| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 07.02.11 02:17l 1074 Lines 38465 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB682
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V6 82
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<PY1AYH<PY1AYH<CX2SA
Sent: 110207/0009Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:50657 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB682
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: AO40 contacts and P3-E (i8cvs)
2. Re: AO40 contacts and P3-E (Dee)
3. Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a recording?2/5/2011
(Zachary Beougher)
4. Doppler Tuning IC-821H (Paul Delaney - K6HR)
5. Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a recording?2/5/2011
(Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
6. Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a recording?2/5/2011
(Edward R. Cole)
7. Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a recording?2/5/2011
(Edward R. Cole)
8. Re: Doppler Tuning IC-821H (Mateusz)
9. Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a recording?2/5/2011
(Zachary Beougher)
10. Re: Doppler Tuning IC-821H (Alan P. Biddle)
11. Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a recording?2/5/2011 (Joe)
12. Re: Doppler Tuning IC-821H (Paul Delaney - K6HR)
13. Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a recording?2/5/2011
(Edward R. Cole)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:10:24 +0100
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 contacts and P3-E
To: "Peter Guelzow" <peter.guelzow@xxxxxx.xx>, "Amsat - BBs"
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <002001cbc639$e3d95de0$0401a8c0@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Guelzow" <peter.guelzow@xxxxxx.xx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:17 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO40 contacts and P3-E
Hi All,
> You guys are making me all teary-eyed! I loved that bird, especially for
all the "challenges" it presented.
Ughh.. this really hit's me hard and I'm getting very sentimental
reading all email's to this topic.
But it gives me also
The launch campaign in french Guiana, were I was staying in Kourou for
more than quarter of the year, and the re-birth of AO-40 on Christmas
were the most exciting days in my life.
I haven't made many contacts, I was more among the "listeners" and
enjoyed the fun.
It's sometimes very frustrating to me that 10 years after the launch of
AO-40 we still haven't got P3-E into orbit.
We have been going to many up's and down's during this time, but we are
not giving up.
There are new challenges we are working on presently and some of them
give us a good hope of success.
Indeed and I'm sorry for that, It has been very quiet about the progress
of P3-E in the last year.
While most mechanical work is done, there was also progress on the
electronics, mostly the IHU.
However, one of the biggest challenges is indeed funding and a launch we
can afford.
That's where we a concentrating most of our efforts and time at the moment
Indeed, we need the support of the community. There will only a P3-E, if
we all really want it..
If you want to support P3-E, than please visit
http://www.p3e-satellite.org/?lang=en_EN and make a direct donation to
the project - THANKS!
73s Peter, DB2OS
Peter G?lzow
President AMSAT-DL
Hi Peter, DB2OS
In my opinion AO40 was the best satellite ever made by AMSAT-DL and it
was very fun until lasted.
We all hope that AMSAT-DL will find a launch opportunity with ESA and
a ARIANE-5 launcher with P3-E inside the SPELDA adapter as soon as
possible.
Pulling for P3-E ! !
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 15:28:53 -0500
From: Dee <morsesat@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 contacts and P3-E
To: "'i8cvs'" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>, "'Peter Guelzow'"
<peter.guelzow@xxxxxx.xx>, "'Amsat - BBs'" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <F8433AC5155349838BE506ABE610A353@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Trying to find my AO-40 log book- I took it out to verify that I had made a
first day QSO---Found my original combined pre-AO-40 logbook withFO-29,
FO-20, AO-21, AO-27, AO-10, RS-12, AO-12(JAS-1), RS-10/11, & AO-13 QSO's in
it. Wow-teary eyed yes---Many 60 minute + QSO's many Nets and other great
contacts...Still looking for my AO-40 logbook- here somewhere...
Keep the faith guys, there is bound to be something in the future that will
allow us to enjoy HEO's again..we'll turn that corner soon...
73,
Dee, NB2F
Meanwhile, Go Giants (?) oops..didn't make it this year.
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of i8cvs
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 3:10 PM
To: Peter Guelzow; Amsat - BBs
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 contacts and P3-E
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Guelzow" <peter.guelzow@xxxxxx.xx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:17 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO40 contacts and P3-E
Hi All,
> You guys are making me all teary-eyed! I loved that bird, especially
> for
all the "challenges" it presented.
Ughh.. this really hit's me hard and I'm getting very sentimental
reading all email's to this topic.
But it gives me also
The launch campaign in french Guiana, were I was staying in Kourou for more
than quarter of the year, and the re-birth of AO-40 on Christmas were the
most exciting days in my life.
