| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 12.06.09 15:04l 868 Lines 28585 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 42027-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 275
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<F5GOV<CX2SA
Sent: 090612/1302Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:42027 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:42027-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: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson) (Clint Bradford)
2. Re: Request cross test of satellite prediction. Thanks
(Justin Pinnix)
3. Re: New Satellites (Justin Pinnix)
4. Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson) (Ben Jackson)
5. Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment (Clint Bradford)
6. Partial List of Citations (Clint Bradford)
7. Re: Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
(Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
8. Re: Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment (Eric Fort)
9. Re: Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment (Nigel G8IFF/W8IFF)
10. Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson) (Howard Kowall)
11. confused satpc32 (w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxxx
12. AO-51 update (Andrew Glasbrenner)
13. OT? Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment (Roger Kolakowski)
14. Delaware on the A0-51 (Rick - WA4NVM)
15. Re: OT? Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
(Clint Bradford)
16. Satellite Log Software (Larry Teran)
17. Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson) (Edward Cole)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:08:38 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson)
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <D54B9C04-B37A-4EFF-B4DA-86D57FFF2256@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
> ... Also check out the Motorola JT1000 ...
Sure ... Let's discuss a fifteen-year-old HT that has long been
discontinued by Motorola ....
Clint Bradford
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:51:29 -0400
From: Justin Pinnix <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Request cross test of satellite prediction.
Thanks
To: Rhyolite@xxxxxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<e27ab1960906111251y6d7cc5a0x619db823e0ff84ed@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Joe,
I used the AMSAT web site to check your numbers (
http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/tools/predict/). Enter the coordinates you
gave and choose "next 30 passes" or so to look ahead into the future.
The first passes of the day seem to be within +- 1 minute of your
predictions for 50, 51, 27, and 16. ISS is about 4 minutes off, so you
might want to update your keps for that one.
I didn't go beyond the first passes of June 15. As the textbooks say, that
is an exercise left to the reader.
73 de AJ4MJ
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:49 PM, RFI-EMI-GUY <Rhyolite@xxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Could some kind sole with a trusted program please run some or all of
> the satellites below for the date June 15, 2009
> for the coordinates for Virgin Gorda BVI (listed below) and cross check
> my sample results below?
>
> I am using keps 14 days old.
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Location:
>
> Virgin Gorda British Virgin Islands
>
> Lattitude 18.433, Longitude - 64.416, 12 m AMSL
>
> Radio visibility - Multiple satellite schedule for : Ao-16
>
> Ao-16, Ao-27, Ao-51, Iss, So-50
>
> +------------------ AOS ------------------+MAX EL.+ ----- LOS ------ +
> UTC Date Time | Satellite Azm | Elev. | Time Azm |
> Duration
> 06/15/09 00:58:00 | So-50 313.1? | 21.1? | 01:10:00 183.3?
> | 00:12
> 06/15/09 05:10:00 | Ao-27 67.8? | 3.5? | 05:17:00 125.7?
> | 00:07
> 06/15/09 06:37:00 | Ao-16 48.3? | 12.5? | 06:48:00 150.6?
> | 00:11
> 06/15/09 06:46:00 | Ao-27 12.5? | 86.3? | 07:01:00 192.1?
> | 00:15
> 06/15/09 07:56:00 | Iss 181.1? | 13.0? | 08:04:00 64.5?
> | 00:08
> 06/15/09 08:15:00 | Ao-16 359.7? | 42.1? | 08:29:00 207.0?
> | 00:14
> 06/15/09 08:28:00 | Ao-27 325.0? | 5.3? | 08:37:00 250.9?
> | 00:09
> 06/15/09 09:29:00 | Ao-51 46.7? | 13.6? | 09:40:00 155.2?
> | 00:11
> 06/15/09 09:31:00 | Iss 250.1? | 17.4? | 09:40:00 22.1?
> | 00:09
> 06/15/09 11:06:00 | Ao-51 357.4? | 33.0? | 11:20:00 210.1?
> | 00:14
> 06/15/09 11:43:00 | So-50 146.4? | 6.1? | 11:53:00 61.9?
> | 00:10
> 06/15/09 13:21:00 | So-50 207.6? | 71.1? | 13:36:00 22.2?
> | 00:15
> 06/15/09 15:06:00 | So-50 279.1? | 4.1? | 15:13:00 339.5?
> | 00:07
>
> --
> Joe Leikhim K4SAT
> "The RFI-EMI-GUY"?
