| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 25.02.09 00:28l 1467 Lines 48521 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 11979-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 92
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<OE6XPE<OE3XZR<OE1XAB<HG8LXL<CX2SA
Sent: 090224/2320Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:11979 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:11979-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Manual (Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604)
2. Re: Manual (Jim Jerzycke)
3. Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency working
(Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
4. Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency working (Trevor)
5. Re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 91 (Louis McFadin)
6. Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency working
(Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
7. Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating procedure. (Darin Cowan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:07:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Manual
To: BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20090224200734.211868FDE0@xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
That's a User Manual- he's looking for the mythical Service Manual.
I've never seen a Service Manual on the ICOM site- they usually charge
(a lot) for them.
73, doug
From: BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxx
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:51:48 EST
Hi all,
Although it was a little hard to find, Icom has manuals for all of their
equipment online:
_http://www.icom.co.jp/world/support/download/manual/disp_cate.asp?searchcode=
ham_
The IC 471a is a mobile by the way.
In a message dated 2/24/2009 10:26:00 A.M. Central Standard Time,
robertsondack@xxxxxxxxx.xx writes:
I need the ICOM 471A Service Manual to recalibrate my equipment who has
drifted 1.5 kHz ,with age.The manual could be on paper form or CD.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:31:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Jim Jerzycke <kq6ea@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Manual
To: BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxxx Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604
<faunt@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <772134.54998.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
mods.dk has service manuals for several similar rigs. You might be able to
find what you need in one of those.
Jim KQ6EA
--- On Tue, 2/24/09, Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> From: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Manual
> To: BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxx
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 12:07 PM
> That's a User Manual- he's looking for the mythical
> Service Manual.
> I've never seen a Service Manual on the ICOM site- they
> usually charge
> (a lot) for them.
>
> 73, doug
>
> From: BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxx
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:51:48 EST
>
> Hi all,
>
> Although it was a little hard to find, Icom has manuals
> for all of their
> equipment online:
>
>
>
_http://www.icom.co.jp/world/support/download/manual/disp_cate.asp?searchcode=
ham_
>
>
> The IC 471a is a mobile by the way.
>
>
> In a message dated 2/24/2009 10:26:00 A.M. Central
> Standard Time,
> robertsondack@xxxxxxxxx.xx writes:
>
> I need the ICOM 471A Service Manual to recalibrate my
> equipment who has
> drifted 1.5 kHz ,with age.The manual could be on paper
> form or CD.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 24 Feb 2009 13:37:53 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency
working
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<2e18ad3e0902241237v7ebca616n495188cef6ad022d@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Drew!
>> Actually we can do split on AO-51. ? ?If anyone felt a ?DX-depition was
>> worth
>> the effort and resources, we just tell the DX to use one ?uplink channel
>> and
>> the people replying to use the other. It would maximise QSO ?rate and even
>> a
>> handheld with low audio would be Q5 without any interfering ?signals.
>
> We considered doing this, but unless they used two receivers, how would
> anyone know when to shut up and when to call? Even though there is a capture
> effect, when 20 signals come up at once, usually no one wins. Now if we'd
> used the SSB receiver on the user uplink?
Or just a second FM receiver with an unpublished uplink frequency for the
DXpedition - just like how it is done with the ISS school contacts we hear on
145.800 MHz? This is not a perfect alternative, but might give them a
fighting
chance to be heard and still keep it FM on the uplink and downlink.
> This whole DXpedition was on a space and operator available basis. We looked
> at sending a 817 for the transponder sats, but the space and operators
> unfamiliar with current satellites kept us to the HT and Arrow. I think it's
> still a positive that so many made QSOs considering the alternative.
It's been good to see your posts listing who made it into the K5D satellite
log. Despite whatever was happening on those passes, QSOs were
being made. I didn't work any SO-50 passes over the last few days where
K5D was in the footprint with me, and avoided the second AO-51 repeater
so K5D could be the focus of attention on those passes.
> Rest assured I've learned from this, and future efforts will benefit from
> those lessons. Meanwhile, I've identified the jerks among us from some of
> the really out of line negative comments directed at me and the expedition
> members ;-).
Thanks for your efforts to get K5D to be on the satellites - even
though I won't
have K5D in my log this time. Maybe we will have opportunities to work future
DXpeditions on whatever satellites we have at that time. More equipment
would be needed, but we have options on that front like we've never had in
the past with the small rigs and portable antennas.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:46:33 +0000 (GMT)
From: Trevor <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency
working
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20881.63496.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
While in theory anyone with a kilowatt output and good antenna system could
control access to a single channel FM sat by instituting some form of net
procedure in practise nobody has done so.
What I beleive people want to have are random QSO's that they initiate
themselves and that are aren't controlled by anybody else.