I haven't made many contacts, I was more among the "listeners" and enjoyed
the fun.
It's sometimes very frustrating to me that 10 years after the launch of
AO-40 we still haven't got P3-E into orbit.
We have been going to many up's and down's during this time, but we are not
giving up.
There are new challenges we are working on presently and some of them give
us a good hope of success.
Indeed and I'm sorry for that, It has been very quiet about the progress of
P3-E in the last year.
While most mechanical work is done, there was also progress on the
electronics, mostly the IHU.
However, one of the biggest challenges is indeed funding and a launch we can
afford.
That's where we a concentrating most of our efforts and time at the moment
Indeed, we need the support of the community. There will only a P3-E, if we
all really want it..
If you want to support P3-E, than please visit
http://www.p3e-satellite.org/?lang=en_EN and make a direct donation to the
project - THANKS!
73s Peter, DB2OS
Peter G?lzow
President AMSAT-DL
Hi Peter, DB2OS
In my opinion AO40 was the best satellite ever made by AMSAT-DL and it was
very fun until lasted.
We all hope that AMSAT-DL will find a launch opportunity with ESA and a
ARIANE-5 launcher with P3-E inside the SPELDA adapter as soon as possible.
Pulling for P3-E ! !
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
_______________________________________________
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: 3
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 16:53:07 -0500
From: "Zachary Beougher" <zack.kd8ksn@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <SNT111-DS23A2594401349C938E6426B3E80@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
Hi Joe and Group,
I would have to say that if Michael's (K4MOA) QSO was not confirmed based
upon remembering the call sign, 95% of the QSOs in my log are not confirmed.
Many of us use recorders because of the obvious reason - we have one hand to
hold the Arrow, Elk or tripod, and the other hand is busy with an HT (or in
my case, 2 HTs). There is no hand available to right call signs down.
Another obvious reason behind the recorder is that most people cannot go
outside and stand for a 15 minute pass, work __# of stations, and then go
back inside and recall all the call signs, grid squares, RST reports, etc.
If we could all recall all of the info like this, recorders would not be in
use. If recorders were not being used, what would we do? You could either
type it into the computer, or you could write it down on paper. This brings
about the question of, why write it on paper? The bottom-line reason for
writing it on paper is you don?t want to forget it, the same reason for a
recorder. If you were going to remember it, why right it down? Even after
taking a memory course a few months ago in college I can't go outside and
remember everything. This sounds like a lot to ask of someone. Most passes
are fast pace and crazy. You are not going to be able to remember every
station you worked, especially if you are working from a boundary, etc.
In my mind, a QSO is confirmed when the two operators have a successful
relay of information between each other. Example: "K4MOA this is WP3PZ,
FK58" - "WP3PZ, this is K4MOA, EM95, QSL?" - "QSL, 73" To me, this is a
confirmed QSO. When K4MOA goes inside, if he cannot remember the EXACT call
of the station(s) he worked, that is not an issue of the QSO was not
confirmed, it is an issue of K4MOA got a phone call right as he walked in
the door and forgot the call sign of the station he worked. I know this
sounds like a silly scenario, but it is reality. To me, a confirmed QSO
happens at the mic, not when you are listening to a recording, or how good
your memory is. I don't remember reading anything in the Tech or General
books about you must remember every call sign for a QSO to be confirmed.
Now, if you repeated the call back to the station incorrectly, then it is
between you and your conscience; but if you could say his call back to him
correctly, but just happened to forget it, I would still call this
confirmed. If you have a base station and have the ability to sit at a desk
and type it directly into a computer or write them down on a piece of paper,
that is great, but most of the portable equipment ops are going to use a
recorder.
I apologize I am repeating the same things over and over. I would be
interested to hear a few other's opinions on this. Maybe I am the one that
has it backwards.
73!
Zack
KD8KSN
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 2:42 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
Now in My MIND
this was not a valid QSO,, the information was NOT all done on the
radio, never mind he had the call wrong.
BUT even if he did work WP3T,
he did not know he did it
it took YOU and YOUR station to let him know it. so even if the call he
thought he copied was right I would never ever think this as being a
valid qso. now if the tape he made had worked fine and he later
determined that he copied the call wrong it still even then is not a
valid qso.
even if he had the call right is a grey area to me that it was a valid qso.
Joe WB9SBD
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 2/6/2011 1:09 PM, Rick - WA4NVM wrote:
> Mike,
>
> I jumped on that one to quick. I just listened to my recording and you
> worked
> WP3PZ.
