| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 27.04.11 18:55l 891 Lines 29564 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB6243
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V6 243
Path: IZ3LSV<IK6ZDE<VE2PKT<F1BBI<CX2SA
Sent: 110427/1645Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:2227 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB6243
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Arrow Antennas (Clint Bradford)
2. Sat32PC Question (Paul Delaney - K6HR)
3. Contest - AMSAT-NA Wins! (Clint Bradford)
4. Fw: RESOURCESAT 2 Close Approach Message (Peter Portanova)
5. Re: DJ-G7 for LEO (Bill W1PA)
6. AO-51 reported down 27 April 2011 1200utc (Mark L. Hammond)
7. Re: DJ-G7 for LEO (Andrew Glasbrenner)
8. searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz
(Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK)
9. Re: Icom D-Star (Gregg Wonderly)
10. Re: searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz (John Geiger)
11. Re: DJ-G7 for LEO (Clint Bradford)
12. Re: searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz (Dee)
13. Re: searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz
(Graham Shirville)
14. Re: DJ-G7 for LEO (Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
15. Re: Sat32PC Question (George Henry)
16. New ham station on the ISS (Armando Mercado)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 21:32:03 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Arrow Antennas
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <5DF4D386-C514-4E10-B3E0-7693DAEED833@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Spoke with Allen Lowe the past few days. He has formally passed the baton of
Arrow Antennas to
fellow ham, Tim Chapman - KB7MDF, for the future of Arrow Antennas.
Allen needs more time to devote to the recovery of his lovely wife from her
health problem of last year.
He will not disappear entirely - his "hand" will still be on the products
for a few years.
My personal experience began with Arrow Antennas began as a mere consumer
six or seven years ago,
then quickly a "devotee" (OK, "groupie"), then one who exclusively uses my
Arrow for scores of
satellite presentations and demonstrations the past few years ...
(During my AMSAT presentations, I hold up my Arrow, and tell the audience a
little story ...
"This is my setup. And this antenna, faded purple as it is."
(I have a six-year-old unit, but purchased a pair of new elements from Allen
recently - to show
what a new one looks like, versus my beloved faded purple unit)
"This antenna was actually sold to a client when I worked at Ham Radio
Outlet a few
years ago. The gentleman who I sold it to was waiting for me to open up the
shop the next
day. "This cannot possibly work," he declared. "It is engineered all wrong
... " "
Well, Tim, part of me wanted to pry into the guy's problem, and find out
what his
true problem was. BUT - the OTHER part of me thought: "I can purchase this
returned item
myself at a greatly reduced price ... "
And I did. I cheerfully refunded the client his money. Immediately bought it
myself. And use it
to this day for ALL my demos and presentations.
In my wanderings 'round the 'Net, detractors of Arrow Antennas' product
line seem to
fall into these categories -
1. Arrow doesn't give away products for us as raffle prizes at our ham fests.
My reply? SHAME ON THOSE who demean a small business owner's decision to
produce a high-quality product at a reasonable price, and not give 'em away
to all who ask.
I include this "shame" on many AMSAT members - I am an AMSAT area
coordinator and
benefactor myself - but have been irritated with fellow AMSAT members'
attitude display towards
Arrow the past few years on this point.
2. Arrow doesn't publish gain figures.
I absolutely love Allen's behind-the-scenes reply to these people. It boils
down to, "They work.
And I can sell every one I produce."
Yes, that may be interpreted as "arrogance" by some. And part of me smiles
at that answer
(my wife is a public relations professional ... and I have been on the 'Net
for over 20 years - we
bring our own online histories to the equation).
But part of me DOES want to know gain figures. And I KNOW what they are. I
have tested them
with calibrated, quality equipment. And if people dig enough on Google, they
can find the info, too.
But should Arrow prominently post "gain figures" on their units?
Personally, I'd leave this topic alone as the new ownership of Arrow creates
its new marketing /
business plan for the company. A valid study would involve hiring an outside
firm to conduct
independent studies (otherwise, detractors would dismiss any results). And
argumentative hams
would argue the merits of ay such study, anyway.
Well, there you go. Un-solicited testimonial from an Arrow devotee - and one
who owns most of the
"alternatives" - acquired via money from my own wallet. And as you read
"reviews" from others
debating "Arrow versus the others" - I only ask that you make sure you
determine where the "reviewers"
are coming from. Make sure they actually own what they are "reviewing." And
in these days of
anyone being able to post anything at will, ask if the "reviewer" paid cash
for the units, or had them
"supplied" to them for review purposes. Sad to say, but some are not as "up
front" with honesty and
integrity as I would like 'em to be.
