| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 26.04.11 21:11l 672 Lines 23929 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB6242
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V6 242
Path: IZ3LSV<IW0QNL<VE2PKT<N9PMO<ZL2BAU<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 110426/1903Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:2079 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB6242
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: 2m/70cm Quadrifilar Helix antenna Antenna Kit from
Antennas.us (Richard Lawn)
2. Re: VUCC, grids, and a new QTH ((kp4tr)Ramon Gonzalez)
3. Re: Arrow and ELK comparative antenna tests (John Kopala)
4. Re: VUCC, grids, and a new QTH (Rick - WA4NVM)
5. AO-51 update 25 April 2011 (Mark L. Hammond)
6. Re: AO-51 update 25 April 2011 (Ted)
7. Re: Arrow and ELK comparative antenna tests (i8cvs)
8. GO-32 (jerry keeton)
9. amsat-bb (nh6vb Scheller)
10. Re: Arrow and ELK Comparative Antenna Tests
(Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
11. Re: Arrow and ELK comparative antenna tests (Roberto)
12. Re: 2m/70cm Quadrifilar Helix antenna Antenna Kit
fromAntennas.us (K5OE)
13. Re: Arrow and ELK Comparative Antenna Tests (Clare Fowler)
14. Trying to find Specs (Farrell Winder)
15. Re: Arrow and ELK Comparative Antenna Tests (K5OE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:37:28 -0400
From: Richard Lawn <rjlawn@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 2m/70cm Quadrifilar Helix antenna Antenna Kit
from Antennas.us
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BANLkTiko3=O4mmYJGdcS9Ka2gzxT758z8A@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I purchased their 440 antenna built a year or so ago and waited forever to
get it. The wait wasn't really worth it in the end and I felt like I got a
better downlink signal with a homebrewed K5OE design. In both cases I used a
preamp close to the antenna mounted at about 20' above ground. I'm now in
the process of trying to build a few other stationary antennas and will let
the group know the results if they are worth reporting!
Rick
W2JAZ
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:10:19 -0400
From: "(kp4tr)Ramon Gonzalez" <kp4tr.ramon@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: VUCC, grids, and a new QTH
To: "amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <04D262D9-7F6C-4C9E-8B40-D3AD0EE8893A@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Excellent! I still recall the pileups on AO-13 from the JA's and DL's when
all I wanted to do was ragchew.
6 meter is my best bet and 2m/70cm from a vertical. So when you hear me the
KP4TR/W4 will be from EL87 while plain KP4TR is from either FK68 or Fk78 (I
forgot the other remote I have in Carolina PR in FK78). I hope i can keep my
operations organized accordingly!
Btw KP4WK is in same situation since we are sharing the remote stations.
Sent from my Adobe Flash and Java challenged iPhone
On Apr 25, 2011, at 2:02 PM, "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)"
<amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Hello Ramon!
>
>> I have around 74 countries worked from FK78 (puerto rico) via AO-13 and
>> other modes but that stopped in 1998 when i moved to florida. I recently
>> installed a remote control station in Ponce PR which is in FK68. I will be
>> able to work 6 meters and some LEO. Ponce is around 50 miles southwest
>> of my old QTH. Am i zero for VUCC as well?
>
> If your new FK68 QTH is 50 miles from your FK78 location, you don't have
> to start over with a new VUCC. You would be within the 200km/124.2-mile
> limit in the VUCC rules for satellite or 6m through 1.2 GHz. You could add
> to whatever you had from FK78. That distance - 50 miles - is the limit for
> the WAS awards, and you can work from anywhere in Puerto Rico for
> DXCC.
>
> Hope to hear you on the satellites. 73!
>
>
>
>
>
> Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
> http://www.wd9ewk.net/
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 25 Apr 2011 14:29:30 -0700
From: John Kopala <jkopala@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow and ELK comparative antenna tests
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4DB5E7BA.2020604@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
One supplemental note on the testing of the Arrow and ELK antennas.