If you get more than half a dozen Amateur operators active in the footprint of
a single channel FM satellite they'll inevitably be congestion issues.
We'll just have to live with that for those satellites that have already been
designed, but for future designs a linear transponder seems the obvious
choice. A 40 kHz linear transponder would allow for multiple SSB QSO's over
areas with a high Amateur population but would still enable the use of FM in
the many areas of the world where there are few Amateurs.
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:27:37 -0500
From: Louis McFadin <w5did@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 91
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <0122CAE8-B5E9-4F2E-823A-0377D0BE7A13@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
I have to chime in with Nate on this, This BB is not the place for
personal attacks.
Bob's contributions to the betterment of ham radio are legendary. I
have found that any suggestions he has made should be taken seriously.
None of these things have anything to do with the military.
I am not sure if his idea of a directed net are practical on a short
satellite pass pass but I am also sure that we need to try some way of
avoiding the current situation of he with the most signal at the
satellite staying on to the exclusion of all others is a bad situation.
Bob has made many suggestions about courtesy and operational
techniques on the FM birds as well as have others. Many hams ignore
those suggestions.
I think education and courtesy are the only thing that will work.
On Feb 24, 2009, at 3:00 PM, amsat-bb-request@xxxxx.xxx wrote:
> Send AMSAT-BB mailing list submissions to
> amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> amsat-bb-request@xxxxx.xxx
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> amsat-bb-owner@xxxxx.xxx
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of AMSAT-BB digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating procedure. (Darin
> Cowan)
> 2. Re: W9VNE response to N5UXT on AO 51 (Clint Bradford)
> 3. Re: the tyranny of the military (Nate Duehr)
> 4. Re: Manual ( Great site for alot of free Manuals ) (nader omer)
> 5. Re: the tyranny of the military (Donald Jacob)
> 6. Proper operating procedure? (Darin Cowan)
> 7. Re: the tyranny of the military (Greg Dober)
> 8. Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating procedure.
> (Sean Cavanaugh)
> 9. Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating procedure.
> (Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604)
> 10. The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency working
> (G0MRF@xxx.xxxx
> 11. Re: Manual (BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxxx
> 12. Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency working
> (Andrew Glasbrenner)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:28:52 -0500
> From: "Darin Cowan" <yet.another.squid@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating
> procedure.
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Message-ID: <49a42e65.1917400a.692e.fffff607@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> W9VNE said:
>>> Unfortunately the operation of AO 51 is a large embarrassment. I
>>> have never in 56 years of operating ever seen demonstrated such
>>> poor operating procedures.
>
> I'd be happy if people would just use the proper phonetic alphabet.
> So many
> logs have been messed up by "kilowatt" which is KW to me, as opposed
> to the
> correct "kilo" and the other bizarre appellations of letters. And
> it's not
> just on satellites that this is a problem. When I hear something like
> "Kilowatt Capacitor Eight United Airlines" (made up example, if you
> are
> KC8UAL, I'm not picking on you or accusing you) I can pretty much
> guarantee
> it won't end up correct in the logs. That makes it a non-QSO and a
> waste of
> time for both ends.
>
> Combine proper phonetic use with "listen before transmitting" and
> 90% or
> better of the issues we see would go away.
>
> 73 de VE3OIJ
> -Darin
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:42:25 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
> From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: W9VNE response to N5UXT on AO 51
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Message-ID:
>
<31077319.1235497345926.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.xxxxxxxxx.
xxx
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>>> ... what is abundantly clear on AO 51 is a lack of respect for
>>> your fellow operator ...
>
> I live in the most populous region of the U.S.' most populous state.
> I state this because the potential for abuse with this concentration
> of hams should be evident here. But I have no idea what you are
> referring to. Sure, the FM birds get busy during "prime time"
> passes. But "lack of respect" being displayed on the air? Nonsense.
> First-time sat operators are as welcome and acknowledged - as are
> the experienced operators.
>
>>> ... I consider myself somewhat of an iconoclast ...
>
> Although you might believe you are one a who effectively attacks
> cherished beliefs or institutions, true iconoclasts destroy
> religious symbols, or, by extension, established dogma or
> conventions. No, your baseless arguments do not merit that label.
> More appropriately, you're merely dissatisfied and rebellious.
> That's being a "malcontent."
>
> Clint Bradford, K6LCS
> 909-241-7666
>
>
> --------------------------------------
> Clint Bradford, K6LCS / KAF3359
> 909-241-7666 - cell
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:22:17 -0700
> From: "Nate Duehr" <nate@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: the tyranny of the military
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Message-ID: <001201c996ac$d39af920$7ad0eb60$@xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> It's important to maintain civility on these mailing lists, because
> cowards
> behind keyboards will say anything -- but part of that is to call
> someone
> out when they're WAY out of line.
