June 2007 - AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

Re: FD Contacts!
by George Henry 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Jerzycke" <kq6ea(a)pacbell.net> To: "George Henry" <ka3hsw(a)earthlink.net>; "amsat bb" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 11:00 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! > Well, that may be, but I read the Field Day rules, and > as we all know, Field Day is NOT a "contest". > If other rules override the Field Day rules, it should > be widely published, or mentioned in the Field Day > rules, which it aint. Yes, it is... Field Day rule 9.2: 9.2. See "General Rules for All ARRL Contests," "General Rules for All ARRL Contests on Bands Below 30 MHz," and "General Rules for All ARRL Contests on Bands Above 50 MHz" for additional rules (www.arrl.org/contests/forms ) that may cover situations not covered in these Field Day rules. > I agree that making more than one contact violates the > *spirit* of the rules, but NOT the written Field Day > rules. > Did you read THIS year's Field Day rules? It doesn't get more explicit than this: 7.3.7.1 Stations are limited to one (1) completed QSO on any single channel FM satellite.

4 4

Nova
by David - M0ZLB 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

Hi All, This is probably a dumb question but I am evaluating NOVA and wonder why none of the satellites I am interested in seem to be in the Nova database> I found ISS but where is AO-51, SO-50 and VO-52 for a start? Thanks in advance. David M0ZLB/KG4ZLB

2 1

Re: FD Contacts
by Clare Fowler 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

Yes FD is a contest but that does not mean that consideration, fairness, and the goldren rule should be abondonded. The point, which is obvious to everyone, is that the single QSO per FM channel rule was introduced in order to try and reduce the chaos that occured with hundreds of stations trying to make multiple QSO's with the result that practucally no one made a QSO. 99 percent of the time ONE QSO means ONE QSO. You have got your lolly pop. You dont need, nore can use, five more and even if you are offered one you should decline and let someone else have it. There may be the very odd time when someone calls several CQ's and does not get a reply in which case a second QSO my be justified. It just takes courtesty and some commen sense. If you really want to get into the contest mode get on the linear transponder birds where each QSO counts and where experience and operating skill really shows up. A lot of rule deffinition should not be required. EVERYONE knows the intent and should operate accordingly. It may be of interest to note that while in Canada we have band plans they are not Govt. regulations. They are completly voluntary and I have not heard of a single instance where a Canadian amateur has intentionaly not followed them. Clare VE3NPC .

1 0

Re: FD Contacts!
by Reicher, James 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

The rule reads "7.3.7.1 Stations are limited to one (1) completed QSO on any single channel FM satellite" The absolute strict interpretation of this rule would mean that once you make a single contact on an FM bird, you turn off the radio and walk away. If you don't, you'll get your hands slapped and lose your rubber ducky. However, many people, probably most, interpreted the rule to mean that one may claim no more than one completed QSO for credit. This interpretation would not mean that one could not make more, it just means only one would be granted credit - the same as AMSAT Field Day rules did in past years. AMSAT FD's rule never prohibited making more contacts but credit was given for only one. Should there be a more restrictive rule, perhaps instituting a penalty for making more than one QSO? How would it be enforced? You'd have a big fight on your hands. My suggestion is: lighten up. The real problem was the guy playing traffic cop, tying up the bird with unnecessary, malicious and unidentified transmissions, not the gentleman (and I mean that in the best sense of the word) in Arizona working them like a seasoned contester. 73 de N8AU, Jim in Raymore, MO Light travels faster than sound... This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak. Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:52:04 -0500 From: "George Henry" <ka3hsw(a)earthlink.net> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! To: "amsat bb" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Message-ID: <004401c7b86e$86e64620$0500a8c0@parents> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I am one of the people who asked the ARRL to implement the "one contact per FM satellite" rule, so I am more than a little PO'd to see it so blatantly ignored, and even more so, to see people in this forum, the very people who should most support the rule, actually DEFENDING the violator!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: Angelo Glorioso To: George Henry ; amsat bb Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 12:48 PM Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! Better yet! How many QSO's did the Satellite police prevent because of his BROADCAST STATEMENTS????? 73 de Angelo

7 7

FD CONTACTS
by Mr Jeff Ross 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

Well, did anyone have any fun, even with the sat police? I say shove the one contact rule, get in if you can. and shove the the sat police. Looks like he had all the fun. I should of listened there on the fm, no one was on 146520 simplex.

2 1

Re: FD Contacts!
by sco＠mindspring.com 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