Thank you, Allen, for your support of the amateur radio community. You will
be missed.
Clint Bradford, K6LCS
909-2410-7666 - cell
http://www.work-sat.com
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 22:27:59 -0700
From: "Paul Delaney - K6HR" <paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Sat32PC Question
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <1D63A0F44D17448FB22BF7C6D7A8E7A8@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
I am using SatPC32 with WispDDE and all was working fine before an
unexpected shutdown on my PC. I think some files were corrupted. When I
uninstall both programs and reinstall them I notice the previous settings
are still there. Can anyone tell me where the files are located? I'd like to
remove them so I can install from scratch.
As these programs are running now they no longer tune the radio.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
Paul Delaney - K6HR
paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx
http://k6hr.dyndns.org:8080
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:04:07 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Contest - AMSAT-NA Wins!
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <97C75493-3BBF-4720-A80D-1255D996EDD6@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Been around the ham radio hobby for a while? Want to use those memories to
help AMSAT-NA?
Be the first to correctly identify the three folks in the photograph
published here ...
http://tinyurl.com/K6LCS-CONTEST
... and K6LCS will donate money in your name to AMSAT-NA.
Read the "fine print" on the page ... entries submitted in this message
group will NOT be considered!
Clint Bradford, K6LCS
909-241-7666
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:04:18 -0400
From: "Peter Portanova" <wb2oqq@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Fw: RESOURCESAT 2 Close Approach Message
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <84D4F21CC2574CD895AB8F2AF7AF4C98@xxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=Windows-1252;
reply-type=original
Good Morning,
FYI
73's Pete
WB2OQQ
Subject: RESOURCESAT 2 Close Approach Message
> Sir/Ma'am,
>
> The United States Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) has identified a
> predicted conjunction between RESOURCESAT 2 (SCC# 37387) and SCC# 34301.
>
> Primary Object: RESOURCESAT 2 (SCC# 37387)
> Secondary Object: SCC# 34301
> Time of Closest Approach: 27 APR 2011 10:35 UTC
>
> Overall miss distance: 154 meters
> Radial (dU) miss distance: -151 meters
> In-Track (dV) miss distance: 1 meter
> Cross-track (dW) miss distance: 36 meters
>
> Primary Radial Error (U): 3 meters
> Primary In-track Error (V): 9 meters
> Primary Cross-track Error (W): 4 meters
>
> Secondary Radial Error (U): 11 meters
> Secondary In-track Error (V): 44 meters
> Secondary Cross-track Error (W): 15 meters
>
> Please reply to this message to acknowledge receipt of this close approach
> notification.
>
> It is possible to provide another estimate using owner/operator ephemeris
> data. If the satellite operator is interested please have them reply to
> all
> addresses listed in the Cc line. Email is the preferred method of
> communication.
>
> Thank you for your time and assistance. Please contact us if there are
> any
> questions.
>
> Very Respectfully,
>
> JSpOC Orbital Protection Team
> Joint Space Operations Center
> Vandenberg Air Force Base, California USA
> Comm: 1-805-605-3533
> Fax: 1-805-605-3507
> JSpOCSpaceCorrespondence@xxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxx
>
> NO WARRANTIES: The United States provides the enclosed Space Situational
> Awareness (SSA) services or information "as is" and makes no warranty,
> either express or implied, as to the condition or suitability of the
> information and services, nor its fitness for a particular purpose.
>
> IMMUNITY: The United States, any agencies and instrumentalities thereof,
> and
> any individuals, firms, corporations, and other persons acting for the
> United States, shall be immune from any suit in any court for any cause of
> action arising from the provision or receipt of SSA services or
> information,
> whether or not provided in accordance with 10 USC 2274, or any related
> action or omission.
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:40:25 -0400
From: "Bill W1PA" <w1pa@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DJ-G7 for LEO
To: "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BAY157-ds141A7596E1ECE87B06201C98980@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=original
Drew,
Is it just de-sense, or lower sensitivity on the sub-band? I have one on
loan I am going to try (A-B compare to my FT-530 with the Arrow), as soon as
I find a SMA-BNC adapter in my shack.
I read the QST review and the author said "no issue" except for same-band
sub-band, but he is not an experienced LEO user (as he stated in the
review).
Bill
W1PA
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:47 AM
To: "Bill Acito" <w1pa@xxxxxxx.xxx>; "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] DJ-G7 for LEO
>
> Big thumbs down, as the full duplex desenses very badly. Nice radio
> otherwise, but stinks for satellite. I bought one of the first hundred,
> and have kept up with the firmware updates.
