Email Detail
Show an email
GET /hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/6GVB4QAHBQKGIBCJ6NXNGZOIEY7FBZDW/?format=api
{ "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/6GVB4QAHBQKGIBCJ6NXNGZOIEY7FBZDW/?format=api", "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api", "message_id": "[email protected]", "message_id_hash": "6GVB4QAHBQKGIBCJ6NXNGZOIEY7FBZDW", "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/XFY2XMU2FX3CB7WFGPQECF6XENDOHTXP/?format=api", "sender": { "address": "awhitney42 (a) yahoo.com", "mailman_id": "58d278281db8426c85c29aac0d997fab", "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/58d278281db8426c85c29aac0d997fab/emails/?format=api" }, "sender_name": "Adam Whitney", "subject": "Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85", "date": "2017-08-15T02:51:02Z", "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/QKKHL7CAHUL3I4YIQ4KO47CQHKK3BRWD/?format=api", "children": [], "votes": { "likes": 0, "dislikes": 0, "status": "neutral" }, "content": "K7TAB shared this link with me awhile back, which describes the fields/logic that LOTW purportedly uses to match: https://lotw.arrl.org/lotw-help/frequently-asked-questions/#datamatch\n\nAdam, K0FFY\n\n> On Aug 14, 2017, at 21:27, Matthew Stevens <[email protected]> wrote:\n> \n> I've had a few match even though I accidentally uploaded a \"20m\" SAT qso because my logger autofilled the band field incorrectly lol.\n> \n> In the few cases I couldn't get a match because of some unknown hiccup in LOTW, I have just changed the qso time by a minute or two (so lotw recognized it as a different qso record), reuploaded and got a match. \n> \n> Most of the satellite lotw info I've read online has mentioned several adif fields that don't seem to make a difference. In my experience, only the callsign,gh SAT mode, satellite name, time, and mode (FM, SSB etc) have to match. Ymmv.\n> \n> 73\n> \n> - Matthew nj4y\n> \n> Sent from my iPhone\n> \n>> On Aug 14, 2017, at 21:42, Frank Westphal <[email protected]> wrote:\n>> \n>> My experience with LOTW and SAT QSO's is the frequency does matter. I have had to fool my logging program to upload the uplink frequency to get a match on a rare occasion. N5JB's guide to LOTW and satellite QSO's says 7 items must match to get a satellite verification in LOTW. Only 5 items need to match for a non-satellite QSO.\n>> \n>> 73,\n>> Frank\n>> K6FW\n>> \n>>> On 8/14/17 6:30 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:\n>>> The convention in logging split band or mode QSOs is to use what band or mode you're transmitting on.\n>>> \n>>> That said, LoTW doesn't care about the frequencies if the propagation mode is set to 'SAT'\n>>> \n>>> 73,\n>>> \n>>> Paul, N8HM\n>>> \n>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Frank Westphal <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:\n>>> \n>>> I use LOGIC 9 and it uploads the downlink frequency. I enter both\n>>> uplink and downlink frequencies into the logging program LOCIC 9. I receive lots of matches and that seems to be the accepted\n>>> convention. I know ARRL suggests uploading the uplink frequency\n>>> in their documentation. LOGIC 9 does not follow that\n>>> recommendation and from my experience most other sat operators are\n>>> not either.\n>>> \n>>> YMMV\n>>> \n>>> 73,\n>>> Frank\n>>> K6FW\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> On 8/14/17 10:27 AM, [email protected]\n>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:\n>>> \n>>> Spending some time here by telling several times on AO-85\n>>> passes about bad modulation to the same stations, but they\n>>> DON'T listen.\n>>> \n>>> Just ignoring them, because i cannot understand them on my\n>>> TS-790/FT-847.No narrow FM and no PL tone. Never got a problem.\n>>> \n>>> And please...why do some stations upload logs with DWNlink\n>>> freq on sat qso's instead of the UPlink freq?\n>>> Always having some rejected qsl's because qso's don't match\n>>> due to wrong band. I log with VQlog, uplink and dwnlink freq\n>>> etc, so i think the TX-freq is most important for logging\n>>> sat'qso's and not the RX-freq?\n>>> \n>>> 73's\n>>> \n>>> Jerry,ON4CJQ\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> \n>>> \n>>> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----\n>>> Van: \"R.T.Liddy\" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>>> Aan: \"Matthew Stevens\" <[email protected]\n>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>, \"Joe\" <[email protected]\n>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>>> Cc: \"amsat-bb\" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>>> Verzonden: Maandag 14 augustus 2017 02:33:37\n>>> Onderwerp: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85\n>>> \n>>> \"...food in the mic hole, etc.