| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 15.02.14 11:23l 821 Lines 32705 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB957
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V9 57
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<DB0ANF<CX2SA
Sent: 140215/1022Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA #:3510 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB957
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net (Anthony Monteiro)
2. Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net (Kevin Elliott)
3. Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net (Paul Stoetzer)
4. Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net (n0jy)
5. Re: FOX-2 Information (was: "Flying repeater" inquiry) (Gus)
6. Re: FOX-2 Information (was: "Flying repeater" inquiry) (Michael)
7. Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net (Michael)
8. Re: FOX-2 Information (was: "Flying repeater" inquiry)
(Bryce Salmi)
9. Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net (Kevin Elliott)
10. Yuma Hamfest - day 1 (Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
11. Missing Mails (Vincenzo Mone)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:06:01 -0500
From: Anthony Monteiro <aa2tx@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Kevin Elliott <kevin@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net
Message-ID: <52FEAF69.6050206@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
On 2/14/2014 6:55 PM, Kevin Elliott wrote:
...
Like you, I want to do satellite tracking hardware
and not just point HTs at the birds and do manual
doppler correction. But, there?s a very, very
useful place for the newbie stuff...
Hi Kevin,
Yes, that is why we need and are building
a variety of satellites.
73,
Tony AA2TX
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:30:13 -0800
From: Kevin Elliott <kevin@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Anthony Monteiro <aa2tx@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net
Message-ID: <9989BABE-282A-4F94-ACC9-07F2DC2805BA@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
The CubeSats, NanoSats, PicoSats, and even the behemoths that cost millions
are pretty damn cool. I?m so excited that there are so many opportunities
above our heads now in amateur radio! Soon there will be too many of them
for any single individual to ever touch.
On Feb 14, 2014, at 4:06 PM, Anthony Monteiro <aa2tx@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> On 2/14/2014 6:55 PM, Kevin Elliott wrote:
> ...
> Like you, I want to do satellite tracking hardware
> and not just point HTs at the birds and do manual
> doppler correction. But, there?s a very, very
> useful place for the newbie stuff...
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> Yes, that is why we need and are building
> a variety of satellites.
>
> 73,
> Tony AA2TX
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:49:11 -0500
From: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@xxxx.xxx>
To: Anthony Monteiro <aa2tx@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net
Message-ID:
<CABzOSOqzRfpX9Yz9fVP-JKps6B2oE3GpKTb-bY=HBtVjFxH4uA@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I'm glad Mode J is on the agenda. Most of the birds that have launched
recently and are scheduled to launch in the near future have 2m
downlinks. Here in Southwest Washington, DC, about a mile from the
Capitol, there's an awful lot of QRN on 2 meters. 70cm downlinks are
much easier to hear. There is QRM from the military EPLRS system on
70cm, but the noise blanker is rather effective on reducing that.
73,
Paul, N8HM
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Anthony Monteiro <aa2tx@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> On 2/14/2014 4:57 PM, Michael wrote:
>>
>> OK then, I have a legitimate satellite question. Is Fox 2 going to be a
>> linear bird? See, I have some confusion on this....
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Good question. I think I can clear this up.
>
> The main point of Fox-2 is to develop and fly an
> advanced, software defined transponder (SDX.)
> An SDX can be programmed to be any kind of
> transponder. It will be a linear, inverting,
> mode-J transponder by default.
>
> We would also like to try some new and
> interesting digital modes perhaps including
> digital voice which would be my personal favorite.
> That is the tremendous flexibility you get with
> an SDX. You can change the transponder in software.
>
> ARISSat-1 was our first attempt at an SDX and it
> worked very well. It could only be programmed on
> the ground though. The SDX for Fox-2 will
> be programmable in orbit.
>
> Fox-2 will be a 3U CubeSat (3x the size of Fox-1)
> providing a lot more power and space for the
> electronics.
>
> The source of confusion may be because we are
> building four Fox-1 flight units. The idea is
> to have them available and ready to fly so
> we can easily team up with universities that want
> to fly science missions and get free launches.