>
> 73, Drew KO4MA
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:11:19 -0400
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 reported down 27 April 2011 1200utc
To: Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikhdW4-Emx_e9wsUhhcUzC52YCwog@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hello AO-51 Users,
We are receiving reports that AO-51 is down. It will be several hours
until a command station is in the footprint. We'll do try and get it
active as soon as possible.
73,
--
Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:53:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DJ-G7 for LEO
To: Bill W1PA <w1pa@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<28886204.1303912433749.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Desense. Your FT-530 will whip it in any test you try I'm sure. In my
opinion, and after 10+ years of heavy FM LEO operation, the FT-530 is the
finest HT for satellite work ever made. The receiver is sensitive but good
with intermod, it's true full duplex, 5 watts, and has that wonderful
sub-band tune feature.
I don't recall specifics, but I remember thinking the QST review really
missed the boat on the G7.
73, Drew KO4MA
-----Original Message-----
>From: Bill W1PA <w1pa@xxxxxxx.xxx>
>Sent: Apr 27, 2011 8:40 AM
>To: "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DJ-G7 for LEO
>
>Drew,
>
>Is it just de-sense, or lower sensitivity on the sub-band? I have one on
>loan I am going to try (A-B compare to my FT-530 with the Arrow), as soon as
>I find a SMA-BNC adapter in my shack.
>
>I read the QST review and the author said "no issue" except for same-band
>sub-band, but he is not an experienced LEO user (as he stated in the
>review).
>
>Bill
>W1PA
>
>--------------------------------------------------
>From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
>Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:47 AM
>To: "Bill Acito" <w1pa@xxxxxxx.xxx>; "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx
><amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
>Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] DJ-G7 for LEO
>
>>
>> Big thumbs down, as the full duplex desenses very badly. Nice radio
>> otherwise, but stinks for satellite. I bought one of the first hundred,
>> and have kept up with the firmware updates.
>>
>> 73, Drew KO4MA
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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: 8
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:41:31 +0200
From: "Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK" <hb9bnk@xxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4DB81D0B.9050604@xxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
To improve the reception of the sats on 145.9xx MHz with my
little yagi, I recently acquired a SSB-preamplifier SP-2000. To my
dismay, the reception on my IC910H was intermittend heavily
distorted.
After a while I found, that a nearby located commercial
transmitter (POCSAG) emitting bursts on 147.300 is so strong, that
the frontend of the IC910H (or its AGC) practically quites the
receiver on 145.900. When the bursts stop, reception resumes.
Difficult to qso.
I have experimented with a large cavity filter and found, that the
impact of the bursts can be reduced, so that normal satellite work
is possible again.
Now I am looking for advice on how to build a steep low pass
filter, eliminating everything above 146 MHz, to be mounted before
the preamp on the mast. The filter must however be capable to
accept the rf power, if I work in V/U mode.
Thank you for any ideas !
Werner, HB9BNK
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:00:35 -0500
From: Gregg Wonderly <w5ggw@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Icom D-Star
To: Ben Jackson <bbj@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx Gordon JC Pearce <gordonjcp@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4DB82183.50300@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
So as every followup seems to have detailed, there is an increase in desired
bandwidth with a direct need in required spectrum. If we can reduce spectrum,
we increase distance the signal can transit. If we increase bandwidth for a
particular size spectrum, we improve the amount of information we send.
The problems with current voice compression being understood have to do with
remedial compression techniques based on available compute power. I suggested
FPGA because of exactly this issue. Sure, people pick the easy route because
they can buy those solutions and get into the marketplace faster. What
needs to
happen is the "Apple" thing. We need a company that actually cares enough
about
the quality of what it can ship, worries about power requirements and
optimizes
performance to create a truly awesome voice CODEC standard.
The cell phone market keeps trying to optimize the bandwidth needs to increase
their spectrum's available capacity.
We are frustrated by the attributes of AM-VSB television characteristics vs
ATSC
coded VSB television. Because, the minimal available information
transitions to
no available information in a very short distance and signal level change.
Thus
we can't hear the TV at least. Either we get everything, or we get nothing.
This is where we are at with digital emission standards at this point. It's
not
the perfect solution because we are not sending enough information to
recreate a
perfect version of the original audio sample, for audio stuff. But, we are
able
to use the complete 12.5khz that D-Star is using (down from 20khz wide band FM
is at now, and less than half of the old 30khz stuff that the old mobile phone
radios were using). That 12.5khz has 2 channels in it. One for voice an done
for data. So more information is bandwidth is available.