>
> Sorry about the error,
> Rick
>
>
>
>> Hello to the group -
>>
>> My recorder battery died during a pass of AO-51 yesterday (2/5/2011) I
>> think
>> the pass was approximately 18:53 UTC - it was a mainly east coast pass.
>> I
>> made a contact with WP3T, I believe, which is why I rely so much on my
>> recorder. Many of you know how bad I mess up calls so I may have the
>> suffix
>> of the call incorrect. I just failed to notice the battery was running
>> low. If anyone may be able to help me out I would appreciate it...
>>
>> Thanks in advance and I hope everyone enjoys the 10 hours of Super Bowl
>> Pre-Game...
>>
>> 73's,
>>
>> Michael, K4MOA
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 4
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 10:06:20 -0800
From: "Paul Delaney - K6HR" <paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning IC-821H
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <01E86170C4CD478590C304E4BB3154B1@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
I just acquired an ICOM IC-821H as I plan to build a satellite capable
station. I cannot get HRD to tune both uplink and downlink. Seems the CAT
commands in the ICOM don't exist or are not supported.
Am I stuck turning the dial manually on this radio, or is there another
program that can tune both the 2m and 70cm on an IC-821H?
Paul Delaney - K6HR
paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx
http://k6hr.dyndns.org:8080
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 22:14:13 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4D4F1D35.6010808@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I don't think the issue is whether or not you use a recorder,
packet/psk31/rtty ops are not penalised because they have
a computer record of the contact by virtue of the technology used for that
mode. If a voice recorder is part of your
shack, that's fine.
The issue is having to ask others if they heard your QSO and can tell you
the details.
If you chose technology to help you, fine. If your technology fails, so does
the QSO. It's not acceptable to expect the
rest of the world to be your log keeper.
On 06-Feb-11 21:53, Zachary Beougher wrote:
> Hi Joe and Group,
>
> I would have to say that if Michael's (K4MOA) QSO was not confirmed based
> upon remembering the call sign, 95% of the QSOs in my log are not confirmed.
>
> Many of us use recorders
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 13:18:27 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <201102062218.p16MIRwN033526@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Excuse me for wading into this
discussion. Especially since I have not been active for a couple years.
But I did do some operating with a THD-7A + Arrow
and with a FT-817 + Arrow and I can see no
problem with the use of a audio recorder being
used as a log (at least until one has time to
transcribe it to a permanent log - whether paper or digital).
I did do paper but it was not "pretty" and I did
have trouble remembering callsigns to do that (right after the pass).
In all ham radio, individual integrity is the
bottom line for valid contacts. If you used the
wrong call on the air the other station should
not credit the QSO as valid. If you merely have
a memory problem and the recording can provide
backup to that...that seems reasonable.
If your personal standards find this
unacceptable, then don't, but...I think imposing
that standard on others is questionable (on a
practical level). If you are the awards log
checker - well I can not tell you how to conduct your business.
----------------------------------------
Afterall this is NOT moonbounce. You ask why I insert that?
For one to count a moonbounce contact as legitimate one MUST do the following:
1-copy your own callsign plus copy the other station's callsign
2-Must copy your signal report from the other station
3-Must confirm that to the other station
4-get confirmation the other station has copied his signal report
5-and usually confirm that all exchanges are complete
At minimum this is four transmissions by each station.
