| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 20.12.08 21:21l 502 Lines 14464 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 59899_CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V3 661
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 081220/2017Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:59899 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:59899_CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: QRP re deux (Sebastian)
2. Re: 70 cm YAGI (James Duffey)
3. Re: 70 cm YAGI (Andrew Rich)
4. Re: 70 cm YAGI (Andrew Rich)
5. Re: QRP re deux (Michael Heim)
6. Re: 70 cm YAGI (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
7. Re: 70 cm YAGI (James Duffey)
8. Re: AO-51 QRP...or does anyone actually read the real
schedule? (Edward Cole)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 23:10:45 -0500
From: Sebastian <w4as@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: QRP re deux
To: AMSAT BB <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <0AFB88CF-3680-4656-B80D-CC938C52DBFE@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
I agree 100% with you Jim.
If you look at it another way. Standing on relatively flat terrain
with 5 watts from an HT on a simplex channel will give you a mile or
so on FM.
That same 5 watts from the same HT at the Empire State Building
observation deck will give you coverage to several miles, if not
several states.
Either of those two scenarios, I consider to be QRP.
73 de W4AS
Sebastian
On Dec 19, 2008, at 6:49 PM, Jim Danehy wrote:
> the premise that I follow is that QRP in the ham fraternity for
> decades prior to AMSAT was 5 watts output from the final stage of
> the transmitter . . . any other attempt which hopes to replicate
> that simplistic approach is speculation based upon a dynamic that is
> flawed from lack of accurate measurements . . . and constantly
> changing parameters . .
>
> HAPPY HOLIDAYS
>
> Jim W9VNE
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 22:03:44 -0700
From: James Duffey <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 70 cm YAGI
To: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20865256-5759-4100-AE62-51FDF147C1D4@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Dec 19, 2008, at 6:17 PM, Andrew Rich wrote:
> Hi
>
> I built an antenna for AO-51 which works well
>
> I just cant seem to find the dimensions on the net
>
> Here is a picture
>
> http://www.tech-software.net/antennae/images/yagi_001.jpg
>
> I want ot scale it and make one for 1090 MHz
This is the WA5VJB Yagi, a good performer that is cheap and easy to
make. Here is a link:
< http://www.wa5vjb.com/yagi-pdf/cheapyagi.pdf >
There are plans for a 902/903 version which should scale nicely to
1090 MHz. Let us know how it works out. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:46:38 +1000
From: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 70 cm YAGI
To: "James Duffey" <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <002001c96266$54e882c0$6501a8c0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thats the one !
Thank you
----- Original Message -----
From: James Duffey
To: Andrew Rich
Cc: James Duffey ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] 70 cm YAGI
On Dec 19, 2008, at 6:17 PM, Andrew Rich wrote:
> Hi
>
> I built an antenna for AO-51 which works well
>
> I just cant seem to find the dimensions on the net
>
> Here is a picture
>
> http://www.tech-software.net/antennae/images/yagi_001.jpg
>
> I want ot scale it and make one for 1090 MHz
This is the WA5VJB Yagi, a good performer that is cheap and easy to
make. Here is a link:
< http://www.wa5vjb.com/yagi-pdf/cheapyagi.pdf >
There are plans for a 902/903 version which should scale nicely to
1090 MHz. Let us know how it works out. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.19/1857 - Release Date: 12/19/2008
10:09 AM
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 16:09:37 +1000
From: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 70 cm YAGI
To: "James Duffey" <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <002801c96269$8ccd4240$6501a8c0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Are those spacings between the elements, or form the reference 0 ?
