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/ZWYLYBSJEEYMMU7TG7733MLEM2M7LCSE/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "75C7E344628B4129AE54F4A45937D80C@little",
    "message_id_hash": "ZWYLYBSJEEYMMU7TG7733MLEM2M7LCSE",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/FVVMU6KDIBRYIBRJKDVHIPGOYYDN3T5M/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "jtowler (a) xtra.co.nz",
        "mailman_id": "763d249c87d34f5f9602fc4d85264db1",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/763d249c87d34f5f9602fc4d85264db1/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Jim Towler",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: Automatic doppler tracking of DSB",
    "date": "2008-02-06T07:35:30Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/FVVMU6KDIBRYIBRJKDVHIPGOYYDN3T5M/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/HXC2JOJDEIOEA6XXHGNYJCJK54VZPIFN/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "James,\n\nThanks for your email, which I have not included below, to save bandwidth.\n\nYou make a number of interesting points, and I might write more at a later\ntime.\n\nRegarding your point that there was little need to have good Doppler control\nof the uplink, as its FM:\n\nIn general terms, this is largely true, and for a 2m uplink, little or no\ntuning is required on AO-51/Echo etc. However, a number of earlier emails\nspoke of the more critical need for AO-16 as it appears to have tight\nfilters compared to a typical FM uplink. Careful control of Doppler for the\nuplink would allow a more full use of the entire filter bandwidth, rather\nthan using FM-Narrow, and having weak audio.\n\nI still like the idea of attempting CTCSS, so may try this myself at some\npoint. I have the sometimes great advantage that sat passes here may have\nonly zero, one or two stations on, so it becomes possible to test or try\nthings that might be considered unacceptable usage or sharing of the\nresource in many other locations around the world. If the sat makes a pass\nto my East, I can be close to 100% sure I would be the only station, so\ncould test mostly anything I wanted that would not be harmful to the sat.\n(The downside is that its also impossible to make a contact too.)\n\nNot related to AO-16, but something I intended to test on FO-29 at some\npoint, was \"two-station Doppler correction\". Its not something I got around\nto, but the plan was to get the exact locations of both myself and the other\nstation, and feed both sets of data into the Doppler corrections. The result\ncould be that the other station would use a FIXED uplink and FIXED downlink\nfor the entire pass, and the other station would do both. This would be\nideal for someone to have their \"first go\" at working a contact via an SSB\npassband sat. HOWEVER, the signals would walk all over the passband on the\nsat, so would be totally unacceptable except for short tests, and when very\nfew stations are in the footprint of the bird, as is mostly the case here in\nNew Zealand. Sadly, its too late for FO-29, but it is still an idea I'd like\nto test. Again, I must repeat: This is NOT for use in busy parts of the\nworld, were many stations are in the footprint, as it creates a more extreme\nuse of the bandwidth.\n\nRegards,\nJim, ZL1TYF\nWellington\nNew Zealand\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On\nBehalf Of James Whitfield\nSent: Wednesday, 6 February 2008 1:58 p.m.\nTo: [email protected]\nSubject: [amsat-bb] Re: Automatic doppler tracking of DSB\n\nMany thanks to each of you who have replied to my inquiry.\n\n <<< Contents Removed >>>\n\n\n\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}