Aren't you glad you don't have to live by eme (moonbounce rules)? ;-)
73, Ed - KL7UW
At 12:53 PM 2/6/2011, Zachary Beougher wrote:
>Hi Joe and Group, I would have to say that if
>Michael's (K4MOA) QSO was not confirmed based
>upon remembering the call sign, 95% of the QSOs
>in my log are not confirmed. Many of us use
>recorders because of the obvious reason - we
>have one hand to hold the Arrow, Elk or tripod,
>and the other hand is busy with an HT (or in my
>case, 2 HTs). There is no hand available to
>right call signs down. Another obvious reason
>behind the recorder is that most people cannot
>go outside and stand for a 15 minute pass, work
>__# of stations, and then go back inside and
>recall all the call signs, grid squares, RST
>reports, etc. If we could all recall all of the
>info like this, recorders would not be in
>use. If recorders were not being used, what
>would we do? You could either type it into the
>computer, or you could write it down on
>paper. This brings about the question of, why
>write it on paper? The bottom-line reason for
>writing it on paper is you don???t want to
>forget it, the same reason for a recorder. If
>you were going to remember it, why right it
>down? Even after taking a memory course a few
>months ago in college I can't go outside and
>remember everything. This sounds like a lot to
>ask of someone. Most passes are fast pace and
>crazy. You are not going to be able to remember
>every station you worked, especially if you are
>working from a boundary, etc. In my mind, a QSO
>is confirmed when the two operators have a
>successful relay of information between each
>other. Example: "K4MOA this is WP3PZ, FK58" -
>"WP3PZ, this is K4MOA, EM95, QSL?" - "QSL,
>73" To me, this is a confirmed QSO. When
>K4MOA goes inside, if he cannot remember the
>EXACT call of the station(s) he worked, that is
>not an issue of the QSO was not confirmed, it is
>an issue of K4MOA got a phone call right as he
>walked in the door and forgot the call sign of
>the station he worked. I know this sounds like
>a silly scenario, but it is reality. To me, a
>confirmed QSO happens at the mic, not when you
>are listening to a recording, or how good your
>memory is. I don't remember reading anything in
>the Tech or General books about you must
>remember every call sign for a QSO to be
>confirmed. Now, if you repeated the call back to
>the station incorrectly, then it is between you
>and your conscience; but if you could say his
>call back to him correctly, but just happened to
>forget it, I would still call this
>confirmed. If you have a base station and have
>the ability to sit at a desk and type it
>directly into a computer or write them down on a
>piece of paper, that is great, but most of the
>portable equipment ops are going to use a
>recorder. I apologize I am repeating the same
>things over and over. I would be interested to
>hear a few other's opinions on this. Maybe I am
>the one that has it backwards. 73! Zack KD8KSN
>-----Original Message----- From: Joe Sent:
>Sunday, February 06, 2011 2:42 PM To:
>amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx Subject: [amsat-bb] Re:
>Recorder battery died - anyone have a
>recording?2/5/2011 Now in My MIND this was not a
>valid QSO,, the information was NOT all done on
>the radio, never mind he had the call wrong.
>BUT even if he did work WP3T, he did not know he
>did it it took YOU and YOUR station to let him
>know it. so even if the call he thought he
>copied was right I would never ever think this
>as being a valid qso. now if the tape he made
>had worked fine and he later determined that he
>copied the call wrong it still even then is not
>a valid qso. even if he had the call right is a
>grey area to me that it was a valid qso. Joe
>WB9SBD The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme
>Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com On
>2/6/2011 1:09 PM, Rick - WA4NVM wrote: >
>Mike, > > I jumped on that one to quick. I just
>listened to my recording and you > worked >
>WP3PZ. > > Sorry about the error, >
>Rick > > > >> Hello to the group - >> >> My
>recorder battery died during a pass of AO-51
>yesterday (2/5/2011) I >> think >> the pass was
>approximately 18:53 UTC - it was a mainly east
>coast pass. >> I >> made a contact with WP3T, I
>believe, which is why I rely so much on my >>
>recorder. Many of you know how bad I mess up
>calls so I may have the >> suffix >> of the call
>incorrect. I just failed to notice the battery
>was running >> low. If anyone may be able to
>help me out I would appreciate it... >> >>
>Thanks in advance and I hope everyone enjoys the
>10 hours of Super Bowl >> Pre-Game... >> >>
>73's, >> >> Michael, K4MOA >>
>_______________________________________________ >
> > 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
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: 7
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 13:24:20 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
To: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <201102062224.p16MOK6a005435@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 01:14 PM 2/6/2011, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote:
>I don't think the issue is whether or not you use a recorder,
>packet/psk31/rtty ops are not penalised because they have
>a computer record of the contact by virtue of the technology used
>for that mode. If a voice recorder is part of your
>shack, that's fine.
>
>The issue is having to ask others if they heard your QSO and can
>tell you the details.
>If you chose technology to help you, fine. If your technology fails,
>so does the QSO. It's not acceptable to expect the
>rest of the world to be your log keeper.
I agree with this!
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: 8
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 23:26:26 +0100
From: "Mateusz" <sq7dqx@xxxxxx.xxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning IC-821H
To: "Paul Delaney - K6HR" <paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <D806C9386E1E472EBE08A4F006A33251@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=original
WiSP DDE by CX6DD supports IC821. What about IC821H? Try it ...