> Building them all at once is also a much cheaper
> way to build satellites.
>
> All four Fox-1 units will have the same hardware
> and avionics. The universities will supply their
> experiment cards and the software can be customized
> for each satellite as needed.
>
> Once the Fox-1 flight models are built, the engineering
> team can begin working on Fox-2. That should start
> this year.
>
> The status of the Fox-1 satellites is as follows:
>
> Fox-1 (Fox-1A) is scheduled to fly on NROL-55.
>
> RadFxSat (Fox-1B) is a joint project with Vanderbilt
> University. It has already been accepted into the
> NASA ELaNa program but it has not been assigned a
> launch yet.
>
> Fox-1C and Fox-1D are not currently assingned.
>
> OK?
>
> Best satellite DX and 73,
> Tony AA2TX
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 4
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 18:54:40 -0600
From: n0jy <n0jy@xxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net
Message-ID: <52FEBAD0.2050408@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
THAT is why I like amateur radio, ALREADY there are more things to do
than I will ever be able to do in my lifetime!
It's an ADD person's dream hobby! :-)
Jerry
N?JY
On 2/14/2014 6:30 PM, Kevin Elliott wrote:
> I?m so excited that there are so many opportunities above our heads now in
amateur radio! Soon there will be too many of them for any single individual
to ever touch.
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:10:59 -0400
From: Gus <gus@xxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FOX-2 Information (was: "Flying repeater"
inquiry)
Message-ID: <52FEBEA3.2030606@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 02/14/2014 08:00 PM, Bryce Salmi wrote:
>> I'd be interested to know if there is going to be any technical
>> challenge to working Fox 2 or if it will just be yet another ones
>> of Clint's Easysats.
>
> Now, the actual important comment in this sentence is the reference that
> Fox-1 being an FM bird is assumed to be easy to build.
Actually, I didn't get that at all. I read the original message (and
your quote) and they clearly indicated that the question was about the
technical challenge of WORKING the bird.
--
Gus 8P6SM
The Easternmost Isle
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:26:37 -0500
From: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: bstguitarist@xxxxx.xxxx Clayton Coleman <kayakfishtx@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FOX-2 Information (was: "Flying repeater"
inquiry)
Message-ID: <52FED05D.6030602@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hold on. Not once did I ever suggest that ANY satellite was "easy to
build". I very much respect the effort, research, testing, etc. that
goes into every one, be it a flying repeater or not. My reference to
the term "easysats" comes from Clint or one of his ilk that seems
determined to show the rest of the amateur community how "easy" the FM
sats are to work. That's all well and good for them to do that too.
However, I was drawn to satellite work because of the challenge. I mean
call me weird or crazy but when something loses it's challenge and
becomes too easy, it begins to bore me pretty quickly.
73,
Michael, W4HIJ
On 2/14/2014 7:00 PM, Bryce Salmi wrote:
> To expand upon the flying repeater email.
>
> "I'd be interested to know if there is going to be any technical
> challenge to working Fox 2 or if it will just be yet another ones of
> Clint's Easysats."
>
> Now, the actual important comment in this sentence is the reference
> that Fox-1 being an FM bird is assumed to be easy to build. Strictly
> and professionally speaking this is a huge understatement of the
> technical challenges of any satellite. I'll assume you do not work in
> the the aerospace industry or have volunteering to build one of the
> AMSAT satellites (more than welcome to give it a shot!). Even an
> easysat is incredibly hard to build. Beyond the actual transmission
> mode the satellite must maintain a healthy power budget, provide
> telemetry to monitor the status of the satellite, be implemented in a
> 95mmx95mmx95mm space (inside the cube), survive the 5 year mission's
> expected 30krad dose of radiation, and survive 16 sunrises/sunsets per
> day in the vacuum of space (have heat? can't use convection to get rid
> it!). Just to name a few items...
