| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 04.07.09 00:28l 1142 Lines 37608 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 48076-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 312
Path: IZ3LSV<IQ3GO<SR1BSZ<F4BWT<F4DUR<CX2SA
Sent: 090703/2226Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:48076 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:48076-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: [SPAM] Re: Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO (Joe)
2. Re: How you do DOPPLER correction in Linear Transponders?
(n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx
3. Re: Software Commodore 64 (Rich Dailey (iPhone 3GS OS 3.0.3))
4. Lunar link budget (Howie DeFelice)
5. Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO, Thanks for the Data (MM)
6. FW: Re: G-5500 and LVB tracker question. (Pierre van Deventer)
7. Re: The Moon is our Future (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
8. Re: Lunar link budget (i8cvs)
9. KEP 09183 PROBLEM (Doug Kuitula)
10. Re: The Moon is our Future (i8cvs)
11. Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM (N0JY)
12. KEP 09183 PROBLEM (Perry Yantis)
13. Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM (Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF)
14. Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM (Alan VE4YZ)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:10:17 -0500
From: Joe <nss@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [SPAM] Re: Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO
To: James French <w8iss@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4A4DE719.6020000@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
James French wrote:
>We have been discussing building and packaging a system that is
>SEPARATE from the rest of the landing craft that would take up weight
>and not supply ANY benefit to any mission support.
>
>What if we change that to from just asking for a FREE ride to helping
>provide mission specific support ALONG with supplying the band width
>for our needs? If we could build a package that would support the
>PRIMARY mission and then could be switched over for our needs during or
>after the mission, don't you think that we MAY get a better
>consideration for a FREE ride for these ideas?
>
>
I like that,
>Domenico, I8CVS, brings up a good point about IF bandwidth also.
>1) How many QSOs do we want to be able to have on this?
> FM would be a HUGE waste of resources (even though a modulated CW
> beacon may be an idea to entice some of the FM users).
> a) 2 SBB/6 CW?
> b) 5 SSB/15 CW?
> c) 10 SSB/30 CW?
>
>
How about PSK? I've seen like 20 of them in a single ssb window, and
pretty deep into the noise still too. something to think about?
>2) How much electrical power do we need to supply for each of these
> amounts?
>3) IS it feasible to have that many or do we have to limit ourselves?
>
>Kenneth brings up good points also.
>1) How LONG do we PLAN this to be usable?
>2) Power source - solar? nuclear? battery (even though I don't
> think they would last very long, still have to consider them here)?
>3) WHAT do we need to do to certify this package for flight?
>4) HOW many do we need to build to get ONE certified as flight ready
> hardware?
>5) How do we control it?
>6) How complicated do we want to go?
>
>As far as the Earth station, the bigger the better as always. But
>anything above 23cm would be feasible EVEN for that antenna restricted
>home station that is becoming the norm now a days.
>
>45 element 1.2GHz antenna:
>Boom Length: 144 inches
>Weight: 5 pounds
>Gain: 20dbi
>3db Beamwidth: 16 degrees
>
>52 element 2.4GHz loop antenna:
>Boom Length: 96 inches
>Weight: 3 pounds
>Gain: 21 dbi
>3db Beamwidth: 14 degrees
>
>45 element 3.4GHz antenna:
>Boom Length: 60 inches
>Weight: 1.5 pounds
>Gain: 20dbi
>3db Beamwidth: 16 degrees
>
>These are figures that I have handy for antennas I already have. Each of
>these antennas can be had from Directive Systems for about one hundred
>and fifty dollars each as a kit, more if you want it already assembled.
>I give these as EXAMPLES to help out. Preamps and amplifiers are extra.
>But even those are cheap if you want to tinker some. I found a 75 watt
>2.4GHz amplifier for 20 dollars at Dayton this year that would give me
>about half that if I run it on 12 volts instead of 26 volts.
>
>1.2GHz/2.4GHz antennas: 300 dollars
>1.2GHz preamp: 50 dollars
>2.4GHz amplifier: 25 dollars
>sequencer: 60 dollars
>1.2GHz transverter: 100 dollars (W1GHZ type)
>2.4GHz transverter: 100 dollars (W1GHZ type)
>Misc. parts: 100 dollars
>TOTAL: 735 dollars (+/-)
>This is presuming that the station ALREADY has a 2m SSB radio
>and no homebrewing other than putting together the W1GHZ transverters,
>sequencer, 2.4GHZ amplifier, and antenna mounting hardware. So cost CAN
>be kept down to about 1000 dollars, maybe even less than the 735 dollar
>figure if the station is very creative (possibly around the 500 dollar
>mark then).
