September 2006 - AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

IMPORTANT - Symposium spouse tours
by Emily Clarke 14 Sep '06

14 Sep '06

I wanted to make one more announcement about Symposium group tours for wives/husbands who will not be attending the Symposium. Currently we don't have very many signed up for the tours. We have approximately 5 days to arrange for a tour, and the current level of interest doesn't warrant a private tour from the hotel. However if you or your spouse does want to sign up please do so in the next 5 days at: http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/symposium/2006GroupTours.php If we are unable to get enough people to arrange a tour there are still other options though the hotel. It would require taking an early (6:45am) shuttle to the Crowne Plaza at the Airport. 73, Emily --------------------------------- N1DID formerly W0EEC - CM87tm Support Project OSCAR - http://www.projectoscar.net

1 0

L'ers equipment
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 14 Sep '06

14 Sep '06

Hello I would like an informal survey regarding what you are using for Mode L. I am working on my system and do not want reinvent the wheel. The format of radio-power-transmission line-antenna/gain. I use a IC-1271A-10 watts-50 feet LMR400-12T helix about 12 db gain (or so). I need to improve my system and as usual your advice is invauable. Perhaps several on the list could benifit from this. The current AO-51 in L/S is an excellent chance to fine tune my system. 73 Bob W7LRD Seattle

3 2

hardline
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 14 Sep '06

14 Sep '06

Hello I have some hardline all I can find on it is GCC AL500P. Does anyone know what I have? 73 Bob W7LRD Seattle

1 0

CQ magazine, September 2006 sat article
by Diane Bruce 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

Hi, Our very own Drew, KO4MA appears in the article on page 55 of September 2006 CQ magazine. "Discover Ham Satellites with a Cheap Yagi" by Kent Britain, WA5VJB. He also has a very simple diplexer that you can build yourself. Very nice! I don't normally read CQ magazine but I happened to see this. Good work by all! - 73 Diane VA3DB (Amsat area coordinator) -- - db(a)db.net http://www.db.net/~db

2 2

Re: L'ers equipment
by Edward R. Cole 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

At 04:51 PM 9/12/2006 +0000, w7lrd(a)comcast.net wrote: > >Hello >I would like an informal survey regarding what you are using for Mode L. I am working on my system and do not want reinvent the wheel. The format of radio-power-transmission line-antenna/gain. I use a IC-1271A-10 watts-50 feet LMR400-12T helix about 12 db gain (or so). I need to improve my system and as usual your advice is invauable. Perhaps several on the list could benifit from this. The current AO-51 in L/S is an excellent chance to fine tune my system. >73 Bob W7LRD >Seattle Bob, Your feedline loss is 2.4 dB so that approx. 5.8 w are getting to the helix. Your ERP is slightly below 100w. That would be very low if this were AO-40. I ran 10w at antenna with 20-dBi gain for ERP 0f 1000w for AO-40 amd way marginal (one s-unit above noise floor). I have no info re: AO-51, so will have to wait for that. 73's Ed PS: When I get tower back up, I will be able to run 20w to two lloop-yagis 23-dBi for ERP of ~4000w! 73's, Ed - KL7UW ========================================= http://www.qsl.net/al7eb - BP40iq 144-EME: FT-847, mgf-1801/1402, 4xM2-xpol-20, 170w 432-EME: FT-847, mgf-1402, 1x21-ele (18.6 dBi), 60w =========================================

1 0

S-Band and Eagle
by ANTHONY JAPHA 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

There have been so many thoughtful comments on the S band question that it's been fun to follow the thread. I'd like to chime in. I bought S band gear just before AO40 went south. Not a lot of equipment, just a W7LRD dish with helix, a K5GNA converter, and a few odds and ends. Unfortunately, I never got to put them on the air. Now I try out the converter on AO-51when the mode is right. I live in Manhattan, operate portable, and have a fairly decent QTH to get maybe a 100 degree window. Mode V/U on AO-51 is a breeze with an HT, and FO-29 provides the occasional DX QSO using a pair of FT817s and an old 20 watt 2 mtr. amp. S-band here is nearly hopeless. I live in a census tract that contains 10 city blocks. There are 15,000 people in 9,000 households. I would not be surprised to find that 75% of those households had some sort of 2.4 Ghz device! The bird can be directly overhead, but only the rare station pops up out of the noise for a few syllables at a time. Using an Arrow ant. for 435 Mhz., by contrast, much is heard on both FO-29 and AO-51. That is my experience. It is an anecdote, to be added to the many others that have been shared. I would be shocked if a satellite designer paid much attention to it if he had some more aggregate data on which to base a design decision. It's a shred of evidence, no more, no less. Even a cub reporter shouldn't write about it without doing some research into what others are experiencing and whether my experience squares with what informed people and the data suggest. For one thing, my QTH probably isn't typical, to say the least. The designers of Eagle probably aren't hung up on making sure that users in my position should be able to use all the bird's modes. They probably don't design for the superstations either. The job is to make the bird useful to the greatest number of possible users given the budgets they face (money, power, size, etc.). The evidence I've seen in these exchanges seems to favor the designers by a large margin. They have cited their evaluation of the available data regarding the present and future use of S band. Are there data to the contrary? The fact that some stations can make it through a tough QRM situation isn't very convincing. It is the great majority of stations that should be able to use the bird. I have a couple of concerns. Is the emphasis on making the bird accessible to very modestly equipped stations (like mine?!) going too far? The bird's potential use in emergencies sounds farfetched to me. Maybe if we're down to a choice between the bird and a semaphore! I'd also like to know much more about the ground equipment required for S/C mode. How will it interface with existing equipment in the shack? Are these new pieces of gear add-ons to existing transceivers or do they stand alone? What functions to they perform? Sorry, but I'm not up on digital SSB and CW as you can see. Finally, is enough known about U/V to tell us now what ERP and receive capability will be needed? That is, how big will the antennas need to be? Thanks for all the work being put into this by the design team. If Eagle is going to fly any time soon, we've got to let them get on with it. 73, Tony, N2UN LM 183

2 1

DXpedition
by Reicher, James 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

