| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 21.02.11 18:32l 800 Lines 30224 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB6110
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V6 110
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<PY1AYH<PY1AYH<CX2SA
Sent: 110221/1627Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:54121 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB6110
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Kysat-1 (Andrew Rich)
2. Re: Kysat-1 (i8cvs)
3. ND9M/MM - Sat Ops (Clary, James T, Civilian)
4. Re: Elk (n8gbu)
5. FTM-350AR Question (Zachary Beougher)
6. Elk as a Base Antenna (Clint Bradford)
7. Re: FTM-350AR Question (Jeff Moore)
8. Considerate satellite operations behavior. (Tom Schuessler)
9. Re: Elk as a Base Antenna (Amir K9CHP)
10. Re: SA-AMSAT satellite to carry linear transponder
(Bruce Robertson)
11. Re: SA-AMSAT satellite to carry linear transponder
(Alan P. Biddle)
12. LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts? (Bill Dzurilla)
13. Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior.
(wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxxx
14. Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior. (Mark L. Hammond)
15. Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?
(Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:03:15 +1000
From: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Kysat-1
To: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, "Kevin
Deane" <summit496@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4CDBFAB54F6947CD95FE813AFF0D5812@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Why dont we have more digis in space ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Kevin Deane" <summit496@xxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 7:58 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Kysat-1
--- On Sun, 20/2/11, Kevin Deane <summit496@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> So how come nobody is talking about Kysat-1 wich will be
> launched on Feb, 23???
Looks a good sat that hopefully will eventually function as an AX.25
digipeater.
It still amazes me is how much functionality can be packed into a CubeSat
these days.
73 Trevor M5AKA
_______________________________________________
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: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:49:08 +0100
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Kysat-1
To: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Trevor ."
<m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>, "Amsat - BBs" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, "Kevin
Deane" <summit496@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <001001cbd150$62b04860$0401a8c0@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Kevin Deane"
<summit496@xxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 11:03 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Kysat-1
> Why dont we have more digis in space ?
>
Hi Andrew, VK4TEC
Why dont we have at least one HEO in space to talk with you from all
continents ?
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 00:25:25 -0000
From: "Clary, James T, Civilian" <James.T.Clary.civ@xxx.xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] ND9M/MM - Sat Ops
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<91BA9771DE57884FBCD59E08A62C65A8881CE7@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I expect to be QRV on AO7 tomorrow morning at 21/1653Z and will try to
be in the 145.950-955 range. CW will be the primary mode, but I should
be able to switch to SSB if needed. My QTH should be in or near grid
AM42.
FO29 looks good at 21/0209Z, but that's during the business hours. If
nothing's going on that needs tending to, I'll look to be on
435.850-855. VO52 looks to provide a window common with the western
states and VE7 at around 22/0605Z. I'll be in the 145.900-905 range.
We'll probably be in or near AM52 at that point.
All that said, we're expecting to get some sea swells tomorrow and the
next day. These would rock the ship side to side pretty well if they
occur, which is likely. If it's only the swells and not bad weather,
then my op sked should be OK though.
73,
Jim, ND9M / VQ9JC
Grid AM21 / GMT -11
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 01:52:24 -0000
From: "n8gbu" <n8gbu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Elk
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <8316FF27E4974F799EE94B0E66561C36@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
I was wondering if anyone knows or has used an Elk as a base station antenna
? I have been kicking around the idea of using it they way as a first
antenna for a base station. Something to try out and get the hang of things.
Mike N8GBU
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:55:10 -0500
From: "Zachary Beougher" <zack.kd8ksn@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FTM-350AR Question
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <SNT111-DS23243C39C53E6806DDB633B3D90@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi!
Hopefully there are a few on this list that own one of the new Yaesu
FTM-350ARs ? I cannot find anyone that owns one of these! I picked one up
yesterday, and after a frustrating evening and day trying to familiarize
myself with a new radio, I think I got most of it figured out. I do have a
question: On my TH-D7A, when I get digi?d, ?My Packet? appears on the
display. Is there some feature I can enable on the 350 that would give me a
confirmation message/beep that my APRS packet has been digipeated? I get a
brief beep about 1/2 second before it transmits, but after that there is no
beep/message.
Any tips?
73!
Zack
KD8KSN
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:06:52 -0800
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Elk as a Base Antenna
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <1D9CB925-5EE4-485E-B367-A4512D450849@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>> ... used an Elk as a base station antenna ...