>
>If the plan stays at using 2m and 70cms, antennas do get bulkier and
>harder to handle for teardown and setup. ( I know - I am preaching to
>the choir here...<L>)
>
>Figures are based on what I already have handy, so I may have to add or
>change depending on what bands are used.
>
>James W8ISS
>=====
>On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 21:29 -0500, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BARRIOS
>TECHNOLOGY] wrote:
>
>
>>I realize this is still very early in the dreaming stage but it would be
>>nice to start seeing some realistic proposals soon. How about starting with
>>a blank worksheet that outlines the desirements and requirements. This would
>>give folks some specifics to address.
>>
>>*LUNAR System*
>>Modulation type:
>>Mode:
>>Power source:
>>Lunar transmitter (type, output power and band):
>>Lunar TX antenna (type and gain):
>>Lunar receiver (type and band):
>>Lunar RX antenna (type and gain):
>>Lunar controller (type and capability):
>>
>>Delivery deadline for flight certified hardware to be launched:
>>Length of time the system is expected to operate:
>>Periods that the system is expected to be available for use:
>>
>>Once you have some general ideas as to what the items are then you will have
>>a good idea of the total weight, size and what it will cost to buy, build
and
>>certify for spaceflight. It would also be nice to know what sort of station
>>equipment would be needed to use this lunar system.
>>
>>*EARTH Station*
>>Description of minimal Earth station capable of operation through above
>>mentioned lunar system:
>>Transmitter (type, output power and band):
>>TX antenna (type and gain):
>>Receiver (type and band):
>>RX antenna (type and gain):
>>Antenna tracking system:
>>
>>The above should allow for a realistic guess at the number of users
>>willing to and capable of operating through the system.
>>
>>Kenneth
>>________________________________________
>>From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On Behalf
>>Of MM [ka1rrw@xxxxx.xxxx
>>Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:14 PM
>>To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>>Subject: [amsat-bb] Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO
>>
>> High orbit launch prices
>>
>>It is hard to find exact values for the price per kilo to a geo-stationery
>>orbit. I did find a few old numbers on the web suggesting that around the
>>year 2000 prices were approximately 25,000 to 35,000 USD per kilo. I can
>>only assume it will cost more today?s 2009 dollars. If we were to build
>>our own Geo-stationary satellite and were able to keep the weight down to
>>the same weight of AO-40 (244 kilos), that would only cost us $8.5 USD
>>million in launching fees (plus inflation). That is not including the cost
>>of the satellite. A ballpark Geo-stationary amateur radio satellite and
>>launching fees would be in the 20-40 million-dollar range per satellite
(SWAG).
>>
>>If you have an extra 40 million kicking around then go ahead and build us a
>>Geo satellite. Or if you work at Huges and can talk them into attaching a
>>Micro Satellite to the next geo satellite for Free great, go for it.
>>
>>I can?t afford that and I do not know anyone at Huges, so I am looking into
>>the piggyback options. Let some other company pay the big bucks for the
flight
>>and navigation and just tag along for the ride.
>>
>>In this case NASA wants to send Un-manned Landers to the Moon. All we need
to
>>do is convince them to let us attached a 1-2 kilo micro-satellite to the
moon
>>lander and use some of their power and antennas, etc.
>>
>>Just look at the Huge Savings $$$
>>No navigation system (we have never had much luck at building our own rocket
>>motors (AO-10- damaged satellite, AO-13 Miss fired and caused a premature
>>reentry and AO-40 Kaboom)
>>
>>No command and control RF links (just command between the Microsat and
>>existing command and control system)
>>
>>NASA will pay for the rocket (we hope)
>>
>>Assuming a good landing, there will not be any need for periodic orbital
>>changes.
>>
>>It?s true that our resources for building new satellites are very limited.
>>I believe that Putting the effort into building a Moon qualified micro
>>satellite seems to be the most economical path to take. And will provide
>>the greatest return on our investment.