>
> Bob's done thousands of volunteer hours of work on things for
> Amateur Radio
> that weren't even dreamed up before he attempted them, Pat. The
> Amateur
> Radio community simply wouldn't have APRS if it weren't for Bob's
> unique
> entrepreneurial characteristics.
>
> You're WAY out of line with your "military" and "tyranny" comments and
> personal attacks on Bob. That is, unless you're going to dedicate
> the time,
> resources, and intelligence that he has to the Amateur Radio community
> WORLDWIDE.
>
> Are you prepared to step up and offer useful things at the rate and
> enthusiasm to the Amateur community as Bob has? If not... "Step off."
>
> The space station comment is almost comical -- the Astronauts have
> strict
> schedules set by their CIVILIAN program managers, and then choose on
> their
> own what to do with the remaining time in their days.
>
> The fact that APRS and other Amateur technology are even on board --
> technology that can be used when the Astronauts are NOT available --
> is a
> testament to Bob's ingenuity and stamina, along with many other
> Amateurs who
> worked together to make it happen.
>
> Do you have ANY idea how hard it is to fly gear on a manned
> spacecraft, to
> get it certified, and to build procedures for its safe use?
> (Example: The
> Amateur station must be switched OFF during EVA activity in order to
> alleviate risks with frequency interference. This makes the
> Astronauts
> BUSIER, and that makes coordination more difficult -- don't you
> think the
> program manager would rather just say "shut the thing down
> permanently" or
> have never flown the Amateur station in the first place?)
>
> Do you have enough interpersonal skill to work with people in those
> roles
> and garner the Amateur community enough resources to put something
> in orbit
> around the planet? Realistically, you probably don't have to answer
> that
> question -- since I doubt you do. If you do... "Step up."
>
> Your perception of Bob is wickedly twisted, indicating that you have
> some
> deep and over-reaching mistrust of quite normal hams who just happen
> to have
> military-related jobs. You may want to get some counseling for
> that. Bob
> never did anything but good for you, as far as I can see. Meanwhile
> to
> soothe your strange phobia, think of Bob as a college professor
> instead, if
> that helps you lower your outlandish concern level.
>
> Attacking him in a public forum (while I'm sure he's seen it all
> before,
> well maybe not THIS one... and can defend himself adequately), is an
> insult
> to all volunteer hams who build infrastructure for other hams,
> everywhere.
>
> My personal pet-peeve are the IDIOTS who attack volunteers who do
> good work
> for Amateur Radio. They're few and far between and I get seriously
> pissed
> off at people like you who attack them for no sane reason. Welcome
> to my
> gun-sights.
>
> I'd rather see you learn and get over your personal problems, but if
> it's a
> choice between you or Bob, the community would be better off with
> Bob. If
> you think my reply is harsh, it is MEANT to be. Maybe you'll think
> before
> you attack the next volunteer while you whine from your recliner,
> accomplishing nothing.
>
> Celebrate Ability,
>
> Nate WY0X
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx
> On
> Behalf Of Thomas McGrane
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 7:36 AM
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] the tyranny of the military
>
> Greetings from Patrick N2OEQ
>
> Regarding bruninga's post suggesting even more control over the
> satellite.... Bruninga and the military has too much control over the
> space program and amsat satellites.
>
> Look what happened to the space station, years of military devised
> packet position reporting and very little "human" contact.
>
> I recommend you all think for yourselves and remember, this is AMATEUR
> radio, NOT PROFESSIONAL.
>
> Regarding activity on oscar 51, its great to hear the excitment of new
> operators but very disappointing to hear so many regulars almost every
> day. Give some new people a chance.
>
> Bruninga reminds me of the movie title, "the world is not enough"
>
> Think for yourselves!
>
> pat
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 10:23:33 -0800 (PST)
> From: nader omer <st2nh@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Manual ( Great site for alot of free Manuals )
> To: amsat bb bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Message-ID: <43110.59396.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hello Robert Sondack,VE2ASL & ALL
> ?
> KB2LJJ radio mods database offers approximately 7,000 Radio Mod's,
> This comes close to 12Mb of the typical space. The KB2LJJ Radio Mods
> Database is the premier online that stores many radios
> modifications, that you can search on the Radio Mods Database for free
> (the above info? from KB2LJJ QRZ website)
> ?
> link is:-
> ?
> http://kb2ljj.serveftp.com/
> ?
> KEEP IT IN YOUR FAVORITES
> ?
> Thanks JOAO F RIBEIRO KB2LJJ? for the great work.FB OM.
> ?
> ?
> ?
> Here is a link to Icom 471A
> http://kb2ljj.serveftp.com/icoms/IC-471A_E%20Instruction%20Manual.pdf
> ?
> ?
> ?