I indicated that having both the transmit and receive antennas in the same
plane with the ELK might
have some advantages.
I failed to mention that having the crossed yagi design of the Arrow
isolates the 2 antennas from
each other and may help to minimize UHF downlink desensing when transmitting
on a VHF uplink. This
can vary greatly with the configuration and the radios used, but certainly
would provide significant
isolation when separate radios are used for the uplink and downlink. Recent
posts on the Alinco
DJ-G7 also highlight the fact that the radio itself my desense on one band
when transmitting on the
other. In that case, all the isolation in the world might not make any
difference.
John Kopala
N7JK
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:45:52 -0500
From: "Rick - WA4NVM" <wa4nvm@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: VUCC, grids, and a new QTH
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <3349E6397B0140759C09C48CC20DB85A@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Patrick,
The website is way behind on updates. Jim got #3 and Rob #4 months ago.
I think #5 spot is open. Maybe you, John K8YSE, or some others can lock
it down it the future.
We all appreciate everyone's effort just traveling to that one grid next to
your
home qth that is not very active. And a big thanks to the few of you that
make
a major effort to activate many new grids for all of us.
And what can you say about our two favorite M/M stations in the last four
months.
WOW! Super job Jim, ND9M and Yuri, UT1FG for their tireless effort during
many
sleepless nights.
Great Job, Thanks and 73,
Rick WA4NVM
> I have thought about doing the reverse VUCC. I think that is the correct
> name. I think I will slowly work towards that, but my main enjoyment from
> portable operations is getting to confirm to new grids for others, along
> with sightseeing, using new equipment, meeting weird people, ;-) designing
> QSLs, etc.
You are correct. The Central States VHF Society has a Reverse VUCC
award:
http://www.csvhfs.org/CSVHFVUC.HTML
There have been 2 satellite awards issued, according to this web page:
http://www.csvhfs.org/CS-VUCCr.html
I thought KD4ZGW had also obtained this award. If ND9M receives enough
QSL cards, he'd also qualify for it. I've worked from 58 different grids,
and
may eventually get to the 100 mark.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
_______________________________________________
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: 5
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 17:48:42 -0400
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 update 25 April 2011
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <bxpS1g00756cfur05xpS7c@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi All,
For now, it looks like the PL tone management (and changes to other
settings) has helped to keep AO-51 running and supporting normal operations.
We are now running around 475 mW of power out on 435.300 MHz.
Over the last few days, some of you on the east coast of the U.S. have
probably heard command stations downloading telemetry files on the 435.300
frequency. You can expect this to happen every few days; sometimes in the
AM, sometimes in the PM. Because it's 9600 baud packet, it sounds like a
carrier or open squelch with a "SSSSSHHHHHHHHHH" sound to it. If you hear
that sound, there isn't much use in trying to uplink; it means we're
collecting telemetry and the voice repeater is off for the moment. Wait for
the "SSSHHHHHHH" sound to go away, and you'll know the voice repeater is
active again.
The current power budget makes it very hard to run both transmitters at the
same time. Also, we are trying to keep the amount of commanding to a
minimum, so using the single transmitter for both voice and telemetry is our
current approach. We'll see how it goes. It does mean that it eats into
voice operations a little, but the trade off is worth it-both for the short
and long terms.
In the meantime, keeping using our old bird when it's active! We don't want
to take it for granted...
73 on behalf of the Command Team,
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:52:02 -0700
From: "Ted" <k7trkradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-51 update 25 April 2011
To: "'Mark L. Hammond'" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <7CC01AF60B10425B92940066D200FADC@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thanks for your efforts Mark
73, Ted K7TRK
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Mark L. Hammond
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 2:49 PM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 update 25 April 2011
Hi All,
For now, it looks like the PL tone management (and changes to other
settings) has helped to keep AO-51 running and supporting normal operations.
We are now running around 475 mW of power out on 435.300 MHz.
