| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 17.04.09 01:49l 776 Lines 23154 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 25963-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 181
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 090416/2340Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:25963 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:25963-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
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: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 180 (Mark L. Hammond)
2. uiss can send msg's? (Mr Jeffrey L Ross)
3. Re: EggBeater (Bill Dzurilla)
4. Re: EggBeater (Mark Spencer)
5. Re: EggBeater (Andrew Glasbrenner)
6. Presentations (Bob Herrell)
7. Re: Presentations (David Johnson)
8. Re: EggBeater (Robert Bruninga)
9. Re: [amsat-florida] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal (Trevor .)
10. Re: EggBeater (w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxxx
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:12:07 -0400
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 180
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx josepharmbruster@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<5d8cecfe0904160812v7554f5fdh72221efbba58a216@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Joseph,
I use Predict under a DOS box in WinXPPro. It works fine--but I
mainly use it for illumination projections.
Do you have a specific question or do you need general help?
73,
Mark N8MH
> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:37:29 -0400
> From: Joseph Armbruster <josepharmbruster@xxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] ?predict
> To: "AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Message-ID: <49E6A7F9.4000404@xxxxx.xxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
> Does anyone here use the dos version of Predict?
>
> Joseph Armbruster
> KJ4JIO
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:20:47 -0400
From: "Mr Jeffrey L Ross" <radiooperator@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] uiss can send msg's?
To: "amsat" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <73F28E4442504286B6A5A0E75EEAA01B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
hi folks, I hear that the UISS software can send msg.s. someone send me one
please.
kc8gkf-5
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 08:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <209516.99040.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Steve,
I have both a commercial and a homebrew Eggbeater and am disappointed with
both, especially in light of its rather high price. Connected to my IC-7000
via an ARR mast-mounted preamp, performance is far less than with an HT and an
Arrow. Guess an omni can't cut it, at least not from my QTH.
Maybe if I could get it up higher, clear of all roofs, it would do better. I
can make contacts at relatively high sat elevations, but can do just as well
with a $10 dual band ground plane. My friend has an Eggbeater and the same
preamp at a clearer QTH, and he hears substantially better, down to 10 degrees
elevation in some directions.
Good luck and 73,
Bill NZ5N
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > It is surprising to read that you are not hearing
> anything. I have
> > repeatedly used a 2m and 70cm Eggbeater for the sats
> and have had no
> > problem hearing things. No pre-amp.
> >
> > I was using a short cable (e.g. less than 10 meters).
> The rigs I
> > used were a FT-736r (deaf) and a FT-847 (so-so).
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Dave
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 08:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Spencer <mspencer12345@xxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <796270.50874.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Several years ago?I had reasonable success with a UHF colinear mobile antenna
mag mounted onto the metal flashing of my house connected via a short piece of
low loss cable to an ARR Gasfet?pre amp.????(I used a mag mount intended
for?800 mhz applications that?had low loss cable with an N connector.)? ?At
times though you won't be able to hear the satellites very well but you should
be able to hear enough to make some contacts.??
I ended up connecting a 2 m to 70 cm duplexer between the antenna and the
preamp and connected the 2 m port of the duplexer to a dummy load to cure a
desense issue on some frequencies.???? I was able to make a number of contacts
on AO51, SO50, FO29?and AO27.
I've also tried listening to FO29 using a dual band ground plane anteena fed
via approx 70 feet of 9913 and with my FT736 and the pre amp in my mirage
power amplifer I can reliably hear the beacon from horizon to horizon but the
signals are quite weak.?? Without?the preamp the signals are?hard to copy.?The
ARR pre amp works a bit better but is not T/R switched.?? I suspect directly
connecting a good preamp to the ground plane antenna would make a significant
improvement.
Regards
Mark VE7AFZ
----- Original Message ----
From: Bruce Robertson <ve9qrp@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Steve Bluemel <stevebluemel@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 6:31:35 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Rick - WA4NVM <wa4nvm@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> Good luck with your testing. ?The ISS and A0-51 haven't been on for you
> to try with your setup. ?Try S0-50 and A0-27 at this time.
>
> Look for you on the birds,
> Rick- WA4NVM
Thanks for sharing your experiments with us, Steve.