----- Original Message -----
From: James Duffey
To: Andrew Rich
Cc: James Duffey ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] 70 cm YAGI
On Dec 19, 2008, at 6:17 PM, Andrew Rich wrote:
> Hi
>
> I built an antenna for AO-51 which works well
>
> I just cant seem to find the dimensions on the net
>
> Here is a picture
>
> http://www.tech-software.net/antennae/images/yagi_001.jpg
>
> I want ot scale it and make one for 1090 MHz
This is the WA5VJB Yagi, a good performer that is cheap and easy to
make. Here is a link:
< http://www.wa5vjb.com/yagi-pdf/cheapyagi.pdf >
There are plans for a 902/903 version which should scale nicely to
1090 MHz. Let us know how it works out. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.19/1857 - Release Date: 12/19/2008
10:09 AM
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 04:51:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Heim <kd0ar@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: QRP re deux
To: AMSAT BB <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <629099.22354.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
I'd like to weigh in on this topic with my 2 cents worth, being a long time
QRP operator on various bands and modes...
I think QRP means soething different depending on what kind of operating you
do.? On HF, its generally 5 watts into a simple antenna, such as a dipole or
vertical.
HF digital, there isnt much of a distinction (psk31) as many run 5 watts into
a dipole vs maybe 20-30 watts into a similar antenna for QRO?
I operate VHF and microwave.? to me, on 2m SSB tropo, I consider QRP to be?5-
10 watts into whatever and however large an array you can muster, as?most QRO
stations?run 50 watts or more into a similar antenna.
EME ops?typically defines QRP?as anything under about?500 watts or so into a
single yagi. (no matter how large that single yagi is)
Meteor Scatter I've been called QRP running 50 watts into 10 elements.
However, on 10 GHz, I run 2 watts into a 18 inch offset fed dish, and I do NOT
consider myself QRP.? I'm an "average powered station" with that setup.? When
I ran 200 mW into the same dish, it was questionable even then if I could
consider myself QRP.? 2 watts = about 2-4KW ERP, 200 mw -= 200-400W ERP.? (I
havent actually MEASURED the gain, this is calculated ERP)
QRP is a relative term.? Depending on what kind of operating you do, ERP
certainly does?take into account whether you're QRP or not.
I think in the satellite realm, I would understand QRP to be 5 watts or less
into a low gain antenna.? Maybe I'm wrong about this, as I'm still a relative
newcomer, however? This puts everyone on an even keel as far as?someone
stepping over another to make it fair for everyone.? I know there are
operators on the main channel that might tweak?up the power to get thru on a
busy channel.? I know, because I have?when I started out.? I have realised it
wasnt right, and now my power stays at 5 watts on the 857.? Do i consider
myself QRP on AO-51?? well, with my homebrew 3 ele/6 ele V/u antenna on a
fixed elevation mount, yea, at times I do, when running 5 watts.? I actually
have LESS antenna gain than someone would have with a handheld yagi because
the antenna is hardly ever pointing right at the bird.
The QRP channel does provide some interesting experimentation like what Tim,
N3TL and others have done, exploring "how low can you go" and still make
contact.? To me, THAT is the kind of experimentation that seems like a logical
purpose for the "QRP" channel.
As a side note, hasnt the?rule always been to run just enough signal to
achieve a downlink of reasonable quality?? I remember this from my AO-10
days.? Too much power on an SSB bird robs power from everyone.? Too much power
on an FM bird robs others from getting in.
?Michael Heim
Chief Engineer, Forever Broadcasting
New Castle PA
WKST WJST WWGY
?814-671-0666?
ARS KD0AR
----- Original Message ----
From: Sebastian <w4as@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: AMSAT BB <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 11:10:45 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: QRP re deux
I agree 100% with you Jim.
If you look at it another way.? Standing on relatively flat terrain?
with 5 watts from an HT on a simplex channel will give you a mile or?
so on FM.
That same 5 watts from the same HT at the Empire State Building?
observation deck will give you coverage to several miles, if not?
several states.
Either of those two scenarios, I consider to be QRP.
73 de W4AS
Sebastian
On Dec 19, 2008, at 6:49 PM, Jim Danehy wrote:
> the premise that I follow is that QRP in the ham fraternity for?