Over the last few days, some of you on the east coast of the U.S. have
probably heard command stations downloading telemetry files on the 435.300
frequency. You can expect this to happen every few days; sometimes in the
AM, sometimes in the PM. Because it's 9600 baud packet, it sounds like a
carrier or open squelch with a "SSSSSHHHHHHHHHH" sound to it. If you hear
that sound, there isn't much use in trying to uplink; it means we're
collecting telemetry and the voice repeater is off for the moment. Wait for
the "SSSHHHHHHH" sound to go away, and you'll know the voice repeater is
active again.
The current power budget makes it very hard to run both transmitters at the
same time. Also, we are trying to keep the amount of commanding to a
minimum, so using the single transmitter for both voice and telemetry is our
current approach. We'll see how it goes. It does mean that it eats into
voice operations a little, but the trade off is worth it-both for the short
and long terms.
In the meantime, keeping using our old bird when it's active! We don't want
to take it for granted...
73 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
----------------son I suggest you to read also the following articles:
ANTENNA GAIN MEASUREMENTS Part 1 : Technique- the fine points
of making accurate gain measurements without access to a professional
antenna range. by Fred Brown W6HPH
published on QST November 1982 pages 35 to 37
ANTENNA GAIN MASUREMENTS Part 2 : Intrumentation- simple,easy
construction instruments permit a precise determination of antenna gain
by Fred Brown W6HPH
published on QST December 1982 pages 27 to 31
UHF ANTENNA RATIOMETRY : Inconsistent results in checking antenna
gain ? Here is a technique that can restore your faith in measurements and
speed up empirical designe by Richard T. Knadle W2RIW
published on QST February 1976 pages 22 to 25
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Kopala" <jkopala@xxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 11:29 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow and ELK comparative antenna tests
> One supplemental note on the testing of the Arrow and ELK antennas.
>
> I indicated that having both the transmit and receive antennas in the same
> plane with the ELK might have some advantages.
>
> I failed to mention that having the crossed yagi design of the Arrow
> isolates the 2 antennas from each other and may help to minimize UHF
> downlink desensing when transmitting on a VHF uplink. This
> can vary greatly with the configuration and the radios used, but certainly
> would provide significant isolation when separate radios are used for the
> uplink and downlink.
> Recent posts on the Alinco DJ-G7 also highlight the fact that the radio
> itself my desense on one band when transmitting on the other.
> In that case, all the isolation in the world might not make any
> difference.
>
> John Kopala
> N7JK
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 21:53:49 -0500
From: "jerry keeton" <jkboxk@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] GO-32
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <8D666A4B116B4CD88F75F036B317EF24@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
recieved this from GO-32 on 435.325 9600k
1:Fm 7-14 To Z-7 Via c8-10*,,-8,-8,-8 <RR P/F R1 [DAMA] [EAX25]>[18:06:01]
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 23:42:20 +0000
From: nh6vb Scheller <nh6vb@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] amsat-bb
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP6578458B3CE4CE01E2A7F0E1990@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I am always looking for a change amsat-bb this was absolutely flawless its
brought me nothing but good fortune http://lnk.co/G2MCN now im finally
standing on my own two feet hope that you consider it
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 21:06:14 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ID: <002601cc03ef$4d791630$0201a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hello,hi support link W1GHZ Paul website:
http://www.w1ghz.org/small_proj/hna.zip
73 de iw5bsf Roberto
----- Original Message -----
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
To: "John Kopala" <jkopala@xxxxx.xxx>; "Amsat - BBs" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:16 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow and ELK comparative antenna tests
> Hi John, N7JK
>
> Since you are interested in accurate antenna gain measurements and
> comparison I suggest you to read also the following articles:
>
> ANTENNA GAIN MEASUREMENTS Part 1 : Technique- the fine points
> of making accurate gain measurements without access to a professional
> antenna range. by Fred Brown W6HPH
> published on QST November 1982 pages 35 to 37
>
> ANTENNA GAIN MASUREMENTS Part 2 : Intrumentation- simple,easy
> construction instruments permit a precise determination of antenna gain
> by Fred Brown W6HPH
> published on QST December 1982 pages 27 to 31
>
> UHF ANTENNA RATIOMETRY : Inconsistent results in checking antenna
> gain ? Here is a technique that can restore your faith in measurements and
> speed up empirical designe by Richard T. Knadle W2RIW
> published on QST February 1976 pages 22 to 25
>
> 73" de
>
> i8CVS Domenico
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Kopala" <jkopala@xxxxx.xxx>
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 11:29 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow and ELK comparative antenna tests
>
>
>> One supplemental note on the testing of the Arrow and ELK antennas.
