| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 22.02.11 01:51l 982 Lines 34211 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB6113
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V6 113
Path: IZ3LSV<IV3YXW<HB9TVW<DB0ANF<CX2SA
Sent: 110221/2350Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:54199 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB6113
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. LoTW troubles (George Henry)
2. Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts? (Bill Dzurilla)
3. HELP ON LINEAR BIRDS (Marc Tessier - VE3TES)
4. Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior. (Tony Langdon)
5. Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior. (Tony Langdon)
6. AO-51 mode change 21 Feb 2011 2145utc (Mark L. Hammond)
7. Re: LoTW troubles (Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
8. Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior. (Patrick Green)
9. Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy! (Patrick Green)
10. Re: AO-51 mode change 21 Feb 2011 2145utc (Greg D.)
11. Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy! (Nigel A. Gunn)
12. HELP ON LINEAR BIRDS a reply (Gkcarr)
13. Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy! (jmfranke)
14. Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy! (Mark Spencer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 07:38:28 -0800 (PST)
From: George Henry <ka3hsw@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] LoTW troubles
To: AMSAT <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <401775.37587.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Although the LoTW FAQ shows "ARISS" and "AO-7" as the valid satellite names,
TQSL bounced all of my QSOs for those two?for "Invalid Satellite Name"...? I
looked in the ADIF file, and the Sat_Name fields are all correct, and it
processed all of my other QSOs successfully.? I also tried "ISS" and "AO-07",
and it bounced those, as well.
Any hints?
George, KA3HSW
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:23:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx Marvin Tamez <k5mlt@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <962371.38098.qm@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
M,
You probably had already worked and been credited for the grids of the
contacts that were blank in the VUCC column.
What were you using before the Elk?
B
--- On Mon, 2/21/11, Marvin Tamez <k5mlt@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
From: Marvin Tamez <k5mlt@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?
To: "Bill Dzurilla" <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Date: Monday, February 21, 2011, 2:30 PM
Patrick, I mentioned to Bill earlier, off group, that three of
my?confirmed?QSL's are blank?in the "VUCC" column. What could have caused
that? Leaving out Propagation=SAT, maybe? Also on the 10th of this month?I
started using an ELK-L5 and it has made a noticable difference! Hearing
at?much lower elevations and making QSO's at and below 10*.? Thanks for all
your help and advice.
?
73,
Marvin
K5MLT
From: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Mon, February 21, 2011 11:19:29 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?
Thanks, Patrick,, I have already sent an email to LOTW.? If the other
station failed to include Propagation Mode or Satellite Name, there should
be no match at all.? There is no basis for me to be credited with a 144mhz
or 432 mhz grid.
I spent a lot of time going through my log before uploading it, as LOTW
demands perfection.? The slightest error (e.g., writing vo-52 instead of
VO-52, AO51 instead of AO-51) and the entry is rejected.
73, Bill NZ5N
>
> 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.
? ? ?
_______________________________________________
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: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:02:37 -0500
From: "Marc Tessier - VE3TES" <ve3tes@xxxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] HELP ON LINEAR BIRDS
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <CD8DF043137A4474B4496A344E3A564E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello, after finally getting my uhf yagi to operate well again, I want to
try my hand at the linear birds or SSB sats again, I am having troubles
calibrating my uplink to the bird.
I have read and followed the steps laid out in the FAQ, Yet I still have to
recalibrate each pass. what could I be doing wrong???
my station is as follows
Software - Satpc32
Radio - Kenwood TS-2000
Antennae are - 5 ele on 2m
- 9 ele on uhf.
Regards,
Marc Tessier - VE3TES
ve3tes@xxxxxx.xx
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:51:08 +1100
From: Tony Langdon <vk3jed@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior.
