Email Detail
Show an email
GET /hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/QKKHL7CAHUL3I4YIQ4KO47CQHKK3BRWD/?format=api
{ "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/QKKHL7CAHUL3I4YIQ4KO47CQHKK3BRWD/?format=api", "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api", "message_id": "[email protected]", "message_id_hash": "QKKHL7CAHUL3I4YIQ4KO47CQHKK3BRWD", "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/XFY2XMU2FX3CB7WFGPQECF6XENDOHTXP/?format=api", "sender": { "address": "matthew (a) mrstevens.net", "mailman_id": "9211e31bd97d4743ace6c47863af3e1b", "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/9211e31bd97d4743ace6c47863af3e1b/emails/?format=api" }, "sender_name": "Matthew Stevens", "subject": "Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85", "date": "2017-08-15T02:27:04Z", "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/3ZC2B6YVFOKVADH2EUKKMTMXOOUCPPSH/?format=api", "children": [ "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/6GVB4QAHBQKGIBCJ6NXNGZOIEY7FBZDW/?format=api" ], "votes": { "likes": 0, "dislikes": 0, "status": "neutral" }, "content": "I've had a few match even though I accidentally uploaded a \"20m\" SAT qso because my logger autofilled the band field incorrectly lol.\n\nIn the few cases I couldn't get a match because of some unknown hiccup in LOTW, I have just changed the qso time by a minute or two (so lotw recognized it as a different qso record), reuploaded and got a match. \n\nMost of the satellite lotw info I've read online has mentioned several adif fields that don't seem to make a difference. In my experience, only the callsign,gh SAT mode, satellite name, time, and mode (FM, SSB etc) have to match. Ymmv.\n\n73\n\n- Matthew nj4y\n\nSent from my iPhone\n\n> On Aug 14, 2017, at 21:42, Frank Westphal <[email protected]> wrote:\n> \n> My experience with LOTW and SAT QSO's is the frequency does matter. I have had to fool my logging program to upload the uplink frequency to get a match on a rare occasion. N5JB's guide to LOTW and satellite QSO's says 7 items must match to get a satellite verification in LOTW. Only 5 items need to match for a non-satellite QSO.\n> \n> 73,\n> Frank\n> K6FW\n> \n>> On 8/14/17 6:30 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:\n>> The convention in logging split band or mode QSOs is to use what band or mode you're transmitting on.\n>> \n>> That said, LoTW doesn't care about the frequencies if the propagation mode is set to 'SAT'\n>> \n>> 73,\n>> \n>> Paul, N8HM\n>> \n>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Frank Westphal <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:\n>> \n>> I use LOGIC 9 and it uploads the downlink frequency. I enter both\n>> uplink and downlink frequencies into the logging program LOCIC 9. I receive lots of matches and that seems to be the accepted\n>> convention. I know ARRL suggests uploading the uplink frequency\n>> in their documentation. LOGIC 9 does not follow that\n>> recommendation and from my experience most other sat operators are\n>> not either.\n>> \n>> YMMV\n>> \n>> 73,\n>> Frank\n>> K6FW\n>> \n>> \n>> On 8/14/17 10:27 AM, [email protected]\n>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:\n>> \n>> Spending some time here by telling several times on AO-85\n>> passes about bad modulation to the same stations, but they\n>> DON'T listen.\n>> \n>> Just ignoring them, because i cannot understand them on my\n>> TS-790/FT-847.No narrow FM and no PL tone. Never got a problem.\n>> \n>> And please...why do some stations upload logs with DWNlink\n>> freq on sat qso's instead of the UPlink freq?\n>> Always having some rejected qsl's because qso's don't match\n>> due to wrong band. I log with VQlog, uplink and dwnlink freq\n>> etc, so i think the TX-freq is most important for logging\n>> sat'qso's and not the RX-freq?\n>> \n>> 73's\n>> \n>> Jerry,ON4CJQ\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----\n>> Van: \"R.T.Liddy\" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>> Aan: \"Matthew Stevens\" <[email protected]\n>> <mailto:[email protected]>>, \"Joe\" <[email protected]\n>> <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>> Cc: \"amsat-bb\" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>> Verzonden: Maandag 14 augustus 2017 02:33:37\n>> Onderwerp: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85\n>> \n>> \"...food in the mic hole, etc.\"!!! LOL!!! - Bob K8BL\n>> From: Matthew Stevens <[email protected]\n>> <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>> To: Joe <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>\n>> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>\n>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 7:25 PM\n>> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Modulation levels on AO-85\n>> Like Jerry said, its more an issue with mic gain or poor\n>> mic technique than anything else.\n>> \n>> - Matthew nj4y\n>> \n>> Sent from my iPad\n>> \n>> On Aug 13, 2017, at 19:18, Joe <[email protected]\n>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:\n>> \n>> Plus a LOT of people are running Narrow Modulation now.\n>> Joe WB9SBD\n>> Sig\n>> The Original Rolling Ball Clock\n>> Idle Tyme\n>> Idle-Tyme.com\n>> http://www.idle-tyme.com\n>> \n>> On 8/13/2017 6:14 PM, Jerry Buxton wrote:\n>> 5 kHz is the nominal \"wide\" setting for ham radio\n>> equipment on the\n>> VHF/UHF bands. So a rig set to 5 kHz is what we all\n>> usually expect.\n>> 5 kHz deviation with 3 kHz audio (the usual top for\n>> most voice) would be\n>> about 16 kHz bandwidth. The deviation number alone is\n>> not equal to\n>> bandwidth. (\"Carson's Rule\")\n>> Low audio is usually just that, not talking loud\n>> enough, not talking\n>> into the mic properly, mic gain setting too low, food\n>> in the mic hole, etc.\n>> \n>> Jerry Buxton, NØJY\n>> \n>> On 8/13/2017 17:55, Ronald G. Parsons wrote:\n>> I’ve noticed lately that many stations on AO-85\n>> have barely audible modulation. Yet other stations\n>> have clear audio with good quieting. I have heard\n>> the some manufacturers of hand-held and mobile\n>> rigs are setting their maximum deviation to 5 kHz\n>> or even less. I have noticed the same effect on\n>> local repeaters. Has anyone done any tests of the\n>> deviation required for reasonable quieting on\n>> AO-85? Or are more stations using lower power than\n>> in the past?\n>> \n>> Ron W5RKN\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected]\n>> <mailto:[email protected]>. AMSAT-NA makes this\n>> open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without\n>> requiring membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect\n>> the official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the\n>> amateur satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings:\n>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected]\n>> <mailto:[email protected]>. AMSAT-NA makes this open\n>> forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the\n>> amateur satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings:\n>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>> satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings:\n>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>> satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings:\n>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> | | Virus-free. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com> |\n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>> satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings:\n>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.\n>> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring\n>> membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\n>> official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur\n>> satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings:\n>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>. AMSAT-NA\n>> makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.\n>> Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official\n>> views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite\n>> program!\n>> Subscription settings:\n>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>> <http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>\n>> \n>> \n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed\n> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.\n> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n", "attachments": [] }