> decades prior to AMSAT was 5 watts output from the final stage of?
> the transmitter . . .? any other attempt which hopes to replicate?
> that simplistic approach is speculation based upon a dynamic that is?
> flawed from lack of accurate measurements . . . and constantly?
> changing parameters . .
>
> HAPPY? HOLIDAYS
>
> Jim W9VNE
_______________________________________________
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: 6
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 14:00:25 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 70 cm YAGI
To: Andrew Rich <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <494CFA79.6070905@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
element spacings are normally cumulative and start at the reflector.
Andrew Rich wrote:
> Are those spacings between the elements, or form the reference 0 ?
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 07:54:30 -0700
From: James Duffey <JamesDuffey@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 70 cm YAGI
To: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <0690C4B7-F613-4F9A-9DEC-1A6AF1783177@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Those are cumulative spacings from 0, the reflector. - Duffey
On Dec 19, 2008, at 11:09 PM, Andrew Rich wrote:
> Are those spacings between the elements, or form the reference 0 ?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: James Duffey
> To: Andrew Rich
> Cc: James Duffey ; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 3:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] 70 cm YAGI
>
>
> On Dec 19, 2008, at 6:17 PM, Andrew Rich wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > I built an antenna for AO-51 which works well
> >
> > I just cant seem to find the dimensions on the net
> >
> > Here is a picture
> >
> > http://www.tech-software.net/antennae/images/yagi_001.jpg
> >
> > I want ot scale it and make one for 1090 MHz
>
>
> This is the WA5VJB Yagi, a good performer that is cheap and easy to
> make. Here is a link:
>
> < http://www.wa5vjb.com/yagi-pdf/cheapyagi.pdf >
>
> There are plans for a 902/903 version which should scale nicely to
> 1090 MHz. Let us know how it works out. - Duffey
> --
> KK6MC
> James Duffey
> Cedar Crest NM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.19/1857 - Release Date:
> 12/19/2008 10:09 AM
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:06:48 -0900
From: Edward Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-51 QRP...or does anyone actually read the
real schedule?
To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: ao51-modes@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <200812201906.mBKJ6mu2072126@xxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 06:11 PM 12/19/2008, Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
> >From http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/echo/CTNews.php:
>
>QRP user FM Repeater, V/U (All users restricted to 10 watts or less, omni or
>handheld antennas)
>Uplink: 145.880 MHz FM
>Downlink: 435.150 MHz FM
>
>I think the removal of the "graphic" schedule will force people to spend an
>extra 10 seconds to read what restrictions or intentions are in effect, and
>this problem will be solved. I'm sorry it's come to this, again, but we
>cannot sacrifice civility and order on the air for convenience.
>
>73, Drew KO4MA
>AMSAT-NA VP Operations
Thankyou, Andrew:
This ongoing "debated" meaning of QRP has devolved a bit. QRP was
invented for HF, so its use for VHF+, satellite, and even EME needs a
bit of re-definition since the original definition does not satisfy
Amsat's purpose or intent (e.g. low power operation).
At VHF and higher frequencies where gain antennas are commonly used
the definition is best satisfied if both transmitter output and
antenna gain are specified. This leaves less ambiguity to the
concept. Exactly what Amsat has done!
Amsat QRP is intended to help the HT + handheld antenna
operator. Home stations using high gain antennas with long coax runs
need to adjust their transmitter power to compensate for the change
in RF radiated power that these afford in order to be in accordance
with the spirit of QRP operation.
So follow Andrew's instruction, above for QRP satellite
operations. If you need help figuring out how to compensate a large
home station's output to comply with QRP, just ask the experts that
are present on this list. With some input on your stations makeup,
we can calculate what level of power you should operate at.
73, Ed - KL7UW
former NASA Microwave Engineer
40-years professional experience in RF technology
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 3, Issue 661
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