> 73 de Nader , st2nh
> www.st2nh.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 10:36:54 -0800
> From: Donald Jacob <wb5eku@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: the tyranny of the military
> To: Nate Duehr <nate@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Message-ID:
> <1a659d360902241036s51f57694hc6a251678547849b@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Nate,
> Very well said. I support your comments 100%. I hope the person that
> you replied to is able to understand your comments.
>
> 73
> Don WB5EKU
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Nate Duehr <nate@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
> wrote:
>
>> It's important to maintain civility on these mailing lists, because
>> cowards
>> behind keyboards will say anything -- but part of that is to call
>> someone
>> out when they're WAY out of line.
>>
>> Bob's done thousands of volunteer hours of work on things for
>> Amateur Radio
>> that weren't even dreamed up before he attempted them, Pat. The
>> Amateur
>> Radio community simply wouldn't have APRS if it weren't for Bob's
>> unique
>> entrepreneurial characteristics.
>>
>> You're WAY out of line with your "military" and "tyranny" comments
>> and
>> personal attacks on Bob. That is, unless you're going to dedicate
>> the
>> time,
>> resources, and intelligence that he has to the Amateur Radio
>> community
>> WORLDWIDE.
>>
>> Are you prepared to step up and offer useful things at the rate and
>> enthusiasm to the Amateur community as Bob has? If not... "Step
>> off."
>>
>> The space station comment is almost comical -- the Astronauts have
>> strict
>> schedules set by their CIVILIAN program managers, and then choose
>> on their
>> own what to do with the remaining time in their days.
>>
>> The fact that APRS and other Amateur technology are even on board --
>> technology that can be used when the Astronauts are NOT available
>> -- is a
>> testament to Bob's ingenuity and stamina, along with many other
>> Amateurs
>> who
>> worked together to make it happen.
>>
>> Do you have ANY idea how hard it is to fly gear on a manned
>> spacecraft, to
>> get it certified, and to build procedures for its safe use?
>> (Example: The
>> Amateur station must be switched OFF during EVA activity in order to
>> alleviate risks with frequency interference. This makes the
>> Astronauts
>> BUSIER, and that makes coordination more difficult -- don't you
>> think the
>> program manager would rather just say "shut the thing down
>> permanently" or
>> have never flown the Amateur station in the first place?)
>>
>> Do you have enough interpersonal skill to work with people in those
>> roles
>> and garner the Amateur community enough resources to put something
>> in orbit
>> around the planet? Realistically, you probably don't have to
>> answer that
>> question -- since I doubt you do. If you do... "Step up."
>>
>> Your perception of Bob is wickedly twisted, indicating that you
>> have some
>> deep and over-reaching mistrust of quite normal hams who just
>> happen to
>> have
>> military-related jobs. You may want to get some counseling for
>> that. Bob
>> never did anything but good for you, as far as I can see.
>> Meanwhile to
>> soothe your strange phobia, think of Bob as a college professor
>> instead, if
>> that helps you lower your outlandish concern level.
>>
>> Attacking him in a public forum (while I'm sure he's seen it all
>> before,
>> well maybe not THIS one... and can defend himself adequately), is
>> an insult
>> to all volunteer hams who build infrastructure for other hams,
>> everywhere.
>>
>> My personal pet-peeve are the IDIOTS who attack volunteers who do
>> good work
>> for Amateur Radio. They're few and far between and I get seriously
>> pissed
>> off at people like you who attack them for no sane reason. Welcome
>> to my
>> gun-sights.
>>
>> I'd rather see you learn and get over your personal problems, but
>> if it's a
>> choice between you or Bob, the community would be better off with
>> Bob. If
>> you think my reply is harsh, it is MEANT to be. Maybe you'll think
>> before
>> you attack the next volunteer while you whine from your recliner,
>> accomplishing nothing.
>>
>> Celebrate Ability,
>>
>> Nate WY0X
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-
>> bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
>> Behalf Of Thomas McGrane
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 7:36 AM
>> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] the tyranny of the military
>>
>> Greetings from Patrick N2OEQ
>>
>> Regarding bruninga's post suggesting even more control over the
>> satellite.... Bruninga and the military has too much control over the
>> space program and amsat satellites.
>>
>> Look what happened to the space station, years of military devised
>> packet position reporting and very little "human" contact.
>>
>> I recommend you all think for yourselves and remember, this is
>> AMATEUR
>> radio, NOT PROFESSIONAL.
>>
>> Regarding activity on oscar 51, its great to hear the excitment of
>> new
>> operators but very disappointing to hear so many regulars almost
>> every
>> day. Give some new people a chance.
>>
>> Bruninga reminds me of the movie title, "the world is not enough"
>>
>> Think for yourselves!
>>
>> pat
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 6
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:54:24 -0500
> From: "Darin Cowan" <yet.another.squid@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Proper operating procedure?