I got this through another reflector. It looks like there will be satellite operations, courtesy of Rafael, XE1GRR 73 de N8AU, Jim in Raymore, MO __________________________________________ Dear OM, you may already be aware of the DXpediton to Revillagigedo we are planning in the time frame of Oct 16 to Nov 3, 2006. Except weather conditions like Hurricanes or other limitations out of our control might cause changes of that time schedule we expect to operate for about 2 weeks under the call XF4DL from Socorro Island (IOTA NA-030) and - at the end of the operation - for several hours under the call XF4K from Clarion (IOTA NA-115). The German participants are DF7TH, DJ5IW, DK2WV, DL1YFF, DL3DXX and me, DL8LE. All participants have a solid background of several successful dxpeditions. The Mexican participants are XE2K, XE1GRR, XE1AY, XE1HBU, XE1FRF, XE1UN, XE1FXM, XE1MMB, XE1XFX and XE1FXZ of which the majority has a high level of expertise on IOTA operations in general and four were active from XF4 before between two and four times. We are planning to operate with up to 5 stations with 3 of those 5 for 24 hours/day. Equipment to be used is mainly ICOM and YAESU for transceivers, ALPHA 99 for amplifiers plus two FL2100B and transistor amps as spare. Antennas to be installed are Titanex Verticals for the low-bands, Spider-Beams and Cushcraft A3S as well as Phased Arrays for all others. K9AY loops and / or beverages are planned as low-band receiving antennas. Besides our low-band activity the main focus will be on RTTY (digital modes) and WARC bands. The planned operation site near the air strip will be optimum for North- and South - America, Europe and Japan and will provide an excellent chance to have a XF4-qso for low and medium power stations as well as compensate the difficult propagation a little bit which is affected by the present low SSN. QSL'ing will be done via N6AWD for North-America, DL9NDS for the rest of the world. Direct inquiries will be sent directly if SASE and sufficient funds to cover the postage will be provided. All others, i.e bureau cards as well as e-mail requests, will be sent via bureau, including those arrived without adequate funds. As of today the landing and transportation permit of the Mexican Navy has already been sent to us (departure date from Manzanillo will be either Oct 14 or 15, 2006). The COFETEL has already assigned the calls XF4DL and XF4K, the permits of the environmental agency and the immigration authority are ok as well. To cover the high costs of nearly 10.000 USD for this operation in addition to the air fares of the participants, air freight fees and the equipment we have to buy we are depending on the donation of clubs, companies, organisations and private persons like you and yours. Therefore we would be very glad if you could review the possibility to support our activity. If you could decide to do so we would put your logo on our web site www.xf4dl.xedx.org as well as on the XF4DL qsl. Due to the large number of qso's we expect because of the planned duration of the operation an equivalent large number of qsl's are planned to be distributed. We would be very glad about a positive response. If you have any questions please respond via e-mail to dl8le(a)darc.de as well as jsturhahn(a)vogt-electronic.com , or just phone +49 8591 937110 (office) or +49 8546 973783 (home). 73 and thanks for reading! Juergen Sturhahn, DL8LE Manager XF4DL Neuhofen 3 94575 Windorf Germany --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by the mail server]

1 0

Re: PCSAT2 Special Ops on 12 Sept
by Armour, Randy (ITS) 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

Is PCSAT2 off until removal from the ISS? Understanding that it must be silent during EVA, I was wondering if it might be turned on for a while after EVA #2. Randy - KI4LMR -----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 8:51 PM To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] PCSAT2 Special Ops on 12 Sept PCSAT2 on ISS continues to operate its FM voice downlink on 437.975 on most passes during waking hours. Since the Shuttle has been delayed for several days, and passes are 20+ minutes earlier each day, this results in passes during the Naval Academy's morning classroom hours in the USA area next week. For EASTERN USA stations, we want to make a special FM voice contact with other schools. The 0903 EDT and 1036 EDT passes on Tuesday the 12th will occur during our students satellite lab period and we hope to contact other schools or VIP ARISS stations. If you want to set up a station during that class time, let us know so we can coordinate. Thanks, WB4APR, Bob USNA Satellite Lab _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb

2 1

Re: AO-51 Mode L/S.
by Dave G1OCN 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

Hi Clare. Thank you for your reply. The pass was fine but no other takers. It was good to give the new WIMO 4 x 9 turn helix a whirl at such low elevation, (3degrees) Next job is to change the BBQ dish vertical to a 19 turn helix, to get over the fading. Sept the 16th is a possible, but it's my only day off, so might have to be out doing other things, but the late one on the 17th is a much better one for me. We have worked before, on the 27th May at 2235 UTC on AO-51. My place of work is GB1CPB on QRZ.COM. I do get on to a few sat passes from there if I don't have any visitors at the time of the pass. Perhaps chat on the 17th. Cheers, Dave. AMSAT 5766 cc AMSAT BB

1 0

(no subject)
by Colorbinsmith＠wmconnect.com 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

unscribe

1 0

Symposium Rooms - Block Size Increased
by Emily Clarke 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

I have spoken to the director of Sales for the Crowne Plaza and they have increased our allocation of rooms. If you haven't been able to book a room everything should work OK now. Please let me know if you run into any difficulty. 73, Emily --------------------------------- N1DID formerly W0EEC - CM87tm Support Project OSCAR - http://www.projectoscar.net

1 0

sale
by gerry 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

I have for sale a PacComm TNC DFM Modem and Psk-1 and switch box. The switch box is presently setup for a Yaesu 736 transceiver. The unit is being offered here, If not sold will list on E-Bay. contact me of list for any further information at ve4gtb(a)mts.net 73 Gerry VE4GTB Amsat #29196 Area Coordinator Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada www.ve4gtb.com

