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/CCM5DOMR5VJVJJGSWABQQBLYN2BERNJK/",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "CCM5DOMR5VJVJJGSWABQQBLYN2BERNJK",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/CCM5DOMR5VJVJJGSWABQQBLYN2BERNJK/",
    "sender": {
        "address": "brahn (a) woh.rr.com",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Bruce Rahn",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: 10mtr and Galileo",
    "date": "2006-09-11T05:13:24Z",
    "parent": null,
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "John B. Stephensen wrote:\n> Galileo transmits on 1260-1300 MHz and 1215-1300 MHz is now allocated to\n> global positioning systems (up to 5 of them). Amateur transmissions can\n> desense the earth-based receivers. Tests on U.S. GPS receivers showed \n> that a\n> 1W EIRP CW signal 10 km away would cause inteference. It would be \n> better if\n> 1260-1270 MHz was a downlink for amateur satellites.\n>\n> 73,\n>\n> John\n> KD6OZH\nJohn,\n\nYou are neglecting real word conditions...future civilian airborne \nGPS/GNSS/Galileo receiver systems are going to have to incorporate \nanti-jam capabilities.  A few do already and changes in the signal \ncoding for the new civilian GPS downlink will have a much more robust \ncapability when it comes to interference rejection.  I also believe \nGalileo will too employ a more jam resistant signal waveform.\n\nThere are much greater threats to these systems than ham operators from \na real-world technical perspective.  However, I will concede that \ngovernment agencies may eliminate amateur use of L-Band for political \nreasons...an easy, but meaningless way for them to show they are taking \naction.\n\nHowever, until and if the hammer comes down, there are currently no \nstrong technical reasons to eliminate L-Band uplinks.\n\nBruce\n\n-- \nBruce Rahn\n\nWisdom has two parts:\n1.  having a lot to say; and\n2.  not saying it!\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}