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/QBWZ47QOKDC2SRRRIYV6KVZV462FYI3M/",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "QBWZ47QOKDC2SRRRIYV6KVZV462FYI3M",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/QBWZ47QOKDC2SRRRIYV6KVZV462FYI3M/",
    "sender": {
        "address": "hamdan (a) ix.netcom.com",
        "mailman_id": "1ffe696a2eda4e2a8ca83d482ab51a16",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/1ffe696a2eda4e2a8ca83d482ab51a16/emails/"
    },
    "sender_name": "Bernie and Cheryl",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: SO-50",
    "date": "2013-11-10T05:59:52Z",
    "parent": null,
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Paul:\n\nI didn't realize that it's downlink was only 250mw.  No wonder.\n\nI don't think AO-51 had a constant carrier.  But it seemed that way \nsometimes.  And, it frequently got my receiver to full quieting, \nwhile SO-50 almost never does that.\n\nOne reason why I was asking is that I have been working up to getting \nback on the FM birds via a handheld.  I have a place in the mountains \nin DN60, and I suspect that's much more rare than my home QTH grid \n(DM 79).  I was thinking of operating handheld from there, and activating it.\n\nThanks for your answer.  I really appreciate it.\n\n73 de Bernie, KF0QS\n\nAt 10:37 PM 11/9/2013, Paul Stoetzer wrote:\n>It's got a weaker downlink. I don't think the receiver is any less \n>sensitive than the other birds, but since it's only running 250 mW, \n>it's harder to hear.\n>\n>The other issue is that SO-50 doesn't transmit a constant carrier \n>like AO-27 did (did AO-51? I never operated through it), so it \n>doesn't sound as \"smooth\" during a pass.\n>\n>In case you missed it, the control operators are working on \n>recovering AO-27, so lets hope they are successful. I listened to \n>the packet tones as they commanded it during a pass this afternoon \n>and the transmitter sounded good. Nice strong signal.\n>\n>I too prefer the linear birds, but since there are lots of grids \n>where hams only have FM equipment, it'd be nice to get AO-27 back to \n>tide us over until Fox-1 launches next year.\n>\n>73,\n>\n>Paul Stoetzer, N8HM\n>Washington, DC\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Bernie and Cheryl \n><<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote:\n>Dear Folks:\n>\n>Is it just me or is SO-50 not quite as easy a bird to work as AO-27 \n>or AO-51 were?  I actually prefer working the SSB/CW birds, so I \n>don't have as much experience on the FM sats.  That's why I'm \n>asking.  Even though I'm able to make a few contacts on SO-50 every \n>pass I am on, it seems like everyone has a harder time getting \n>in.  It seems there are few times that people seem to get into the \n>bird full quieting, even without other stations competing for access.\n>\n>Just curious.\n>\n>Thanks and 73 de Bernie, KF0QS\n>\n>_______________________________________________\n>Sent via <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]. Opinions \n>expressed are those of the author.\n>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n>Subscription settings: \n><http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>\n",
    "attachments": []
}