| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 04.07.09 20:04l 972 Lines 33418 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 48294-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 316
Path: IZ3LSV<IK6ZDE<XE1FH<CX2ACB<CX2SA
Sent: 090704/1756Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:48294 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:48294-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. The Moon is our Future / antennas (G0MRF@xxx.xxxx
2. (no subject) (WILLIAMS MICHAEL)
3. SuitSat-II question (Greg D.)
4. Re: The Moon is our Future (Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
5. Been A While (jbblack68@xxxxx.xxxx
6. Re: Been A While (Dave Guimont)
7. Re: Kenpro-Yaesu 5400 5600B question (John Kopala)
8. Re: SuitSat-II question (Rich Dailey (Gmail))
9. Re: SuitSat-II question (Gould Smith)
10. Re: The Moon is our Future / antennas (john hackett)
11. More Future Thoughts (Jeff Davis)
12. Antenna Question (Joel Black)
13. Re: Antenna Question (David - KG4ZLB)
14. Re: Antenna Question (George Henry)
15. Re: AMSAT Forum videos from Dayton Hamvention
(Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK))
16. Re: AMSAT Forum videos from Dayton Hamvention (David - KG4ZLB)
17. Re: More Future Thoughts (James French)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 19:21:08 EDT
From: G0MRF@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] The Moon is our Future / antennas
To: kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <c6c.4f9d052a.377fec64@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 03/07/2009 20:46:44 GMT Standard Time,
kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx writes:
Building a prototype that works on Earth for project like this is only a
few percent of the effort required. Treating it as a radio club project
won't be effective as people need to sign up for a 5-year project.
Hi all.
John is absolutely right in saying the complexity cannot be easily compared
to a terrestrial radio project. One other thing that stands an almost zero
chance of succeeding is a dish antenna that needs to point towards the
earth. If NASA and the ISS have trouble with moving parts on the solar array
you can imagine how much more difficult it would be on the moon.
However, how about this.
The problem with the higher bands is power generation / path loss / antenna
gain. Any higher band like 1.2, 2.4 or 5.8G would need a high gain antenna
to offset the increased path loss.
But, instead of a conventional steerable dish....with its unreliable moving
joints...How about an electrically steerable array of patches / dipoles /
or any other type of antenna element.
But how to 'point' it?
Well. actually I think Tom Clark provided the answer for that with his
proposal of a few years ago. The principle is this: If you have 2 arrays.
One
say on 5.6G uplink and one on 5.8G downlink, then the receiving array can
electrically look in different directions for a signal from the Earth.
Once the receiver has identified a signal and optimised the RX Antenna, the
information on the direction of the Earth i.e. the direction of the strongest
incoming signal can be used to configure the transmit array which will
then beam a signal back to earth with high ERP.
Directional, high gain, and no moving parts.
Thanks
David G0MRF
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 16:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: WILLIAMS MICHAEL <k9qho6762@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] (no subject)
To: va2ss@xx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <830679.71960.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
It looks like I have a copy of VR-85. Please let me know if you need a copy.
?
I'll have to fire up the C-128.
?
I need to check it out anyway.
?
?
Mike (K9QHO)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 19:17:25 -0700
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] SuitSat-II question
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BLU133-W11D0D7A194957AE7CA8558A92D0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Hi folks,
I just watched the video of Gould Smith talking about SuitSat-II. Nice job.
But it left me wondering... With a new battery, solar cells, custom
electronics package, switches, and antennas, what is the Suit itself needed
for? At least in the original SuitSat, we used the battery pack (I think),
and even that's being replaced.
Don't get me wrong, the use of the suit is a marketing master-stroke. But am
I right that it's basically only there for support (both mechanically and
politically)?
Greg KO6TH
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live? SkyDrive?: Get 25 GB of free online storage.
http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_SD_25GB_062009
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 22:20:06 -0500
From: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL0-DAV296E1B68616B2574F8CAB48A2D0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The thermal cycling would make a gas "Bag" antenna interesting as the gas
expands and contracts with temperature changes.
I like Bob's idea of an array of collinears lying on the moon's surface,
since "ground" on the moon must be quite deep due to the lack of moisture.
This makes 2 meters very attractive as a down-link. We could take advantage
of the reduced path loss and higher efficiencies in the circuits that 2
meters (or ten meters) has to offer.
