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/QBUEG2XKOPXRONGCPAVGPMJY6OGNMVE2/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "QBUEG2XKOPXRONGCPAVGPMJY6OGNMVE2",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/VAU2KRU4V6JOALVSGKJXIA4MGKXNNI7P/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "tosca005 (a) umn.edu",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "[email protected]",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: Montagues & Capulets (was: FM vs SSB, HEO vs LEO,\tetc)",
    "date": "2012-10-22T04:29:15Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/RARYHZS74MSYTE4CT6RV6RYP4OE5QOE7/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/Z4BLWUL4KMRYV4OCOUP5KK6XC4CU4HJI/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "On Oct 21 2012, R Oler wrote:\n\n>\n The gear for the linear birds is not all that much more expensive then FM \nequipment. BUT if you dont use it for the birds and dont have really good \nantenna arrays it is more or less not of a lot of use. The same could be \nsaid in spades for some gear that will do C to X band or the other way.\n>\n Without some sort of HEO (or even a reasonable MEO) any \"band\" that comes \nfrom the linear birds is always going to be more \"short ranged\"...and while \na lot of people like building things etc the prime object in amateur radio \nstill is \"communication\" and working DX...one doesnt have to do a lot of \n\"footprint\" work to see that AO-7 and VU-52 great birds that they are, are \nstill not terribly \"dx\" birds.\n>\n \nSpoken like someone who is not active on the 10 GHz band. If you look at \nthe records of the ARRL 10 GHz and Up Cumulative Contest (the only ARRL \ncontest that reports the distances between stations in QSO's), you will \nfind a large number of 300 Km and longer contacts. And I'm not talking \nabout the spectacular distances covered by rare and exotic band openings. \nI'm talking about repeated contacts between stations running 2 to 8 watts \ninto a small offset feed dishes. Microwave bands are NOT just for contacts \nin the 20-50 Km range.\n\nAnd not just for contests either. I admit that a lot of the hams in the \narea where I lived for 33 years and now live during the summertime (where \nthe Northern Lights Radio Society plays) turn off the microwave equipment \nand put it into storage between contests, but not all of them. In fact, \nthere are a couple of operators that ragchew on 10 GHz between Minneapolis \nMN (EN34lx) and Grand Rapids, MN (EN37ed) nearly every day. No monstrous \nband opening required.\n\nThe more often that people hear hams say that the microwave bands are only \ngood for contesting over very short distances, the greater is the chance \nthat the \"brainwashing\" will be successful. This is known as a \nself-fulfilling prophecy.\n\nNote that I am firmly in the camp of wishing for linear transponders on any \nbird that we manage to fly. The accomplishments of PE1RAH prove that even a \ntiny cubesat can physically support a linear transponder, not just an FM \nsingle-channel transponder. (See \nhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/59006469/le005-r2 ) And I am firmly in the camp \nof wishing for HEO satellites if we can ever manage to get one launched \nagain. Too bad that Bill Gates (or someone with almost as much money as \nhim) isn't a ham interested in satellite communication.\n\nJust want to set the record straight about the utility of the higher bands.\n\n73 de W0JT\nEN34js June-September\nEL09ro October-May\nAMSAT-NA Life Member #2292\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}