In my experience, with a omni antenna and no preamp, these two 70cm
satellites are very difficult to hear if there is any significant
amount of cable between the antenna and the radio. On the other hand I
find that a low-noise preamp *at the antenna* with a well-built omni
antenna should hear at least parts of their passes. If you're unsure
that your egg-beater is working properly, consider using a simple 1/4
wave vertical with legs of about 6" at 70cm. Put this as close to the
preamp as possible: I constructed mine out of the connector that mates
with the preamp's connector!
Again in my experience, an easier introductory experiment is to copy
the birds with CW telemetry, especially LO-19 (sometimes LU-19). If
your radio has CW reception in 70cm, you might want to give this a try
without the preamp. SatPC32 has the frequency for this bird stored in
it from the get-go. You needn't have? Doppler tuning in place; just
look at the corrected frequency and tune around that. Don't make your
CW filter too tight: 500 Hz is better than 200 if you're hunting for a
moving signal.
Indeed, the FM signals of SO-50 and AO-27 can also be copied in CW
mode, and will be more easily heard with a typical radio than the same
signal in FM mode. Of course, you can't understand the modulated
information, but it is a good baseline to ensure that other aspects of
your station are working well, and allows you to focus on the issue of
antenna gain. Similarly, the beacon on VO-52, though usually an
unmodulated CW signal, provides a pretty nice baseline for 2m
reception.
73, Bruce
VE9QRP
>> Well, Im sorry to say that my Egg Beater experiment has yet to yield any
>> good results. I have attempted passes on IIS, AO-51, and SO-50 and not
>> heard
>> a single contact. Im a trying some reconfiguring and will keep at it. I
>> will
>> post pictures of my progress soon and would appreciate any observations
>> you
>> might have.
>>
>> I'll tell you, the Pre-amp thread could not have been more timely. I just
>> ordered one from ARR. If im lucky....and im always lucky, this will make
>> some difference.
>>
>> In the mean time, I will listen for you all with the Elk and HT!
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> Steve KI6OQU
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your
favourite sites. Download it now
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:02:20 -0400
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
To: <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <2CC9CCA5207B49FFA013804F7E26CFA4@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Consider trying AA2TX's excellent parasitic lindenblad design. Unlike the
overpriced eggbeater, it puts the gain on the horizon where it is needed,
and is circular across the pattern. The parts mostly are from your local
hardware store, and in Tony's typical fashion, it is simple to assemble and
works well.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dzurilla" <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:56 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
>
> Steve,
>
> I have both a commercial and a homebrew Eggbeater and am disappointed with
> both, especially in light of its rather high price. Connected to my
> IC-7000 via an ARR mast-mounted preamp, performance is far less than with
> an HT and an Arrow. Guess an omni can't cut it, at least not from my QTH.
>
> Maybe if I could get it up higher, clear of all roofs, it would do better.
> I can make contacts at relatively high sat elevations, but can do just as
> well with a $10 dual band ground plane. My friend has an Eggbeater and
> the same preamp at a clearer QTH, and he hears substantially better, down
> to 10 degrees elevation in some directions.
>
> Good luck and 73,
> Bill NZ5N
>
>> > Hi Steve,
>> >
>> > It is surprising to read that you are not hearing
>> anything. I have
>> > repeatedly used a 2m and 70cm Eggbeater for the sats
>> and have had no
>> > problem hearing things. No pre-amp.
>> >
>> > I was using a short cable (e.g. less than 10 meters).
>> The rigs I
>> > used were a FT-736r (deaf) and a FT-847 (so-so).
>> >
>> > 73,
>> >
>> > Dave
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 09:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Herrell <nk7i@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Presentations
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <423505.20151.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi all.
I have been asked to do a presentation on satellite operation. Does anyone
have any kind of presentation they would be willing to share?
Appreciate your help.
73,
Bob Herrell, AJ5C EM36
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:54:49 +0100
From: David Johnson <dave@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Presentations
To: Bob Herrell <nk7i@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <49E762D9.2060208@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi,
You can download mine from:
http://www.slideshare.net/g4dpz/amateur-satelllite-beginners-presentation
73
Dave
Bob Herrell wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I have been asked to do a presentation on satellite operation. Does anyone
have any kind of presentation they would be willing to share?