>>
>>Sincerely
>>
>>Miles WF1F MarexMG.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.2/2215 - Release Date: 07/02/09
18:06:00
>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:53:55 +0000
From: n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: How you do DOPPLER correction in Linear
Transponders?
To: Fabiano Moser <fabianomoser@xxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb
<AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<070320091153.6349.4A4DF153000930E9000018CD22243323629B0A02D2089B9A019C0
4040A0DBF049BCC02@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Fabiano,
Are you using the Beta version of Ham Radio Deluxe - v 4.1, Build 1989? That
is the version I have installed. In it, the bottom "slider" on the right side
of the tuning bar will enable you to fine-tune the uplink and downlink. The
top slider allows you to use HRD to tune up and down the passband, and the
offset will not change.
I hope this is helpful.
Note to all - I tried tuning the downlink on FO-29 last night. It seemed
awkward at first because I'd only been tuning the uplink, regardless of
whether it was the higher frequency. But literally after a minute or so, it
was no problem.
73 to all,
Tim
-------------- Original message from Fabiano Moser <fabianomoser@xxxxx.xxx>: -
-------------
> Dear friends,
> Thank you very much for the answers, help me a lot and now I have better
> idea how operators does.
> Now I come back to other situation when I do doppler control automatic by
> Hamradiodeluxe:
>
> Let make an example at VO-52 using middle of transponder.
> While the software is doing correction in the two VFO?s when I start to TX
> my signal are always above or below the frequency suggested by computer, and
> I need to put OFF uplink adjust at HRD and do by manual to go higher or
> lower in Uplink to listen my self. Okay I know the UHF doppler is higher
> than VHF, but I presume that HRD always adjust the better adjustment for UP
> and DOWN.
>
> At FM satellites this not happen
>
> This make me confused becuase if I have new kepler downloaded, why my audio
> always comes above or below the downlink who Hamradiodeluxe adjust on my
> FT-847.
>
> 73
> Fabiano Moser CR7/PY5RX
> ARISS-PORTUGAL (Amateur Radio on the International Space Station)
> Representative at Teleconference and Portugal Telebridge Coordinator.
> AMRAD/AMSAT-CT
> http://www.amrad.pt/ariss.php
>
>
> 2009/7/2 i8cvs
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Fabiano Moser"
> > To: "amsat-bb"
> > Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 6:19 PM
> > Subject: [amsat-bb] How you do DOPPLER correction in Linear Transponders?
> >
> >
> > Dear friends,
> >
> > We know that some Satellite Operators use diferent system to doppler
> > control.
> >
> > For Linear Transponder
> > 1) Adjust uplink and downlink automatic by CAT? (Not always woks, some
> > times
> > I?m up or down from the computer adjust)
> > 2) Adjust uplink and downlink manual
> > 3) Keep Uplink fixed and adjust only the Downlink frequency.
> >
> > What is the more indicate method to use?
> > FT-847 have knob to adjust Uplink without change downlink VFO, and I?m
> > using
> > it to keep my voice in downlink at same downlink much I can.
> >
> > But I know some operators use fixed uplink.
> >
> > How you do?
> >
> > --
> >
> > Hi Fabiano, CR7/PY5RX
> >
> > My preferred metod (from OSCAR-6 to AO40) is to adjust only the Uplink
> > frequency in order to keep my voice in downlink as clear as possible
> > exactly
> > as you actually do manually.
> > If the station in contact with me moves up or down I invite the operator
to
> > move the VFO of his TX to come again in my constant receiving frequency.
> >
> > 73" de
> > i8CVS Domenico
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> 73
> Fabiano Moser CR7/PY5RX
> ARISS-PORTUGAL (Amateur Radio on the International Space Station)
> Representative at Teleconference and Portugal Telebridge Coordinator.
> AMRAD/AMSAT-CT
> http://www.amrad.pt/ariss.php
>
> "There is no great talent without great will. (Honor? de Balzac)"
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 08:47:03 -0400
From: "Rich Dailey (iPhone 3GS OS 3.0.3)" <redailey1@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Software Commodore 64
To: w7lrd@xxxxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20090703084404.04b1f680@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Hey, I'm not crazy... Hi !! I'm looking for satellite prediction software or
similar for Commodore 64. Anybody know where I can find this !?!?
You might want to contact John Magliacane, kd2bd - as I recall he wrote some
early basic code for the c-64 that later was incorporated into PREDICT.