1 0

Fw: 3400-3410
by i8cvs 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Hi Bob, N4HY My answere sent to you at rwmcgwier(a)comcast.net bounced back so I am forced to resend it via BB as well 73" de i8CVS Domenico ----- Original Message ----- From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(a)tin.it> To: "Robert McGwier" <rwmcgwier(a)comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 12:29 AM Subject: Re: 3400-3410 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert McGwier" <rwmcgwier(a)comcast.net> > To: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(a)tin.it> > Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:02 PM > Subject: 3400-3410 > > > Dom: > > > > What is the current status for 3400-3410 in Italy? Can you use it as a > > earth to space band? > > > > Bob > > Hi Bob > > Unfortunately in Italy 3400-3410 MHz cannot be used at all by radioamateurs > because 3400-3600 MHz is for military radiolocation and military earth to > space service. > > You can dowload the IARU bandplan allowed in Italy at > > http://www.ari.it/vhf/bandplan.pdf > > and you will see that the above band is clipped. > > By the way in a previous message this morning in BB you writes : > > "The P3E team would like to include the SDX and we all think we could get > a great Mode B transponder out of this." > > I woul like to know from you if for B transponder on P3E I can use my > old home made CW/SSB TX/RX as used for OSCAR-13 with no DSP > at all or if I have to switch to something new. > > Please let me know. > > TNX and 73" de > > i8CVS Domenico > > >

2 1

AO-51 Mode L/S.
by Dave G1OCN 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Anyone for a go across the pond at 2248 UTC ? Cheers, Dave. Portland. Dorset. IO80SM

1 0

Re: 50 MHz (was S band and Eagle: an appeal for a higherleveldiscussion)
by Tom Clark, K3IO 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Trevor, M5AKA asked > What are peoples views on trying to get an Amateur Satellite Service allocation > at 50-51 MHz ? On time scales of 10 years (i.e. soon enough to be applicable to any of the ongoing decisions), IMHO the chances are somewhere between "microscopically slim" and "no way in hell". Any change like this has to be proposed to the ITU (usually by the IARU) by some national delegation (BTW -- the head of delegation has Ambassadorial status) at a WRC. If the proposal isn't laughed out of the house instantly, it will be referred to the ITU's Study Groups for presentation at a subsequent WRC. Then the topic might be placed in front of the ITU, where it it might be adopted. The ITU's recommendations must then be ratified as a treaty by the nations involved. Here in the USA, it is offered up by the President (if he/she cares) to be ratified by the Senate (a political process that hasn't been going too swiftly on this side of the pond -- witness Kyoto). To squeeze out spectrum for Galileo (& the other proposed new GNSS systems) -- which involves gigaEuro financial issues -- took at least 3 WRC cycles (if I count right) -- i.e. 10++ years. BTW -- Since we'd have to have the first fight just in the IARU in order to have the chance of getting the ideas considered by the ITU/WRC cycle, the initial fight would be 6M vs more world-wide 40M spectrum; and I note that the IARU has a heavy pro-HF bias. Personally, if we were going to fight a battle, I'd rather see us fight for an S2 = 3400-3410 MHz allocation in R1. 73, Tom

2 1

S band and Eagle: an appeal for a higher level discussion
by Bruce Robertson 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

There has been a recent restatement of disappointment regarding the Eagle design committee's recent choice to use S band as an uplink not a downlink. Note that the next two HEO's scheduled to launch *will* have S band downlinks, so there's no worry that people like I, who live in radio quiet areas, will be unable to use our developing S band equipment in the future. As I understand it, the Eagle design team have used standard predictions of 801.11 usage to determine mathematically that by the time of launch the radio environment will simply not support reliable communications. I cannot imagine that they like these conclusions. Implementing new bands entails new risks, after all. But numbers don't lie (or shouldn't), and it would be a horrible disservice to all of us if they designed and launched a bird that was effectively mute at launch. The design team have said again and again on this list that they would welcome contradicting evidence that is cogent, and I, for one, believe them. They're our volunteers, and they deserve our support. I can't provide that contradicting evidence: I'm not skilled or qualified. But I can assess an argument, and the responses so far have not been nearly as rigorous. They have amounted to "works for me", which I think misses the point. Please, please, those of you who are qualified and competent and hold the opposing opinion, take the design committee at their word and assess their work, check their assumptions, present cogent opposing arguments. There is some thought that a dish antenna properly implemented will overcome the obstacles described by the design team. Let's model this. Or those who live in heavy 802.11b environments, do some experiements with terrestrial links (which I suppose could be assumed worse than earth/sky). Who knows? Maybe it's all like my last tax return, where a missed decimal point made me think I'd have to take out a second mortgage to pay our taxes :-) This list and the wiki exist so that we can undertake that sort of dialogue, and for my part, it is my favorite part of participation in AMSAT. Some have suggested that Eagle fly with an S-band downlink on the off chance that it *does* work despite the theory; others, that we survey the members to see what they'd like. I fully support the design teams rejection of the former approach. Launch weight is very expensive and the kitchen sink approach is not to my mind sensible. As to the latter, a survey presumably pertains only to *working* bands, not ones that are polluted out of existance. It's human nature for us more readily to see our misfortunes as caused by the malace of others, but I think we should strongly avoid terms like "bait and switch". We'll get much further if we all assume the goodwill of everyone involved. 73, Bruce VE9QRP

17 24

Re: Planning for the future, downconverter options
by jules＠g0nzo.co.uk 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Micheal, You can use it right now on AO51 ! Jules ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Tondee" <mat_62(a)netcommander.com> To: "Vince Fiscus, KB7ADL" <vlfiscus(a)mcn.net> Cc: <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:33 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Planning for the future, downconverter options. > At the rate things seem to be going. I would avoid planning anything > for the future until the designers figure out exactly what it is they want. > I planned for the future a year ago and bought a dish and AIDC 3731 for > S band. Now according to the "experts", it's going to be useless in a > short while! > 73, > Michael, W4HIJ > AMsat # 36017 Hi Michael, W4HIJ You can use the actual S-band setup when P3E will be in orbit. Read please http://www.amsat-dl.org/pic/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_i temId=6497 A 5.6 MB long pdf file about P3E 73" de i8CVS Domenico