>
> "Use only Genuine Interocitor Parts" Tom Servo ;-P
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:00:22 -0400
From: Justin Pinnix <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: New Satellites
To: Vincenzo Mone <vimone@xxxxx.xx>
Cc: Amsat - BBs <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<e27ab1960906111300h6966a18fje8be4aba0668d961@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Here is most of the info you are looking for:
http://amsat.org/pipermail/amsat-bb/2009-February/017391.html
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Vincenzo Mone <vimone@xxxxx.xx> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> is it possible to know the Downlink and if any uplink frequencies and modes
> for these new birds:
>
> TACSAT-3
> PHARMSAT
> HAWKSAT1
> CP6
> AEROCUB3
>
> And also what to hear, if Packet at 1200 or 9600 baud ecc Or voice or any
> other mode?
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
> 73 de Enzo IK8OZV
> EasyLog 5 BetaTester
> EasyLog PDA BetaTester
> WinBollet BetaTester
> D.C.I. CheckPoint Regione Campania
> Skype: ik8ozv8520
>
>
>
>
> ***************************************
> ***** GSM +39 338 9749786 *****
> ***** SMS +39 338 9749786 *****
> ***** FAX +39 328 7244294 *****
> *** 2nd e-mail: vimone@xxx.xx ***
> ***************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:50:09 -0400
From: Ben Jackson <bbj@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson)
To: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A315FF1.7020305@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Clint Bradford wrote:
> > ... Also check out the Motorola JT1000 ...
>
>
> Sure ... Let's discuss a fifteen-year-old HT that has long been
> discontinued by Motorola ....
So, that proves that front-panel programmable commercial radios have
been approved by the FCC for at least 15 years.
- --
Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA
bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQEVAwUBSjFf8AQiWVsfSvVvAQJGJAf/XIQyMPaDf8F/X8Og6OwH+1nJUrcaXXp8
U9Ptlukn7aDhgpfwmnjFjxOvXS0CYofSiWXTnPl9ELfK3MVnEeT3d85VAe40+wvu
ZG8qIjya2CxuUhC7ZyyWfbmgQcvNH4fDzoHsBrHPd2et1KAz605vgdLOcekxJBMg
C5Sa2ltZZNyvRtYb7KOviVm1sDW9c5ef/esP2fVg5SWVpGophTfP3L0q2mshHMoO
OWndhPTmlLXA0NTyenpSKF7Ap0VQ5CLGItZUHREf6xpv2McOZ66W3B/g71wQg+lX
MlbHS0f5nxCJArroLagxY/gaYMnVxF/x5otVWQna6Z7PZGhAiOSlYQ==
=CTHW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:21:12 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <74C8F30E-4CAD-488A-BED3-AF2E4BDE9204@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Wow .. sure have faced a bunch of hostility from "friends" here (grin).
No one has cited any specific US/FCC Code on any aspect of the matter
- except for me, of course.
I have a conference call set up for Tuesday with the FCC's OET and
another department. We all can agree that "pure amateur radios" are
exempt from Part 97 certification procedures. But I will be
documenting - with facts and direct legal citations - whether or not
U.S. hams can use non-certified commercial gear (HTs that cover
138-170 and/or 400-470) on the amateur bands in the U.S.
I will not be reporting my findings here. I'll post it on my amateur
site's blog. And have been approached by two publications (well, two
print mags and one online mag) to write an article on this, which is
in the works.
Clint Bradford, K6LCS
http://www.clintbradford.com
909-241-7666
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:30:04 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Partial List of Citations
To: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <F976FA7D-FDC2-456C-BE4B-AC5BB6C9E9EA@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
For anyone seriously interested in all of this, here's a partial list
of applicable rules to study ...
47 CFR 2.801: Radio frequency (RF) device defined
2.803: Radio frequency (RF) device defined and Marketing of radio
frequency devices prior to equipment authorization. - What can be
marketed
Importation of Devices Capable of Causing Harmful Interference
(Subpart K Sections 2.1201 through 2.1207)
47 CFR 2.1201: Purpose Importation of Devices Capable Of Causing
Harmful Interference
47 CFR 2.1202: Exclusions
47 CFR 2.1203: General requirements for entry into the USA
47 CFR 2.1204: Import Conditions
47 CFR 2.1205: Filling of required declaration
47 CFR 2.1207: Examination of imported equipment
Part 15 Sections
47 CFR 15.3: Definitions
47 CFR 15.101: Unintentional Radiators
47 CFR 15.103: Exempted devices ? devices that are exempt from Part 15
specific technical standards
Clint
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:55:30 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<2e18ad3e0906111355m145c5964v7c63a1ebf5bd0a10@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Clint.