>
> Appreciate your help.
>
> 73,
> Bob Herrell, AJ5C EM36
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 13:36:45 -0400
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
To: <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <38497630FE56425FBBBA4D6C1FC0FFFB@xxxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> I have both a commercial and a homebrew Eggbeater
> and am disappointed with both,
Yes, because the best omni in the world is no better (generally)
than a dipole made out of a piece of wire. By definition, these
antennas are OMNI's so they can hear in all directions. This
means they have zero gain. That is the basic law of physics.
> ... performance is far less than with an HT and
> an Arrow.
This is because the arrow is a "gain" antenna. Gain means that
the structure sacrifices gain in all directions to concentrate
it in only one direction. Which then you have to point. It is
impossible to have both gain and omni at the same time.
But what about Gain Vertical OMNI antennas? Well, they have
GAIN in all directions but only on the horizon. To get that
gain on the horizon, they MUST sacrifice gain somewhere else.
They sacrifice all gain that is UP. But that is where
satellites are, so it makes little sense to try to use one of
these, because you still wont hear any satelites, because the
gain you get "on the horizon" (maybe 3 to 6 dB or so) is just
barely enough, but then as the satellite gets higher, it gets
into the null of the antenna.
> Guess an omni can't cut it, at least not from my QTH.
Yes, by definition. An omni cannot hear most of the amateur
satellites on the horizon, because there just isnt enough signal
(except for ISS). You need some gain to hear them on the
horizon. BUT when the satellite gets above 20 to 30 degrees, it
can be TEN times stronger and then ANY omni antenna will work
quite well (and you don't have to point it).
BUT... plot the amount of time a satellite is in view above 25
degrees and it is less than 1/4th of the time.
So there is no free lunch. Either put up an omni and only be
able to hear the satellites for on the order of 25% or less of
their available time in view (but have no moving parts). Or use
a beam to get the gain on the horizon where you need it most,
and plan on keeping it pointed at the satellite.
> Maybe if I could get it up higher, clear of all
> roofs, it would do better.
Not really. Because getting "high" only gets you visiblity to
the horizon where, by definition, you already do not have enough
gain to hear any of the low powered satellites.
> I can make contacts at relatively high sat
> elevations, but can do just as well with a
> $10 dual band ground plane.
Yes! That is exactly what we are talking about here. You
cannot have both. If you want an omni, then a simple ground
plane antenna made out of a few pieces of wire will do just
about as good most of the time as the most expensive "omni"...
Some will argue that you need circular polarization, to
eliminate some fading, but again you can also say that many
times the polarization is opposite and so even the right hand
circular antnena hears fades too when the circularity gets
reversed...
Go with a simple 1/4 wave ground plane antenna with a preamp,
and hear well, less than 1/3rd of the time. Or us a beam...
> My friend has an Eggbeater and the same preamp
> at a clearer QTH, and he hears substantially better,
> down to 10 degrees elevation in some directions.
Yes, some satellites are stronger than others. But most are not
designed with the 10dB link margin they need to hit omni's
horizon to horizon. Most cannot afford to waste that much power
for the benefit of people with omni's.
Plenty of people corrrectly swear by their omni that it can hear
very well. And tthis is true, but not at low elevations -and-
with the low power satellites. So always make sure you are
comparing apples and apples.
I was shocked during a class today when I went out to listen to
VO-52 and the signals sounded like 20 over S9... But then 30
seconds later, they were down where I expected. Looking at the
track, it was almost directly overhead (and 10 dB) stronger than
when it is a few minutes later.
Good luck
Bob, WB4APR
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 18:31:04 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Trevor ." <m5aka@xxxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [amsat-florida] Re: FCC 70cm Proposal
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx amsat-florida@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <163973.63924.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
--- On Thu, 16/4/09, Mike - N4HHA <n4hha@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> "The Notice proposes to limit MMN operations to use only by
> persons for
> diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, and only to the extent
> provided under
> the direction of authorized health care professionals."
For now, it's what'll happen in 5 or 10 years time that we need to watch out
for.