I suspect it would be possible to build such antenna that uses a "wound up"
spring to unwind the antennas for deployment, like a reverse tape measure
that uncoils instead of coils up.
73,
Joe kk0sd
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Gordon JC Pearce
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 11:41 AM
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future
On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 18:21 -0500, Gregg Wonderly wrote:
> It seems to me that the correct choice is the highest frequency we can get
on
> board for at least 24dB at the longest length of antenna that we would be
> allowed to send up.
Lunar gravity is weaker and there is no wind. So, a collapsible antenna
that wouldn't last five minutes in typical Earth weather will be a lot
more usable on the Moon.
Maybe something like a telescopic boom with a gas canister or pyro
charge to pop the sections out?
Gordon
_______________________________________________
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: 5
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:48:22 +0000
From: jbblack68@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Been A While
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <0016e644de6812d796046dd4f456@xxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
It's been quite a while since I have been on this BB. I got out of the
hobby for about four years but I am working my way back in. I used to be
KS4AW then K2SAT. Now I'm W4JBB. I don't even know if some of the folks who
were involved in AMSAT are even still around. I do searches on their
webpages and either get nothing or no updates in years - I don't dive past
the first search results page. These are a few I remember:
K5OE
K6YK
KF4FDJ
N7SFI
N8DEU
WB6LLO
There were many others too.
I am getting my equipment slowly out of storage (I have it stored all over
the house apparently). I had a FODtrack interface and found a partial build
of the G6LVB tracker. I cannot remember if I finished the LVB tracker or
not. I have a cutout for and LCD display, but no display in it. My dad has
my '847, but he's not using it and I'll get it back in the next week. I
left my tower up with my 2m/70cm antennas and the G5400 rotor. Feedline is
still there too... partially. I guess my only question about gear is what
should I use for auto-tracking with a Vista box? Like I said, I *had* a
FODtrack interface, but I cannot find it. I also have a partially built LVB
tracker. I have a parallel PCI card I can install in the Vista machine but
I wonder if anyone has had any luck with that setup... I'm not opposed to
booting up into Linux either.
I have looked at the AMSAT homepage and there is only a small fraction of
satellites still available. I have renewed my membership and am really
looking forward to getting back on the birds. I think I have rambled enough.
73,
Joel, W4JBB
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:03:19 -0700
From: Dave Guimont <dguimon1@xxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Been A While
To: jbblack68@xxxxx.xxx
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <20090704050322622.GXUM2041@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxxx.xx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>left my tower up with my 2m/70cm antennas and the G5400 rotor. Feedline is
>still there too... partially. I guess my only question about gear is what
>should I use for auto-tracking with a Vista box? Like I said, I *had* a
Hi Joel,
Welcome back!!
Some of the old timers still around...
I get on FO29, VO52 and O7 once in awhile, and bump into quite a few
from the old crowd...
I use SatPC32, and works like a charm, AZEL and freq. control...And
Erich is a jewel when it comes to an assist....
Could meet an AM pass here, let me know..
Get a gang up there once in a while...
73, Dave, WB6LLO
dguimon1@xxx.xx.xxx
Disagree: I learn....
Pulling for P3E...
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:22:54 -0700
From: John Kopala <jkopala@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Kenpro-Yaesu 5400 5600B question
To: bpn518@xxx.xxxx AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4A4EE72E.3040102@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Bennett,
I may be a little off on the following since I do not have a schematic for the
G-5400, but here goes:
The KR-500 elevation rotor did not have limit switches and the run cap was in
the control box.
The G400 did not have limit switches and the run cap was in the control box.
The KR-500 and G-400 were combined to make the G-5400 which did not have the
computer interface in the control box and did not have limit switches or run
caps in the rotors.
The G-5400B added limit switches and the run cap to the elevation rotor, but
not the azimuth rotor.
The G-5500 added limit switches and run caps to both rotors plus the special
cable connector on the rotors.
The G-5600B is the same as the G-5500 but with the screw type terminal strips
on the rotors.
I will send you PDF files for the KR-500, G-400, G-5400B/G-5600B, and G-5500
in a separate email.
If you get 5500 rotors, I understand the connectors are rather pricey.