>
> To put the sunrise/sunset into perspective (think of the road and
> other objects you see cracking due to expansion and contraction)
> MIL-STD-1540 which is a good idea to follow and the associated
> specifications usually require a spacecraft to be designed to survive
> -34C to +71C temperature extremes. Try operating a consumer product in
> that environment and it will fail pretty quickly.
>
> Also, from an extremely high-level point of view, the only difference
> between Fox-1 and Fox-2 will be the FM repeater being changed to the
> Software Defined Transponder (SDX). The SDX is a bit more power hungry
> so it requires an upgraded Maximum Power Point Tracker and more solar
> cells to produce the needed power. Otherwise, Fox-2 and Fox-1 will
> share a lot of the same technology. This is good because we don't want
> to re-invent the wheel. Therefore I respectively reject the idea that
> just because Fox-1 is an FM bird it is not technically challenging to
> design and build.
>
> Bryce
> KB1LQC
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Bryce Salmi <bstguitarist@xxxxx.xxx
> <mailto:bstguitarist@xxxxx.xxx>> wrote:
>
> You can already find out more about the prototype maximum power
> point tracker that will be used to power the software defined
> transponder on Fox-2!
>
> http://edge.rit.edu/edge/P13271/public/Home
>
> Bryce
> KB1LQC
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Clayton Coleman
> <kayakfishtx@xxxxx.xxx <mailto:kayakfishtx@xxxxx.xxx>> wrote:
>
> Hi Michael
>
> You're in luck. The Phase 2 Fox series are based on the SDX
> transponder as
> tested on ARISSat-1 and not your favorite "flying repeaters."
>
> Learn more by visiting the "Meet the Fox Project" page at:
> http://ww2.amsat.org/?page_id=1113
>
> Welcome aboard. You can join AMSAT and renew via the web
> store or by
> calling the office.
>
> See http://store.amsat.org/catalog/ and click on "Membership"
> for several
> options.
>
> 73
> Clayton
> W5PFG
> On Feb 14, 2014 4:04 PM, "Michael" <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx
> <mailto:Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>> wrote:
>
> > If Fox 2 is a linear bird, I'll even put my money where my
> mouth is and
> > renew my long dormant membership in AMSAT because I will
> feel that they
> > are moving in a direction that I and many others have
> interest in. If it's
> > just another flying repeater though well..... YAWN....I'm
> getting sleepy
> > now.
> > 73,
> > Michael, W4HIJ
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:48:06 -0500
From: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: Kevin Elliott <kevin@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net
Message-ID: <52FED566.6060403@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
I'll just say this Kevin. I was a "newbie" to all this a few short years
ago too but you know what I did, I figured it out. I had no "Elmer" to
guide me and I didn't need anyone like Clint holding and HT in one
hand and an antenna in the other doing a demo to show me how " easy" it
was. In fact, had I seen such a thing at the time, it probably would
have turned me off to it more than anything. I enjoyed doing the
research on antennas and rotator tracking systems and then building many
of the items I needed. I then enjoyed the challenge of learning how to
work the birds. The demos to show how "easy" it all is certainly have
their place but I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think we
sometimes do ourselves a disservice by the de- emphasis of the tech side
of things and how one can build a much more complex and entertaining
ground station if one so chooses. Sure you can scare people off by
getting overly involved with technical stuff but I bet you can scare
just as many away by showing them how "easy" it is too. Don't even get
me started on the "instant gratification" business. That's a major part
of what's wrong with society today. Anything worth doing is worth
working for, but nobody seems to want to do that anymore.
73,
Michael, W4HIJ
On 2/14/2014 6:55 PM, Kevin Elliott wrote:
> Perhaps that was a legitimate question hiding in there, but I read most of
that as cheap shots at Clint. Will you please let it rest? You don?t have to
like him, but I?d appreciate some positivity.