>>
>> I indicated that having both the transmit and receive antennas in the
>> same
>> plane with the ELK might have some advantages.
>>
>> I failed to mention that having the crossed yagi design of the Arrow
>> isolates the 2 antennas from each other and may help to minimize UHF
>> downlink desensing when transmitting on a VHF uplink. This
>> can vary greatly with the configuration and the radios used, but
>> certainly
>> would provide significant isolation when separate radios are used for the
>> uplink and downlink.
>> Recent posts on the Alinco DJ-G7 also highlight the fact that the radio
>> itself my desense on one band when transmitting on the other.
>> In that case, all the isolation in the world might not make any
>> difference.
>>
>> John Kopala
>> N7JK
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: K5OE <k5oe@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 2m/late last year I wanted to get back on the birds, so I "threw" up an old
omin antenna (Eggbeater II from a long, long time ago) and put a Landwehr
preamp in the attic (it was easy and fast). See my comment above about
being frustrated--I didn't operate much. When ND9M was at sea I got really
frustrated! So I swapped out the Egg II with a slightly-less old antenna, a
TPM II and pointed it due !
West (fixed, no rotor) and worked Jim a few times, mostly on FO-29, when he
was in the Pacific Ocean. After he went through the Panama Canal, I went
back on the roof and pointed the antenna to the SE and worked him a few more
times in the Carrib and GoM. I worked him in 9 grids, but was not able to
work much else. Last weekend I finally made the time to run the cables
through the house walls for the rotor and quickly built up a small homebrew
beam for 70 cm (3x3), installed a coaxial relay for polarity switching, and
moved the preamp to just below the antenna: a world of difference, as you
can imagine. Solid copy on all those birds now. Sorry for the long story,
but my recommendation is borne out of experience--only use the omni if you
can't use a beam.
73,
Jerry, K5OE
--- original message ---
Interesting, Zack.
I would ask them about transmitting through the one with the preamp built in.
Can you do it? (i.e., is it RF-sensed/switched)
Or does the preamp make it a "receive only" antenna, with the accidental
transmission through it smoking the device :) It's bound to happen on a dual
band radio...
(I think you'd be better off building a pair of AA2TX style Lindenblads...)
Mark N8MH
At 12:01 PM 4/25/2011 +0000, vtnn43e@xxxxxxx.xxx wrote:
>Antennas.us is selling a combo package of 2M and 70cm quadrifilar helix
>antennas and a bias tee for $330.00. The 70cm antenna has a built-in 15db LNA
>BTW.
>
>http://www.antennas.us/store/p/391-UC-AMSAT-KIT-2-m-70-cm-Amateur-Satellite-A
ntenna-Kit.html
>
>
>The UC-AMSAT-KIT, 2 m / 70 cm Amateur Satellite Antenna Kit is a discounted
>bundle combination of quantity 1 each of the following three antenna
products:
>UC-1464-433, VHF Amateur Satellite QFH Antenna, Passive
>UC-4364-513, UHF Amateur Satellite QFH Antenna, with built-in LNA and SMA
Male
>connector
>BIT-1500-385, UHF Bias Tee
>
>I was wondering though what some of you on the list think of these antennas
>for FM LEO users that are looking for fixed outdoor antennas?