I don't see the problem. If some clubs do not wish to follow the rules ... only one QSO per FM satellite on FD. Then publish a list in QST of those clubs who refused to follow the FD rules. Then place that Club on a one year probation list. If they violate the rules on the next year's FD then ban them from the following year's FD reporting in QST. We are supposed to self police ourselves. Les W4SCO -----Original Message----- >From: "Reicher, James" <JReicher(a)hrblock.com> >Sent: Jun 27, 2007 10:00 AM >To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org >Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! > >The rule reads "7.3.7.1 Stations are limited to one (1) completed QSO on >any single channel FM satellite" > >The absolute strict interpretation of this rule would mean that once you >make a single contact on an FM bird, you turn off the radio and walk >away. If you don't, you'll get your hands slapped and lose your rubber >ducky. > >However, many people, probably most, interpreted the rule to mean that >one may claim no more than one completed QSO for credit. This >interpretation would not mean that one could not make more, it just >means only one would be granted credit - the same as AMSAT Field Day >rules did in past years. AMSAT FD's rule never prohibited making more >contacts but credit was given for only one. > >Should there be a more restrictive rule, perhaps instituting a penalty >for making more than one QSO? How would it be enforced? You'd have a >big fight on your hands. > >My suggestion is: lighten up. The real problem was the guy playing >traffic cop, tying up the bird with unnecessary, malicious and >unidentified transmissions, not the gentleman (and I mean that in the >best sense of the word) in Arizona working them like a seasoned >contester. > > >73 de N8AU, Jim in Raymore, MO > >Light travels faster than sound... This is why some people appear >bright until you hear them speak. > > >Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:52:04 -0500 >From: "George Henry" <ka3hsw(a)earthlink.net> >Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! >To: "amsat bb" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> >Message-ID: <004401c7b86e$86e64620$0500a8c0@parents> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > >I am one of the people who asked the ARRL to implement the "one contact >per FM satellite" rule, so I am more than a little PO'd to see it so >blatantly ignored, and even more so, to see people in this forum, the >very people who should most support the rule, actually DEFENDING the >violator!!! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Angelo Glorioso > To: George Henry ; amsat bb > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 12:48 PM > Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! > > > > Better yet! How many QSO's did the Satellite police prevent because >of his > BROADCAST STATEMENTS????? > > > 73 de Angelo > > >_______________________________________________ >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

1 0

KC0TGY QSLs
by Alvaro de Leon Romo 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

Hi guys Bill KC0TGY was yesterday in FN77-87 intersection and several QSOs were made , it was his fiirst time in AO27 end he loved his powerful signal THANKS AO27 TEAM !!!!! Bill will try to be in FN85 from 29th to 2nd next month so keep in touch. He sent me an email and he will back to his home in MO until Septemeber so will answer all QSLs until he back, he apologize for not answer before ...... GL all Al XE2AT _________________________________________________________________ Live Search en Prodigy/MSN. Todo lo que buscas ahora más rapido http://live.com

1 0

Re: FD Contacts!
by n5uxt＠hotmail.com 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

I fail to see were two wrongs make a right. The fact is that the sat police making his statement over and over on the bird causing QRM when at least One new station makes a first time contact just blows my mind. The type of broadcast statements do no good on field day. If anything the big gun that was giving out contact was helping the new/amatuer sat operators make a contact for the points. This is the same picture but a different view. It is all good. 73 de Angelo -----Original Message----- From: "George Henry" <ka3hsw(a)earthlink.net> To: "amsat bb" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Sent: 6/26/2007 11:12 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! I am one of the people who asked the ARRL to implement the "one contact per FM satellite" rule, so I am more than a little PO'd to see it so blatantly ignored, and even more so, to see people in this forum, the very people who should most support the rule, actually DEFENDING the violator!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: Angelo Glorioso To: George Henry ; amsat bb Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 12:48 PM Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: FD Contacts! Better yet! How many QS [truncated by sender]

1 0

V/S mode AO-51
by Fernandez Montaña, Juan Antonio 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

Speaking about the shift downlink frequency, I receive with a DB6NT downconverter and a PCR1000 with the AFC enabled. Working with this set up it does not mind if there is this problem. The signals were 5-7 with fading, as usual, with my 0.7 meters offset dish and 4+1/4 turns helix. The pass was over 20 degrees. Juan Antonio EA4CYQ 73s =============================================================== Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Los datos incluidos en el presente correo son confidenciales y sometidos a secreto profesional, especialmente en lo que respecta a los datos personales, se prohibe divulgarlos, en virtud de las leyes vigentes. Si usted no lo es y lo ha recibido por error o tiene conocimiento del mismo por cualquier motivo, le rogamos que nos lo comunique por este medio y proceda a destruirlo o borrarlo, y que en todo caso se abstenga de utilizar, reproducir, alterar, archivar o comunicar a terceros el presente mensaje y ficheros anexos, todo ello bajo pena de incurrir en responsabilidades legales. Cualquier idea contenida en este correo es exclusiva de su autor y no representa necesariamente el criterio de Iberdrola. El emisor no garantiza la integridad, rapidez o seguridad del presente correo, ni se responsabiliza de posibles perjuicios derivados de la captura, incorporaciones de virus o cualesquiera otras manipulaciones efectuadas por terceros. This message is intended for the exclusive attention of the address(es) indicated. Any information contained herein is strictly confidential and privileged, especially as regards personal data, which must not be disclosed, in accordance with legislation currently in force. If you are not the intended recipient and have received it by mistake or learn about it in any other way, please notify us by return e-mail and delete this message from your computer system. Any unauthorised use, reproduction, alteration, filing or sending of this message and/or any attached files to third parties may lead to legal proceedings being taken. Any opinion expressed herein is solely that of the author(s) and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Iberdrola. The sender does not guarantee the integrity, speed or safety of this message, not accept responsibility for any possible damage arising from the interception, incorporation of virus or any other manipulation carried out by third parties. ===============================================================

1 1

Fwd: Re: Re: FD Contacts!
by Jim Jerzycke 26 Jun '07

26 Jun '07

Note: forwarded message attached.

1 0