>
> Like you, I want to do satellite tracking hardware and not just point HTs
at the birds and do manual doppler correction. But, there?s a very, very
useful place for the newbie stuff that seems useless to you. Everyone
benefits when the hobby grows, and overwhelming new people to the hobby with
excessively technical projects can serve to scare them off. When more people
join the hobby, more products are made, more competition between hardware
manufacturers occurs, and the costs go down for all of us! That alone should
be incentive for everyone to bring the newbies in.
>
> So, I?m not suggesting that anyone needs to lighten the technical
offerings, or make anything more simple. But, I do think that anyone
offering marketable material that attracts newbies, regardless of how simple
it may be, should be welcome.
>
> We have to remember that there are people of all skill levels in this
world, and not all of them are able to grasp things immediately. Sometimes,
adding a lot of complexity isn?t fun for people looking for a little instant
gratification. And it?s that fun that powers the interest in the hobby and
creates a lifelong connection to it. So let?s avoid bashing anyone who likes
?easysats? or anyone who wants to help others with them, OK?
>
> Kevin
>
> On Feb 14, 2014, at 1:57 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
>> OK then, I have a legitimate satellite question. Is Fox 2 going to be a
linear bird? See, I have some confusion on this. I could swear I read
somewhere that it was yet another flying repeater just like Fox 1 is but
then someone here told me I was mistaken. Since you're here Tony, I thought
I'd ask you since I'm pretty sure you can give me a definitive answer. I
mean after all, since we are talking about " Tech" as in technology, I'd be
interested to know if there is going to be any technical challenge to
working Fox 2 or if it will just be yet another ones of Clint's Easysats.
Unlike some folks such as Clint, I don't delight in how "easy" it is to work
a satellite and actually enjoy a challenge like I had when I first got into
this part of the hobby and put my station together using the homebrew
SAEBRTrack tracking system I built along with the OR-360 rotators that you
told me where to find back then. Thank you btw.... I mean if people enjoy
working "easysats" with!
an HT and a handheld antenna, that's all well and good. To each their
own. It's just that I'd like a bit more of a challenge than that.
Unfortunately I missed out on A0-40 which I understand took a fair amount of
"tech" savvy to conquer. AO-7 and FO-29 were fun mixed with a bit of
challenge though and even AO-51 was pretty cool trying to conquer the S band
mode. I'd very much like to start putting my old homebrew antennas and
rotators back in the air if I feel like it will result in some challenge and
a sense of accomplishment and knowing that I did something that "not just
anyone can do" instead of "heck it's just so easy" as Clint likes to point
out..... If Fox 2 is a linear bird, I'll even put my money where my mouth is
and renew my long dormant membership in AMSAT because I will feel that they
are moving in a direction that I and many others have interest in. If it's
just another flying repeater though well..... YAWN....I'm getting sleepy now.
>> 73,
>> Michael, W4HIJ
>>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 18:54:27 -0800
From: Bryce Salmi <bstguitarist@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FOX-2 Information (was: "Flying repeater"
inquiry)
Message-ID:
<CAN5j0sqpTkFXvfES4st4S_O3g_S2xDCjySAX3BrAkL5DpF-twA@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
OK I do apologize, as was pointed out I completely misread your wording in
the original email. While my facts still stand on the challenges of
building the satellite I stand corrected on your argument. Sorry!
Bryce
KB1LQC
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Hold on. Not once did I ever suggest that ANY satellite was "easy to
> build". I very much respect the effort, research, testing, etc. that goes
> into every one, be it a flying repeater or not. My reference to the term
> "easysats" comes from Clint or one of his ilk that seems determined to
> show the rest of the amateur community how "easy" the FM sats are to work.
> That's all well and good for them to do that too. However, I was drawn to
> satellite work because of the challenge. I mean call me weird or crazy
> but when something loses it's challenge and becomes too easy, it begins to
> bore me pretty quickly.
> 73,
> Michael, W4HIJ
>
>
> On 2/14/2014 7:00 PM, Bryce Salmi wrote:
>
> To expand upon the flying repeater email.
>
> "I'd be interested to know if there is going to be any technical
> challenge to working Fox 2 or if it will just be yet another ones of
> Clint's Easysats."