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Message-ID: <49a44271.1e2d400a.2769.09dc@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> W9VNE wrote:
>>> Upon my recent retirement I decided to equip my station with
>>> a satellite setup. I have a substantial amount of money invested
>>> ( $3500 ) in antennas and transceiver. I can work just about
>>> anything that I can hear. Since August 2008 until December I
>>> made more than 800 QSOs in 200 grids and 15 countries. I met a
>>> lot of fine people who gave me good advice.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately the operation of AO 51 is a large embarrassment. I
>>> have never in 56 years of operating ever seen demonstrated such
>>> poor operating procedures. I am not writing this note to trash
>>> AMSAT. I could continue to operate, experiment and enjoy HF and
>>> VHF radio and ignore the Satellite operation. However, I have
>>> always thought when you see something that is terribly wrong you
>>> have an obligation for the ( Ham and AMSAT ) community to speak
>>> out. That is the spirit in which I write.
>
> Not to be catty, but other than writing about it, what have you done
> to
> positively influence the operating procedures of other radio amateurs?
>
> I should have put this in the other message I wrote on this topic.
>
> In the various publications, in the clubs, and apparently on this
> list,
> there is much writing and speaking devoted to how operating skills are
> declining, how it was better in the old days, yadda yadda. In fact,
> I'm
> even going to go so far as to say that I agree with a lot of it.
>
> The problem is, that aside from grousing, very little is done.
>
> The older, experienced operators use poor operating procedure all
> the time -
> not just on satellites, but on HF and VHF radio as well. Those that
> care
> tend (in my experience) to belittle rather than mentor.
>
> When teaching opportunities are presented, radio operation is
> overlooked.
> One of the local clubs here offers an excellent exam prep course for
> getting
> one's licence - but it includes almost nothing on operation, and
> certainly
> no practical work. Graduates get their tickets and are tossed to the
> breeze. This is contrary to my training in the military where we
> spent many
> hours on operation and less on technical stuff.
>
> Operating procedures also change. Just because you learned it as a
> rad-op
> in Korea back in '52 doesn't mean it's done that way now - "niner" and
> "fife" being a fine example. People who use those terms merely date
> themselves. We don't use Q-codes in voice modes because it makes
> communication less clear? I suppose that is true, but if you
> understand
> what is being said, who cares? If you don't understand - ask. That's
> called communication, and I bet Mr. Q-code will give up having to
> explain
> himself repeatedly soon enough.
>
> The spirit of amateur radio is friendly communication with an eye to
> learning. The primary operating procedure everyone needs to learn
> is "be
> polite and don't interfere with other stations". Everything else
> comes with
> practice in the fullness of time. But if you're not leading by
> example...
> not operating the way you expect other people to operate... and not
> being
> polite, it's unfair to expect any improvement any time soon.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:18:25 -0500
> From: "Greg Dober" <almetco@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: the tyranny of the military
> To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Message-ID: <001401c996b4$aad89490$6701a8c0@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Nate, Concur, very well said...
>
> Greg
> N3MVF
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx
> On
> Behalf Of Donald Jacob
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 1:37 PM
> To: Nate Duehr
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: the tyranny of the military
>
> Nate,
> Very well said. I support your comments 100%. I hope the person that
> you replied to is able to understand your comments.
>
> 73
> Don WB5EKU
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Nate Duehr <nate@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
> wrote:
>
>> It's important to maintain civility on these mailing lists, because
> cowards
>> behind keyboards will say anything -- but part of that is to call
>> someone
>> out when they're WAY out of line.
>>
>> Bob's done thousands of volunteer hours of work on things for Amateur
> Radio
>> that weren't even dreamed up before he attempted them, Pat. The
>> Amateur
>> Radio community simply wouldn't have APRS if it weren't for Bob's
>> unique
>> entrepreneurial characteristics.
>>
>> You're WAY out of line with your "military" and "tyranny" comments
>> and
>> personal attacks on Bob. That is, unless you're going to dedicate
>> the
>> time,
>> resources, and intelligence that he has to the Amateur Radio
>> community
>> WORLDWIDE.
>>
>> Are you prepared to step up and offer useful things at the rate and
>> enthusiasm to the Amateur community as Bob has? If not... "Step
>> off."
>>
>> The space station comment is almost comical -- the Astronauts have
>> strict
>> schedules set by their CIVILIAN program managers, and then choose
>> on their
>> own what to do with the remaining time in their days.
>>
>> The fact that APRS and other Amateur technology are even on board --
>> technology that can be used when the Astronauts are NOT available
>> -- is a
>> testament to Bob's ingenuity and stamina, along with many other
>> Amateurs
>> who
>> worked together to make it happen.
>>
>> Do you have ANY idea how hard it is to fly gear on a manned
>> spacecraft, to
>> get it certified, and to build procedures for its safe use?
