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/Z5SO7FMO6BYK23SHXQH6VCC7WHFKGNT4/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "Z5SO7FMO6BYK23SHXQH6VCC7WHFKGNT4",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/PA5WWG4ZOQHJPOTOO5KFJ4F2CNN7YOMG/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "mat_62 (a) netcommander.com",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Michael Tondee",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: Using a scanner to hear the FM sats?",
    "date": "2007-05-31T19:41:14Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/MBS3KWDXY6HOENWWMUT62AJMB7REUNED/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/TNN74HHQDAHTOUQK2F4RRTAGZ5UUQ6B4/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": " Thanks to everyone who replied to my question. I'm going to give it a \nshot, I have nothing to lose. I've got a 2 meter mobile for the uplink \nso hearing the downlink well enough is the issue. Luckily I live out in \nthe \"boonies\" and it's quiet out here as far as RF. I don't anticipate \nany intermod issues. My main concerns will be the scanner sensitivity \nand tuning for doppler it appears.\n73,\nMichael\nTony Langdon wrote:\n> At 10:38 AM 5/31/2007, Michael Tondee wrote:\n>> Due to some money issues, I had to sell all my sat gear including my\n>> beloved  TS-2000X. I've been going through some of my old gear and\n>> rustled up a Radio shack VHF/UHF scanner that covers ham frequencies. Do\n>> you think it would be possible to hear the FM sats with it? I have a\n>\n> Depends on the scanner.  You have some possible issues to contend \n> with.  Firstly, scanners are likely to be a little deaf, compared to \n> the Kenwood, but with a decent antenna (and possibly preamp) it should \n> have the sensitivity.  Secondly, if you're in an RF heavy area, \n> intermods and image responses might cause interference.  Suck it and \n> see. :)\n>\n>> homebrew 11 element  linearly polarized yagi and I can still track the\n>> sats via computer rotator control.\n>\n> That solves the antenna problem.  I'd say your chances are good.\n>\n>> I can make it where I have a short run of cable to the antennas since I\n>> don't have preamps anymore.\n>> I'm also wondering about using some 75ohm RG6 quad shield satellite TV\n>> cable for receiving. Would this be better or worse than 9913 with the\n>> scanner? Kind of grabbing at straws here but I'm wondering if anyone\n>> thinks it would work before I invest too much time into it.\n>\n> The 75 ohm cable will probably work fine for receiving.  If you \n> already have the cable, suck it and see.  The most difficult part will \n> be fitting connectors to it.\n>\n> Worth a shot I'd say.\n>\n> 73 de VK3JED\n> http://vkradio.com\n>\n>\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}