> Wow .. sure have faced a bunch of hostility from "friends" here (grin).
Friends can disagree on different topics. As for hostility, I
am only trying to get you to answer a question that you have
been avoiding.
> No one has cited any specific US/FCC Code on any aspect of the matter
> - except for me, of course.
I guess you're overlooking my repeated citations from Part 97 -
the two specifically related to HF/6m amplifiers requiring
certification before marketing/sale in the US, and all of the
technical requirements in Subpart D. Remember that my
posts - and those of several others - came after your blanket
statement regarding the use of the non-certified commercial
radios by hams being illegal, without any offer of rules or
laws to back that up.
> I have a conference call set up for Tuesday with the FCC's OET and
> another department. We all can agree that "pure amateur radios" are
> exempt from Part 97 certification procedures. But I will be
> documenting - with facts and direct legal citations - whether or not
> U.S. hams can use non-certified commercial gear (HTs that cover
> 138-170 and/or 400-470) on the amateur bands in the U.S.
>
> I will not be reporting my findings here. I'll post it on my amateur
> site's blog. And ?have been approached by two publications (well, two
> print mags and one online mag) to write an article on this, which is
> in the works.
Since you made the blanket statement that the use of the non-
certified gear by hams is illegal, please let us know at least when
you post that on your blog.
I saw your other post about some rules. Again, most of your citations
avoid the matter of using the radios - they deal with the import and
marketing of them. One that seems to cut to the heart of your
argument related to the import of these radios is found in 2.1204(a)(7):
(a) Radio frequency devices may be imported only if one or more of
these conditions are met:
... (skipping 1 through 6 - see them all at the link below)
(7) Three or fewer radio receivers, computers, or other unintentional
radiators as defined in Part 15 of this chapter, are being imported
for the individual's personal use and are not intended for sale.
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/octqtr/47cfr2.1204.htm
This appears to allow us to order up to 3 of these radios from
overseas, as long as we are not going to sell them. This seems
to be the way hams (and others) are getting these non-certified
radios - and the way that California guy was busted by the FCC
for selling those radios through his eBay page. I know that some
have used this rule - loophole? - to get wide-band VHF/UHF
receivers from non-US shops that do not have the FCC-mandated
gaps in reception at 800 MHz for many years. One Toronto radio
shop used to have a section on their web page specifically
related to selling those non-FCC-certified receivers to those
living in the US.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:46:47 -0700
From: Eric Fort <eric.fort@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
To: amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<2ad2af430906111446k3a5c73edy3f92824d86b4feae@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
actually the whole of
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/octqtr/47cfr2.1204.htm seems like an
excellent citation to consider and I would hope it is addressed in clint's
findings. 47cfr2.1204(a)(3)(i) also seems interesting as it specificly
addresses, "operation within one of the Commission's authorized radio
services for which an operating license is required to be issued by the
Commission".
47cfr2.1204(a)(7) would also seem to allow , "Three or fewer... being
imported for the individual's personal use and are not intended for sale."
This however leaves out what may be an importaint clause, "radio receivers,
computers, or other unintentional radiators as defined in part 15 of this
chapter". I see nothing in this section referring to transmitters and
intentional radiators and that could be a problem as most of us are
communicators not just listeners on the ham bands. Again clarification of
the rules here would be a good thing and I look forward to Clint's comments
both commercially published and blogged when they are available.
Eric
AF6EP
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK) <
amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> Hi Clint.
>
> > Wow .. sure have faced a bunch of hostility from "friends" here (grin).
>
> Friends can disagree on different topics. As for hostility, I
> am only trying to get you to answer a question that you have
> been avoiding.
>
> > No one has cited any specific US/FCC Code on any aspect of the matter
> > - except for me, of course.
>
> I guess you're overlooking my repeated citations from Part 97 -
> the two specifically related to HF/6m amplifiers requiring
> certification before marketing/sale in the US, and all of the
> technical requirements in Subpart D. Remember that my
> posts - and those of several others - came after your blanket
> statement regarding the use of the non-certified commercial
> radios by hams being illegal, without any offer of rules or
> laws to back that up.
