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/KB73KPLY2GJN3H4HFTY5STKQJEGXHB6N/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "KB73KPLY2GJN3H4HFTY5STKQJEGXHB6N",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/O4CBHCQWIXPB6I76ZE7HLBOT23BUM32U/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "bill (a) hsmicrowave.com",
        "mailman_id": "d7ecbf0c1df148f289f27dd7a8c37974",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/d7ecbf0c1df148f289f27dd7a8c37974/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Bill Ress",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: Galileo interference on L band",
    "date": "2006-09-22T06:54:32Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/O4CBHCQWIXPB6I76ZE7HLBOT23BUM32U/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/DVLSTIZCHOIJAVBNPC6IWP5QE7ZQ6MPQ/?format=api",
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/ONNPOCILEOSAD4VPHWBCDFYOEHOYD3XP/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Hi Tom,\n\nYou stated:\n\n\"Sorry -- I've been away from home on business while the latest flack\noccurred under the general topic heading \"Galileo interference on L band\".\"\n\nFirst, I would hope we could characterize the past proceedings on the -bb as\na useful debate rather than \"flack.\"\n\nThat said, I do appreciate your links on interference which I have read\npreviously but they can be useful to others following this discussion.\n\nBut perhaps my conclusions, after reading the links, might differ from\nyours. But, I think we can agree, as I have stated before, that a potential\nfor interference \"could\" possibly exist, albeit, at some future time.\n\nThe key issue here for us the use of the Amateur satellite L-Band 1260 to\n1270 Mhz.\n\nThe articles you reference deal primarily with interference to G2 GLONOSS\nwhich operates at 1240 to 1256. One of the interfering signals the articles\npoint out are German Digipeaters operating in the (authorized) frequency\nrange of 1240 to 1242 Mhz (the low end of the G2 band).\n\nThat material was published in 1999. While I don't have the answer, maybe\nyou do, the question to ask is: in the seven intervening years has there\nbeen any GLONOSS or GPS \"public safety\" issues resulting from the Digipeater\noperations, and have these Digipeaters since been taken off the air by the\nregulatory agencies?\n\nI believe the articles also hit heavy on the ATC radar interference in\nGermany (and likely elsewhere). Do we know if any of the ATC radars have\nmoved in frequency?\n\nThe articles also point out interference deficiencies in several of the\nreceivers tested and alludes to ways of mitigating their deficiencies. I'm\nsure that over the past seven years receiver improvements have been made.\n\nYou also said:\n\n\"We the Eagle technical team, have never said that L-band won't work NOW\nor 5 years from now. But our vision for Eagle is that when the first one\nflies 4-5 years from now, we want it to be a useful resource for at\nleast a 10 year lifetime. We are very concerned about making a several\nmillion dollar (after you count the volunteer builder's blood, sweat &\ntears) investment only to have it blown away right after launch by the\nGNSS cartels just because we picked L-band to be anything like a\n\"primary\" uplink.\"\n\nYes - those are admirable desires but we can't engineer for \"unknown\" future\nevents. It just bogs us down with worry that we might not make the right\n\"guess.\" Instead, as I stated before, base decisions on the engineering\nfacts as we know them today (available technology, size, power, space,\nresources, user needs, etc.) and let the future bring on whatever it has in\nstore for us.\n\nIf you can make arguments that L-Band won't work because of system\nengineering constraints or the mission objectives we have before us today -\nI can live with that. But lets take this Galileo \"cloud\" off the decision\nprocess.\n\nI don't think many future AMSAT communicators will fault you for not being\nable to predict the future.\n\nRegards...Bill - N6GHz\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": []
}