Rich, N8UX
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 09:14:31 -0400
From: Howie DeFelice <howied231@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Lunar link budget
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BAY142-W919EB7FC39D9CDAEA9FF3E72C0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Domenico,
I could be wrong but I think your budget is correct for a regenerative
transponder but for a bent pipe transponder we need to add the uplink noise to
the downlink noise where
C/N (total) = 1/((1/C-Nup)+(1/C-Ndn)) which in this case would be about 6.7
dB.
Still pretty good, but would probably be better even at the lower microwave
freqs. If we used PSK31 exlusively, even 2.5 KHz many simultaneous QSO's.
Howie AB2S
_________________________________________________________________
Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail?.
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial
_QuickAdd_062009
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 06:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: MM <ka1rrw@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO, Thanks for the
Data
To: "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>, " Kenneth G.
\(JSC-OC\)\[BARRIOS TECHNOLOGY\]Ransom" <kenneth.g.ransom@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <827787.81203.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
He Everyone.
thank you for your good input.
Lets slow down this thread for a few days, while i recompile all of the Great
information you have sent me.
Then I will post a memo to the marex web page for your review later next week.
I do need 2 more key items.
Link budget: Assume SSB
Moon to Earth on 2.4 Gig
Earth to Moon on 1.2 gig
(note, under curret ITU rules we can not use 1.2 gig for Moon to Earth, is
this still valid?)
Thanks Miles WF1F
--- On Thu, 7/2/09, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BARRIOS TECHNOLOGY]
<kenneth.g.ransom@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> From: Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BARRIOS TECHNOLOGY]
<kenneth.g.ransom@xxxx.xxx>
> Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO
> To: "MM" <ka1rrw@xxxxx.xxx>, "amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 10:29 PM
> I realize this is still very early in
> the dreaming stage but it would be nice to start seeing some
> realistic proposals soon. How about starting with a blank
> worksheet that outlines the desirements and requirements.
> This would give folks some specifics to address.
>
> *LUNAR System*
> Modulation type:
> Mode:
> Power source:
> Lunar transmitter (type, output power and band):
> Lunar TX antenna (type and gain):
> Lunar receiver (type and band):
> Lunar RX antenna (type and gain):
> Lunar controller (type and capability):
>
> Delivery deadline for flight certified hardware to be
> launched:
> Length of time the system is expected to operate:
> Periods that the system is expected to be available for
> use:
>
> Once you have some general ideas as to what the items are
> then you will have a good idea of the total weight, size and
> what it will cost to buy, build and certify for spaceflight.
> It would also be nice to know what sort of station equipment
> would be needed to use this lunar system.
>
> *EARTH Station*
> Description of minimal Earth station capable of operation
> through above mentioned lunar system:
> Transmitter (type, output power and band):
> TX antenna (type and gain):
> Receiver (type and band):
> RX antenna (type and gain):
> Antenna tracking system:
>
> The above should allow for a realistic guess at the number
> of users willing to and capable of operating through the
> system.
>
> Kenneth
> ________________________________________
> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx
> [amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx
> On Behalf Of MM [ka1rrw@xxxxx.xxxx
> Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:14 PM
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb]? Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO
>
> High orbit launch prices
>
> It is hard to find exact values for the price per kilo to a
> geo-stationery orbit.? I did find a few old numbers on
> the web suggesting that around the year 2000 prices were
> approximately 25,000 to 35,000 USD per kilo.? I can
> only assume it will cost more today?s 2009 dollars.?
> If we were to build our own Geo-stationary satellite and
> were able to keep the weight down to the same weight of
> AO-40 (244 kilos), that would only cost us $8.5 USD million
> in launching fees (plus inflation).? That is not
> including the cost of the satellite.? A ballpark
> Geo-stationary amateur radio satellite and launching fees
> would be in the 20-40 million-dollar range per satellite
> (SWAG).
>
> If you have an extra 40 million kicking around then go
> ahead and build us a Geo satellite. Or if you work at Huges
> and can talk them into attaching a Micro Satellite to the
> next geo satellite for Free great, go for it.
>
> I can?t afford that and I do not know anyone at Huges, so
> I am looking into the piggyback options.? Let some
> other company pay the big bucks for the flight and
> navigation and just tag along for the ride.
