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/WJTJXHVCT77GO4XY2XMWIZMYTR3T3LWD/",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "WJTJXHVCT77GO4XY2XMWIZMYTR3T3LWD",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/WJTJXHVCT77GO4XY2XMWIZMYTR3T3LWD/",
    "sender": {
        "address": "ldeffenb (a) homeside.to",
        "mailman_id": "eee93dddea7c4d1fad57b07e74fd5e6d",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/eee93dddea7c4d1fad57b07e74fd5e6d/emails/"
    },
    "sender_name": "Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Pass Duration vs Max Elevation",
    "date": "2011-10-15T00:39:37Z",
    "parent": null,
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Another question from a satellite newbie.\n\nI'm working on a satellite pass information query system via APRS \nmessaging and am currently providing future pass duration as a layman's \nindicator of the \"quality\" of an upcoming pass.  I've been told that \nduration is \"of little value\" (see below for the full quote) and a max \nelevation is all that matters.\n\nIn my (relatively short) time of watching various pass predictions, I've \nfound a nearly direct correlation between the duration of a pass and the \nmax elevation achieved.  I've not noticed a \"longer low pass\" nor a \nshort high pass for that matter.  Low elevation passes are short, and \nhigh elevation passes are long.\n\nSo, my question, to be answered from the perspective of hoping to get \nmore people aware of satellite passes by making it easy to casually \nquery their availability while at the same time providing useful \ninformation to people that frequently \"work the birds\" (if I've got that \nexpression correct) while they're away from their normal prediction \ntools is:\n\nWould a forecast pass duration (expressed as a delta time) be useful in \nthis context, or is that truly \"of little value\" and the Max Elevation \nof a pass should be provided necessitating a potentially greater \neducation of the general populace?\n\nLynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32\n\nPS.  Here's my original reasoning for pass duration rather than max \nelevation and the comments I received in reply.  The sender of the \nresponse is purposely kept anonymous so that I can get independently \nreasoned responses and not just agreements with the quoted source.\n\n>  I went with a pass duration rather than max\n>  elevation so novices can better plan their\n>  time investment.  They both basically\n>  communicate pass \"quality\" and \"ease of\n>  working\", but everyone understands time, while\n>  the experts have a handle on elevation.\n\nSorry, but time is of little value since it can be a longer low pass that one has no prayer of working from a mobile because it is so low.  So elevation tells it all.  A low max elevation is not worth bothering with no matter how long it is.  A high elevation pass will have a nearly 10 dB advantage to the mobile operator and is very important information.  And also, by definition it is longer.\n\nAnd satellite operators know the approximate length of a pass.  For a mobile, the shortest is the ISS with about 5 minutes useable.  For PCSAT1, about 10 minutes max.  All other satellites are somewhere in between or are not usually workable from an FM mobile rig with omni antenna.  So the few minutes difference is of little value.\n\nI dont think people are going to arrange their daily schedules around whether a satellite is going to be useable fo 5 minutes or 8 minutes.  But they certainly will change plans for a 60 degree pass compared to a 10 degree pass.\n\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}