Email Detail
Show an email
GET /hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/OMZSQBSGK4MSCU5FUEVPG2MIBDGB26FM/?format=api
{ "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/OMZSQBSGK4MSCU5FUEVPG2MIBDGB26FM/?format=api", "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api", "message_id": "[email protected]", "message_id_hash": "OMZSQBSGK4MSCU5FUEVPG2MIBDGB26FM", "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/OMZSQBSGK4MSCU5FUEVPG2MIBDGB26FM/?format=api", "sender": { "address": "nsp25 (a) cornell.edu", "mailman_id": "013b724c0f5242a785b441fc3ae1038c", "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/013b724c0f5242a785b441fc3ae1038c/emails/?format=api" }, "sender_name": "Nathaniel S. Parsons", "subject": "[amsat-bb] Ridge Test Results", "date": "2008-04-22T03:06:42Z", "parent": null, "children": [], "votes": { "likes": 0, "dislikes": 0, "status": "neutral" }, "content": "Hi again, everyone.\n\nIt's a little overwhelming to get so much help at once, but thank you,\neveryone, for all of it.\n\nOne clarification: I did indeed mean pF, not uF for the capacitors in the\nmatching circuit.\n\nAlso, we performed another ridge test this evening (another typo there: the\nridge is 3.18km from the roof where we have the ground station setup), using\nthe complete ground station (minus pre-amp), and TH-D7 with rubber duck.\n\nWe transmitted from the ground station, while varying the amount of\nattenuators between the TS-2000 and coax to the antenna. The \"PWR\" column is\nin the format (TH-D7)/(TS-2000). With each test, two 319-byte packets were\nsent by the ground station in rapid succession. The results are below. If\nany of this is not clear, I will do my best to clarify things.\n\nAlso, the entire test was performed at 437.405MHz, at 1200 baud, even though\nwe would like to operate at 9600. I have gotten 9600 baud to work when two\nTH-D7's are across the room from each other, but since 9600 baud didn't work\nduring the initial configuration, we decided to just characterize the rubber\nduck at 1200.\n\nAnt. Pos. PWR Atten. Packets\nVertical .05W/5W 0dB 2/2\nVertical .5W/5W 50dB 0/2\nVertical .5W/5W 45dB 1/2\nVertical .5W/5W 45dB 2/2\nVertical .5W/5W 50dB 0/2\n\nHorizontal .5/5 50dB 0/2\nHorizontal .5/5 45dB 1/2\nHorizontal .5/5 45dB 0/2\nHorizontal .5/5 45dB 0/2\nHorizontal .5/5 45dB 0/2\nHorizontal .5/5 40dB 0/2\nHorizontal .5/5 40dB 0/2\nHorizontal .5/5 35dB 0/2\nHorizontal .5/5 30dB 2/2\nHorizontal .5/5 30dB 1/2\nHorizontal .5/5 30dB 2/2\n\n45 deg. .5/5 30dB 2/2\n45 deg. .5/5 30dB 2/2\n45 deg. .5/5 35dB 2/2\n45 deg. .5/5 40dB 2/2\n45 deg. .5/5 45dB 1/2\n45 deg. .5/5 45dB 0/2\n\nComments? Concerns? Questions?\n\nMy initial interpretation of these data is that our square loop antenna has\na MUCH lower gain than is required, and something like a short length of\nmeasuring tape would be a better substitute, as has been suggested by\nnumerous people.\n\n-Nate\n", "attachments": [] }