>
> In this case NASA wants to send Un-manned Landers to the
> Moon.? All we need to do is convince them to let us
> attached a 1-2 kilo micro-satellite to the moon lander and
> use some of their power and antennas, etc.
>
> Just look at the Huge Savings $$$
> No navigation system (we have never had much luck at
> building our own rocket motors (AO-10- damaged satellite,
> AO-13 Miss fired and caused a premature reentry and AO-40
> Kaboom)
>
> No command and control RF links (just command between the
> Microsat and existing command and control system)
>
> NASA will pay for the rocket (we hope)
>
> Assuming a good landing, there will not be any need for
> periodic orbital changes.
>
> It?s true that our resources for building new satellites
> are very limited.
> I believe that Putting the effort into building a Moon
> qualified micro satellite seems to be the most economical
> path to take.? And will provide the greatest return on
> our investment.
>
> Sincerely
>
> Miles WF1F? MarexMG.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:45:43 +0200
From: "Pierre van Deventer" <pierrevd@xxxx.xx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] FW: Re: G-5500 and LVB tracker question.
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000001c9fbe4$8f8cbb90$aea632b0$@xx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I found that the regulator output voltage inside the G-5500 drifted
slightly.
The problem was resolved by changing the value of C9, 0.01 MFD, at output of
the regulator to a 0.1 MFD capacitor.
Before the mod the azimuth values varied by 15 degrees from switch on to
final operating temperature, after the mod the Azimuth and Elevation values
are steady.
Hope that helps.
73, Pierre ZS6BB
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Allan Saul
Sent: 03 July 2009 11:13
To: 'racer5039'; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 and LVB tracker question.
Hi Howard and Marv,
I had exactly the same problem. The issue revolved around the
7806 regulator the is used in the G-5500 control box that
supplied the 6V DC to the position feedback potentiometers
on the rotators. If you monitor the output voltage of the regulator,
you will find they drift down considerably as the box warms up.
Maybe they had a bad batch.
I replaced the 7806 with a LM317T set for 6V and that solved
the problem.
73's
Allan Saul ZS1LS
-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Long [mailto:howard@xxxxxxxxxx.xxxx
Sent: 30 June 2009 10:09 AM
To: 'racer5039'; amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 and LVB tracker question.
Hi Marv.
If you have the LCD fitted, do both the left and right Az/El readings move
too?
I am assuming you don't have the problem if the LVB Tracker is unplugged.
73, Howard G6LVB
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of racer5039
Sent: 30 June 2009 00:13
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] G-5500 and LVB tracker question.
I have the G-5500 and a LVB Tracker on my antenna set. I have noticed that
when the pair are just setting there the LVB tracker will loose its place.
By that I mean if the G-5500 box is at 180* the LVB will start out at 180
but as it sets there it will soon be at 178, 174, 172 and so on. I also
noted the meter on the g-5500 is going down too.
Where do I start looking ?
Marv
N0FJP
_______________________________________________
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: 7
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:53:41 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future
To: stuckbit@xxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A4E0D65.4070006@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
It's called APRS.
Jeff Davis wrote:
Our own 'Twitter' messaging network from space...?
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 16:27:35 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Lunar link budget
To: "Howie DeFelice" <howied231@xxxxxxx.xxx>, "AMSAT-BB"
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <007001c9fbea$698df5c0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Howie DeFelice" <howied231@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 3:14 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Lunar link budget
Hi Domenico,
I could be wrong but I think your budget is correct for a regenerative
transponder but for a bent pipe transponder we need to add the uplink noise
to the downlink noise where
C/N (total) = 1/((1/C-Nup)+(1/C-Ndn)) which in this case would be about 6.7
dB.
Still pretty good, but would probably be better even at the lower microwave
freqs. If we used PSK31 exlusively, even 2.5 KHz many simultaneous QSO's.
Howie AB2S
Hi Hovie AB2S
I agree with you and this is why I writes....................290 kelvin but
(probably more)
> The gain of the 2 meters antenna on the Lander is 3 dBd = 5.14 dBi
> Assume that the Noise Figure of the 2 meter receiver is 0.5 dB = 35 kelvin
> and the sky temperature as seen by the 2 meter Lander antenna looking at
> the earth is conservatively 290 kelvin but (probably more ).