>
> > I have a conference call set up for Tuesday with the FCC's OET and
> > another department. We all can agree that "pure amateur radios" are
> > exempt from Part 97 certification procedures. But I will be
> > documenting - with facts and direct legal citations - whether or not
> > U.S. hams can use non-certified commercial gear (HTs that cover
> > 138-170 and/or 400-470) on the amateur bands in the U.S.
> >
> > I will not be reporting my findings here. I'll post it on my amateur
> > site's blog. And have been approached by two publications (well, two
> > print mags and one online mag) to write an article on this, which is
> > in the works.
>
> Since you made the blanket statement that the use of the non-
> certified gear by hams is illegal, please let us know at least when
> you post that on your blog.
>
> I saw your other post about some rules. Again, most of your citations
> avoid the matter of using the radios - they deal with the import and
> marketing of them. One that seems to cut to the heart of your
> argument related to the import of these radios is found in 2.1204(a)(7):
>
> (a) Radio frequency devices may be imported only if one or more of
> these conditions are met:
>
> ... (skipping 1 through 6 - see them all at the link below)
>
> (7) Three or fewer radio receivers, computers, or other unintentional
> radiators as defined in Part 15 of this chapter, are being imported
> for the individual's personal use and are not intended for sale.
>
> http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/octqtr/47cfr2.1204.htm
>
> This appears to allow us to order up to 3 of these radios from
> overseas, as long as we are not going to sell them. This seems
> to be the way hams (and others) are getting these non-certified
> radios - and the way that California guy was busted by the FCC
> for selling those radios through his eBay page. I know that some
> have used this rule - loophole? - to get wide-band VHF/UHF
> receivers from non-US shops that do not have the FCC-mandated
> gaps in reception at 800 MHz for many years. One Toronto radio
> shop used to have a section on their web page specifically
> related to selling those non-FCC-certified receivers to those
> living in the US.
>
> 73!
>
>
>
> Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
> http://www.wd9ewk.net/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 9
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:14:51 +0000
From: Nigel G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
To: amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A3181DB.20602@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
It's also the way, until thy were recently approved, that numerous
FT-817 users were getting the small THP HF linear amplifiers.
Ordering them direct from THP.
Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK) wrote:
> This appears to allow us to order up to 3 of these radios from
> overseas, as long as we are not going to sell them. This seems
> to be the way hams (and others) are getting these non-certified
> radios -
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:35:51 -0500
From: "Howard Kowall" <hkowall@xxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson)
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000a01c9eaed$5ba0bfa0$6701a8c0@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hello to all
I am the one who originally posted this subject on this BBS
I just posted it to give a little head scratching,and by the look of it I
have done more then that.
I apologize to anyone who is upset with this,I meant no harm.
I really enjoy using this BBS and I have learned allot from it and I really
hope I did not abuse the board
Sorry if I caused any harm or subject way off topic of this board.
Thanks To All
Howard
VE4ISP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Jackson" <bbj@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Clint Bradford" <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 2:50 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Clint Bradford wrote:
>> > ... Also check out the Motorola JT1000 ...
>>
>>
>> Sure ... Let's discuss a fifteen-year-old HT that has long been
>> discontinued by Motorola ....
>
> So, that proves that front-panel programmable commercial radios have
> been approved by the FCC for at least 15 years.
>
>
> - --
> Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA
> bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQEVAwUBSjFf8AQiWVsfSvVvAQJGJAf/XIQyMPaDf8F/X8Og6OwH+1nJUrcaXXp8
> U9Ptlukn7aDhgpfwmnjFjxOvXS0CYofSiWXTnPl9ELfK3MVnEeT3d85VAe40+wvu
> ZG8qIjya2CxuUhC7ZyyWfbmgQcvNH4fDzoHsBrHPd2et1KAz605vgdLOcekxJBMg
> C5Sa2ltZZNyvRtYb7KOviVm1sDW9c5ef/esP2fVg5SWVpGophTfP3L0q2mshHMoO
> OWndhPTmlLXA0NTyenpSKF7Ap0VQ5CLGItZUHREf6xpv2McOZ66W3B/g71wQg+lX
> MlbHS0f5nxCJArroLagxY/gaYMnVxF/x5otVWQna6Z7PZGhAiOSlYQ==
> =CTHW
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 11
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:42:58 +0000 (UTC)
From: w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] confused satpc32
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<2051572768.3347721244763778420.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx
.xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
How do I get AO7 into the "standard" column?? It is not in the available
column.? However it is in the available column when I am not looking at the
standard column.? Sounds confusing, still learning Satpc32.? The LVB tracker
is working.