I would use Blue LocTite on all element threads ... then probably use marine
spar varnish on it all before mounting in a semi- or permanent outdoor
situation.
And, of course, have some manner to rotate it.
Clint, K6LCS
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:20:38 -0800
From: "Jeff Moore" <tnetcenter@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FTM-350AR Question
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <5C55AAE2ECBA49A5BBBABCA684E18DD6@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
You might look for a dedicated Yahoo group for this radio (or start one if
not). It's so new I doubt if very many members of this list have one.
Jeff More -- KE7ACY
CN94
----- Original Message ----- From: "Zachary Beougher"
<zack.kd8ksn@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FTM-350AR Question
Hopefully there are a few on this list that own one of the new Yaesu
FTM-350ARs ? I cannot find anyone that owns one of these! I picked one up
yesterday, and after a frustrating evening and day trying to familiarize
myself with a new radio, I think I got most of it figured out. I do have a
question: On my TH-D7A, when I get digi?d, ?My Packet? appears on the
display. Is there some feature I can enable on the 350 that would give me a
confirmation message/beep that my APRS packet has been digipeated? I get a
brief beep about 1/2 second before it transmits, but after that there is no
beep/message.
Any tips?
73!
Zack - KD8KSN
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:29:20 -0600
From: "Tom Schuessler" <tjschuessler@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Considerate satellite operations behavior.
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000001cbd188$4b3541d0$e19fc570$@xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Hi all,
I do not have the dollars yet to upgrade to an all mode radio to be able to
do SSB/CW operations so FM is my lot for now. I love early mornings on
AO-51 and later in the evening SO-50 and SO-67 when available because the
roar of the crowd is significantly less. That being said, I like to give
AO-51 or AO-27 a try once in a while in the afternoons to make a few Qs but
find myself more often than not put off by the sheer mess found there. Only
been doing this for 8 months with 260 QSOs on an irregular schedule so maybe
I am out of line here, but I will throw out some observations anyway.
The for me 2210Z 20-Feb, 2011 pass was a typical example of what makes this
part of the hobby hard to promote. I know that many of you are
conscientious operators and do not try stomp on others but there are some
out there who just don't seem to understand that there is a proper way to do
this that will maximize the number of QSOs that actually get completed on a
given pass.
I don't know how many times I heard someone call another station but when
that second station answers, somebody else comes right on top and
obliterates the poor guy with a totally unrelated call. I have had a
station call me back only to have his exchange blown out of the water by
somebody else who is apparently not listening to the fact that several
seconds of an exchange has already occurred.
I am sure I was the cause of some interference this afternoon attempting to
jump in after an exchange to get my call out there. I try however, if it
appears that I with my 5W handheld and Arrow, are not making it through the
current pileup, will wait 3 or 4 minutes until the pass has progressed some
and try it again. Yes I know it is FM and I should not expect better but
honestly I know it can be. Several times I heard a weak voice that sounded
like a youth trying to get in but nobody paused enough to give the poor kid
a shot. I made three Qs that pass but the kid got none and probably walked
away thinking he had just wasted his time.
I will be at a hamfest in a few weeks and plan to do a few demonstrations
of FM satellite work with my Arrow there and know that many folks will just
wag their heads and decide to never try at all because of the noise and
disorganization.
Another issue I hear is stations calling but not apparently hearing anything
but they continue to call anyway and cause interference. A recent SO-50
pass in the evening had 6 or seven stations calling but only one or two QSOs
actually took place as nobody seemed to be listening to the right
frequencies. I would request that the person who keeps up with the
Satellite status pages on the AMSAT web site please post the reality the
SO-50 downlink is really about 5Khz lower than the published 436.795. If
that were really the case, than I should always be starting a pass on my
handeld at 436.805 but if I go there, I hear nothing much and always end the
pass way down at 436.780 instead of .785. Since we always recommend that
new operators look to AMSAT.org for their basic information, it needs to be
kept current. If the information is wrong then people have to go through
the trial and error method to find out the truth.
Hopefully these remarks will not offend but will serve to spur us all to
improve the way we do things so others can too have a shot at making
contacts.
Tom Schuessler
2713 Lake Gardens Drive
Irving, Texas 75060
972-986-7456
214-403-1464 (Cell)
n5hyp@xxxx.xxx
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 06:21:56 -0500
From: Amir K9CHP <sarlabs@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Elk as a Base Antenna
To: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <F237FB54-413D-4FFB-A0B9-8EF0148DABD1@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Also, take coax losses into consideration. A pre-amp at the antenna might be
a good idea. Get one that can deal with the RF when you are in Tx and
waterproof it!