At microwave frequencies where the gain of the antennas of the Lander are
higher and higher than 3 dBd and the antenna pattern is very narrow who will
automatically and precisely point the antennas toward the earth and who will
compensate the pointing to follow the libration movements of the moon ?
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 10:42:23 -0400
From: "Doug Kuitula" <ka8qcu@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] KEP 09183 PROBLEM
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <001201c9fbec$7ca1c540$0aef6742@xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi all,
Looks like there may be a problem with the latest 2 line dated for day 183.
I tried inputting them and came up with numerous checksum failures.
Has anyone else had the same problem?...........73 de Doug KA8QCU
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 16:41:48 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future
To: "Joe" <nss@xxx.xxx>
Cc: "Jack K." <kd1pe.1@xxxxx.xxx>, AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>,
kg4zlb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <009901c9fbec$65d0b4c0$0201a8c0@xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Joe,
The specification given by Miles WF1F is for a Lander transmit power of 5 to
10 watt in 70 cm from the moon.My calculation shoves that a single SSB station
to be received in 70 cm with a S/N ratio of 10 dB on the earth a power of 10
watt in 70 cm is necessary on the moon.
If you like an IF window 10 time greater i.e. 250 KHz to accomodate more
stations at the same time than the Lander transponder must have the capability
to get around 100 watt wich is out the WF1F specifications.
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe
To: i8cvs
Cc: MM ; kg4zlb@xxxxx.xxx ; AMSAT-BB ; Jack K.
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future
This is all good except for one thing,
The IF window is 10 times too small.
Look at the mess the FM single channel birds are with their tiny surface
foot print. Imagine now a whole hemisphere worth of people trying to use it
at once. The thing would be useless
i8cvs wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "MM" <ka1rrw@xxxxx.xxx>
To: <kg4zlb@xxxxx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Jack K." <kd1pe.1@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 1:31 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] The Moon is our Future
We need a simple Mode-J transponder (2-meters up, 440 down).
Low power consumption.
Assume minimal antenna gain from the Lander (3 dBd on each antenna)
Assume transmitter power 5-10 watts.
Questions:
What?s the link budget?
How much gain will be needed on earth for such a setup?
Can we build a working mockup in 1 year or less.
The Moon is within Reach. Let?s Go for IT.
Miles WF1F MarexMG.org
Hi Miles, WF1F
The gain of the 2 meters antenna on the Lander is 3 dBd = 5.14 dBi
Assume that the Noise Figure of the 2 meter receiver is 0.5 dB = 35 kelvin
and the sky temperature as seen by the 2 meter Lander antenna looking at
the earth is conservatively 290 kelvin but (probably more ).
The isotropic path loss earth-moon in 2 meters at an average distance of
380.000 km is 187 dB
You don't specify the IF bandwidth of your transponder so that for
simplicity I will assume that only one QSO will be possible in SSB and 3
on CW in a total BW = 2.5 KHz
With the above data the calculated Noise Floor (KTB) of the above 2 meter
Lander receiver is -139 dBm
We assume to use an earth 2 meters antenna with a gain of 13 dBi and a power
of 100 watt pep in 2 meters.
UPLINK BUDGED:
Earth TX power 100 watt.............................+ 50 dBm
Earth antenna gain............................. .............+ 13 dB
------
Earth EIRP.....................................................+ 63 dBm
2 m isotropic attenuation earth-moon..............-187 dB
------
Isoptropic power received on the moon .........- 124 dBm
2 meters Lander antenna gain.........................+ 5 dBi
------
Power applied to the 2 m Lander receiver......- 119 dBm
Lander receiver 2 m Noise Floor...................- 139 dBm
------
S/N ratio available from the Lander receiver.. + 20 dB
COMMENT:
With a 2 meter signal +20 dB above the noise floor the
70 cm TX on the Lander transponder is in condition to
supply a noise-less power between 5 to 10 watt pep to
the 70 cm TX antenna.