>> (Example: The
>> Amateur station must be switched OFF during EVA activity in order to
>> alleviate risks with frequency interference. This makes the
>> Astronauts
>> BUSIER, and that makes coordination more difficult -- don't you
>> think the
>> program manager would rather just say "shut the thing down
>> permanently" or
>> have never flown the Amateur station in the first place?)
>>
>> Do you have enough interpersonal skill to work with people in those
>> roles
>> and garner the Amateur community enough resources to put something in
> orbit
>> around the planet? Realistically, you probably don't have to
>> answer that
>> question -- since I doubt you do. If you do... "Step up."
>>
>> Your perception of Bob is wickedly twisted, indicating that you
>> have some
>> deep and over-reaching mistrust of quite normal hams who just
>> happen to
>> have
>> military-related jobs. You may want to get some counseling for
>> that. Bob
>> never did anything but good for you, as far as I can see.
>> Meanwhile to
>> soothe your strange phobia, think of Bob as a college professor
>> instead,
> if
>> that helps you lower your outlandish concern level.
>>
>> Attacking him in a public forum (while I'm sure he's seen it all
>> before,
>> well maybe not THIS one... and can defend himself adequately), is an
> insult
>> to all volunteer hams who build infrastructure for other hams,
>> everywhere.
>>
>> My personal pet-peeve are the IDIOTS who attack volunteers who do
>> good
> work
>> for Amateur Radio. They're few and far between and I get seriously
>> pissed
>> off at people like you who attack them for no sane reason. Welcome
>> to my
>> gun-sights.
>>
>> I'd rather see you learn and get over your personal problems, but
>> if it's
> a
>> choice between you or Bob, the community would be better off with
>> Bob. If
>> you think my reply is harsh, it is MEANT to be. Maybe you'll think
>> before
>> you attack the next volunteer while you whine from your recliner,
>> accomplishing nothing.
>>
>> Celebrate Ability,
>>
>> Nate WY0X
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-
>> bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
>> Behalf Of Thomas McGrane
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 7:36 AM
>> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] the tyranny of the military
>>
>> Greetings from Patrick N2OEQ
>>
>> Regarding bruninga's post suggesting even more control over the
>> satellite.... Bruninga and the military has too much control over the
>> space program and amsat satellites.
>>
>> Look what happened to the space station, years of military devised
>> packet position reporting and very little "human" contact.
>>
>> I recommend you all think for yourselves and remember, this is
>> AMATEUR
>> radio, NOT PROFESSIONAL.
>>
>> Regarding activity on oscar 51, its great to hear the excitment of
>> new
>> operators but very disappointing to hear so many regulars almost
>> every
>> day. Give some new people a chance.
>>
>> Bruninga reminds me of the movie title, "the world is not enough"
>>
>> Think for yourselves!
>>
>> pat
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:21:47 -0600
> From: Sean Cavanaugh <seanc@xxxxxxxxx.xx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating
> procedure.
> To: Darin Cowan <yet.another.squid@xxxxx.xxx>
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Message-ID: <49A448CB.1080809@xxxxxxxxx.xx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Darin Cowan wrote:
>> W9VNE said:
>>>> Unfortunately the operation of AO 51 is a large embarrassment. I
>>>> have never in 56 years of operating ever seen demonstrated such
>>>> poor operating procedures.
>>
>> I'd be happy if people would just use the proper phonetic
>> alphabet. So many
>> logs have been messed up by "kilowatt" which is KW to me, as
>> opposed to the
>> correct "kilo" and the other bizarre appellations of letters. And
>> it's not
>> just on satellites that this is a problem. When I hear something
>> like
>> "Kilowatt Capacitor Eight United Airlines" (made up example, if you
>> are
>> KC8UAL, I'm not picking on you or accusing you) I can pretty much
>> guarantee
>> it won't end up correct in the logs. That makes it a non-QSO and a
>> waste of
>> time for both ends.
>>
>> Combine proper phonetic use with "listen before transmitting" and
>> 90% or
>> better of the issues we see would go away.
>
> I am often guilty of not using the correct phonetics, but I do have a
> reason. 95% of the time, if the other station has marginal reception,
> they come back as VE5, not VA5. I think it's just the other ops' brain
> filling in the blanks with what they expect to hear, so I will correct
> as "Victor America 5" and it usually seems to solve that problem. I do
> try to stick with the ITU phonetics 99% of the time though.
>
> I'd be happy with people just doing the listen before you transmit
> thing. I can't count the number of times I've had my transmissions cut
> off mid exchange.
>
> I would also add to that the following: If you can't hear the bird,
> don't transmit! I have NEVER had a situation where I can't hear the
> sat.