This is one of those experimentation moments. Not everyone is happy with
where
it is at, but without some more participation, those experimenting now will be
the ones setting the standards, and if you are not happy with those results,
it
will be your fault not theirs, because you chose not to participate.
Gregg Wonderly
W5GGW
On 4/25/2011 6:10 AM, Ben Jackson wrote:
> On 4/23/2011 2:42 PM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
>> On Sat, 2011-04-23 at 10:42 -0500, Gregg Wonderly wrote:
>>> In the end, digital compression of spectrum space is going to happen
more and
>>> more. AM style broadcast is hugely inefficient even though it is
painfully
>>
>> Okay, but *why*? Why are we so obsessed with squeezing bandwidth down
>> and down, at the expense of intelligibility?
>
> You unfortunately provided data on why we should get ahead of crunching
> down bandwidth: Because sooner or later, we're going to get squeezed for
> bandwidth due to our spectrum being fairly empty and everyone and their
> brother wanting to push IP to their new wireless toaster service.
>
> I'm not a fan of proprietary codecs but our lack of an alternative back
> in the 2000s caused D-STAR to be used with AMBE. Too bad, so sad. Don't
> support it, probably not going to use it. My worry is that even though
> we provided a alternative with Codec2, what cutting edge technology that
> will be here five years from now are we not developing because we were
> playing catch up?
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:04:14 -0000
From: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: searching advice on low hpass filter for 146
MHz
To: "Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK" <hb9bnk@xxxx.xx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <AFDA734FDF36466A88BDE9492DF98505@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I believe DCI makes a 144-146 bandpass filter.
73s John AA5JG
----- Original Message -----
From: "Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK" <hb9bnk@xxxx.xx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 1:41 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz
> To improve the reception of the sats on 145.9xx MHz with my
> little yagi, I recently acquired a SSB-preamplifier SP-2000. To my
> dismay, the reception on my IC910H was intermittend heavily
> distorted.
>
> After a while I found, that a nearby located commercial
> transmitter (POCSAG) emitting bursts on 147.300 is so strong, that
> the frontend of the IC910H (or its AGC) practically quites the
> receiver on 145.900. When the bursts stop, reception resumes.
> Difficult to qso.
>
> I have experimented with a large cavity filter and found, that the
> impact of the bursts can be reduced, so that normal satellite work
> is possible again.
>
> Now I am looking for advice on how to build a steep low pass
> filter, eliminating everything above 146 MHz, to be mounted before
> the preamp on the mast. The filter must however be capable to
> accept the rf power, if I work in V/U mode.
>
> Thank you for any ideas !
>
> Werner, HB9BNK
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:17:02 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DJ-G7 for LEO
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <6638A897-59E7-40A4-929B-31DA9B513561@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
> ... I read the QST review and the author said "no issue" ...
QST's reviewers disappointed me with that mis-statement, as well as recently
calling the Wouxun HTs "dual-receive" units - which they most definitely are
NOT.
Clint, K6LCS
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:25:00 -0400
From: Dee <morsesat@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: searching advice on low hpass filter for 146
MHz
To: "'Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK'" <hb9bnk@xxxx.xx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <047998D4A4934296B76A3B2FE03DF014@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Werner,
Since you are using a very good rig and adding a great preamp, to hear what
you are after and expense involved might be as simple as adjusting the gain
(SP2000 indicates it is adjustable and already has a helical front end) so
as to stop this interference. Doing this simple thing might correct
everything--Let us know if it works. I adjusted the gain of my preamp to
stop similar type intermod.
73,
Dee, NB2F
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:42 AM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz
To improve the reception of the sats on 145.9xx MHz with my little yagi, I
recently acquired a SSB-preamplifier SP-2000. To my dismay, the reception on
my IC910H was intermittend heavily distorted.
After a while I found, that a nearby located commercial transmitter (POCSAG)
emitting bursts on 147.300 is so strong, that the frontend of the IC910H (or
its AGC) practically quites the receiver on 145.900. When the bursts stop,
reception resumes.
Difficult to qso.
I have experimented with a large cavity filter and found, that the impact of
the bursts can be reduced, so that normal satellite work is possible again.
Now I am looking for advice on how to build a steep low pass filter,
eliminating everything above 146 MHz, to be mounted before the preamp on the
mast. The filter must however be capable to accept the rf power, if I work
in V/U mode.
Thank you for any ideas !