Sent from my iPod
Amir K9CHP
On Feb 21, 2011, at 0:06, Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>> ... used an Elk as a base station antenna ...
>
> I would use Blue LocTite on all element threads ... then probably use
marine spar varnish on it all before mounting in a semi- or permanent
outdoor situation.
>
> And, of course, have some manner to rotate it.
>
> 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: 10
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 08:55:47 -0400
From: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SA-AMSAT satellite to carry linear transponder
To: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTi=4XJfLRiNDZ1-hv65UY1fuuFeLH9sjD__LY60-@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Wow, we're getting so much innovation going on in designing 1U
cubesats with linear transponders.
Here's the link to the project website. You'll never guess what
'KLETSkous' means!
http://www.amsatsa.org.za/KLETSkous.htm
73, Bruce VE9QRP
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Trevor . <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx> wrote:
> http://www.southgatearc.org/news/february2011/kletskous.htm
>
> 73 Trevor M5AKA
--
http://ve9qrp.blogspot.com
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 07:15:10 -0600
From: "Alan P. Biddle" <APBIDDLE@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SA-AMSAT satellite to carry linear transponder
To: "'Bruce Robertson'" <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>, "'Trevor .'"
<m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Cc: 'AMSAT-BB' <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <928988EE053549BF90B4331B777617F9@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Interesting derivation. Of course, it can also mean "If you talk a lot and
monopolize the transponder, put a sock in it." Hi Hi!
More seriously, yet another fine contribution to satellite operations. It
will be interesting to see it grow and develop.
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Bruce Robertson
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 6:56 AM
To: Trevor .
Cc: AMSAT-BB
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SA-AMSAT satellite to carry linear transponder
Wow, we're getting so much innovation going on in designing 1U
cubesats with linear transponders.
Here's the link to the project website. You'll never guess what
'KLETSkous' means!
http://www.amsatsa.org.za/KLETSkous.htm
73, Bruce VE9QRP
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Trevor . <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx> wrote:
> http://www.southgatearc.org/news/february2011/kletskous.htm
>
> 73 Trevor M5AKA
--
http://ve9qrp.blogspot.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: 12
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 06:36:43 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <318738.89719.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi,
I just upload several hundred sat contacts to LOTW. Many matches were
returned, BUT many of them were credited for "VUCC 144 mhz" or "VUCC 432
mhz" and NOT for "VUCC Satellite", which is how they should be credited.
Does this mean that the person on the other side of the QSO did not properly
encode the log entry as a satellite QSO? Or is there some glitch in the
LOTW program? I would have guessed that, if I encoded the QSO as Satellite
and the guy on the other side did not, it would not show as a match at all.
Anyone know how this is handled?
73, Bill NZ5N
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 14:41:10 +0000 (UTC)
From: wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior.
To: Tom Schuessler <tjschuessler@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<30821750.1304545.1298299270665.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx.xxxx
xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
This is and will be an ongoing problem until the powers to be at amsat do
something about the mess on the FM birds . Tom you are preaching to the
choir here because most of the offenders have no idea that this BBS is here.
If the FCC stopped long enough to monitor this madness, they would likely
have Amsat shut it down. BUT it is our job to police the ham bands.I guess
that might mean we need to write down the bird,call sign ,date ,mode, and
time and try to contact the offender and explain to the operator the trouble
they are causing and offer them some advice on how to operate on the birds.
Amsat wants users and needs members but this madness has to be corrected. I
would not do a satallite demo any where and let people hear the mess that is
ever present now and even worse on the weekends. Amsat needs to address this
issue and offer a solution before the responsible operators givenup and
quite dealing with the birds.
Thats my 2 cents worth AGAIN
WA4HFN Damon EM55
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Schuessler" <tjschuessler@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 11:29:20 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Considerate satellite operations behavior.
Hi all,
I do not have the dollars yet to upgrade to an all mode radio to be able to
do SSB/CW operations so FM is my lot for now. I love early mornings on
AO-51 and later in the evening SO-50 and SO-67 when available because the
roar of the crowd is significantly less. That being said, I like to give
AO-51 or AO-27 a try once in a while in the afternoons to make a few Qs but
find myself more often than not put off by the sheer mess found there. Only
been doing this for 8 months with 260 QSOs on an irregular schedule so maybe
I am out of line here, but I will throw out some observations anyway.
