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/DRNISI5JXU6KVRB3TJBFH3T5U2VV2OE5/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "003801c6dd82$4e9914e0$0b0a0a0a@RICK",
    "message_id_hash": "DRNISI5JXU6KVRB3TJBFH3T5U2VV2OE5",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/UPK4RTUGRHTRVDPDYXKITZDIFRCLMXOK/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "w2gps (a) cnssys.com",
        "mailman_id": "5948a5f4b4c343b5ae370965ac0fc1c2",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/5948a5f4b4c343b5ae370965ac0fc1c2/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Rick Hambly (W2GPS)",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: Why do the amsats get more and more complex?",
    "date": "2006-09-21T13:31:55Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/YRJ2VRA4RSM2USXIF5YO237AWHRTPK6N/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Les,\n\n> Galileo (if it is ever built and \n> launched and worked) would just be \n> over Europe, right? \n\nNo.\n\n> That would leave the rest of the \n> world the ability to use our L band \n> uplink, right? \n\nNo.\n\n> If we hams are using a dish pointed at \n> the sky with a narrow bandwidth how is \n> that going to interfere with ground \n> receivers some distance from us? \n\nThe high EIRP signals will impinge on aircraft.  Also, other Hams like ATV\nwill create interference that will not be tolerated for long and all will\nsuffer the consequences.\n\n> We would be smart enough to not have \n> the Eagle uplink on the same freq, right? \n\nWrong, there is almost no place to hide.\n\n> And we would design Eagle such that we \n> could (from ground control) move the Eagle \n> receive freq away from any potential conflict \n> with Galileo, right? \n\nNo.\n\n> And Eagle would be in orbit and operational long \n> before Galileo, right? \n\nNo.\n\n> And Galileo receivers on the ground will have \n> the ability to cut out any possible \n> interference from us, right?\n\nNo.\n\n> Seems to me that we are planning to give up \n> the L band (as an uplink) \n> based on a lot of bad assumptions.\n\nThe assumption that we are giving up on anything, including L-band, for our\nsatellites (P3E and Eagle) is overblown and untrue.\n\nRick\nW2GPS\nAMSAT LM2232\n \n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On\nBehalf Of [email protected]\nSent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:16 PM\nTo: [email protected]\nSubject: [amsat-bb] Re: Why do the amsats get more and more complex?\n\n\nGalileo (if it is ever built  and launched and worked) would just be \nover Europe, right? That would leave the rest of the world the \nability to use our L band uplink, right? If we hams are using a dish \npointed at the sky with a narrow bandwidth how is that going to \ninterfere with ground receivers some distance from us? We would be \nsmart enough to not have the Eagle uplink on the same freq, right? \nAnd we would design Eagle such that we could (from ground control) \nmove the Eagle receive freq away from any potential conflict with \nGalileo, right? And Eagle would be in orbit and operational long \nbefore Galileo, right? And Galileo receivers on the ground will have \nthe ability to cut out any possible interference from us, right?\n\nSeems to me that we are planning to give up the L band (as an uplink) \nbased on a lot of bad assumptions.\n\nLes W4SCO\n\n\n>The answer is in two parts. First, an L-band ground antenna would be too\n>large to disguise as a TVRO dish. Second, there is fear that over the\n>lifetime of Eagle that L-band could become unavailable, particularly in\n>Europe, if the Galileo system is deployed.  Galileo would be a primary\n>service and Ham transmissions would likely interfere with low cost\n>commercial receivers.\n>\n>I don't wish to debate these points. I'm just telling you the reasoning\nthat\n>went into not choosing L-band. I assure you that every possibility was\n>considered. Lists were created and discussed on each alternative.\n>\n>Rick\n>W2GPS\n>AMSAT LM2232\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nSent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author.\nNot an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\nSubscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}