The addition of the limit switches requires that the run cap be located in the
rotor rather than the control box. Otherwise the motor would not run once a
limit switch was opened. Placing the run cap after the limit switch provides
the phase shifted voltage/current necessary to reverse the motor when the
switch is opened.
John Kopala
N7JK
Good day sat-guys:
I have an old Kenpro G5400 without computer interface and a newer Yaesu G5600B
control box.
What are the differences in the motors between these 2 series other than the
limit switches?
In case of the control boxes, I see the G5400 has starter motor caps, but the
G5600B control box doesn't.
The old motors didn't work with the 5600B box until I added a starter cap to
both the AZ and EL motor lines.
I am planning to use the 5600B box with LVB tracker- any other issues?
What do I need to do to use my old motors with the G5600B? Or, anyone have
5500 motors that they wish to sell?
Any assistance would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Bennett ko2ok
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:23:06 -0400
From: "Rich Dailey (Gmail)" <redailey1@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SuitSat-II question
To: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20090704092115.023df458@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Don't get me wrong, the use of the suit is a marketing master-stroke. But am
I right that it's basically only there for support (both mechanically and
politically)?
Yeah, I think it's mostly for media impact. The sight of a lifeless suit
floating away from
the station is Stanley Kubrick-ish creepy.
Rich, N8UX
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 10:27:03 -0400
From: "Gould Smith" <gouldsmi@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SuitSat-II question
To: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <FE2B071673284913BAF961FD451D466C@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
reply-type=original
Greg has picked up on the basic point of the endeavor for AMSAT. We are
learning about and developing a modular system that will be adaptable to
many projects. This particular project is useful for both ARISS and AMSAT
We will have an array of building blocks to configure for missions as they
become available, as well as test new technology.
Gould
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 10:17 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] SuitSat-II question
Hi folks,
I just watched the video of Gould Smith talking about SuitSat-II. Nice job.
But it left me wondering... With a new battery, solar cells, custom
electronics package, switches, and antennas, what is the Suit itself needed
for? At least in the original SuitSat, we used the battery pack (I think),
and even that's being replaced.
Don't get me wrong, the use of the suit is a marketing master-stroke. But
am I right that it's basically only there for support (both mechanically and
politically)?
Greg KO6TH
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live? SkyDrive?: Get 25 GB of free online storage.
http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_SD_25GB_062009
_______________________________________________
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: 10
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 14:00:21 +0200
From: john hackett <la2qaa@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future / antennas
To: <g0mrf@xxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx eu-amsat@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BAY144-W2160CE6E1E4A46B136353C812D0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Hello David,
Principally, the same as the Fyllingsdales BMEWS steerable
phased array, yes ??.
We have some info on it on OBSERVATIONS.
<http://www.observations.biz)
73 John. <la2qaa@xxxxx.xxx>
..............................................................................
...................
> From: G0MRF@xxx.xxx
> Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 19:21:08 -0400
> To: kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] The Moon is our Future / antennas
>
>
> In a message dated 03/07/2009 20:46:44 GMT Standard Time,
> kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx writes:
>
> Building a prototype that works on Earth for project like this is only a
> few percent of the effort required. Treating it as a radio club project
> won't be effective as people need to sign up for a 5-year project.
>
>
> Hi all.
>
> John is absolutely right in saying the complexity cannot be easily compared
> to a terrestrial radio project. One other thing that stands an almost zero
> chance of succeeding is a dish antenna that needs to point towards the
> earth. If NASA and the ISS have trouble with moving parts on the solar
array
> you can imagine how much more difficult it would be on the moon.
>
> However, how about this.
> The problem with the higher bands is power generation / path loss / antenna
> gain. Any higher band like 1.2, 2.4 or 5.8G would need a high gain antenna
> to offset the increased path loss.
>
> But, instead of a conventional steerable dish....with its unreliable moving
> joints...How about an electrically steerable array of patches / dipoles /
> or any other type of antenna element.
>
> But how to 'point' it?
>
> Well. actually I think Tom Clark provided the answer for that with his
> proposal of a few years ago. The principle is this: If you have 2 arrays.
One
> say on 5.6G uplink and one on 5.8G downlink, then the receiving array can
> electrically look in different directions for a signal from the Earth.
