| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 20.11.12 21:10l 337 Lines 12394 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB7384
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V7 384
Path: IZ3LSV<IW0QNL<IK6ZDE<VE2PKT<F1BBI<CX2SA
Sent: 121120/2004Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA #:676 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB7384
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Allocations in L-band (Trevor .)
2. Re: Allocations in L-band (Alan)
3. Phonesat Video (Trevor .)
4. Re: Allocations in L-band (Alan)
5. Re: Allocations in L-band (Rsoifer@xxx.xxxx
6. KSC photos? (Gould Smith)
7. Who is using a IC-910 with Maspro Antennas?
(PE0SAT | Amateur Radio)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:10:21 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Allocations in L-band
Message-ID:
<1353406221.94625.YahooMailClassic@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
--- On Mon, 19/11/12, Richard Ferryman <g4bbh@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Just curious - Can someone enlighten me as to why there is no allocation
> for satellite downlinks in L-band (at least in the bandplans I have seen).
> There are uplinks around 1267 to 1269 MHz.?Is it due to possibility of
> interference with commercial/military/aeronautical systems?
I believe it dates back to a WARC conference in about 1971. Prior to that
the Amateur Service had I believe been able to use any Amateur Frequencies
just as they can still do for that other form of Space Communication - Moon
Bounce (EME).
Wayne Green W2NSD does make references to the loss of satellite frequencies
a few times in his column in 73 Magazine from that era, see 73 Mag archive
at http://archive.org/search.php?query=73%20magazine
Although a separate service, the Amateur-satellite Service, was created they
were only given access a limited sub-set of the Amateur Service frequencies.
For the UHF and Microwave bands the satellite segments were all remote from
the terrestrial weak-signal segment meaning separate equipment had to be
built to work satellites. Back in those days even 435 MHz would have seemed
"remote" from the 432 MHz weak-signal area due to the use of 28 to 432 MHz
transvertors that only covered a narrow 2 MHz segment of the band. We share
432-438 MHz with commercial SAR satellites but why in the 70's we weren't
allowed to use the whole of 432-438 I do not know. Maybe no-one thought to
ask for the whole segment ?
The same with 1260-1270, why it's there I don't know perhaps someone can
enlighten us. The band 1260-1300 MHz is used for wideband Global Positioning
transmissions from Galileo, see
http://www.southgatearc.org/articles/galileo.htm
Do restrictions that were applied to the Amateur-satellite Service 40 years
ago (but not to Moonbounce) still have any relevance today ? again I don't
know.
Ideally the Amateur-satellite Service should have access to the weak-signal
segments of all the UHF and Microwave bands for both Earth-to-Space and
Space-to-Earth so we would only need to build one set of equipment on each
band for both terrestrial and satellite working. It would be good if IARU
were to work towards that objective.
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 06:51:36 -0600
From: Alan <wa4sca@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Allocations in L-band
Message-ID: <DA11F35627C4460BA7B2304424A9CD47@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Someone years ago told me that one of the early amateur satellites had a
mode-L beacon, but because the rules changed, it was never turned on. I
haven't been able to verify or disprove this story.
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Trevor .
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 4:10 AM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Allocations in L-band
--- On Mon, 19/11/12, Richard Ferryman <g4bbh@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Just curious - Can someone enlighten me as to why there is no allocation
> for satellite downlinks in L-band (at least in the bandplans I have seen).
> There are uplinks around 1267 to 1269 MHz.?Is it due to possibility of
> interference with commercial/military/aeronautical systems?
I believe it dates back to a WARC conference in about 1971. Prior to that
the Amateur Service had I believe been able to use any Amateur Frequencies
just as they can still do for that other form of Space Communication - Moon
Bounce (EME).
Wayne Green W2NSD does make references to the loss of satellite frequencies
a few times in his column in 73 Magazine from that era, see 73 Mag archive
at http://archive.org/search.php?query=73%20magazine
Although a separate service, the Amateur-satellite Service, was created they
were only given access a limited sub-set of the Amateur Service frequencies.
For the UHF and Microwave bands the satellite segments were all remote from
the terrestrial weak-signal segment meaning separate equipment had to be
built to work satellites. Back in those days even 435 MHz would have seemed
"remote" from the 432 MHz weak-signal area due to the use of 28 to 432 MHz
transvertors that only covered a narrow 2 MHz segment of the band. We share
432-438 MHz with commercial SAR satellites but why in the 70's we weren't
allowed to use the whole of 432-438 I do not know. Maybe no-one thought to
ask for the whole segment ?
The same with 1260-1270, why it's there I don't know perhaps someone can
enlighten us. The band 1260-1300 MHz is used for wideband Global Positioning
transmissions from Galileo, see
http://www.southgatearc.org/articles/galileo.htm
Do restrictions that were applied to the Amateur-satellite Service 40 years
ago (but not to Moonbounce) still have any relevance today ? again I don't
know.