Werner, HB9BNK
_______________________________________________
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: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:50:20 +0100
From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: searching advice on low hpass filter for 146
MHz
To: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK"
<hb9bnk@xxxx.xx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <B4A1FEF7CC08439599891A51BFE7CFCB@xxxxxxx.xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
The DCI filters are VERY good but are designed, as standard, to provide a
bandpass between 144-148MHz!
I guess a special version that is either much narrower, or is setup for
142-146MHz, might give maybe 20dB of attenuation ...maybe this plus your
cavity as a suck out notch/rejecter after preamp would be a winning
combination?
good luck
Graham
G3VZV
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK" <hb9bnk@xxxx.xx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 3:04 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz
>I believe DCI makes a 144-146 bandpass filter.
>
> 73s John AA5JG
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Werner Kullmann, HB9BNK" <hb9bnk@xxxx.xx>
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 1:41 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] searching advice on low hpass filter for 146 MHz
>
>
>> To improve the reception of the sats on 145.9xx MHz with my
>> little yagi, I recently acquired a SSB-preamplifier SP-2000. To my
>> dismay, the reception on my IC910H was intermittend heavily
>> distorted.
>>
>> After a while I found, that a nearby located commercial
>> transmitter (POCSAG) emitting bursts on 147.300 is so strong, that
>> the frontend of the IC910H (or its AGC) practically quites the
>> receiver on 145.900. When the bursts stop, reception resumes.
>> Difficult to qso.
>>
>> I have experimented with a large cavity filter and found, that the
>> impact of the bursts can be reduced, so that normal satellite work
>> is possible again.
>>
>> Now I am looking for advice on how to build a steep low pass
>> filter, eliminating everything above 146 MHz, to be mounted before
>> the preamp on the mast. The filter must however be capable to
>> accept the rf power, if I work in V/U mode.
>>
>> Thank you for any ideas !
>>
>> Werner, HB9BNK
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 14
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:19:30 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DJ-G7 for LEO
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BANLkTimamX5kbXHgDsTW5GqZyvt6qHqSGQ@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Bill!
> Is it just de-sense, or lower sensitivity on the sub-band? I have one on
> loan I am going to try (A-B compare to my FT-530 with the Arrow), as soon as
> I find a SMA-BNC adapter in my shack.
Actually, it's both. There is very noticeable desense, and the sub-band VFO
is less sensitive than the main band. The main band is for ham bands only,
where the sub-band VFO has the wide-band receiver.
You *may* be able to work with the DJ-G7 using memory channels in the main
band, but won't have full-duplex operation that way. I have not tried it
using
memory channels for the satellites.
> I read the QST review and the author said "no issue" except for same-band
> sub-band, but he is not an experienced LEO user (as he stated in the
> review).
The CQ magazine review was also a huge disservice. The DJ-G7, although
a good radio for non-satellite work and with analog FM at 1.2 GHz (the main
reason I kept one of the two I bought at Dayton in 2009), is a disappointment
for satellite work. Go with your FT-530 for satellites.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Henry <ka3hsw@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Sat32PC Question
To: Paul Delaney - K6HR <paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>,
amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <394427.24367.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
The SatPC32 main program files are in C:\Program Files\SatPC32, and the data
files are in C:\Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application
Data\SatPC32.? Don't know about the WispDDE files.
George, KA3HSW
----- Original Message ----
> From: Paul Delaney - K6HR <paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Sent: Wed, April 27, 2011 12:27:59 AM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Sat32PC Question
>
>
> I am using SatPC32 with WispDDE and all was working fine before an
> unexpected shutdown on my PC. I think some files were corrupted. When I
> uninstall both programs and reinstall them I notice the previous settings
> are still there. Can anyone tell me where the files are located? I'd like to
> remove them so I can install from scratch.
>
> As these programs are running now they no longer tune the radio.
> Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
>
>
> Paul Delaney - K6HR
> paul.hamradio@xxxxxxx.xxx
> http://k6hr.dyndns.org:8080
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:31:37 -0400
From: "Armando Mercado" <am25544@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] New ham station on the ISS
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BC1824EB16D4432EA12AC737095217A7@xxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello,
ISS has a new operating position in the Columbus module.
ISS On-Orbit Status 04/26/11
"...Cady (Coleman) prepared for and completed the installation of a new
amateur/ham radio station in the COL (Columbus Orbital Laboratory). Later in
the day, Cady checked out the radio's audio for proper functioning by
talking with a ham operator on the ground. [Activities involved first
retrieving all necessary hardware from stowage and setting it up in COL,
then installing the VHF Ericsson Transceiver station at the ER3 (EXPRESS
Rack 3).]"
http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/somd/reports/iss_reports/index.html
Armando, N8IGJ
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 243
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