To: Rocky Jones <orbitjet@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
<tjschuessler@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4d62de54.c502df0a.0140.2263@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 04:11 AM 2/22/2011, Rocky Jones wrote:
>My argument with AMSAT and others is that the organization should be
>leading by pushing more linear devices AND birds with larger
>footprints. Where I think things got off track badly was with the
>notion of AO-40...the theory that we had to build a satellite that
>people could work "worldwide" with not much antenna and other
>equipment. Oscar 10 and 13 (along with Arsene) in my view is about
>the baseline satellite that AMSAT should be building and trying to
>lead the satellite movement. As long as "baseline" satellite access
>is a handitalkie with a long whip...we are not going to see much
>different in my view nor should we expect it
Linear birds are a good idea, and the idea of creating an "off the
shelf" transponder package that university groups can install into
their projects has been discussed here before, to help that
end. larger footprints would be nice (and extremely useful in this
part of the world), but the trick there is getting the launch
opportunities at an affordable price, since it seems most affordable
launch opportunities are to LEO. You can only place your bird where
the ride takes you, unless you add propulsion, which means extra
weight and complexity (meaning more cost, fewer launch opportunities
and higher risk of failure, and most likely fewer birds).
One of these days, I'll have a crack at the linear birds we have. I
have the gear, just have to get around to using it! :)
73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:56:04 +1100
From: Tony Langdon <vk3jed@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior.
To: Luc Leblanc <lucleblanc6@xxxxxxxxx.xx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4d62df7b.0297df0a.2ecd.1130@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 09:35 PM 2/21/2011, Luc Leblanc wrote:
>The main problem is here: "you should hear your own downlink" but
>they try to call in the void hoping someone will answer??
If I don't hear anything, I don't Tx, except for a _brief_ keyup to
see if I am hitting the bird (in this part of the world at certain
times, the satellite may actually be quiet!).
73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:56:40 -0500
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 mode change 21 Feb 2011 2145utc
To: amsat-bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: ao51-modes@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <Alwh1g00d56cfur05lwivk@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello All,
Power up that L-band transmitter!
AO-51 is about 2 days away from full sun. On-board temperatures are
climbing, and it looks like we have just enough power to try to run both
repeaters. It will take some tweaking of various power management
parameters, and we'll see how things go. Right now 435.300 is at 420mW and
435.150 is at 300mW.
Expect interruptions for telemetry collection by command stations; we'll try
to keep the impact down to a minimum. You may also see the transmitters
shutting off as we run right on the edge of the power budget. They should
come back on when the batteries get a bit more juice in them. Both
transmitters will be off during eclipses (which won't last much longer).
We'll probably run dual repeaters until Sunday 27 Feb 2011. There is only
about 3 weeks of full sun, then eclipses return.
Dust off your S-band downconverters and antennas! We'll try to fit in some
S-band activity before eclipses return (approx. 14 March or so).
As of 21 Feb 2011 2145utc:
Dual Voice Repeaters
Mode V/U FM Voice Repeater (no PL tone needed)
Uplink: 145.920 MHz FM
Downlink 435.300 MHz FM
Mode L/U FM Voice Repeater (no PL tone needed)
Uplink: 1268.700 MHz FM
Downlink 435.150 MHz FM
On behalf of the command team,
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:40:18 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LoTW troubles
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinLVQqcAUSuWmZMdwq9j3Tse=LMbf8iPU2k9xN_@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi George!
> Although the LoTW FAQ shows "ARISS" and "AO-7" as the valid satellite names,
> TQSL bounced all of my QSOs for those two?for "Invalid Satellite Name"...? I
> looked in the ADIF file, and the Sat_Name fields are all correct, and it
> processed all of my other QSOs successfully.? I also tried "ISS" and
"AO-07",
> and it bounced those, as well.
>
> Any hints?
You may want to e-mail lotw-help @ arrl.org about that. I used "ARISS" as
the satellite name for the ISS cross-band repeater, and "AO-7" for that
satellite, without any problems. I was only waiting for SO-67 to be put in
that system, by the time I started uploading my QSOs a few weeks ago
(it is in there now).
LOTW was down for some period of time yesterday (Sunday) afternoon,
so maybe something has happened to it in the recent past.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:51:37 -0600
From: Patrick Green <pagreen@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Considerate satellite operations behavior.
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTim3Mg6_DfJ1ZxrSjyPhDbnQKZqAojYHTJnLDySq@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
This the parking lot at rush hour problem. Try a pass at 2am and you
won't have to fight. You may not find anyone to talk to even.
73 de Pat --- KA9SCF.
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:47 AM, k6yk <k6yk@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> There's nothing AMSAT can do about lids. ?Lids are lids and they
> are everywhere on the hambands, not just satellite. ?I would suspect
> that the ones you're complaining about don't read this list, or talk to
> any
> other hams. ? We do all this writing, but the people who need to read it
> don't.