The for me 2210Z 20-Feb, 2011 pass was a typical example of what makes this
part of the hobby hard to promote. I know that many of you are
conscientious operators and do not try stomp on others but there are some
out there who just don't seem to understand that there is a proper way to do
this that will maximize the number of QSOs that actually get completed on a
given pass.
I don't know how many times I heard someone call another station but when
that second station answers, somebody else comes right on top and
obliterates the poor guy with a totally unrelated call. I have had a
station call me back only to have his exchange blown out of the water by
somebody else who is apparently not listening to the fact that several
seconds of an exchange has already occurred.
I am sure I was the cause of some interference this afternoon attempting to
jump in after an exchange to get my call out there. I try however, if it
appears that I with my 5W handheld and Arrow, are not making it through the
current pileup, will wait 3 or 4 minutes until the pass has progressed some
and try it again. Yes I know it is FM and I should not expect better but
honestly I know it can be. Several times I heard a weak voice that sounded
like a youth trying to get in but nobody paused enough to give the poor kid
a shot. I made three Qs that pass but the kid got none and probably walked
away thinking he had just wasted his time.
I will be at a hamfest in a few weeks and plan to do a few demonstrations
of FM satellite work with my Arrow there and know that many folks will just
wag their heads and decide to never try at all because of the noise and
disorganization.
Another issue I hear is stations calling but not apparently hearing anything
but they continue to call anyway and cause interference. A recent SO-50
pass in the evening had 6 or seven stations calling but only one or two QSOs
actually took place as nobody seemed to be listening to the right
frequencies. I would request that the person who keeps up with the
Satellite status pages on the AMSAT web site please post the reality the
SO-50 downlink is really about 5Khz lower than the published 436.795. If
that were really the case, than I should always be starting a pass on my
handeld at 436.805 but if I go there, I hear nothing much and always end the
pass way down at 436.780 instead of .785. Since we always recommend that
new operators look to AMSAT.org for their basic information, it needs to be
kept current. If the information is wrong then people have to go through
the trial and error method to find out the truth.
Hopefully these remarks will not offend but will serve to spur us all to
improve the way we do things so others can too have a shot at making
contacts.
Tom Schuessler
2713 Lake Gardens Drive
Irving, Texas 75060
972-986-7456
214-403-1464 (Cell)
n5hyp@xxxx.xxx
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 10:45:31 -0500
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior.
To: wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx
Cc: AMSAT <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, Tom Schuessler
<tjschuessler@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimPrNtyq-AG55GY=pRvtXu3EPgnX=6GRx-eefa_@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Okay, this one perplexes me--what in the world can the "powers to be at
amsat" do to fix this? About the only thing I can imagine is AMSAT helping
with education on appropriate behavior, etiquette (following good operating
practice and rules!).
That being said--eclipses are getting shorter and nearly gone. With that we
will be announcing a change in the operating modes for AO-51, so things will
at least change in the next few days.
It's up the operators to determine if things get better or worse...not "the
powers that be at AMSAT."
WE ARE AMSAT :)
Mark N8MH
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 9:41 AM, <wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> This is and will be an ongoing problem until the powers to be at amsat do
> something about the mess on the FM birds . Tom you are preaching to the
> choir here because most of the offenders have no idea that this BBS is here.
> If the FCC stopped long enough to monitor this madness, they would likely
> have Amsat shut it down. BUT it is our job to police the ham bands.I guess
> that might mean we need to write down the bird,call sign ,date ,mode, and
> time and try to contact the offender and explain to the operator the trouble
> they are causing and offer them some advice on how to operate on the birds.
> Amsat wants users and needs members but this madness has to be corrected. I
> would not do a satallite demo any where and let people hear the mess that is
> ever present now and even worse on the weekends. Amsat needs to address this
> issue and offer a solution before the responsible operators givenup and
> quite dealing with the birds.
> Thats my 2 cents worth AGAIN
> WA4HFN Damon EM55
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Schuessler" <tjschuessler@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 11:29:20 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Considerate satellite operations behavior.
>
> Hi all,
>
> I do not have the dollars yet to upgrade to an all mode radio to be able to
> do SSB/CW operations so FM is my lot for now. I love early mornings on
> AO-51 and later in the evening SO-50 and SO-67 when available because the
> roar of the crowd is significantly less. That being said, I like to give
> AO-51 or AO-27 a try once in a while in the afternoons to make a few Qs but
> find myself more often than not put off by the sheer mess found there.