>
> Now, the actual important comment in this sentence is the reference that
> Fox-1 being an FM bird is assumed to be easy to build. Strictly and
> professionally speaking this is a huge understatement of the technical
> challenges of any satellite. I'll assume you do not work in the the
> aerospace industry or have volunteering to build one of the AMSAT
> satellites (more than welcome to give it a shot!). Even an easysat is
> incredibly hard to build. Beyond the actual transmission mode the satellite
> must maintain a healthy power budget, provide telemetry to monitor the
> status of the satellite, be implemented in a 95mmx95mmx95mm space (inside
> the cube), survive the 5 year mission's expected 30krad dose of radiation,
> and survive 16 sunrises/sunsets per day in the vacuum of space (have heat?
> can't use convection to get rid it!). Just to name a few items...
>
> To put the sunrise/sunset into perspective (think of the road and other
> objects you see cracking due to expansion and contraction) MIL-STD-1540
> which is a good idea to follow and the associated specifications usually
> require a spacecraft to be designed to survive -34C to +71C temperature
> extremes. Try operating a consumer product in that environment and it will
> fail pretty quickly.
>
> Also, from an extremely high-level point of view, the only difference
> between Fox-1 and Fox-2 will be the FM repeater being changed to the
> Software Defined Transponder (SDX). The SDX is a bit more power hungry so
> it requires an upgraded Maximum Power Point Tracker and more solar cells to
> produce the needed power. Otherwise, Fox-2 and Fox-1 will share a lot of
> the same technology. This is good because we don't want to re-invent the
> wheel. Therefore I respectively reject the idea that just because Fox-1 is
> an FM bird it is not technically challenging to design and build.
>
> Bryce
> KB1LQC
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Bryce Salmi <bstguitarist@xxxxx.xxx>wrote:
>
>> You can already find out more about the prototype maximum power point
>> tracker that will be used to power the software defined transponder on
>> Fox-2!
>>
>> http://edge.rit.edu/edge/P13271/public/Home
>>
>> Bryce
>> KB1LQC
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Clayton Coleman
<kayakfishtx@xxxxx.xxx>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Michael
>>>
>>> You're in luck. The Phase 2 Fox series are based on the SDX transponder
>>> as
>>> tested on ARISSat-1 and not your favorite "flying repeaters."
>>>
>>> Learn more by visiting the "Meet the Fox Project" page at:
>>> http://ww2.amsat.org/?page_id=1113
>>>
>>> Welcome aboard. You can join AMSAT and renew via the web store or by
>>> calling the office.
>>>
>>> See http://store.amsat.org/catalog/ and click on "Membership" for
>>> several
>>> options.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Clayton
>>> W5PFG
>>> On Feb 14, 2014 4:04 PM, "Michael" <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> > If Fox 2 is a linear bird, I'll even put my money where my mouth is and
>>> > renew my long dormant membership in AMSAT because I will feel that
>>> they
>>> > are moving in a direction that I and many others have interest in. If
>>> it's
>>> > just another flying repeater though well..... YAWN....I'm getting
>>> sleepy
>>> > now.
>>> > 73,
>>> > Michael, W4HIJ
>>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:07:06 -0800
From: Kevin Elliott <kevin@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Another Great Tech Tuesday Net
Message-ID: <8D7A3BEE-0C26-4064-92A8-6E8B44D50019@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Hi Michael,
Yes, I think pushing people to learn for themselves and discover the deeper
technical concepts should certainly be encouraged. But consider this. There
are droves of high school students who would have otherwise watched reality
television who are instead becoming interested in the hobby because they
think it?s ?cool? that they can talk to an astronaut, or bounce a signal off
a satellite. These youngsters have a lot of other distractions available to
them, and when things are overly complicated it will be too much of a
struggle to get their attention.
I?m not talking about the already nerdy high school students who could
gravitate towards self learning and technology, naturally. I?m talking about
the typical student, some of which are edgy, high risk, and even special
education. who have become interested in ham radio because of AMSAT and NASA
(and a few helpful ham radio folks who have make it fun and interesting).