2 1

Re: SDX transponder timing delay measurements?
by Tom Clark, K3IO 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Ken wrote: >> As a design goal, it would be helpful to the >> OD process if the delay could be made consistent >> within about +/-5 micro-sec -- i.e., 1500 meters >> (smaller is better). It is also important to >> quantify the standard deviation to that bias is >> since that is also factored into the OD process. Let me chime in since this is one of my specialty areas. It has been my hope/plan that the delays will be very accurately calibrated, and that we will have "certified" ground stations that are also well calibrated. I've been pushing to have ALL local oscillators on EAGLE and all timing clocks (remember that the 100-200 kb/s sampling clock is yet one more LO in the system) derived from a single, high stability clock. In addition to ranging, it is my hope that we can have an amateur, global time synchronization capability at the usec level. When (occasionally) it is time to do the ranging task, it might be necessary to swap in a different, optimized software into the SDX -- this would be my backup just in case the delay is not deterministic when normal SDX is running. Even if the delays are not as accurately determined as I hope, I see no reason that they will not be stable over times of minutes. With this being true, then we can do very accurate DIFFERENTIAL delays using N "certified" ground stations. If you do this at ~20,000 km range with stations ~1 earth radii, the difference observable only suffers from a factor ~3 degradation. Every ground station pair you add (the number of pairs M increases with the number of stations N as M=(N)*(N-1)/2) gives a statistical improvement of of sqrt(M-1); hence the geometrical loss from using a differenced observable is easily made up on the ground. 73, Tom

1 0

SDX transponder timing delay measurements?
by Douglas Quagliana 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

I know the design isn't even done yet, but has anyone ever measured the time delay of an RF signal *through* the (demo) version of SDX? That is, how much time would it take for the signal to go from the receiver's antenna through all the electronics, and out the transmitter's antenna? Can someone put this on "the plan" so that it's measured before launch? Douglas KA2UPW/5

5 8

Crowne Plaza Reservations
by Emily Clarke 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

It looks like the Crowne Plaza has run out of rooms for the core period (6th, 7th and 8th) of the Symposium in our block, however we are working with them to see if we can increase the block size. It may or may not be possible as they indicated are nearing capacity. To assist you in finding suitable accommodations nearby (hopefully within walking distance) we have contacted other hotels in the area. There are plenty of rooms available and we are negotiating a group rate with one of them. I will provide additional information to you as soon as is possible. Thank-you for your patience! 73, Emily --------------------------------- N1DID formerly W0EEC - CM87tm Support Project OSCAR - http://www.projectoscar.net

1 0

LVB tracker, USB interface boards on eBay.
by jules＠g0nzo.co.uk 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

All I have just seen these items. The look to be the modules that Howard designed his LVB tracker board to accept. Will give your LVB tracker an on-board USB interface. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/USB-Serial-interface-module_W0QQitemZ160009996603QQih… Jules

1 0

Eagle-S
by WILLIAMS MICHAEL 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

I'm waiting for AMSAT-DL to announce it's abandoning P3E's S-band downlink system based on AMSAT-NA's recent data. It would put an end to this. Nobody seems to put my 5 GHz phones back in their chargers when done. Mike K9QHO AMSAT 33589

5 4

(no subject)
by David J 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

The Florida AMSAT Net will meet this Thursday evening at the usual time of 19:30 ET, 23:30 UTC on the West Florida Group Ni4CE repeater system, the Orlando N4HHA repeater at 443.1 MHz, 103.5Hz tone, the N4LEM Cocoa repeater, 147.36 MHz +107.2 PL or connect by echolink to KG4YZY-R. The net's purpose is to provide a platform for hams with amateur satellite interest to meet and discuss topics of interest. All amateurs are invited to check in. Dave, AA4KN

1 0

Re: 10mtr and Galileo
by Miroslav Kasal 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Hi Domenico et al., You are right. Centers of the analog pass-bands are: L1 = 1268.800 MHz L2 = 1263.300 MHz Pass-bands are +/- 75kHz around these frequencies. 73, Mirek OK2AQK Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:29:18 +0200 From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(a)tin.it> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 10mtr and Galileo To: "Miroslav Kasal" <kasal(a)feec.vutbr.cz>, "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Message-ID: <003a01c6d5ae$ab684140$0201a8c0(a)tin.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Mirek, OK2AQK Tank you for this information and so as already published by AMSAT-DL in the following document http://www.amsat-dl.org/pic/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_i temId=6497 For the linear mode the uplink L1 will use 1268.725 to 1268.875 MHz while the Galileo Alternative L2 will use 1263.225 to 1263.375 MHz Please confirm. Best 73" de i8CVS Domenico

1 0

Re: 10m band kibitzing
by jari.koivurinne＠mail.htk.fi 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

>Hi AMSATs, > >I like to give my comment on the message of N6GHZ. >As far as I know there will be a 29MHz receiver on >P3e. >Maybe things have changed but at the last designer >meeting in Marburg, where I showed my MODE-UV >prototype it was discussed. > >At that time the 29MHz receiver was a task of the >Finish group. However this group was very busy with >other parts of the satellite and 29MHz was on low >priority. Another problem was the physical space, and >it was agreed that is should join a small space in the >MODE-UV box. > >73 >William >--- Early P3E-plan had the 10m band receiver and an engineering model was made by Janne OH1LRY. I designed and made a matching diplexer to use simultaneously the L-band receiving helix as a 10m short whip antenna. I modeled the helix tuning unit with some excessive field test. However the commission dropped the 10m RX to save space and make the concept not so complex. Also there was discussion about poor link budget and maybe the L-band helix antenna have to change to other type that made the things uncertain. Besides the short L-band helix was not really good antenna on 10m ;-P So there is no 10m RX aboard. We are having hard times to fit all parts inside that satellite. Space is a bit tight and almost all components must be SMD. At least in our 05E-module size 22x34x3.3cm (8.6x13.3x1.2 inch) which contains S-band receiver, X-band transmitter, switching power supplies, Linear-IF processors, Coherent ranging processor and all control circuits. But now we have some spare parts to build a simple small satellite! -jari oh3uw ----------------------------- VIRPI - http://virpi.net -----------------------------

1 0

L band gain
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Hello My lesson in humility is over. I need more gain/power. If I put a 5 1/2 turn helix in front of a 36x30 primestar dish how much gain would that give me on 1.268 Ghz ? My current antenna is a directive systems DSH23-12 (12 turn helix) and is given as 14.5 dBic. 73 Bob W7LRD Seattle

1 0

FIRST L/S ATTEMPT
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Hello Bob will be making his first L/S attempt on AO51 this evening on orbit #11568 (not sure I have that correct). It's the orbit that goes right (South to North) up the middle of the country. I have an IC-1271A running 10 watts through 50 feet of LMR400 to a 12 turn helix. S band is a 3 foot primestar/helix feed/3731 d/c. Looking for contacts and/or reception results. I may need a larger antenna, I have a 3 foot, a 4 foot and 12TVRO dish that are "waiting" for something. This is really a kick! 73 Bob W7LRD Seattle

