarked to pass along.
73,
Joe
KI4TZ
Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
> On 1/11/2011 2:36 PM, Joe wrote:
>> I am new to the satellite world as of 3 years ago. I have read all the
>> posts on the
>> thread/s and I am wondering if there is a ACTUAL satellite protocol or
>> etiquette
>> that could be referenced.
>> I just the common courtesy I have learn over the years of working the
>> bands
>> Or at least I hope I do. If I am offending please let me know as I will
>> others.
>> I try and get on the early passes on the FM birds when it is not so
>> crowded
>> and can a 2 or 3 sentence conversation with guys I have worked before
>> and
>> guys I have not. It is much easier on the linear birds to do that at
>> most any pass.
>> Just my 2 nickles worth but it would be nice to refer someone to a
>> "protocol"
>> when you feel they are not operating in a manner befitting the hobby
>> rather
>> than them just thinking you should mind your own business and butt out..
>>
>> 73,
>> Joe
>> KI4TZ
>
> This article is a good one: http://www.innismir.net/article/26 I've
> emailed it to bad apples and newbies several times in the past.
>
> That being said, all the high power FM satellites have always had the
> capacity to be a mess. UO-14 was worse than AO-51, partially because
> it was 4 watts and you could truly work it on an HT antenna. There
> were passes of UO-14 that sounded like Field Day from beginning to end.
>
> More and more operators are using half duplex systems on the FM
> satellites, and this really has an impact when things get busy. Listen
> to enough passes and when things jam up, and you'll figure out who is
> full duplex, and who can hear well too. All of us need to encourage,
> by education and example, full duplex operation as soon as possible in
> an operators station evolution. Equipment is getting harder to find
> new, but you can find used 2m uplink rigs for dirt cheap used, and
> almost as much new as you'd save by forgoing the Arrow diplexer!
>
> We should also self-limit our QSOs when it gets busy. Sometimes it can
> be hard to do. Personally, I tend to get dogpiled a little bit when I
> get on. I'll answer someone if they call me (usually) but won't
> initiate more than one or two QSOs, and those are usually new guys I
> hear. I also often ignore stations who exhibit poor manners and QRM
> other stations or QSOs. A little passive-aggressive, but it often gets
> the point across.
>
> 73, Drew KO4MA
> AMSAT-NA VP Operations
>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 22:45:49 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT-UK Front cover
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <995483. satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 19:34:16 -0600
From: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SASI Satellite Tracker Software
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL114-DS2215242D252C4E86EDF7048AF10@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Is there a FODTrack question? It still works here.
73,
Joe kk0sd
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Vince Fiscus, KB7ADL
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 12:04 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SASI Satellite Tracker Software
At 04:48 PM 1/10/2011 -0500, wb2llp@xxxxxxxxx.xxx wrote:
>Vince,
>
>Is there further information, and possibily the code available for SASI?
>Now we have to resurrect FODTRACK.
>
>73 de WB2LLP
All I know is IntantTrack worked with the Kansas city Tracker and the TSR
for SASI uses that to communicate, but through the parallel port. Someone
here must know the KC tracker protocol. Not sure about how the TSR
communicates with the SASI hardware, and I've never looked inside
it. Probably a couple of memory locations to store the AZ & EL locations
from an A to D converter, and some way to send commands to control left
right up & down.
KB7ADL
_______________________________________________
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, 11 Jan 2011 19:36:41 -0600
From: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Ao51 Protocol ?
To: "'Amsat-bb'" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL114-DS1934553EEE1A35705CAC5E8AF10@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mark,
I should have read the whole thread before commenting. Your comments
are very good!
"to welcome new users...there is NOTHING like your first satellite
contact!!! Remember that, and try to be somebody's "first.""
AMEN!
Joe kk0sd
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Mark L. Hammond
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 12:49 PM
To: jmfranke; Amsat-bb
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Ao51 Protocol ?
Running S-band is very difficult to do when AO-51 is seeing eclipses;
the S-band transmitter is not controlled by the transmitter power
management software like the U-band transmitters! It is a much more
manual and labor intensive mode to run in.
Friends, one of the reasons some of this has surfaced recently is
because we are running almost 1.5 watts out of AO-51 right now. It
makes it easy to hear. The result of that is multiplex--more people
hear it, so more people try to transmit to it; people that couldn't
hear the bird at 500mW can now copy it, and try to work it. But isn't
that what we want? To grow our satellite user base?
If we want to reduce the number of users on the bird, we could always
change to some unpublished PL tone, or just turn the uplinks off.
<with tongue in cheek and rolling eyes>. We need to learn to embrace
the popularity, and set good operating examples every time we work a
bird.
My hope is that given a bit of time at 1.5W, things will settle down.
We do need to welcome new users...there is NOTHING like your first
satellite contact!!! Remember that, and try to be somebody's "first."
Mark N8MH
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:34 AM, jmfranke <jmfranke@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Another part of the solution would be to operate AO-51 in V/S or L/S more
> often.
>
> John ?WA4WDL
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "WILLIAMS MICHAEL" <k9qho6762@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 11:14 AM
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Ao51 Protocol ?
>
>> Domenico, I8CVS said:
>>
>> "To solve the above problem the only way is to use satellites with linear
>> transponder like VO-52. OSCAR-7 and FO-29 with several QSO on CW
>> and SSB at the same time without QRM in the same passband."
>>Y/WW3WW
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 13:07:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Marvin Tamez <k5mlt@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Sat protocol
To: Joe <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <924335.20756.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I too am new to satellite operations having made my first?QSO on November 24
of
last year via AO51 and was immediately identified as a newbie and encouraged
and
given advice by several with whom I made QSO's. When I decided to get into
this
mode?of operation,?like most endeavors I pursue, I read everything I
could?on?the subject.?Online and in print the?common advice
from?those?offering?it is "don't call CQ,?do give your call and grid and wait
for someone to answer you or call someone who is giving their?call and grid,
complete the exchange and move on.?There seem to be some who make no effort to
learn proper operating procedures or just ignore procedure, but a vast
majority
does seem to follow this type of procedure. What everyone seems to be
concerned
with?are the pileups and common courtesy of not stepping on others and being
long winded, which on the FM?Birds could be anything above and beyond the
exchange.?Reconfiguring the Birds to transponder only is not a viable option,
unless you wish to exclude newbie?s and oldies who for many reasons can only
work the FM repeater mode. Patience with and outreach to any "offender" should
be the first order of business, which I will make a concerted effort to do
with
the next one I can identify. This can be done with an email that courteously
offers advice on how to succeed in and enjoy our hobby.? A concerted effort
from
AMSAT is one way of getting the info out, but not all operators are members
and
I sure AMSAT has done this over the years. Like many activities, self policing
through offers of help and advice is the best option. ?
?
73,
Marvin
K5MLT
________________________________
From: Joe <jbarkley@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Tue, January 11, 2011 1:36:02 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Sat protocol
I am new to the satellite world as of 3 years ago. I have read all the
posts on the
thread/s and I am wondering if there is a ACTUAL satellite protocol or
etiquette
that could be referenced.
I just the common courtesy I have learn over the years of working the bands
Or at least I hope I do. If I am offending please let me know as I will
others.
I try and get on the early passes on the FM birds when it is not so crowded
and can a 2 or 3 sentence conversation with guys I have worked before and
guys I have not. It is much easier on the linear birds to do that at
most any pass.
Just my 2 nickles worth but it would be nice to refer someone to a
"protocol"
when you feel they are not operating in a manner befittnions 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 6, Issue 19
***************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
