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/D7QMEQZ4HMMQYNT6YQAXDIG74OTMATW6/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "D7QMEQZ4HMMQYNT6YQAXDIG74OTMATW6",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/C5DEUCR5WIARUINY2X55AITRBA3OEO7K/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "aa5uk (a) yahoo.com",
        "mailman_id": "ccd7bbd4f5f849339fc0c8814b1bc350",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/ccd7bbd4f5f849339fc0c8814b1bc350/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Adrian Engele",
    "subject": "Re: [amsat-bb] Diplexer recommendation",
    "date": "2018-01-09T17:17:36Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/K63P6IV66TG7A3YVMYJTHIQHTN7Z6HXA/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Here is another excellent ARRL article back from 2004 about Diplexers:\nhttp://www.dci.ca/pdf/qst-dec-2004.pdf\nI had good experience with the MFJ-916B and got better results compared to the Comet 4160. \n\nAdrian AA5UK\n \n\n    On Tuesday, January 9, 2018, 10:00:30 AM CST, Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK) <[email protected]> wrote:  \n \n Rico,\n\nI had used either Comet or Diamond diplexers in the past, until I\nfound the MFJ diplexers were about half the price of the Comet and\nDiamond units, with what I saw as comparable performance. WiMo in\nthe US is like your description of MFJ in Europe; I've never seen\nor tried WiMo diplexers.\n\nOne review I saw a while back actually showed the MFJ-916B to be\nmuch better than Diamond's MX-72:\n\nhttp://www.w4gso.org/news/comparing-duplexers-mfj-vs-diamond/\n\nThe pictures and screenshots aren't in this article, but the text\ntells the story of this comparison.\n\n73!\n\n\n\n\n\nPatrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK\nhttp://www.wd9ewk.net/\nTwitter: @WD9EWK or http://twitter.com/WD9EWK\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Rico van Genugten <\[email protected]> wrote:\n\n> Hi all,\n>\n> I'm using an FT-897D for TX (non-duplex), and an Airspy and computer for\n> RX. Good idea to use four switches Greg, in fact that's what I'm currently\n> doing. With four switches you always use one antenna for RX and the other\n> for TX though, I want to be able to use the same antenna for RX and TX when\n> that works better with the current satellite orientation. Using two\n> switches and two diplexers I would be able to independently select which\n> antenna to use for RX, and which one to use for TX. I posted the connection\n> scheme on twitter (warning, mspaint ahead):\n> https://twitter.com/PA3RVG/status/950649511935905792\n>\n> But we are drifting from the original question: which diplexers? I have\n> heard good stories about the MFJ-916, but its availability is not great in\n> Europe. What about Comet, Diamond or Wimo? Are they any good?\n>\n> Regards,\n> Rico\n>\n>\n>\n_______________________________________________\nSent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\nto all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed\nare solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.\nNot an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\nSubscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n  \n",
    "attachments": []
}