2 1

First L/S QSO!!
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

I worked AK5V for my first L/S effort. Though several others did not hear me or said "you're too weak om". Clearly I have some work to do. What is the recommeded erp for AO51 L band?? My little 10W through 50 feet of coax to a 12 turn helix is just not cutting it. In planning for the next HEO I will have to make improvements. What are you L'ers using? I will be on the next pass. 73 Bob W7LRD Seattle

1 0

Symposium Registration Reminder
by Emily Clarke 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Just a reminder that if you are going to register for the Symposium it will be a good idea to do it on or before September 15th. On September 16th the price increases from $45 to $55. 73, Emily --------------------------------- N1DID formerly W0EEC - CM87tm Support Project OSCAR - http://www.projectoscar.net

1 0

H-IIA F10 launch successful
by Mineo Wakita 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

H-IIA/F10 was successful in the launch at 04:35 UTC 11Sep06. http://www.jaxa.jp/missions/projects/rockets/h2a/index_e.html --------------------------------------------- Name: Mineo Wakita / JE9PEL, JAMSAT member Mail: ei7m-wkt(a)asahi-net.or.jp URL : http://www.ne.jp/asahi/hamradio/je9pel/ QTH : Yokohama Japan, GL:pm95tj Date: Sep 12, 2006 ---------------------------------------------

1 0

Planning for the future, downconverter options.
by Vince Fiscus, KB7ADL 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

As Eagle won't have S band downlinks, I'd like to know if there is something simple out there that I can use in place of my AIDC 3731 downconverter to receive the higher frequencies on my 3' dish. I'd like something low cost, compact and simple like the transystems units were.

3 3

Re: 10m band kibitzing
by William Leijenaar 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hi AMSATs, I like to give my comment on the message of N6GHZ. He wrote: "I am tried to get 10 metres looked at again by the AMSAT team but my comments have gone unanswered. I have also tried to query Peter to get an understanding why 29 MHz was dropped on P3E but no answer there either." As far as I know there will be a 29MHz receiver on P3e. Maybe things have changed but at the last designer meeting in Marburg, where I showed my MODE-UV prototype it was discussed. At that time the 29MHz receiver was a task of the Finish group. However this group was very busy with other parts of the satellite and 29MHz was on low priority. Another problem was the physical space, and it was agreed that is should join a small space in the MODE-UV box. As I had the MODE-UV transponder under my control I managed to join some PCB units together to make more space for a 29MHz receiver. Finally I even made the 29MHz receiver unit myself as I had the whole transponder here at home. The whole MODE-UV flight-mode transponder included the 29MHz receiver unit I delivered at AMSAT-DL in May 2005, as the first flight ready transponder for P3e. Unfortunatly the 29MHz I had to take out as the Finish group was choosen to design it, what I respect fully. The transponder included the 29MHz receiver can be seen on my webpage at the following link: http://www.qsl.net/pe1rah/p3e_mode-uv3/p3e_mode-uv3.html What supprizes me is that you tell me that 29MHz is not on P3e... I hope this is a mistake as I still have the receiver here at home for P3e in case the Finish group can not deliver their 29MHz rx. Unfortunatly I also didn't hear any sign from AMSAT after I delivered my MODE-UV flight-model. I mentioned many times that I will support in case of MODE-UV problems, as I do it for the world-wide AMSAT community in general... like I did with VO-52. This promise still stands... What ever will not fly on P3e and is of my design will be available for any other (long lifetime) amateur satellite project that has a good chance to fly and will support world-wide ham community. In case there is free satellite space available on an interresting OSCAR orbit (AMSAT or none-AMSAT satellite) I might sponsor a mode-uv or mode-vu linear transponder of my own design. I also hope some more 23cm uplinks will be available on satellites. I would love to test my 200W PA on a Ground Plane antenna, and see how it works on the amsats (and use this band widely so other none-ham users know ham activity is in this band (and hopefully they disapear soon) :o) Lets make some more sats like VO-52... I only need the box, solar panels and a rocket... The radio and antennas I will take care of ;o) 73 William --- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: 10mtr and Galileo
by jules＠g0nzo.co.uk 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Just for the record, the first Galileo satellite has already been launched: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4566264.stm Also there was a study made by the UK microwave group (the body representing UK amateur interests above 1GHz), which makes interesting reading. It suggests that the signals from Galileo would have little impact on terrestrial/EME 23cms opperation. Obviously the conclusions woule require a little re-interpretation, with respect to satellite based reception. But as Galileo transmissions will presumably be aimed at the earth, so that any amatuer satellite will receive signals greater than that on earth, for a minute part of it's orbit, I would think that the conclusions drawn would still be valid. It's an interesting read: http://www.microwavers.org/papers/iaru/C5-13_Galileo.pdf Jules G0NZO >Speaking of allocations being taken away, I just can't fathom the AMSAT >decision to drop L-Band up because of the "Galileo Affair." Now that's a >decision based on "crystal ball engineering" and not fact. I've even read >that if Galileo ever was launched - and that appears in the latest press to >be questionable" the US "would has threatened to shoot them down!" > >Regards...Bill - N6GHz

5 11

Antenna Recommendation
by Steven Samuel Bosshard (NU5D) 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hello to the list, At present I hve a G-5500 AZEL Rotor, with the azimuth rotor on a rotor plate, and the elevation rotor about 5 ft above the flat top tower. An M2 fiberglass cross boom goes out 5 ft either side of the elevation rotor. There is a M2 7 ELE cp antenna on one side, and both a 432, 15 ELE CP antenna and a 35 ele 1296 antenna on the other side. Several questions. 1 - everything VHF and UHF are RH CP. 1296 is fixed horizontal. How much would I benefit adding polarity reversing switches? and is there any benefit trying cp on 1296? 2 - I am thinking about adding 2.4G to this mess. What antenna would this group recommend for out in the country - near Gatesville Texas - pop 15,000 (1/2 of whom are incarcerated). Yagi, parabola, etc - weight would be a factor with the elevation rotor, and fiberglass boom. Downconverter or transverter tower mounted, and IF back to the shack. 3 - Are plans for 2.4 down only or are there also plans for 2.4 up? ie, downconverter or transverter? I know these questions are very elementary, but I am new to AMSAT and learning. Thanks for your patience, Steve NU5D Ham Radio Spoken Here...NU5D EM11