>
> The madness on the birds is minor compared to what it is on HF ?at times.
>
> (Not all the time)...
>
> Doing a demo on a SSB/CW bird would be much nicer. ?It's much more
> civilized most of the time.
>
> 73,
> John K6YK
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 14:41:10 +0000 (UTC) wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx writes:
>> 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
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> $65/Hr Job - 25 Openings
> Part-Time job ($20-$65/hr). Requirements: Home Internet Access
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4d62a99cef9ab4c9af8st01vuc
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 17:22:54 -0600
From: Patrick Green <pagreen@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimurtfc1xD3Dt9CdAq61_qeoCaBnbFEkMZPjnTq@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Auctioning off spectrum that includes the important 435-438 Satellite
segment? Let alone that 430-440 is a ham band almost everywhere in
the world.
73 de Pat --- KA9SCF.
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:40 AM, <wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: "Rick Pinelli" <ka2bsm@xxxxx.xxx>
> To: "Damon" <wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "David" <kd4noq@xxxx.xxx>, "Lee"
<LRACE@xx.xxxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xx>, "Rick" <wa4nvm@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
randyw4412@xxx.xxxx "chris dowland" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Danny Banks"
<dbanksd@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Richard Martin" <kj4dxf@xxx.xxx>,
n4gmt@xxxxxxx.xxxx wv5j@xxxxxxxx.xxxx w5ema@xxxx.xxx
> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 10:27:33 AM
> Subject: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
>
> I received this info from one of the D-STAR groups about the 420 MHz band
> and thought I would pass it along.
>
>
> Rick - KA2BSM
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
> Subject: 420 band auction imminent if HR 607 passes
>
> I think we need to be aware of this issue, since our repeater system lives
> there.
>
> This is being done "in order to offset the loss of revenue that would occur
> as the result of the allocation of the D-Block to Public Safety instead of
> commercial auction".
>
> So they are giving away some spectrum that they said they would auction, and
> we get to pay the price for it.
>
> This bill was introduced by the Horable Peter King, R-NY District #3.
>
> Read more about Congresman King's spin on this plan here.
>
> http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/ny03_king/bipartlegsdblock.html
>
> Note that there is NO MENTION of the 420-450 and 450-470 bands in his press
> release, and they are in a footnote in the bill (oh, by the way, we can make
> up the revenue shortfall by auctioning off these frequencies...) So these
> bands will be sacrificed to pay for the reallocation of the spectrum that
> was previously cleared by TV Broadcasters for acution in the name of
> "Homeland Security".
>
> The 450 band contains Broadcasting Remote Pickup and Studio to Transmitter
> links along with other coordinated use. 420 to 450 is our 70cm amateur
> band.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Spectrum Management Bill Threatens Amateur Frequencies*
>
> *On February 10, Representative Peter King (R-NY-3), Chairman of the House
> Homeland Security Committee, introduced HR 607, the **Broadband for First
> Responders Act of 2011**. The bill been referred to the House Energy and
> Commerce Committee, which handles telecommunications legislation. *
>
> *HR 607 addresses certain spectrum management issues, including the creation
> and maintenance of a nationwide Public Safety broadband network. As part of
> that network, the bill provides for the allocation of the so-called
> "D-Block" of spectrum in the 700 MHz range for Public Safety use.*
>
> *The D-Block consists of two, 5 megahertz-wide segments of **spectrum
> (758-763 and 788-793 MHz) that became available when the FCC ended analog
> television broadcasts in June 2009 and reallocated the 698-806 MHz band for
> Public Safety and commercial broadband. It was anticipated that the D-Block
> would be auctioned for commercial use. *
>
> *There are several bills in Congress providing for the allocation of the
> D-Block for Public Safety use, and HR 607 is one of those. But HR 607
> uniquely provides for the reallocation of other spectrum for auction to
> commercial users, in order to offset the loss of revenue that would occur as
> the result of the allocation of the D-Block to Public Safety instead of
> commercial auction. *
>
> *HR 607 lists the paired bands of 420-440 MHz and 450-470 MHz among the
> bands to be reallocated for commercial auction within 10 years of its
> passage. *
>
> Read more
> here<
http://www.arrl.org/news/spectrum-management-bill-threatens-amateur-frequencie
s >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 15:27:20 -0800
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-51 mode change 21 Feb 2011 2145utc
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BLU133-W24BF489B424D76E522AD29A9D90@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Crickets. 23:15z pass over the US. Nice signal, though.