> Even when the satellite is coming down from the north and no one
> else is
> in the footprint, the background noise changes when it comes into
> range.
>
> Hopefully with my preamps arriving today (gotta pick them up after
> work), I will be able to use the linear birds a bit. Maybe relieve
> some
> pressure on the FM sats.
>
> 73 all, and see you on the satellites.
>
> --
> Sean - VA5LF
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:38:03 -0500 (EST)
> From: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating
> procedure.
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Message-ID: <20090224193803.6F8FB8FDE0@xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
>
> The NATO/ITU phonetics aren't perfect. The "DXer's" phonetics (mostly
> place names) are a reasonable alternative, but only the two sets
> should be used. When I'm working 'phone, when I've got it together, I
> try to repeat back using the other set. And I hate Kilowatt, too- I
> always hear that as "KW".
>
> 73, doug
>
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:21:47 -0600
> From: Sean Cavanaugh <seanc@xxxxxxxxx.xx>
>
> Darin Cowan wrote:
>> W9VNE said:
>>>> Unfortunately the operation of AO 51 is a large embarrassment. I
>>>> have never in 56 years of operating ever seen demonstrated such
>>>> poor operating procedures.
>>
>> I'd be happy if people would just use the proper phonetic
>> alphabet. So many
>> logs have been messed up by "kilowatt" which is KW to me, as
>> opposed to the
>> correct "kilo" and the other bizarre appellations of letters. And
>> it's not
>> just on satellites that this is a problem. When I hear something
>> like
>> "Kilowatt Capacitor Eight United Airlines" (made up example, if you
>> are
>> KC8UAL, I'm not picking on you or accusing you) I can pretty much
>> guarantee
>> it won't end up correct in the logs. That makes it a non-QSO and a
>> waste of
>> time for both ends.
>>
>> Combine proper phonetic use with "listen before transmitting" and
>> 90% or
>> better of the issues we see would go away.
>
> I am often guilty of not using the correct phonetics, but I do
> have a
> reason. 95% of the time, if the other station has marginal
> reception,
> they come back as VE5, not VA5. I think it's just the other ops'
> brain
> filling in the blanks with what they expect to hear, so I will
> correct
> as "Victor America 5" and it usually seems to solve that problem.
> I do
> try to stick with the ITU phonetics 99% of the time though.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:44:49 EST
> From: G0MRF@xxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency
> working
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Message-ID: <bc2.405e179b.36d5a831@xxx.xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
> Having been on a few DX-peditions, I can't imagine the sense of
> failure that
> would go with running a DX-Net on a satellite, However, I nearly
> missed the
> following great idea from Bruce.
>
> Actually we can do split on AO-51. If anyone felt a DX-depition
> was worth
> the effort and resources, we just tell the DX to use one uplink
> channel and
> the people replying to use the other. It would maximise QSO rate
> and even a
> handheld with low audio would be Q5 without any interfering signals.
>
> 73 es gud DX
>
> David G0MRF / 9H0WW / C56DX / ZC4DX / 3B9C
>
>
> In a message dated 24/02/2009 15:02:29 GMT Standard Time, kk5do@xxxxx.xxx
> writes:
>
> Very interesting Bob..... I had just sent this to a friend of mine to
> look at before sending to the bb. It is basically the same thing.
> However, taking checkins is too time consuming, this is a much
> easier plan.
>
> When dx stations are working HF and they are operating split, they
> can
> very easily move up and down the band to find a station that is in
> the
> clear. Also, no one has a problem hearing them (except for the
> occasional guy that forgets to hit split). However, when on the
> satellite, you do not have the luxury of split operations on FM.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:51:48 EST
> From: BobsImsai8800@xxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Manual
> To: robertsondack@xxxxxxxxx.xxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Message-ID: <bc4.41dc438e.36d5a9d4@xxx.xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Although it was a little hard to find, Icom has manuals for all of
> their
> equipment online:
>
>
_http://www.icom.co.jp/world/support/download/manual/disp_cate.asp?searchcode=
> ham_
>
(http://www.icom.co.jp/world/support/download/manual/disp_cate.asp?searchcode=
ham
> )
>
>
> The IC 471a is a mobile by the way.
>
> Bob
>
> K5GNA
>
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 2/24/2009 10:26:00 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> robertsondack@xxxxxxxxx.xx writes:
>
> I need the ICOM 471A Service Manual to recalibrate my equipment who
> has
> drifted 1.5 kHz ,with age.The manual could be on paper form or CD.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Robert Sondack,VE2ASL.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just
> 2 easy
> steps!