-----Oryginalna wiadomo??-----
From: Paul Delaney - K6HR
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 7:06 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning IC-821H
I just acquired an ICOM IC-821H as I plan to build a satellite capable
station. I cannot get HRD to tune both uplink and downlink. Seems the CAT
commands in the ICOM don't exist or are not supported.
Am I stuck turning the dial manually on this radio, or is there another
program that can tune both the 2m and 70cm on an IC-821H?
Paul Delaney - K6HR
paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx
http://k6hr.dyndns.org:8080
_______________________________________________
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: 9
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 17:51:58 -0500
From: "Zachary Beougher" <zack.kd8ksn@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
To: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>,
"Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <SNT111-DS7D988FE9EF9D30819EA43B3E80@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
Hi Ed and Nigel,
I agree this is reasonable as well. I don?t see an issue with using someone
else's recordings because your batteries died, as long as you heard the QSO,
repeated the other station's call back, etc., as I said in my original
email. If you aren't for sure if the station came back to your call or if
he confirmed he heard you because you lost the bird or went behind a tree,
then that's a different story.
I also think it's good to have a little grace - we can't expect a
first-timer to the sats to jump on and copy and repeat all call signs 100%.
When I first started, all I said was a "QSL," or "copy that." I imagine I
frustrated a few ops who were wondering who I was QSLing. ;-)
73,
Zack
KD8KSN
-----Original Message-----
From: Edward R. Cole
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 5:24 PM
To: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
At 01:14 PM 2/6/2011, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote:
>I don't think the issue is whether or not you use a recorder,
>packet/psk31/rtty ops are not penalised because they have
>a computer record of the contact by virtue of the technology used
>for that mode. If a voice recorder is part of your
>shack, that's fine.
>
>The issue is having to ask others if they heard your QSO and can
>tell you the details.
>If you chose technology to help you, fine. If your technology fails,
>so does the QSO. It's not acceptable to expect the
>rest of the world to be your log keeper.
I agree with this!
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
_______________________________________________
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: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 17:15:46 -0600
From: "Alan P. Biddle" <APBIDDLE@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning IC-821H
To: "'Paul Delaney - K6HR'" <paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <64F367D175AF439A95D216DE63E60C00@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Paul,
Give SATPC32 a look. It supports the rig, and should do a very good job for
you. You can download a trial version to verify it does what you want.
http://www.dk1tb.de/indexeng.htm
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Paul Delaney - K6HR
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 12:06 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning IC-821H
I just acquired an ICOM IC-821H as I plan to build a satellite capable
station. I cannot get HRD to tune both uplink and downlink. Seems the CAT
commands in the ICOM don't exist or are not supported.
Am I stuck turning the dial manually on this radio, or is there another
program that can tune both the 2m and 70cm on an IC-821H?
Paul Delaney - K6HR
paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx
http://k6hr.dyndns.org:8080
_______________________________________________
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: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 17:36:37 -0600
From: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4D4F3085.7060605@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Wow,
when did using someone elses station, be a valid qso for YOUR own station?
Wow, I guess I can call every person i hear off the moon but can't copy
and then just ask W5UN for a recording of all my contacts so they will
be good contacts. Even tho I diddn't get any calls correct at MY
station, I was able to correct all my mistakes by using a recording from
HIS station, yeah that sounds valid for sure.
I do not have any problems with recording your qso nd after the pass
fill in the gaps with stuff ya forgot. or I'll even give ya a stretch
stuff ya missed.
But when it involves a third partys station then it is NOT a valid QSO.
Joe WB9SBD
Joe
On 2/6/2011 4:51 PM, Zachary Beougher wrote:
> Hi Ed and Nigel,
>
> I agree this is reasonable as well. I don?t see an issue with using someone
> else's recordings because your batteries died, as long as you heard the QSO,
> repeated the other station's call back, etc., as I said in my original
> email. If you aren't for sure if the station came back to your call or if
> he confirmed he heard you because you lost the bird or went behind a tree,
> then that's a different story.
>
> I also think it's good to have a little grace - we can't expect a
> first-timer to the sats to jump on and copy and repeat all call signs 100%.
> When I first started, all I said was a "QSL," or "copy that." I imagine I
> frustrated a few ops who were wondering who I was QSLing. ;-)
>
> 73,
>
> Zack
> KD8KSN
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edward R. Cole
> Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 5:24 PM
> To: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
> recording?2/5/2011
>
> At 01:14 PM 2/6/2011, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote:
>> I don't think the issue is whether or not you use a recorder,
>> packet/psk31/rtty ops are not penalised because they have
>> a computer record of the contact by virtue of the technology used
>> for that mode. If a voice recorder is part of your
>> shack, that's fine.