1 0

S-band on Eagle
by John Mock KD6PAG 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

I'm too busy with other things to read AMSAT-BB or digest Eaglepedia (or whatever it's called). Speaking only as an satellite QRPer, i do have a naive question... Various amateur satellites, such as AO-7, AO-13, FO-29, AO-40, and AO-51, have been programmed to operate in a variety of different modes. Generally speaking a given frequency is usually an uplink or a downlink. On Eagle, i believe we are contrained by size considerations in terms of antenna placement, so we can't put everything we like on that bird. Assuming S band is not on all of the time, might it be feasible for it to be switchable between being an uplink or a downlink? I see this as allowing newcomers to use existing and/or inexpensive S-band downconverters some of the time, and others to use the wider bandwidth of S-band uplinks for digital experiments at other times. This might also be a way of occupying our allocated S-band spectra enough of the time to make an impression on other users while still providing an easy path for people to get beyond mode J-FM. And perhaps allow the kinds of experiments that i really had hoped that would have happened with RUDAK in parallel with AO-40 voice operations. -- KD6PAG (Networking Old-Timer, Satellite QRPer) P.S. I was able to work AO-40 QRP via a pair of homebrew quagis. I'm looking forward to doing something similar on P3E and Eagle.

1 0

Re: DIY 70cm preamp ideas?
by Kyle Yoksh 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

--- Original Message --- Hi Kyle How about this one: (http://www.g0mrf.freeserve.co.uk/432LNA.htm) 73 David ------------------------ Hi David, Thanks for this link. I was looking this over and it sounds quite impressive, but I did not find a parts listing. Seems a kit can be purchased, but must then be shipped overseas, etc. Do you happen to know where I can find a parts listing? I likely have most of the necessary parts in my 'junk box'. 73, Kyle K0KN

1 0

Re: DIY 70cm preamp ideas?
by G0MRF＠aol.com 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hi Kyle How about this one: _http://www.g0mrf.freeserve.co.uk/432LNA.htm_ (http://www.g0mrf.freeserve.co.uk/432LNA.htm) 73 David In a message dated 11/09/2006 18:08:13 GMT Standard Time, yokshs(a)sbcglobal.net writes: Hi, I am interested in building a couple of preamps for 70cm. I've Googled a little bit, but several designs require finding a specific version of the ARRL Handbook, etc. Does anyone have a complete plan available including parts list, etc? Thanks, Kyle Yoksh KØKN Olathe, Kansas Amsat# 35249

1 0

DIY 70cm preamp ideas?
by Kyle Yoksh 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hi, I am interested in building a couple of preamps for 70cm. I've Googled a little bit, but several designs require finding a specific version of the ARRL Handbook, etc. Does anyone have a complete plan available including parts list, etc? Thanks, Kyle Yoksh KØKN Olathe, Kansas Amsat# 35249

1 0

Latest info on P3E
by i8cvs 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hi, All Tanks to Reinhard DJ1KM r.richter(a)dj1km.de who sent me a letter dated April 14 2006 you will find the latest info on P3E at: http://www.amsat-dl.org/pic/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_i temId=6497 The address is very long so that is truncated. Be sure to copy both lines It is a 5.6 MB large PDF document (download) in English language. Best 73" de i8CVS Domenico

1 0

Re: S-Band Not 2.4 but 2.3
by Matt 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

VK is 2300~2302 and 2400~2450 Lost most of 2.3 GHz for wireless cable paytv broadcast, which by the way failed and is now only a couple of narrowcasts in major cities which are failing too! JA is 2400~2450 only ZL is 2396~2450 HL is 2400~2450 I see a trend here for region 3! >--- Emily Clarke <emily(a)clarke-design.com> wrote: > > Currently there is a 5MHz > > amateur allocation at 2300-2305 in all three regions and a 10MHz > > allocation at 2390 - 2400. I believe the 2390-2400 is primary as it > > appears in all caps and 2300-2305 may also be primary. > >Neither the United Kingdom or Germany have an Amateur allocation at 2300-2310 >MHz. > >The UK's allocation is 2310 - 2450 and Germany's 2320-2450, hence the adoption >of 2320 for weak signal (CW/SSB) terrestrial working in Europe. > >So at present I think only 2390-2400 is common between US/Europe. > >73 Trevor M5AKA

1 0

Re: 10mtr and Galileo
by Miroslav Kasal 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hi OMs, Yes, the Galileo spectrum null for both E6 orthogonal signals goes out on 1263.4 MHz. For that reason the P3E L-band receiver local oscillator is synthesized and receiver is possible to retune from 1268.800 to 1263.300 MHz (center of the analog passband) by command from the Earth. On 1268.52 MHz we expected one of the power spectral density peaks of Galileo sigs. I already offered participation on Eagle project in the field of L-band receiver. Mirek OK2AQK P3E L-band Rx designer >> Hi John, >> >> Consider this....... >> >> >> 4) I understand that the P3E folks have already worked out a solution by locating their L-Band operations in what will be a Galileo spectrum null. If that is the case, then the P3E folks are really using some good "science" to develop their satellite L-Band operations. Good for them!! Hey - I'm not in the thick of it - but it seems there are some serious gaps in communication between AMSAT-DL and AMSAT-NA even though we read about glimpses of real technical exchange. I hope we're not falling for the NIH (Not-Invented-Here) syndrome. >> >> Regards...Bill - N6GHz >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]]On >> Behalf Of John B. Stephensen >> Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 7:47 PM >> To: jules(a)g0nzo.co.uk; amsat-bb(a)amsat.org >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 10mtr and Galileo >> >> >> What bothered people is the fact that we need high power L-band uplinks and the statement in the report that "there is the potential for most amateur 23 cm transmissions to interfere with Galileo unless the Galileo receivers are designed and built to withstand it". >> >> 73, >> >> John >> KD6OZH >>