> Once the receiver has identified a signal and optimised the RX Antenna, the
> information on the direction of the Earth i.e. the direction of the
strongest
> incoming signal can be used to configure the transmit array which will
> then beam a signal back to earth with high ERP.
>
> Directional, high gain, and no moving parts.
>
> Thanks
>
> David G0MRF
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_________________________________________________________________
Drag n? drop?Get easy photo sharing with Windows Live? Photos.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/photos.aspx
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 09:13:57 -0400
From: "Jeff Davis" <ke9v@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] More Future Thoughts
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BAY144-DS23D19F2753DE3E15FF6BFE22D0@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
It's interesting to watch how the desperation to have assets in high orbit
has driven the ideas ever more grandiose here on the old -BB. We've moved
from putting a "simple" transponder (as if there were such a thing) 35,000
miles over our head to landing a repeater a quarter million miles away on
the Moon and using robotic rovers to lay directional antennas along the
lunar surface...
What's next, a Jovian constellation of amateur satellites?
This is almost directly the result of having added the "government" into the
fictional scenario. Whenever a new idea starts with, "maybe we can get the
government to give us a ride..." then what follows can be as ostentatious as
we like because of the perception that the government can afford to do
really BIG things.
And we invariably try to justify that they should want to do this because of
"emergency communication".
It would seem to be more constructive to substitute the words "big magical
genie" in your plans everywhere you use the word "government" or "NASA".
That way when you write, "if we could just get a big magical genie to give
us a ride to the Moon..." the reality will sink in and it probably won't
seem like such a grand idea before it sees the light of day.
We need to disabuse ourselves of the ridiculous notion that the government
is anxious and willing to stuff our pockets with cash just because "when all
else fails". Need we be reminded that we're in the midst of the worst global
economic recession since the great depression? Tax revenues are low while
debt is unbelievably high. Politicians may be stupid but they're going to
easily sniff out the nonsense of spending millions of dollars so a few
hundred radio hams can enjoy their high-tech hobby.
(And who really wants them to do that anyway? What would be your reaction
if you read the news tomorrow that the government was going to spend $20
million tax dollars to help promote Frisbee golf, coin collecting, or some
other hobby?)
When life gives you lemons you make lemonade. We can't get to HEO, so what
can we do?
I think our best option is to create a lot more interesting things to do at
LEO since we know we can get there; but let's make sure we aren't leaving a
stone un-turned.
What about other orbits that may not be as desirable as HEO but that offer
better coverage than low-earth?
I recall reading something from G0RMF about adapting a CubeSat to include
some sort of a propulsion system to get to a mid-Earth orbit:
http://g0mrf.com/MEOSAT.htm
I have no idea if this is viable, but it seems to me that if we want to
place assets higher than LEO these are the kinds of ideas we should be
kicking around on the BB and perhaps leave the moon base installation ideas
for AMSAT members in 2050 to figure out how to make work and to fund.
--
73 de Jeff, KE9V
AMSAT-NA
AMSAT-DL
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:50:59 -0500
From: Joel Black <jbblack@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Antenna Question
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A4F6C53.9010101@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Happy Independence Day.
Does anyone recognize the following antennas? I purchased them years
ago and they were part of a system I never installed. Over the years,
one of the elements has been damaged and, even though I can fix it
myself, I'd like to know who made these.
Doggonit, I cannot upload to my webpage (something else yet to figure
out). Suffice it to say, my description may not do the antennas
justice. There are two of them, a 2m and 70cm made out of sched 40
PVC. They appear to be a "turnstile" type antenna with two aluminum
elements at the top and two at the bottom 90? out of phase from each
other (top and bottom). In other words, if looking at a compass, the
top two elements would be at N and S, the bottom two at E and W. This
is the same on both antennas as they are a matching set.
These antennas were in an old QST, but I have since gotten rid of all
those magazines and cannot find the article online. Any ideas or
suggestions?
Tnx,
Joel, W4JBB
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 11:28:49 -0400
From: David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna Question
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4A4F7531.3020108@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
How can you upload a web page if you have your "dog on it" ? Move the
dog first then try! ;-)
Happy 4th all!
73
--
David
KG4ZLB
www.kg4zlb.com
Joel Black wrote:
> Happy Independence Day.