73 Trevor M5AKA
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 18:36:25 +0000 (UTC)
From: w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
To: bruninga@xxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx billdz geo <billdz.geo@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<644510881.2436141239906985955.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx.
xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
adding to what Bob said
Somewhere I read where the percentages of where the satellites are in
elevation. The majority of low elevation is fairly high. Whereas as a
elevation of 70 plus degrees is quite low. Then a higher elevation is closer
so the path loss is less. Almost everyone that I know who started out with a
egg beater eventually gets a beam of some sort. So why not start there? A
simple short beam aimed at about 30 degrees will cover a huge amount of sky
73 Bob W7LRD
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Bruninga
To: billdz geo , amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Sent: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:36:45 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: EggBeater
> I have both a commercial and a homebrew Eggbeater
> and am disappointed with both,
Yes, because the best omni in the world is no better (generally)
than a dipole made out of a piece of wire. By definition, these
antennas are OMNI's so they can hear in all directions. This
means they have zero gain. That is the basic law of physics.
> ... performance is far less than with an HT and
> an Arrow.
This is because the arrow is a "gain" antenna. Gain means that
the structure sacrifices gain in all directions to concentrate
it in only one direction. Which then you have to point. It is
impossible to have both gain and omni at the same time.
But what about Gain Vertical OMNI antennas? Well, they have
GAIN in all directions but only on the horizon. To get that
gain on the horizon, they MUST sacrifice gain somewhere else.
They sacrifice all gain that is UP. But that is where
satellites are, so it makes little sense to try to use one of
these, because you still wont hear any satelites, because the
gain you get "on the horizon" (maybe 3 to 6 dB or so) is just
barely enough, but then as the satellite gets higher, it gets
into the null of the antenna.
> Guess an omni can't cut it, at least not from my QTH.
Yes, by definition. An omni cannot hear most of the amateur
satellites on the horizon, because there just isnt enough signal
(except for ISS). You need some gain to hear them on the
horizon. BUT when the satellite gets above 20 to 30 degrees, it
can be TEN times stronger and then ANY omni antenna will work
quite well (and you don't have to point it).
BUT... plot the amount of time a satellite is in view above 25
degrees and it is less than 1/4th of the time.
So there is no free lunch. Either put up an omni and only be
able to hear the satellites for on the order of 25% or less of
their available time in view (but have no moving parts). Or use
a beam to get the gain on the horizon where you need it most,
and plan on keeping it pointed at the satellite.
> Maybe if I could get it up higher, clear of all
> roofs, it would do better.
Not really. Because getting "high" only gets you visiblity to
the horizon where, by definition, you already do not have enough
gain to hear any of the low powered satellites.
> I can make contacts at relatively high sat
> elevations, but can do just as well with a
> $10 dual band ground plane.
Yes! That is exactly what we are talking about here. You
cannot have both. If you want an omni, then a simple ground
plane antenna made out of a few pieces of wire will do just
about as good most of the time as the most expensive "omni"...
Some will argue that you need circular polarization, to
eliminate some fading, but again you can also say that many
times the polarization is opposite and so even the right hand
circular antnena hears fades too when the circularity gets
reversed...
Go with a simple 1/4 wave ground plane antenna with a preamp,
and hear well, less than 1/3rd of the time. Or us a beam...
> My friend has an Eggbeater and the same preamp
> at a clearer QTH, and he hears substantially better,
> down to 10 degrees elevation in some directions.
Yes, some satellites are stronger than others. But most are not
designed with the 10dB link margin they need to hit omni's
horizon to horizon. Most cannot afford to waste that much power
for the benefit of people with omni's.
Plenty of people corrrectly swear by their omni that it can hear
very well. And tthis is true, but not at low elevations -and-
with the low power satellites. So always make sure you are
comparing apples and apples.
I was shocked during a class today when I went out to listen to
VO-52 and the signals sounded like 20 over S9... But then 30
seconds later, they were down where I expected. Looking at the
track, it was almost directly overhead (and 10 dB) stronger than
when it is a few minutes later.
Good luck
Bob, WB4APR
_______________________________________________
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 member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 181
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
