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/SHTVEZ6XF4CIJ2OD6GVNDHP5NO5HWCHN/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "SHTVEZ6XF4CIJ2OD6GVNDHP5NO5HWCHN",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/BSGWXQ5C5EG574AP6DYZBNB2C6UYJLUN/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "mat_62 (a) netcommander.com",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Michael Tondee",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: IRB's and Satellites.",
    "date": "2007-04-26T23:54:37Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/J5KWMKVG4LJMETAADH53BV743PPWBZIV/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "I'm having to sell off my gear because of very little time to operate \nand some pressing debts. Are IRB's a possible way for me to make an \noccasional sat contact?\nJust Curious,\nMichael , W4HIJ\nTony Langdon wrote:\n> At 03:29 AM 4/27/2007, you wrote:\n>\n>\n>   \n>> Perhaps this is all about goals then ... if your goal is to simply\n>> communicate via a satellite, then the remote base concept is perfectly valid\n>> and it has been demonstrated that it works.\n>>\n>> If the goal is to learn how to build a groundstation and then optimize it\n>> for use with satellites, then I'm not sure this will do that (unless of\n>> course you are the one building the station).\n>>     \n>\n> I think you're right.  Goals are where it's at, and being in the \n> other VoIP games in town (IRLP, Echolink and friends), I regularly \n> encounter the same debate.  If my goal is to simply communicate via \n> some (at least partly) amateur controlled medium, these modes and \n> IRBs are fine, whether I have RF or a PC on my end.  OTOH, if my goal \n> is to play with RF, investigate propagation and setup a working \n> satellite ground station, then it's time to pull out some radio gear, \n> antennas and rotators and put them on the air (though for long and \n> complicated reasons, I'm also likely to interface that to IRLP or my \n> own IRB, because where I have the best space to erect antennas is \n> 24km from where I mostly operate).\n>\n>\n>   \n>> I see it like a calculator and a slide rule ... the calculator works great,\n>> you just punch in some numbers and the correct result pops out. But the\n>> slide rule allows one to see the underlying mathematics taking shape as it\n>> is moved to the same answer.\n>>\n>> Which way is \"better\" must be self-determined.\n>>     \n>\n> Exactly, horses for courses. :)\n>\n>\n> 73 de VK3JED\n> http://vkradio.com\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n>   \n\n",
    "attachments": []
}