>
>
>
> Doggonit, I cannot upload to my webpage (something else yet to figure
> out).
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 10:51:11 -0500
From: "George Henry" <ka3hsw@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna Question
To: "amsat bb" <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <A537E568A5AE455CB7B20E8BDD8ED329@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Sounds like the "QHTennas", made by N4QH. Reviewed in QST in 2005, then he
stopped producing them just a few months later.
Near as I could figure out, they are a conventional turnstile design, but
with the 2 dipoles separated by the length of the phasing line, and no
reflector.
George, KA3HSW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Black" <jbblack@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2009 9:50 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Antenna Question
Happy Independence Day.
Does anyone recognize the following antennas? I purchased them years
ago and they were part of a system I never installed. Over the years,
one of the elements has been damaged and, even though I can fix it
myself, I'd like to know who made these.
Doggonit, I cannot upload to my webpage (something else yet to figure
out). Suffice it to say, my description may not do the antennas
justice. There are two of them, a 2m and 70cm made out of sched 40
PVC. They appear to be a "turnstile" type antenna with two aluminum
elements at the top and two at the bottom 90? out of phase from each
other (top and bottom). In other words, if looking at a compass, the
top two elements would be at N and S, the bottom two at E and W. This
is the same on both antennas as they are a matching set.
These antennas were in an old QST, but I have since gotten rid of all
those magazines and cannot find the article online. Any ideas or
suggestions?
Tnx,
Joel, W4JBB
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 08:56:47 -0700
From: "Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)" <amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT Forum videos from Dayton Hamvention
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Cc: "Stephen E. Belter" <seb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<2e18ad3e0907040856i34f67f8cifeaa41a8d27b15fd@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Steve!
> Videos of the six presentations at the AMSAT Forum at the
> 2009 Dayton Hamvention are now on the AMSAT website. ?Click on
> this link
>
> http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/information/videoNews.php
>
> or go to the AMSAT website and click on AMSAT Video News about
> halfway down the page in the left column.
Thanks for your work with the camcorder at Dayton! During the
AMSAT Forum, I had asked if videos would be made available in
some form - and it's nice that they have. I will look at them when
I return home tomorrow, and have access to broadband.
A question... regarding Richard Garriott, you uploaded one video of
Richard speaking during the AMSAT Forum at the HamVention:
> 1. ?Richard Garriott's forum talk (mislabeled on the web site as the
> Banquet presentation, actual length about 15 minutes) on his visit to the
ISS.
Is there any chance of posting Richard's talk at the AMSAT/TAPR
Banquet the night before the AMSAT Forum? I thought I saw you
with the camcorder there as well. That talk was longer, and would
be a great addition to what Richard said at the Forum.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:05:56 -0400
From: David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AMSAT Forum videos from Dayton Hamvention
To: amsat-bb@xxxxxx.xxxx amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxx E. Belter"
<seb@xxxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <4A4F7DE4.2050701@xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Yes indeed. Richard's presentation at the AMSAT forum was a much shorter
version of the one he gave at the Banquet the night before and it would
be great to have that in the archives.
73
--
David
KG4ZLB
www.kg4zlb.com
Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK) wrote:
> Hi Steve!
>
>
>
> Thanks for your work with the camcorder at Dayton! During the
> AMSAT Forum, I had asked if videos would be made available in
> some form - and it's nice that they have. I will look at them when
> I return home tomorrow, and have access to broadband.
>
> A question... regarding Richard Garriott, you uploaded one video of
> Richard speaking during the AMSAT Forum at the HamVention:
>
>
>
> Is there any chance of posting Richard's talk at the AMSAT/TAPR
> Banquet the night before the AMSAT Forum? I thought I saw you
> with the camcorder there as well. That talk was longer, and would
> be a great addition to what Richard said at the Forum.
>
> 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
>
>
--
David
KG4ZLB
www.kg4zlb.com
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:52:06 -0400
From: James French <w8iss@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: More Future Thoughts
To: Jeff Davis <ke9v@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <1246726327.18117.26.camel@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain
On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 09:13 -0400, Jeff Davis wrote:
> It's interesting to watch how the desperation to have assets in high orbit
> has driven the ideas ever more grandiose here on the old -BB. We've moved
> from putting a "simple" transponder (as if there were such a thing) 35,000
> miles over our head to landing a repeater a quarter million miles away on
> the Moon and using robotic rovers to lay directional antennas along the
> lunar surface...