Ideally the Amateur-satellite Service should have access to the weak-signal
segments of all the UHF and Microwave bands for both Earth-to-Space and
Space-to-Earth so we would only need to build one set of equipment on each
band for both terrestrial and satellite working. It would be good if IARU
were to work towards that objective.
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: 3
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:52:48 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Phonesat Video
Message-ID:
<1353415968.43225.YahooMailClassic@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Phonesat, 437.425 MHz, are currently slated to launch in December.
See http://www.uk.amsat.org/?p=11544
Also recently added to the AMSAT-UK website is a GB1MIR page at
http://www.uk.amsat.org/?page_id=11501
73 Trevor M5AKA
AMSAT-UK http://www.amsat-uk.org/
----
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 07:26:16 -0600
From: "Alan" <WA4SCA@xxxxx.xxx>
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Allocations in L-band
Message-ID: <BFA79CF89368441EB54D0C6C80C92B29@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Someone years ago told me that one of the early amateur satellites had a
mode-L beacon, but because the rules changed, it was never turned on. I
haven't been able to verify or disprove this story.
Alan
WA4SCA
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Trevor .
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 4:10 AM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Allocations in L-band
--- On Mon, 19/11/12, Richard Ferryman <g4bbh@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Just curious - Can someone enlighten me as to why there is no allocation
> for satellite downlinks in L-band (at least in the bandplans I have seen).
> There are uplinks around 1267 to 1269 MHz.?Is it due to possibility of
> interference with commercial/military/aeronautical systems?
I believe it dates back to a WARC conference in about 1971. Prior to that
the Amateur Service had I believe been able to use any Amateur Frequencies
just as they can still do for that other form of Space Communication - Moon
Bounce (EME).
Wayne Green W2NSD does make references to the loss of satellite frequencies
a few times in his column in 73 Magazine from that era, see 73 Mag archive
at http://archive.org/search.php?query=73%20magazine
Although a separate service, the Amateur-satellite Service, was created they
were only given access a limited sub-set of the Amateur Service frequencies.
For the UHF and Microwave bands the satellite segments were all remote from
the terrestrial weak-signal segment meaning separate equipment had to be
built to work satellites. Back in those days even 435 MHz would have seemed
"remote" from the 432 MHz weak-signal area due to the use of 28 to 432 MHz
transvertors that only covered a narrow 2 MHz segment of the band. We share
432-438 MHz with commercial SAR satellites but why in the 70's we weren't
allowed to use the whole of 432-438 I do not know. Maybe no-one thought to
ask for the whole segment ?
The same with 1260-1270, why it's there I don't know perhaps someone can
enlighten us. The band 1260-1300 MHz is used for wideband Global Positioning
transmissions from Galileo, see
http://www.southgatearc.org/articles/galileo.htm
Do restrictions that were applied to the Amateur-satellite Service 40 years
ago (but not to Moonbounce) still have any relevance today ? again I don't
know.
Ideally the Amateur-satellite Service should have access to the weak-signal
segments of all the UHF and Microwave bands for both Earth-to-Space and
Space-to-Earth so we would only need to build one set of equipment on each
band for both terrestrial and satellite working. It would be good if IARU
were to work towards that objective.
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: 5
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:53:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Rsoifer@xxx.xxx
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Allocations in L-band
Message-ID: <b912.ae95495.3ddd016f@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Trevor, Richard, et al,,
WARC 71 (actually WARC-ST 71) allocated no 23cm frequencies at all to the
amateur-satellite service. The present 1260-1270 MHz allocation dates from
WARC 1979.. Dave Sumner and (I believe) Paul Rinaldo were there and may have
some background info.
Here are the frequencies allocated to the amateur-satellite service at
WARC-ST 71:
7.0-7.1, 14.0-14.25, 28.0-29.7, 144-146, 435-438, and 24000-24050 MHz
73 Ray
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:41:31 -0500
From: "Gould Smith" <gouldsmi@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] KSC photos?
Message-ID: <E725B995A85848CCAC2F712B83337A68@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Anyone posted any KSC photos from our incredible trip yet?
73,
Gould
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:12:29 +0100
From: PE0SAT | Amateur Radio <pe0sat@xxxxx.xx>
To: Amsat bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Who is using a IC-910 with Maspro Antennas?
Message-ID: <7eb8209291202e81b08f7d6fafb84ab3@xxxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Hi,
Thanks for reading this message. I have exchanged my FT-847 for an
IC-910H and now when I try to
work VO-52 my UHF uplink signal interferes with the VHF downlink. Are
the any people out there that
experience the same with this combination?
I tried with and without pre-amp, RHCP and LHCP but the problems
doesn't go away :(
I do know that there can be problems when working FO-29 and a mode-j
filter can solve this, but I
never experiences this when working VO-52.
73 Jan PE0SAT
--
With regards PE0SAT
Internet web-page http://www.pe0sat.vgnet.nl/
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 7, Issue 384
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