I think that?s what makes this hobby great. There are all shades of topics,
and all levels can participate. And we should encourage the ability to have
all levels of it to persist. While the easy/beginner levels might not suit
you and I, it does bring in a slew of new people to the hobby. An those
people will need nurturing so they become the experts in the next 20 years.
I?m like you. Someone showing me the easy route doesn?t help me. I like to
learn by myself, by engaging and exploring. I like to work hard to learn.
Advanced topics lure me in, and that?s what keeps me fascinated. But surely
we can?t hold everyone to that standard, and they shouldn?t be made to feel
bad for not learning the same way!
In any case, I think your heart is in the right place, and we?re saying
similar things in different ways. Thank you for the conversation!
Cheers and 73s,
Kevin
On Feb 14, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> I'll just say this Kevin. I was a "newbie" to all this a few short years
ago too but you know what I did, I figured it out. I had no "Elmer" to
guide me and I didn't need anyone like Clint holding and HT in one hand
and an antenna in the other doing a demo to show me how " easy" it was. In
fact, had I seen such a thing at the time, it probably would have turned me
off to it more than anything. I enjoyed doing the research on antennas and
rotator tracking systems and then building many of the items I needed. I
then enjoyed the challenge of learning how to work the birds. The demos to
show how "easy" it all is certainly have their place but I've said it before
and I'll say it again, I think we sometimes do ourselves a disservice by the
de- emphasis of the tech side of things and how one can build a much more
complex and entertaining ground station if one so chooses. Sure you can
scare people off by getting overly involved with technical stuff but I bet
you can scar!
e just as many away by showing them how "easy" it is too. Don't even get me
started on the "instant gratification" business. That's a major part of
what's wrong with society today. Anything worth doing is worth working for,
but nobody seems to want to do that anymore.
> 73,
> Michael, W4HIJ
> On 2/14/2014 6:55 PM, Kevin Elliott wrote:
>> Perhaps that was a legitimate question hiding in there, but I read most
of that as cheap shots at Clint. Will you please let it rest? You don?t have
to like him, but I?d appreciate some positivity.
>>
>> Like you, I want to do satellite tracking hardware and not just point HTs
at the birds and do manual doppler correction. But, there?s a very, very
useful place for the newbie stuff that seems useless to you. Everyone
benefits when the hobby grows, and overwhelming new people to the hobby with
excessively technical projects can serve to scare them off. When more people
join the hobby, more products are made, more competition between hardware
manufacturers occurs, and the costs go down for all of us! That alone should
be incentive for everyone to bring the newbies in.
>>
>> So, I?m not suggesting that anyone needs to lighten the technical
offerings, or make anything more simple. But, I do think that anyone
offering marketable material that attracts newbies, regardless of how simple
it may be, should be welcome.
>>
>> We have to remember that there are people of all skill levels in this
world, and not all of them are able to grasp things immediately. Sometimes,
adding a lot of complexity isn?t fun for people looking for a little instant
gratification. And it?s that fun that powers the interest in the hobby and
creates a lifelong connection to it. So let?s avoid bashing anyone who likes
?easysats? or anyone who wants to help others with them, OK?
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>> On Feb 14, 2014, at 1:57 PM, Michael <Mat_62@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>>
>>> OK then, I have a legitimate satellite question. Is Fox 2 going to be a
linear bird? See, I have some confusion on this. I could swear I read
somewhere that it was yet another flying repeater just like Fox 1 is but
then someone here told me I was mistaken. Since you're here Tony, I thought
I'd ask you since I'm pretty sure you can give me a definitive answer. I
mean after all, since we are talking about " Tech" as in technology, I'd be
interested to know if there is going to be any technical challenge to
working Fox 2 or if it will just be yet another ones of Clint's Easysats.