>
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http:
%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
> %3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:56:45 -0500
> From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency
> working
> To: <G0MRF@xxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Message-ID: <D6B9905C9EE8484EA35EBD46FB0AFE6F@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
>
>
>> Actually we can do split on AO-51. If anyone felt a DX-depition
>> was
>> worth
>> the effort and resources, we just tell the DX to use one uplink
>> channel
>> and
>> the people replying to use the other. It would maximise QSO rate
>> and even
>> a
>> handheld with low audio would be Q5 without any interfering signals.
>
> We considered doing this, but unless they used two receivers, how
> would
> anyone know when to shut up and when to call? Even though there is a
> capture
> effect, when 20 signals come up at once, usually no one wins. Now if
> we'd
> used the SSB receiver on the user uplink?
>
> This whole DXpedition was on a space and operator available basis.
> We looked
> at sending a 817 for the transponder sats, but the space and operators
> unfamiliar with current satellites kept us to the HT and Arrow. I
> think it's
> still a positive that so many made QSOs considering the alternative.
>
> Rest assured I've learned from this, and future efforts will benefit
> from
> those lessons. Meanwhile, I've identified the jerks among us from
> some of
> the really out of line negative comments directed at me and the
> expedition
> members ;-).
>
> 73, Drew
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 4, Issue 91
> ***************************************
Lou McFadin
W5DID
ARISS US Hardware manager
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:28:34 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Tragedy of the commons / split frequency
working
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<2e18ad3e0902241428p2b316122ha18bff9f58834bd4@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi!
> What I beleive people want to have are random QSO's that they
> initiate themselves and that are aren't controlled by anybody else.
Agreed. Like we do on HF to work a DXpedition - i.e., K5D.
The drawback, or shortcoming, to the "take a list of calls and confirm
the list" approach is that - unless the station taking the list hears a
confirmation to his/her report from each of those stations in the list -
I'm not sure that is really a contact. It's more like an exchange of
SWL reception reports. Having one station act as a net control etc.
to orchestrate the activity then brings the same questions into play
as on HF.
> If you get more than half a dozen Amateur operators active in the
> footprint of a single channel FM satellite they'll inevitably be
> congestion issues.
This is true, just like on a terrestrial repeater. Either everyone cooperates
or there is congestion that makes it useless. With cooperation, there could
be many more stations on a pass that get a chance to make a contact
with someone in a rare country or grid (I've worked as many as 26 on
one AO-51 pass, last November from DM22/DM32).
> We'll just have to live with that for those satellites that have already
been
> designed, but for future designs a linear transponder seems the obvious
> choice. A 40 kHz linear transponder would allow for multiple SSB
> QSO's over areas with a high Amateur population but would still
> enable the use of FM in the many areas of the world where there are
> few Amateurs.
This is a good idea, as demonstrated by VO-52 where hams in South
Asia are encouraged to try it in FM and the rest of us are to use SSB
or CW. But don't overlook the interest in FM satellites for the areas with
high ham populations, also. Otherwise, there goes a low-cost entry to
amateur satellites in those areas. KiwiSAT is interesting, in that it will
have an FM repeater and a linear transponder.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 17:40:15 -0500
From: "Darin Cowan" <yet.another.squid@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: K5D an embarrassment / poor operating
procedure.
To: "'Sean Cavanaugh'" <seanc@xxxxxxxxx.xx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <49a47761.1b17400a.500e.29ed@xx.xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sean Cavanaugh [mailto:seanc@xxxxxxxxx.xxx wrote:
>>Darin Cowan wrote:
>>> I'd be happy if people would just use the proper phonetic alphabet. So
many
>>> logs have been messed up by "kilowatt" which is KW to me, as opposed to
the
>>> correct "kilo" and the other bizarre appellations of letters.
...[deletia]...
>>>
>>> Combine proper phonetic use with "listen before transmitting" and 90% or
>>> better of the issues we see would go away.
>>
>>I am often guilty of not using the correct phonetics, but I do have a
>>reason. 95% of the time, if the other station has marginal reception,
>>they come back as VE5, not VA5. I think it's just the other ops' brain
>>filling in the blanks with what they expect to hear, so I will correct
>>as "Victor America 5" and it usually seems to solve that problem. I do
>>try to stick with the ITU phonetics 99% of the time though.
VA and VE is a constant bugbear for me. My hearing is less than excellent,
and
to me VEE AY and VEE EEE sound essentially the same. I have to ask for
phonetics
even on local repeaters. Some of the incorrect phonetics are more obvious
(America
for A) but I've heard United Airlines (Is it UAL or UA?), Kilowatt (that's
KW for
someone with an electrical or physics background) and other perversions of
the
phonetic alphabet that - when combined with a local speaker's accent, make
it
effectively unintelligible.
I will always be Oscar India Juliet, never Old Injun Joe.
>>I would also add to that the following: If you can't hear the bird,
>>don't transmit!
That's certainly wisdom to be followed.
73 de VE3OIJ
-Darin
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 4, Issue 92
***************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
