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/TFEXHOBJIU7DZON7WQ5CHQ3XR7XXQH4H/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "TFEXHOBJIU7DZON7WQ5CHQ3XR7XXQH4H",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/JYBQARFSNYM7QPN74V22FV2JGA62JEUH/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "matt (a) ettus.com",
        "mailman_id": "fcfbe2ace2e140b5be16e4b6f8dcea6b",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/fcfbe2ace2e140b5be16e4b6f8dcea6b/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Matt Ettus",
    "subject": "[eagle] Re: Another idea on phased array configuration",
    "date": "2007-04-27T05:20:59Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/NOI4WPSYPJWNRTKL3RDYQH77VZWXJJV3/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "\n>\n> For the rest of the group I pose a question: If we assume that we are \n> going to modulate the downlink with BPSK, can we get away with hard \n> limiting (i.e. Class-C) amplifier? Do we really care about occupying a \n> spectrum about twice as wide as \"best engineering practice\"?\n\nThis has long been decided -- we WILL be limiting, and everything will \nbe constant envelope.  Class C or even class E amplifiers should be used.\n\nMatt\n",
    "attachments": []
}