Email Detail

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/5C5ETSPVIC6OUUZXL64R47IA4RFRCTHU/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "CAPvDab07-HmLgRikGjtp5vE_K6BdUxL2Yd3Rq2h3ttWJegyoXA@mail.gmail.com",
    "message_id_hash": "5C5ETSPVIC6OUUZXL64R47IA4RFRCTHU",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/22P32LE2G52H6CJ6NUONR2DZXRTYKX6H/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "badencapecod (a) gmail.com",
        "mailman_id": "228ae4f5c3d547ef8d3f4c2b1e03205d",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/228ae4f5c3d547ef8d3f4c2b1e03205d/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Wes Baden",
    "subject": "[AMSAT-BB] Re: Operating Practices",
    "date": "2022-02-12T18:30:30Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/A3N7TAWKS3E4Y3AZVWSZK3K355ERHLD4/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Marshall,\n\nYou’re absolutely right about Doppler being less of an issue on CW. Also,\nI’ve experimented lately with chasing DX using low horizon RS-44 and AO-7\npasses, 2 degrees and less. I’ve heard and worked many new entities on CW,\nlocated on the far edge of the sat footprints. Were they sometimes weak,\nS2-3? Yes. But SSB signals were more frequently unintelligible, despite my\nlow noise QTH and what I’ve done to upgrade my RX antenna systems. Like\nyou, I hope for lots more CW on satellites.\n\n73,\nWes NA1ME\n\nOn Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 12:51 PM Marshall Toburen <[email protected]>\nwrote:\n\n> I'm happy to voluntarily comply with operating CW in the lower portion of\n> the pass band.  I much prefer CW over voice whether working HF or Sats.  My\n> frustration is that there is little CW operation on Sats!  At one point, I\n> had more cross mode contacts on Sats (me on CW talking with someone using\n> SSB) than CW to CW contacts.  I wish more folks would operate CW on Sats.\n> In my opinion, it is much easier to make and keep a CW contact while\n> compensating for doppler.\n>\n> 73,\n>\n> Marshall AA0FO\n> EM29ne\n>\n> On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 8:40 AM Wes Baden <[email protected]> wrote:\n>\n>> I second the recent posting regarding CW activity in satellite\n>> bandpasses.  Absent compelling reasons otherwise (for example, that rare DX\n>> entity operating CW high up), band management works much better when CW\n>> stations operate in the lower half of bandpasses.  Along the same lines,\n>> I'll say that, when operating CW, especially working weak stations, it can\n>> be very frustrating to be QRM'd by one or more S9 SSB stations in the\n>> bottom half of bandpasses.  This is particularly true when they're calling\n>> CQ after CQ, either not hearing or ignoring CW signals nearby.\n>>\n>> At the risk of appearing grumpy (my apologies), there lately seems to be\n>> a number of CW stations looking for their downlink signal by keeping RX on\n>> one frequency, then tuning TX and simultaneously sending dits at high\n>> speed.  When they are S9 they create quite a bit of QRM as well, to both\n>> SSB and CW ops.  I understand, of course, the need to match RX and TX\n>> freqs--I tune manually myself, without software that helps automatically.\n>> But isn't the better procedure to briefly key down on one freq, away from\n>> the center of the bandpass, and then tune your RX and find your downlink as\n>> quickly as possible?  This minimizes QRMing others.  I've also found that\n>> doing this regularly makes it possible to guess pretty accurately where TX\n>> and RX freqs need to be.  For instance, on RS-44, when it comes over the\n>> north to my QTH, I'm within 1-2 KHz of matching up TX and RX by setting\n>> tuning at 145.960 MHz and 435.648 MHz respectively.\n>>\n>> All this said, I confess that I was a Mad Ditter myself when I first got\n>> on satellites two years ago.  I received a couple of emails--always\n>> friendly, always helpful--from old timers about the above.  This general\n>> email is sent out in the same spirit.  Satellite operation is different\n>> from HF, and there definitely is a learning curve involved.\n>>\n>> 73 from FN54,\n>> Wes NA1ME\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> -----------------------------------------------------------\n>>\n>> Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.\n>> Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of\n>> AMSAT-NA.\n>> Acceptable Use and Privacy Policies available at\n>> https://www.amsat.org/about-amsat/\n>>\n>> View archives of this mailing list at\n>> https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]\n>> To unsubscribe send an email to amsat-bb-leave(a)amsat.org\n>> Manage all of your AMSAT-NA mailing list preferences at\n>> https://mailman.amsat.org\n>\n>\n\n\n",
    "attachments": [
        {
            "email": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/5C5ETSPVIC6OUUZXL64R47IA4RFRCTHU/?format=api",
            "counter": 2,
            "name": "attachment.html",
            "content_type": "text/html",
            "encoding": "utf-8",
            "size": 6069,
            "download": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/5C5ETSPVIC6OUUZXL64R47IA4RFRCTHU/attachment/2/attachment.html"
        }
    ]
}