Yes, people have grandiose designs and wishes for life.
>
> What's next, a Jovian constellation of amateur satellites?
>
> This is almost directly the result of having added the "government" into the
> fictional scenario. Whenever a new idea starts with, "maybe we can get the
> government to give us a ride..." then what follows can be as ostentatious as
> we like because of the perception that the government can afford to do
> really BIG things.
I brought 'government' up as an entity that we night help shave a few
dollars off a proposed project that MIGHT come up to supply the
transponder equipment for. I never mentioned anything about a financial
gain for AMSAT.
>
> And we invariably try to justify that they should want to do this because of
> "emergency communication".
This was NEVER brought up during the discussion about placing a
transponder on the Moon. NEVER!!
>
> It would seem to be more constructive to substitute the words "big magical
> genie" in your plans everywhere you use the word "government" or "NASA".
> That way when you write, "if we could just get a big magical genie to give
> us a ride to the Moon..." the reality will sink in and it probably won't
> seem like such a grand idea before it sees the light of day.
As I mentioned a moment ago, I never said anything about financial gains
from ANY government. I mentioned 'IF' we could get a ride, MAYBE we
could help justify it with providing equipment.
>
> We need to disabuse ourselves of the ridiculous notion that the government
> is anxious and willing to stuff our pockets with cash just because "when all
> else fails". Need we be reminded that we're in the midst of the worst global
> economic recession since the great depression? Tax revenues are low while
> debt is unbelievably high. Politicians may be stupid but they're going to
> easily sniff out the nonsense of spending millions of dollars so a few
> hundred radio hams can enjoy their high-tech hobby.
>
> (And who really wants them to do that anyway? What would be your reaction
> if you read the news tomorrow that the government was going to spend $20
> million tax dollars to help promote Frisbee golf, coin collecting, or some
> other hobby?)
In the current scheme of things, it wouldn't surprise me that ANY
government is supporting ANY hobby with admendments and pork-belly
add-ons to things right now. Do you read everything that ANY government
proposes to make sure they are spending the taxpayers money CORRECTLY?
>
> When life gives you lemons you make lemonade. We can't get to HEO, so what
> can we do?
>
> I think our best option is to create a lot more interesting things to do at
> LEO since we know we can get there; but let's make sure we aren't leaving a
> stone un-turned.
>
> What about other orbits that may not be as desirable as HEO but that offer
> better coverage than low-earth?
>
> I recall reading something from G0RMF about adapting a CubeSat to include
> some sort of a propulsion system to get to a mid-Earth orbit:
>
> http://g0mrf.com/MEOSAT.htm
>
> I have no idea if this is viable, but it seems to me that if we want to
> place assets higher than LEO these are the kinds of ideas we should be
> kicking around on the BB and perhaps leave the moon base installation ideas
> for AMSAT members in 2050 to figure out how to make work and to fund.
And I have no idea if any of these things that everyone is talking about
is viable given the current state of economy. Things have changed and
not for the better for ANYONE. NOTHING is for free and if offered for
'free', I would take a good look to see why it was free and what it was
going to cost me in the long run.
The only thing we as AMSAT can do right now is think of ideas and make
suggestions right now. AMSAT has plans for making 'off-the-shelf'
transponders that would be ready for a ride if the option comes up. But
the kicker is, what should that transponder be? L/s? U/v? S/u? V/v?
Personally, I am tired of V/u transponders. There is NO challenge in
that mode anymore. Been there, done that! I want the challenge of the
higher frequencies - 1.2GHz, 2.4GHz, 3.4GHZ, 5.7GHz, and 10GHz, even
24GHz. AO-40 should that 24GHz was feasible.
AMSAT as a whole (I mean the membership) needs a new challenge and dream
that will bring out the very best in it to build what ever comes up. The
Moon could be that new challenge as we have NEVER designed anything that
would actually LAND and operate in that hostile environment. Is it
viable, who knows! We can only ask ourselves that question and then step
up to the challenge.
James W8ISS
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 316
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