\"!!! LOL!!! - Bob K8BL\n>>> From: Matthew Stevens <[email protected]\n>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>>> To: Joe <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>>> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>\n>>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 7:25 PM\n>>> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85\n>>> Like Jerry said, its more an issue with mic gain or poor\n>>> mic technique than anything else.\n>>> \n>>> - Matthew nj4y\n>>> \n>>> Sent from my iPad\n>>> \n>>> On Aug 13, 2017, at 19:18, Joe <[email protected]\n>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:\n>>> \n>>> Plus a LOT of people are running Narrow Modulation now.\n>>> Joe WB9SBD\n>>> Sig\n>>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock\n>>> Idle Tyme\n>>> Idle-Tyme.com\n>>> http://www.idle-tyme.com\n>>> \n>>> On 8/13/2017 6:14 PM, Jerry Buxton wrote:\n>>> 5 kHz is the nominal \"wide\" setting for ham radio\n>>> equipment on the\n>>> VHF/UHF bands. So a rig set to 5 kHz is what we all\n>>> usually expect.\n>>> 5 kHz deviation with 3 kHz audio (the usual top for\n>>> most voice) would be\n>>> about 16 kHz bandwidth. The deviation number alone is\n>>> not equal to\n>>> bandwidth. (\"Carson's Rule\")\n>>> Low audio is usually just that, not talking loud\n>>> enough, not talking\n>>> into the mic properly, mic gain setting too low, food\n>>> in the mic hole, etc.\n>>> \n>>> Jerry Buxton, NØJY\n>>> \n>>> On 8/13/2017 17:55, Ronald G. Parsons wrote:\n>>> I’ve noticed lately that many stations on AO-85\n>>> have barely audible modulation. Yet other stations\n>>> have clear audio with good quieting. I have heard\n>>> the some manufacturers of hand-held and mobile\n>>> rigs are setting their maximum deviation to 5 kHz\n>>> or even less. I have noticed the same effect on\n>>> local repeaters. Has anyone done any tests of the\n>>> deviation required for reasonable quieting on\n>>> AO-85? Or are more stations using lower power than\n>>> in the past?\n>>> \n>>> Ron W5RKN\n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> Sent via [email protected]\n>>> <mailto:[email protected]>. AMSAT-NA makes this\n>>> open forum available\n>>> to all interested persons worldwide without\n>>> requiring membership. Opinions expressed\n>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect\n>>> the official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the\n>>> amateur satellite program!\n>>> Subscription settings:\n>>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>>> \n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> Sent via [email protected]\n>>> <mailto:[email protected]>. AMSAT-NA makes this open\n>>> forum available\n>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the\n>>> amateur satellite program!\n>>> Subscription settings:\n>>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>>> \n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>>> satellite program!\n>>> Subscription settings:\n>>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>>> \n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>>> satellite program!\n>>> Subscription settings:\n>>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> \n>>> | | Virus-free. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com> |\n>>> \n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>>> satellite program!\n>>> Subscription settings:\n>>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>>> satellite program!\n>>> Subscription settings:\n>>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> \n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>. AMSAT-NA\n>>> 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\n>>> views of AMSAT-NA.\n>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite\n>>> program!\n>>> Subscription settings:\n>>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>>> \n>>> \n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n> _______________________________________________\n> Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed\n> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.\n> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n", "attachments": [] }