2 1

S-band continued.
by john hackett 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Aw C'mon guys, You don't really expect the b.o.d. to pay any attention to the opinions of those whom actually "operate" on amateur satellites - not to speak of the paying public with their "donations". Be smart, tell 'em what you *don't* want - then maybe you'll get what you *do* want. (tongue in cheek). Remember ... they know better than than you! what you want - as I've oft times been told - (by b.o.d. members) (... and yes, I'm fully aware of the following "sound" reasons for some of the decisions). 1) We have to adhere to the "constructors and planners" wishes otherwise the org: will die. 2) This is Amsat-NA, we can't oblige 3rd world country wishes - (even if we DO accept their donations). 3) Cutting edge technology - (read: fewer and fewer participants/the affluent only). 4) Launch criteria has changed - (money, money, money). I just wonder if the simple mode-A that actually worked v high tech that doesn't - (for whatever reason) - has sunk in yet ... apparently not. In my opinion, RS-10 and FO-20 were the most popular and widely used amateur radio satellites (worldwide) - neither of which, incidentally, had anything to do with Amsat. ... and before you turn on the flame throwers, yes, I AM doing my bit for the amateur radio satellite fraternity ... and I AM entitled to an opinion - (though I am NOT asking you to agree with it) - it does appear however that there is a continuing conflict of interests between the "planners" and the "users". 73 John. <la2qaa(a)amsat.org>

6 9

AO-51 Mode L/S
by Francesco Grappi 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hello All, This morning at 07.12 UTC, I had nice qso with OE6AG on Ao-51 L/S mode Strong signal into 90 cm. dish with patch feed and keps downconverter only a little bit qsb, but signal was very good. Excellent mode L/S thank you Willy for qso Thank you the AO-51 Commander Team 73" Francesco IW4DVZ

1 0

Re: 10mtr and Galileo
by Bruce Rahn 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

John B. Stephensen wrote: > The issue isn't technical, but regulatory. What will governments do > worldwide in the next 20 years? We can't change frequencies once we get > within 2 years of the first launch and must live with the choice for the > life of both Eagle satellites. Should AMSAT spend their members money on two > satellites that may become inacessible in the future or pick the safest > frequencies? > > 73, > > John > KD6OZH John, I.E., it is based on a perceived political climate. That's what I thought, thank you and there is still no sound technical reason why the politicians should prevail...sigh..but we know they follow no logic. Bruce -- Bruce Rahn Wisdom has two parts: 1. having a lot to say; and 2. not saying it!

2 1

Re: Eagle Satellite Design
by George Henry 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

A number of BB participants have already indicated that they WON'T fund a satellite that they don't want, which begs the question: will Eagle fly, period? Has the design committee effectively killed the bird by killing enough interest? I hope not, but time will be the judge. I am disappointed by the loss of mode S, but would rather at least have a V/U HEO than no HEO. (I still maintain that the dire predictions for 2.4 GHz will not come to pass) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Emily Clarke" <emily(a)clarke-design.com> To: "George Henry" <ka3hsw(a)earthlink.net> Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 2:33 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Eagle Satellite Design > > Most likely AMSAT wouldn't let you do it - it would interfere with the > primary mission. Besides - why should AMSAT members fund a satellite they > don't want, and they have to pay even more to rent space for a payload > they do want? > > 73, > > Emily > > > At 11:09 AM 9/9/2006, you wrote: >>So, how much to rent one of the TSFR spaces? Maybe all of us who still >>believe in S-Band could pool our funds to fly our own transponder..... >>fund >>the mode instead of the bird? >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Rick Hambly (W2GPS)" <w2gps(a)cnssys.com> >>To: <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> >>Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 5:21 AM >>Subject: [amsat-bb] Eagle Satellite Design >> >> >><snip> >> > >> > c) There are at least two TSFR (This-Space-For-Rent) packages that >> > could >> > possibly contain other RF or other payloads, conditioned on the >> > availability >> > of power, antenna space and compatibility with the primary payloads.

3 2

Re: 10mtr and Galileo
by Bruce Rahn 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

John B. Stephensen wrote: > Galileo transmits on 1260-1300 MHz and 1215-1300 MHz is now allocated to > global positioning systems (up to 5 of them). Amateur transmissions can > desense the earth-based receivers. Tests on U.S. GPS receivers showed > that a > 1W EIRP CW signal 10 km away would cause inteference. It would be > better if > 1260-1270 MHz was a downlink for amateur satellites. > > 73, > > John > KD6OZH John, You are neglecting real word conditions...future civilian airborne GPS/GNSS/Galileo receiver systems are going to have to incorporate anti-jam capabilities. A few do already and changes in the signal coding for the new civilian GPS downlink will have a much more robust capability when it comes to interference rejection. I also believe Galileo will too employ a more jam resistant signal waveform. There are much greater threats to these systems than ham operators from a real-world technical perspective. However, I will concede that government agencies may eliminate amateur use of L-Band for political reasons...an easy, but meaningless way for them to show they are taking action. However, until and if the hammer comes down, there are currently no strong technical reasons to eliminate L-Band uplinks. Bruce -- Bruce Rahn Wisdom has two parts: 1. having a lot to say; and 2. not saying it!

1 0

Re: 10mtr and Galileo
by joseph Murray 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