Unlike some folks such as Clint, I don't delight in how "easy" it is to work
a satellite and actually enjoy a challenge like I had when I first got into
this part of the hobby and put my station together using the homebrew
SAEBRTrack tracking system I built along with the OR-360 rotators that you
told me where to find back then. Thank you btw.... I mean if people enjoy
working "easysats" wit!
h an HT and a handheld antenna, that's all well and good. To each their
own. It's just that I'd like a bit more of a challenge than that.
Unfortunately I missed out on A0-40 which I understand took a fair amount of
"tech" savvy to conquer. AO-7 and FO-29 were fun mixed with a bit of
challenge though and even AO-51 was pretty cool trying to conquer the S band
mode. I'd very much like to start putting my old homebrew antennas and
rotators back in the air if I feel like it will result in some challenge and
a sense of accomplishment and knowing that I did something that "not just
anyone can do" instead of "heck it's just so easy" as Clint likes to point
out..... If Fox 2 is a linear bird, I'll even put my money where my mouth is
and renew my long dormant membership in AMSAT because I will feel that they
are moving in a direction that I and many others have interest in. If it's
just another flying repeater though well..... YAWN....I'm getting sleepy now.
>>> 73,
>>> Michael, W4HIJ
>>>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 22:11:27 -0800 (PST)
From: "Patrick STODDARD \(WD9EWK/VA7EWK\)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Yuma Hamfest - day 1
Message-ID:
<1392444687.90285.YahooMailBasic@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi!
The first day of the two-day Yuma Hamfest in southwestern Arizona
was a great day. A huge crowd showed up as the hamfest opened
at midday, there was steady traffic through the main hall where my
AMSAT booth was located, and I had a nice crowd watch and listen
to a demonstration on AO-7 in the afternoon. The hamfest continues
tomorrow, with a full day of activities wrapping up with a barbecue in
the evening.
Thanks to AC0RA, W5PFG, AA5PK, and N8HM for the contacts on
the AO-7 pass around 2240 UTC. This was the only demonstration I
gave today. This pass showed how well this 39-year-old satellite is
still working, and these stations - in Iowa, two different parts of Texas,
and Washington DC - illustrated the coverage of this satellite. I had
some help for this demonstration. Frank N7ZEV, a satellite ham and
AMSAT Area Coordinator from Las Vegas, was outside for this pass
with his TH-F6A HT and the 2m part of his Arrow Yagi listening in as
I worked the pass. Keeping an eye on my booth in the hamfest's
main hall during this demonstration was a group of ARRL card
checkers, including long-time satellite ham Ron W6ZQ.
The hamfest continues at 8am (1500 UTC) tomorrow morning, and I
am planning to get on passes during the day. I am going to try to
work SO-50 as it passes by at 1441-1453 UTC, just before the official
starting time of the hamfest, and other passes later. Please call me
if you hear WD9EWK on any of these passes. I'm also planning on
going outside the hall to copy AO-73 telemetry on at least one of the
two passes later in the morning.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 11:20:29 +0100
From: "Vincenzo Mone" <vimone@xxxxx.xx>
To: "Amsat - BBs" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Missing Mails
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAALgqrd2N1rRAiaQvRd7pgRDCgAAAEAAAAHO2WTBZralBgpPrZlhfk1
QBAAAAAA==@xxxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hello,
please apologize if i am using this list.
I had problems with my PC and have lost all my emails.
I had some discussion on this list about how to decode the AO-73 with a
Dongle
USB Stick. Please anybody can tell me if I can recover my emails on the list
or
If can help me how to decode the Bird?
Any help will be really appreciated.
Thanks in advance
73's de Enzo IK8OZV
EasyLog 5 BetaTester
EasyLog PDA BetaTester
WinBollet BetaTester
D.C.I. CheckPoint Regione Campania
Skype: ik8ozv8520
**********************************
******* GSM +39 328 7110193 *******
****** SMS +39 328 7110193 ******
*** 2nd e-mail: vimone@xxx.xx ***
*********************************
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 9, Issue 57
***************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