DOWNLINK BUDGED:
The gain of the 70 cm antenna on the Lander is 3 dBd = 5.14 dBi
and the 70 cm power is 10 watt pep
Assume that the Noise Figure of the 70 cm earth receiver is
0.5 dB = 35 kelvin and the sky temperature as seen by the 70 cm
antenna looking at the moon is 75 kelvin
Assume that the antenna gain of the 70 cm earth receiver is 18 dBi
The isotropic path loss earth-moon in 70 cm at an average distance of
380.000 km is 197 dB
With the above data the calculated Noise Floor (KTB) of the 70 cm
ground receiver is -144 dBm
Lander 70 cm TX power 10 watt...................+ 40 dBm
Lander antenna gain.......................................+ 5 dBi
------
70 cm EIRP from the moon...........................+ 45 dBm
70 cm moon-earth isotropic attenuation .........-197 dB
------
70 cm power available in to isotropic antenna -152 dBm
70 cm earth receiving antenna gain..................+ 18 dBi
------
70 cm power on input of the earth receiver.....-134 dBm
70 cm Noise Floor of the earth receiver..........-144 dBm
------
S/N ratio at the output of 70 cm receiver.......+ 10 dB
COMMENT:
Using a Lander transponder on the moon with 2 meters and
70 cm antenna's gain in the order of 5 dBi will not produce
serious problems of pointing at the earth due of libration.
If the Lander transponder is capable to develope 10 watt
pep and the IF bandwidth is very narrow in the order of
2.5 KHz it is possible to accomodate one SSB QSO or 3 CW
QSO just using the actually available TX and RX equipments for
satellite communications i.e.
For the uplink in 2 meters 100 watt pep and a 13 dBi antenna gain
For the downlink in 70 cm a receiving system with an overall Noise
Figure of 0.5 dB and antenna gain of 18 dBi
The rate of change of the frequency due of doppler shift in 2 meters
and 70 cm is very slow and easily manually compensated even into
only a 2.5 KHz bandwidth
The antenna polarization is very important because a linear signal
transmitted from the earth or from the moon by stations located in
different continents can be reversed from Vertical to Horizontal
polarization so that at least on the earth circular RHCP and LHCP
switchable polarization is recommended.
Best 73" de
i8CVS Domenico
_______________________________________________
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.2/2215 - Release Date: 07/02/09
18:06:00
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:55:31 -0500
From: N0JY <n0jy@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM
To: Doug Kuitula <ka8qcu@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A4E1BE3.6070504@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Doug, I had the same problem loading it into InstantTrack. Both the
2-line and text versions.
Jerry
N0JY
Doug Kuitula wrote:
> Hi all,
> Looks like there may be a problem with the latest 2 line dated for day 183.
I tried inputting them and came up with numerous checksum failures.
> Has anyone else had the same problem?...........73 de Doug KA8QCU
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
> Use the link below to report this message as spam.
> https://lavabit.com/apps/teacher?sig=637600&key=3994102619
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:18:44 -0400
From: Perry Yantis <py41@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] KEP 09183 PROBLEM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <C9B68714-86E7-431A-9A86-1BA2509A2836@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
I had no errors with the new keps but the orbit numbers are wrong, and
comparing them with the Amsat online
forecasts they are way off.
I just wish I hadn't deleted the old set.
Perry WB8OTH
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:29:16 +0000
From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM
To: Doug Kuitula <ka8qcu@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A4E23CC.9090309@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
You don't say which satellites or where you obtained the keps.
I do as you ought to be doing,
download just the ones I want from SpaceTrack.
They're generally updated twice a day.
Doug Kuitula wrote:
> Hi all,
> Looks like there may be a problem with the latest 2 line dated for day 183.
I tried inputting them and came up with numerous checksum failures.
> Has anyone else had the same problem?...........73 de Doug KA8QCU
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 10:46:14 -0500
From: "Alan VE4YZ" <ve4yz@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM
To: "'Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF'" <nigel@xxxxx.xxx>, "'Doug Kuitula'"
<ka8qcu@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <C321F2F308CE40EF85CB9245C983C5FE@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I agree Nigel. Downloading a "Favourites" file from Space Track keeps a lot
of clutter out of the databases.
I use Nova to automatically download the favourite file and use that same
file for SATPC32.
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF
Sent: July 3, 2009 10:29 AM
To: Doug Kuitula
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM
You don't say which satellites or where you obtained the keps.
I do as you ought to be doing,
download just the ones I want from SpaceTrack.
They're generally updated twice a day.
Doug Kuitula wrote:
> Hi all,
> Looks like there may be a problem with the latest 2 line dated for day
183. I tried inputting them and came up with numerous checksum failures.
> Has anyone else had the same problem?...........73 de Doug KA8QCU
_______________________________________________
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 312
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
