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/XH5HJJNBGT5YGLAA45ALISX352YBCDLT/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "XH5HJJNBGT5YGLAA45ALISX352YBCDLT",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/GBIJXEAS5H56M7ZHWEIUH2CMAYVTRXZN/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "bill (a) hsmicrowave.com",
        "mailman_id": "d7ecbf0c1df148f289f27dd7a8c37974",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/d7ecbf0c1df148f289f27dd7a8c37974/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Bill Ress",
    "subject": "[eagle] Re: [Fwd: Re: 3GHz]",
    "date": "2007-02-06T02:38:35Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/GBIJXEAS5H56M7ZHWEIUH2CMAYVTRXZN/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Jim,\n\nThe ITU has already listed 3400 to 3410 MHz as the authorized secondary \namateur satellite band for regions 2 and 3. Their HSMM proposed band \nplan is just consistent with what is already allocated.\n\nRegards...Bill - N6GHz\n\nJim Sanford wrote:\n> Team:\n> This is the response I got to an email I sent after seeing the latest \n> CQ-VHF.  The successors to the HSMM effort are proposing a digital band \n> plan, and have included us.  They gave us 3400 to 3410, as an initial \n> proposal.\n>\n> SO, digital guys, is this enough?  In the discussions I've been part of, \n> we spoke of 10 MHz as a minimum, and we spoke of it as nominal.  How \n> much do we REALLY need?  What's been published is a proposal, the \n> beginning of a conversation.  I know we're a long way from saying, \"this \n> is what it will be,\"  but can we articulate a needed bandwidth based on \n> what we know now?  I'd like to think that we can, but will defer to you \n> who are smarter than me on these things.  You who are more familiar with \n> the international regulatory scene, is this a good freq range, or should \n> we ask them to move?\n>\n> These guys like what we're doing and want to support us.  Good things \n> are happening!\n>\n> Thanks & 73,\n> Jim\n> [email protected]\n>\n>\n> -------- Original Message --------\n> Subject: \tRe: 3GHz\n> Date: \tSat, 3 Feb 2007 19:07:47 -0500\n> From: \tPaul Toth-NA4AR <[email protected]>\n> Reply-To: \tPaul Toth-NA4AR <[email protected]>\n> To: \tJim Sanford <[email protected]>\n> References: \t<[email protected]>\n>\n>\n>\n> Jim...\n>\n> I passed it on to Drew Glasbrenner-KO4MA.  Drew coordinates the Florida\n> AMSAT Net on the NI4CE Repeater System (and other repeaters that link into\n> NI4CE via Echolink).  Drew indicated to me he would pass the bandplan up the\n> line.  I haven't seen what CQ published as yet.\n>\n> The bandplan reserves a window between 3.400 GHz-3.410 GHz for EAGLE and\n> other satellite operations.  /*If that is not suffficient, please let me know.\n> The proposed bandplan is really more a suggestion for broadband network\n> operations rather than something set in concrete.*/  ARBA, Inc. (Amateur Radio\n> Broadband Alliance) came up with this to provide some guidance to those who\n> want to build broadband wireless networks.  We recognize that existing local\n> activity on the band will need to be accommodated.\n>\n> I applaud the work you and AMSAT are doing.  One of the missing links in\n> Amateur Radio disaster communications has been digital satellite capability\n> over an extended period (more than give or ten minutes at a time).  EAGLE\n> will help fill that need.\n>\n> Very 73 de Paul-NA4AR\n>\n> ----- Original Message ----- \n> From: \"Jim Sanford\" <[email protected]>\n> To: <[email protected]>\n> Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 6:46 PM\n> Subject: 3GHz\n>\n>\n>   \n>> Paul:\n>> I just read your article in CQ-VHF regarding HSMM work.  In one of the\n>> figures, you mention passing on a proposed band plan to AMSAT for\n>> coordination with Eagle.\n>>\n>> Question:  to whom did you pass that on?  I'm the Eagle project manager\n>> and have not seen it, other than the chart in the article.\n>>\n>> GOod article, congratulations.\n>>\n>> Thanks & 73,\n>> Jim\n>> [email protected]\n>>\n>>     \n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA\n> [email protected]\n> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/eagle\n>\n>\n>   \n\n",
    "attachments": []
}