Greg KO6TH
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:56:40 -0500
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> From: marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx
> CC: ao51-modes@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 mode change 21 Feb 2011 2145utc
>
> Hello All,
>
> Power up that L-band transmitter!
>
> AO-51 is about 2 days away from full sun. On-board temperatures are
climbing, and it looks like we have just enough power to try to run both
repeaters. It will take some tweaking of various power management
parameters, and we'll see how things go. Right now 435.300 is at 420mW and
435.150 is at 300mW.
>
> Expect interruptions for telemetry collection by command stations; we'll
try to keep the impact down to a minimum. You may also see the transmitters
shutting off as we run right on the edge of the power budget. They should
come back on when the batteries get a bit more juice in them. Both
transmitters will be off during eclipses (which won't last much longer).
>
> We'll probably run dual repeaters until Sunday 27 Feb 2011. There is
only about 3 weeks of full sun, then eclipses return.
>
> Dust off your S-band downconverters and antennas! We'll try to fit in some
S-band activity before eclipses return (approx. 14 March or so).
>
>
> As of 21 Feb 2011 2145utc:
>
> Dual Voice Repeaters
>
> Mode V/U FM Voice Repeater (no PL tone needed)
> Uplink: 145.920 MHz FM
> Downlink 435.300 MHz FM
>
>
> Mode L/U FM Voice Repeater (no PL tone needed)
> Uplink: 1268.700 MHz FM
> Downlink 435.150 MHz FM
>
>
> On behalf of the command team,
>
>
>
> Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 23:32:43 +0000
From: "Nigel A. Gunn" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
To: Patrick Green <pagreen@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4D62F61B.7010908@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Most of the world doesn't have 420-430 and the rest of the band is only
secondary in Europe.
Guess you and your buddies need to start using the lower 10 megs if you
don't want to loose it.
Most of us survived happily with only the 430-440 bit.
On 21-Feb-11 23:22, Patrick Green wrote:
> Auctioning off spectrum that includes the important 435-438 Satellite
> segment? Let alone that 430-440 is a ham band almost everywhere in
> the world.
>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 17:42:04 -0600
From: Gkcarr <gkcarr@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] HELP ON LINEAR BIRDS a reply
To: "Marc Tessier - VE3TES" <ve3tes@xxxxxx.xx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <299727da6083db6f834afff034e3faaa@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Marc, you did fine during our FO-29 QSO @ 2053Z today. I also heard you on
the next pass.
73
George
WA5KBH
-----Original message-----
From: "Marc Tessier - VE3TES" ve3tes@xxxxxx.xx
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 21:02:37 -0600
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [Spam] [amsat-bb] HELP ON LINEAR BIRDS
> Hello, after finally getting my uhf yagi to operate well again, I want to
try my hand at the linear birds or SSB sats again, I am having troubles
calibrating my uplink to the bird.
> I have read and followed the steps laid out in the FAQ, Yet I still have
to recalibrate each pass. what could I be doing wrong???
>
> my station is as follows
>
> Software - Satpc32
> Radio - Kenwood TS-2000
> Antennae are - 5 ele on 2m
> - 9 ele on uhf.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marc Tessier - VE3TES
> ve3tes@xxxxxx.xx
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 18:45:35 -0500
From: "jmfranke" <jmfranke@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
To: "Patrick Green" <pagreen@xxxxx.xxx>, "Amsat BB"
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <807BF5DA2BFB4B5CB47429E2AE232520@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Our presence there is secondary and the prime user has a much larger
financial and national security commitment for keeping the band clear of
others. I hope the US military takes the appropriate actions to protect the
bands for their use and thereby ours.
John WA4WDL
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Patrick Green" <pagreen@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 6:22 PM
To: "Amsat BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
> Auctioning off spectrum that includes the important 435-438 Satellite
> segment? Let alone that 430-440 is a ham band almost everywhere in
> the world.
>
> 73 de Pat --- KA9SCF.