John I am confused Please provide something to cure my problem I believe at this point that the Galileo bird transmits to receivers on the ground in the current amateur mode L up link spectrum. Right or wrong? What frequency in the same amateur L mode spectrum is the Galileo using for receiving. Joe Murray K0VTY Amsat #860 ============== On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 02:47:22 -0000 "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh(a)comcast.net> writes: > What bothered people is the fact that we need high power L-band > uplinks and > the statement in the report that "there is the potential for most > amateur 23 > cm transmissions to interfere with Galileo unless the Galileo > receivers are > designed and built to withstand it". > > 73, > > John > KD6OZH > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <jules(a)g0nzo.co.uk> > To: <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 23:37 UTC > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: 10mtr and Galileo > > > > Just for the record, the first Galileo satellite has already been > launched: > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4566264.stm > > > > Also there was a study made by the UK microwave group (the body > representing > > UK amateur interests above 1GHz), which makes interesting reading. > It > > suggests that the signals from Galileo would have little impact > on > > terrestrial/EME 23cms opperation. Obviously the conclusions woule > require > a > > little re-interpretation, with respect to satellite based > reception. But > as > > Galileo transmissions will presumably be aimed at the earth, so > that any > > amatuer satellite will receive signals greater than that on earth, > for a > > minute part of it's orbit, I would think that the conclusions > drawn would > > still be valid. It's an interesting read: > > http://www.microwavers.org/papers/iaru/C5-13_Galileo.pdf > > > > Jules > > G0NZO > > > > > > >Speaking of allocations being taken away, I just can't fathom the > AMSAT > > >decision to drop L-Band up because of the "Galileo Affair." Now > that's a > > >decision based on "crystal ball engineering" and not fact. I've > even read > > >that if Galileo ever was launched - and that appears in the > latest press > to > > >be questionable" the US "would has threatened to shoot them > down!" > > > > > >Regards...Bill - N6GHz > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the > author. > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite > program! > > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the > author. > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite > program! > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > >

3 2

S MODE OR NOT! here is my test results
by Luc Leblanc VE2DWE 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

On 8 Sep 2006 at 1:04, Tom Clark, K3IO wrote: > Yes, this decision was based on incomplete data. It would be wonderful > if many of you took the challenge to make quantitative measurements of > the S-band RFI levels in multiple locations. I try the test during the week end but i cannot received directly on 2.4ghz as i am using a downconverter and what i measure its the downconverter output. I was fortunate enough to find under a pile of paper a "test" sheet i made when AO-40 was at apogee with a squint angle of 8. I was writing at that time at elevation 0 a floor noise swinging between S-3 to S-5 on my Ft-847. I was concern at that time with the low elevation pass where i can be able to reach japan. What i hear was the usual pop pop but tweaking the DSP and the NB i reduce this QRM/N to a level where i was able to perform a QSO, and i made it i work Japan a couple of time then. At 25 degree of elevation the noise fell at S-1 and at 35 degree to 90 the noise remain at .5 S units. At that time The telephone and WI-FI interference was one of the main topics of discussion when speaking about U/S mode on AO-40. Over the week end i recheck my S band noise with EXACTLY THE SAME SETUP i was using in the above test. Did you know what i discover? EXACTLY the same results and AO-40 was placing a S6 to S9 signal at apogee with squint near 0. If AO-40 was still on i certified that i will able to replicate the same results without any doubts! The S2 TX power was about 100 watts and the antenna was only an helix of 8 turns if i can remember correctly. Even if Eagle delivers half this power with a cheaper antenna i am convince i will still be able to make it. You know my town was the fourth first erected in North America during the french regime. She's probably not the greatest in the world actually...but we have electricity and WI-FI and cordless phones who evoluate at the same pace as the other big towns on earth. This is real stuff from the real world and base on what i checked this week end i still don't believe the conclusions made about this FAKED noise problem. What they calculate it is an existing situation who was existing since 2003. Playing with carrier and large bandwidth receiver only confirm that during the whole life of AO-40 THE WHOLE WORLD succeed and quite easily to establish numerous CW and SSB contacts all over the world. This argumenting about a noise floor does not stand the road at all. Did they go fishing to see the reactions of the users? Did they want to force their own ways of thinking to the users or are they making some other clever tricks to as usual make the users swallow the sour pills? Be my guest and added your own explanation to my list. As you all know i develop during the recent years on this reflector a kind of carapace and i just give view an overview of what i received in this "trouble period":"I get emotional when people do not use the minds they have been given and allow people who are no longer even members of our organization drive a debate." I was always asking to restricts the posting privileges to MEMBERS ONLY when i was member but i was told by high ranking BOD members (could be the same he refer to)... that the AMSAT-BB is open to all... Sorry about this but i always believe the insulting comments are the arguments of the weeks or those who are making mistakes and who tries to cover them. Anyway i will protect the identity of this one but this bad planning by AMSAT-NA will only draw more and more members out. Will only remain those with political, financial, selfish interest. My only hope is they are not all in the president donor club... >From this on i suggest a motto for the October AMSAT symposium "WE WANTS S BAND DOWNLINKS ON EAGLE" As i am not a member i can only suggest it but i will try to update my web page to promote the motto. If S band downlink will be on eagle i will join the "gang" See you later S bander ;) "-" The medium is the message...The content is the audience...;) Luc Leblanc VE2DWE Skype VE2DWE www.qsl.net/ve2dwe

1 0

Re: The Eagle has died.
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Hello For me AO-40 was an "easy sat". A 30 inch primestar, helix feed, and a 3731 d/c. Only an occasional "click" from whatever. If we are looking at the sky with a dish, how does the higher noise floor and qrm from the ground affect our reception. I admit I am not quite understanding something. 73 Bob W7LRD Seattle -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Eric Van Offelen" <ericvo(a)telefonica.net> > Mode U/S with AO-40 was a real pleasure to work, with excellent signals once > the receiving set-up had been optimized (1.2 m solid dish and a good DB6NT > LNA). > Living here in high density WiFi area, cordless phones, wireless CCTV and > all kind of 2.4 Ghz junk ! > I could regularly hear the noise floor of the S band transponder and contact > very low power stations. > 73's > Eric > EA5GIY > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "i8cvs" > To: "Robert Oler" ; "Keith Bainbridge" > ; "AMSAT-BB" > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 2:52 PM > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Eagle has died. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Robert Oler" > > To: ; > > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 6:33 AM > > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Eagle has died. > > > >> I sometimes look back on > >> the AO-40 Easy Sat articles (well written by Steve Ford) and smile. > >> > >> anyway intresting comments on your part. > >> > >> Robert Oler WB5MZO/portable > >> > >> Amsat Life member > >> Robert Oler WB5MZO Houston TX > > > > Hi Robert, WB5MZO > > > > In addition to the Steve Ford articles read please the article written by > > Antony Monteiro AA2TX in to QST september 2006 page-42 and smile > > again ! > > > > 73" de > > > > i8CVS Domenico > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb

2 1

P3E
by Tim Tapio 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

Can anyone point me in a direct for current status? I did some googling but couldn't find anything recent. Thanks! 73 de Tim, K4SHF FM04kx

2 1