> Only
> been doing this for 8 months with 260 QSOs on an irregular schedule so
> maybe
> I am out of line here, but I will throw out some observations anyway.
>
> The for me 2210Z 20-Feb, 2011 pass was a typical example of what makes this
> part of the hobby hard to promote. I know that many of you are
> conscientious operators and do not try stomp on others but there are some
> out there who just don't seem to understand that there is a proper way to
> do
> this that will maximize the number of QSOs that actually get completed on a
> given pass.
>
> I don't know how many times I heard someone call another station but when
> that second station answers, somebody else comes right on top and
> obliterates the poor guy with a totally unrelated call. I have had a
> station call me back only to have his exchange blown out of the water by
> somebody else who is apparently not listening to the fact that several
> seconds of an exchange has already occurred.
>
> I am sure I was the cause of some interference this afternoon attempting to
> jump in after an exchange to get my call out there. I try however, if it
> appears that I with my 5W handheld and Arrow, are not making it through the
> current pileup, will wait 3 or 4 minutes until the pass has progressed some
> and try it again. Yes I know it is FM and I should not expect better but
> honestly I know it can be. Several times I heard a weak voice that sounded
> like a youth trying to get in but nobody paused enough to give the poor kid
> a shot. I made three Qs that pass but the kid got none and probably walked
> away thinking he had just wasted his time.
>
> I will be at a hamfest in a few weeks and plan to do a few demonstrations
> of FM satellite work with my Arrow there and know that many folks will just
> wag their heads and decide to never try at all because of the noise and
> disorganization.
>
> Another issue I hear is stations calling but not apparently hearing
> anything
> but they continue to call anyway and cause interference. A recent SO-50
> pass in the evening had 6 or seven stations calling but only one or two
> QSOs
> actually took place as nobody seemed to be listening to the right
> frequencies. I would request that the person who keeps up with the
> Satellite status pages on the AMSAT web site please post the reality the
> SO-50 downlink is really about 5Khz lower than the published 436.795. If
> that were really the case, than I should always be starting a pass on my
> handeld at 436.805 but if I go there, I hear nothing much and always end
> the
> pass way down at 436.780 instead of .785. Since we always recommend that
> new operators look to AMSAT.org for their basic information, it needs to be
> kept current. If the information is wrong then people have to go through
> the trial and error method to find out the truth.
>
> Hopefully these remarks will not offend but will serve to spur us all to
> improve the way we do things so others can too have a shot at making
> contacts.
>
> Tom Schuessler
> 2713 Lake Gardens Drive
> Irving, Texas 75060
> 972-986-7456
> 214-403-1464 (Cell)
> n5hyp@xxxx.xxx
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
--
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 09:07:27 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<AANLkTint2cnM1wQiO1+eHadTv_tyGy4GDQK65bG+ZYvd@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Bill!
> I just upload several hundred sat contacts to LOTW. ?Many matches were
returned,
> BUT many of them were credited for "VUCC 144 mhz" or "VUCC 432 mhz" and NOT
> for "VUCC Satellite", which is how they should be credited.
>
> Does this mean that the person on the other side of the QSO did not properly
> encode the log entry as a satellite QSO? ?Or is there some glitch in the
LOTW
> program? ?I would have guessed that, if I encoded the QSO as Satellite and
the
> guy on the other side did not, it would not show as a match at all.
Most likely, the other station didn't include one or both of the fields
used to mark a QSO as a satellite QSO (Propagation Mode, Satellite
Name). I've seen this on a handful of QSOs I've uploaded in the past
few weeks.
> Anyone know how this is handled?
Assuming your log has all the necessary fields for a satellite QSO (all
of the QSLs I've gotten from you are showing as satellite QSOs, so I
don't think your logs are missing anything), there is only one way to fix
this - the other station has to upload the QSO record(s) again, this time
making sure those additional ADIF fields are in their log. As long as the
other QSO details like date, time, your call, etc. are the same, the new
upload replaces what was originally uploaded.
If the other station's log has the satellite-related fields, then an e-mail to
lotw-help @ arrl.org is necessary. There could be errors in how ARRL's
database queries run to match up QSO records and make QSLs. ARRL
will not fix problems with other stations' log uploads, and everything has
to be in there correctly in order to use the resulting QSLs toward awards.
I found this out recently, as I accumulated just enough grids from satellite
QSOs to apply for my satellite VUCC using LOTW. It's been almost 2
weeks since I filed for that, and hopefully there is some movement with
my application soon.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 110
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