>>
>> The issue is having to ask others if they heard your QSO and can
>> tell you the details.
>> If you chose technology to help you, fine. If your technology fails,
>> so does the QSO. It's not acceptable to expect the
>> rest of the world to be your log keeper.
> I agree with this!
>
>
>
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 15:39:29 -0800
From: "Paul Delaney - K6HR" <paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning IC-821H
To: <APBIDDLE@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <88F91451181B40ECA50CF34E3BBF89C3@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thanks Alan,
I have installed (as administrator) SatPC32 under Windows 7 64bit and have
selected the Model, Baudrate and Addresses. For some reason it does not tune
the radio. I can see that the COM port for the CI-V interface is busy while
SatPC32 is running, but its not tuning the radio. The radio tunes partially
from HRD, as HRD only tunes the downlink frequency, not the uplink.
Now I'm wondering if I purchased the wrong radio! Anyone using an ICOM
IC-821H and have the tuning working correctly? I could really use some
help/advice.
Paul Delaney
paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx
http://k6hr.dyndns.org:8080
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan P. Biddle
To: 'Paul Delaney - K6HR' ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 3:15 PM
Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning IC-821H
Paul,
Give SATPC32 a look. It supports the rig, and should do a very good job for
you. You can download a trial version to verify it does what you want.
http://www.dk1tb.de/indexeng.htm
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Paul Delaney - K6HR
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 12:06 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Doppler Tuning IC-821H
I just acquired an ICOM IC-821H as I plan to build a satellite capable
station. I cannot get HRD to tune both uplink and downlink. Seems the CAT
commands in the ICOM don't exist or are not supported.
Am I stuck turning the dial manually on this radio, or is there another
program that can tune both the 2m and 70cm on an IC-821H?
Paul Delaney - K6HR
paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx
http://k6hr.dyndns.org:8080
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 15:06:17 -0900
From: "Edward R. Cole" <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died - anyone have a
recording?2/5/2011
To: "Zachary Beougher" <zack.kd8ksn@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "Nigel Gunn
G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <201102070006.p1706It2056048@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Zack,
Neither Nigel or I said that. Burden of proof of
contact lies with the stations making the
contact. Use of a recorder is OK (what I said),
but relying on others to log your contact is
not. The farthest one can stretch that is if the
other station in the QSO confirms that you and
they completed a contact. And that is not kosher
under eme rules (as I have pointed out). But
then is "ordinary" ham radio where the rules are more lenient.
But for these contacts to "count" toward awards
such as WAS or DXCC, or in a contest, you must
enter your log. Asking others what they heard
would be considered cheating. If you operate
satellites for personal pleasure with no regard
to awards, standings, etc. then it matters only
to your own personal standard of operation.
But be aware that others may not agree :-\
73, Ed
At 01:51 PM 2/6/2011, Zachary Beougher wrote:
>Hi Ed and Nigel,
>
>I agree this is reasonable as well. I don???t
>see an issue with using someone else's
>recordings because your batteries died, as long
>as you heard the QSO, repeated the other
>station's call back, etc., as I said in my
>original email. If you aren't for sure if the
>station came back to your call or if he
>confirmed he heard you because you lost the bird
>or went behind a tree, then that's a different story.
>
>I also think it's good to have a little grace -
>we can't expect a first-timer to the sats to
>jump on and copy and repeat all call signs 100%.
>When I first started, all I said was a "QSL," or
>"copy that." I imagine I frustrated a few ops
>who were wondering who I was QSLing. ;-)
>
>73,
>
>Zack
>KD8KSN
>
>-----Original Message----- From: Edward R. Cole
>Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 5:24 PM
>To: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Recorder battery died -
>anyone have a recording?2/5/2011
>
>At 01:14 PM 2/6/2011, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote:
>>I don't think the issue is whether or not you use a recorder,
>>packet/psk31/rtty ops are not penalised because they have
>>a computer record of the contact by virtue of the technology used
>>for that mode. If a voice recorder is part of your
>>shack, that's fine.
>>
>>The issue is having to ask others if they heard your QSO and can
>>tell you the details.
>>If you chose technology to help you, fine. If your technology fails,
>>so does the QSO. It's not acceptable to expect the
>>rest of the world to be your log keeper.
>
>I agree with this!
>
>
>
>
>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
>_______________________________________________
>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
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 82
***************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