73 Bob W7LRD
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:57:58 -0400
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-51 update
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <5FB50059F815485BA68BF559A205816C@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
This evening we upped the power on the 435.300 downlink to about 1 watt, and
temporarily suspended the 435.150 telemetry downlink. This is about a 5db
increase on 435.300, so it should be very noticeable.
73, Drew KO4MA
AMSAT-NA VP Operations
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:56:11 -0400
From: "Roger Kolakowski" <rogerkola@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] OT? Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
To: "Clint Bradford" <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <008201c9eb00$f7d616a0$0300a8c0@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
"I have a conference call set up for Tuesday with the FCC's OET and another
department..."
May I suggest that unless this radio runs full duplex and is proven to have
significant sensitivity, there is probably a more appropriate forum than the
AMSAT-BB...
One person's time/space consuming effort to ban foreign radio imports
belongs on one of the Ham blogs, not here.
Roger
WA1KAT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clint Bradford" <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 4:21 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
> I have a conference call set up for Tuesday with the FCC's OET and
> another department. We all can agree that "pure amateur radios" are
> exempt from Part 97 certification procedures. But I will be
> documenting - with facts and direct legal citations - whether or not
> U.S. hams can use non-certified commercial gear (HTs that cover
> 138-170 and/or 400-470) on the amateur bands in the U.S.
>
> I will not be reporting my findings here. I'll post it on my amateur
> site's blog. And have been approached by two publications (well, two
> print mags and one online mag) to write an article on this, which is
> in the works.
>
>
>
> Clint Bradford, K6LCS
> http://www.clintbradford.com
> 909-241-7666
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:29:29 -0500
From: "Rick - WA4NVM" <wa4nvm@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Delaware on the A0-51
To: "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <D40627F130A749AFB8424D63242F327B@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi all AMSAT'er,
Rob, KD4ZGW asked me to post to the BB he
would be on A0-51 Friday morning on the 1120utc
pass. He will operate from FM29 in Delaware.
Also, if you miss him on that pass, don't forget
Jim, ND9M will be operating from Delaware this
Sunday. Get'em while there hot!
Good luck all,
Rick - WA4NVM
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:41:04 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT? Illegal - for U.S. - Commercial Equipment
To: "Roger Kolakowski" <rogerkola@xxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <8D94FF38-DFD9-4772-8FF7-6B2600D07571@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
May I respectfully suggest, Roger, that you read the entire message -
where I already stated,
> >> ... I will not be reporting my findings here ...
Clint Bradford, K6LCS
909-241-7666
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:23:19 -0700
From: Larry Teran <satvader@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Satellite Log Software
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BAY109-W171749520DDD9FA46D62CFCD430@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
I looking for any satellite log software any recomendations?
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_BR_life_in_synch_062009
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:25:09 -0800
From: Edward Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Way-OT: Re: Full Duplex HT's (Ben Jackson)
To: Ben Jackson <bbj@xxxxxxxx.xxx>, Clint Bradford
<clintbrad4d@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <200906120636.n5C6a3mx082357@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 11:50 AM 6/11/2009, Ben Jackson wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Clint Bradford wrote:
> > > ... Also check out the Motorola JT1000 ...
> >
> >
> > Sure ... Let's discuss a fifteen-year-old HT that has long been
> > discontinued by Motorola ....
>
>So, that proves that front-panel programmable commercial radios have
>been approved by the FCC for at least 15 years.
>
>
>- --
>Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA
>bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/
A point missed about programable commercial radio equipment is that
this was allowed as an "experiment" by the FCC and approval for their
manufacture was recinded after a short trial use
period. Non-technically trained operators could and did program
their radios to operate on top of licensed services such as public
safety with severe results.
Lets define programable while were at this. It does not mean a radio
that can be changed in frequency to predetermined
frequencies. Marine (part-80) radios are pre-programmed with a
standard set of channels established for the marine
community. Aviation radios can dial in any frequency in 5-KHz steps
within the aviation band. But both of these services have been set
up by the "authorities" governing them to use certain frequencies
within a reserved sub-band.
A programable radio can be set to any frequency that the radio can
operate. Commercial Hi-band VHF: 150-174 MHz.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 275
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