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:48:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Spencer <mspencer12345@xxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <266421.96492.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
I wonder how that will work out with the Pave Paws (and other) radars along
with
other DOD useage in these bands, not to mention the cross border issues they
are
going to have with Canada.
I can't see the USAF / USN etc?being to keen on large scale comerical useage
of
the 420 to 450 mhz band.
I?doubt that DOD will be very?happy if? 440 to 450 mhz is the only portion of
the 420 to 450 mhz band without large scale comercial use.
?
----- Original Message ----
From: Patrick Green <pagreen@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Amsat BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Mon, February 21, 2011 3:22:54 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fwd: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
Auctioning off spectrum that includes the important 435-438 Satellite
segment?? Let alone that 430-440 is a ham band almost everywhere in
the world.
73 de Pat --- KA9SCF.
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:40 AM,? <wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: "Rick Pinelli" <ka2bsm@xxxxx.xxx>
> To: "Damon" <wa4hfn@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "David" <kd4noq@xxxx.xxx>, "Lee"
><LRACE@xx.xxxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xx>, "Rick" <wa4nvm@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
randyw4412@xxx.xxxx
>"chris dowland" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "Danny Banks"
<dbanksd@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>,
>"Richard Martin" <kj4dxf@xxx.xxx>, n4gmt@xxxxxxx.xxxx wv5j@xxxxxxxx.xxxx
>w5ema@xxxx.xxx
> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 10:27:33 AM
> Subject: 420 MHz in Jeopardy!
>
> I received this info from one of the D-STAR groups about the 420 MHz band
> and thought I would pass it along.
>
>
> Rick - KA2BSM
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
>-
> Subject: 420 band auction imminent if HR 607 passes
>
> I think we need to be aware of this issue, since our repeater system lives
> there.
>
> This is being done "in order to offset the loss of revenue that would occur
> as the result of the allocation of the D-Block to Public Safety instead of
> commercial auction".
>
> So they are giving away some spectrum that they said they would auction, and
> we get to pay the price for it.
>
> This bill was introduced by the Horable Peter King, R-NY District #3.
>
> Read more about Congresman King's spin on this plan here.
>
> http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/ny03_king/bipartlegsdblock.html
>
> Note that there is NO MENTION of the 420-450 and 450-470 bands in his press
> release, and they are in a footnote in the bill (oh, by the way, we can make
> up the revenue shortfall by auctioning off these frequencies...) So these
> bands will be sacrificed to pay for the reallocation of the spectrum that
> was previously cleared by TV Broadcasters for acution in the name of
> "Homeland Security".
>
> The 450 band contains Broadcasting Remote Pickup and Studio to Transmitter
> links along with other coordinated use. 420 to 450 is our 70cm amateur
> band.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Spectrum Management Bill Threatens Amateur Frequencies*
>
> *On February 10, Representative Peter King (R-NY-3), Chairman of the House
> Homeland Security Committee, introduced HR 607, the **Broadband for First
> Responders Act of 2011**. The bill been referred to the House Energy and
> Commerce Committee, which handles telecommunications legislation. *
>
> *HR 607 addresses certain spectrum management issues, including the creation
> and maintenance of a nationwide Public Safety broadband network. As part of
> that network, the bill provides for the allocation of the so-called
> "D-Block" of spectrum in the 700 MHz range for Public Safety use.*
>
> *The D-Block consists of two, 5 megahertz-wide segments of **spectrum
> (758-763 and 788-793 MHz) that became available when the FCC ended analog
> television broadcasts in June 2009 and reallocated the 698-806 MHz band for
> Public Safety and commercial broadband. It was anticipated that the D-Block
> would be auctioned for commercial use. *
>
> *There are several bills in Congress providing for the allocation of the
> D-Block for Public Safety use, and HR 607 is one of those. But HR 607
> uniquely provides for the reallocation of other spectrum for auction to
> commercial users, in order to offset the loss of revenue that would occur as
> the result of the allocation of the D-Block to Public Safety instead of
> commercial auction. *
>
> *HR 607 lists the paired bands of 420-440 MHz and 450-470 MHz among the
> bands to be reallocated for commercial auction within 10 years of its
> passage. *
>
> Read more
> here<
>http://www.arrl.org/news/spectrum-management-bill-threatens-amateur-frequenci
es
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 6, Issue 113
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