>
>
>73
>Zack
>N8FNR
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:19:07 -0400
From: "Clare Fowler" <clarefowler@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow and ELK Comparative Antenna Tests
To: "John Kopala" <jkopala@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BBAE1107C7A1402CB450DE63DB705FBC@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
It is commendable to see some direct antennas comparison measurements being
made.
Computer modeling is one thing. Realizing it in hardware is quite another.
The biggest problem in making field measurements is to reduce and try and
eliminate reflections
from the ground, adjacent structures and overhead wires and your antenna
mount.
The pattern of the antennas under test can be very significant.
Two antennas can have the same direct forward gain. But one can have
a narrow beam width main lobe but with relatively large side lobes,
while the other has a broader main lobe beam width and low side lobes.
While they both can give the same forward gain results the second antenna
is obviously the better antenna.
To test for ground reflections raise and lower your antenna and also move it
back and
forward and see if your signal strength varies.
On a different day and different location repeat the measurements.
Your results may well leave you wondering why you made the
statements you so confidently did.
To reduce ground reflections raise the antennas as far as possible above
ground.
Use a high gain directional antenna for the signal source so that little of
the radiated
power is directed at reflective surfaces.
The greater the spacing between the rx and tx antennas the more likelihood
of
a reflection but the spacing needs to be such that a small change in spacing
has little effect on the results. As xxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 11:49 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Arrow and ELK Comparative Antenna Tests
> On Saturday, April 23, Pat Stoddard (WD9EWK) and I did some antenna
> testing in an attempt to answer
> the questions about which is the best antenna for portable satellite
> operation. We only tested the
> antennas in receive mode to determine their relative gain. Time
> constraints prevented us from
> performing additional testing to determine if the transmitted output was
> consistent with the receive
> gain of the antennas. For the time being we will assume (and we all know
> the dangers of doing so)
> that the transmit performance closely matches the receive performance.
>
> The antennas tested were an Arrow (3 x 7 elements), an ELK (4 elements), a
> PortaFox configured for
> 145/435 operation (4 elements), and a Home Brew 4 by 9 element "arrow"
> antenna. The standard Arrow
> antenna was the only antenna equipped with duplexer, but not the basic
> duplexer which is installed
> in the handle. We did not measure the insertion loss of the duplexer on
> the Arrow antenna, but this
> was obviously not a significant factor in the overall performance. A
> duplexer could still be
> required depending upon the antenna chosen and the radio(s) to be used.
>
> Using the Arrow antenna as the reference antenna and 145.300 MHz as our
> test frequency, our
> measurements indicated that the Arrow and the ELK antennas had identical
> gain. The PortaFox antenna
> showed 2db less gain than the Arrow and the ELK. The Home Brew 4/9
> element crossed yagi showed 2db
> more gain than the Arrow and the ELK.
>
> On 435.300 MHz, the Arrow antenna had 2db more gain than the ELK and 8db
> more gain than the
> PortaFox. The Home Brew 4/9 element had 3db more gain than the Arrow.
I
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:46:28 -0400
From: "Farrell Winder" <fwinder@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Trying to find Specs
To: "AMSAT" <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BAA12ADE61C54E2B93F6BA105FD4A908@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Looking for specifications on old PBS Ch 24 amplifier. Originally mfg by
Comark Southwick, MA. Believe Comark was sold to Thompson.
Amplifier module is model # B400698 and has 2 TRW 5030 RF transistors. If
anyone has specs or source for info please reply off line. Many thanks.
Farrell Winder, W8ZCF.
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:56:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: K5OE <k5oe@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Arrow and ELK Comparative Antenna Tests
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <8CDD252583CDB8E-198C-3234F@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Patrick,
I don't mean to quibble, but don't you think using a Large Capacity Filter
could have bs 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 242
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
