July 2008 - AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

Re: re best transceiver for sats
by Henk, PA3GUO 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

Mmm what is the best transceiver for sats ... ? I LOVE my Kenwood TS-2000X. con: 1) has a birdie on 435.800 (AO-27) pro: 1) has 0..30MHz, 6mtr, 2mtr, 70cm, 23cm 2) all mode (FM, AM ... USB) 3) built in TNC (1k2 and 9k6) (for packet, displays& tracks DX cluster) 4) IF-DSP: standard in, not as option, this rocks (CW filtering 50-2000HZ filters etc.) 5) Built in TXCO (not optional, its just in !) 6) Built in antenna tuner 7) Built in RS232 port (no additional converter needed) 8) Built in cross band repeater 9) Has FM/AM sub transceiver for VHF & UHF 10)Port for remote control head RC2000 http://inform3.kenwoodusa.com/Brochures/Communications/UnitedStates/AMA/TS-… ... single radio: does it all ! Henk, PA3GUO http://www.pa3guo.com

1 0

Re: Best type of coax to use ... in ... AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 3, Issue 326
by Jim Wright 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

Make sure you get the correct N connector. You may have to trim some strands out of the center conductor if you get the wrong connector. I had the problem with a local Ham store that had connectors for RG8/RG11. Amphenol makes one for 9913 specifically. 73, Jim On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 12:45 PM, hasan schiers wrote: > I use them all the time, and have not had to use "trimming > dimensions". It is very easy to see where to trim with these two piece > connectors, just put the cable end near the connector and it's pretty > obvious where to cut things (much like a PL-259). I have found them to > be very acceptable N connectors and have done dozens of them without a > trimming chart. ...hasan, N0AN HARVEY VORDENBAUM wrote: > Someone mentioned the 2-piece type N connector for 9913 type coax. > Does anyone have the trimming dimensions for those? I had to make up > my own and wonder how good they are. > 73, Harvey > K5HV > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "joe cassano aka jmario" > <jmario(a)fast.net <mailto:jmario@fast.net> <mailto:jmario@fast.net> > > To: <amsat-bb(a)AMSAT.Org <mailto:amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org> > <mailto:amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 12:38 PM > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best type of coax to use ... in ... AMSAT-BB > Digest, Vol 3, Issue 326 > > > Installing a classic clamp type N connector like the Amphenol 82-202 > (UG-21D/U) on flexible coax with a real copper center conductor > (RG-8,RG-213) is both easier and has a much higher probability of > success than installing the common PL-259. You only have to make one > easily accessible solder connection. > > Take a look at > http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/assemblyInstructions/280.pdf > <http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/assemblyInstructions/280.pdf> > <http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/assemblyInstructions/280.pdf> to > see > what is involved in attaching classic clamp style N connector. > > You also might want to read the reviews listed here: > http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/7 > <http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/7> > <http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/7> before you make any purchase > decisions. > > > Regards, > JoeC - K3FMA > > >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 12 >> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:49:00 -0500 >> From: Ronald Nutter <rnutter(a)networkref.com >> <mailto:rnutter@networkref.com> <mailto:rnutter@networkref.com> > >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Best type of coax to use between preamps and >> antennas >> To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org <mailto:amsat-bb@amsat.org> >> <mailto:amsat-bb@amsat.org> Message-ID: >> <48697EFC.5010100(a)networkref.com >> <mailto:48697EFC.5010100@networkref.com> >> <mailto:48697EFC.5010100@networkref.com> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> After problems I had on Field Day in trying to operate the >> satellites, I >> am looking to upgrade the coax I use between the preamps and the >> antennas. I am using 9913FX from the IC-910H and the preamps. I had >> been using RG Mini 8/U for the connection between the preamps and >> antennas. Should I also use 9913FX between the preamps and the >> antennas? The run between the radio and the preamp is 50 ft. The >> run >> from the preamp to the antennas is about 10 - 15 ft depending on >> where I >> set the antennas up. I am concerned about how flexible the 9913FX >> would >> be in terms of the antennas rotating back and forth. I was planning >> on >> ordering the cables pre-made from CableXperts since working with N >> connectors isnt my strong point and dont want to worry about my >> soldering and having a good connection on both ends of the cable. >> >> Any suggestions appreciated. >> >> Thanks, >> Ron >> KA4KYI >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. <mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org> > <mailto:AMSAT-BB@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 > <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> > <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. <mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org> > <mailto:AMSAT-BB@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 > <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> > <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.134 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1529 - > Release Date: 7/1/2008 7:23 PM > > > ------------------------------ > > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.134 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1529 - Release Date: 7/1/2008 7:23 PM > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. <mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org> <mailto:AMSAT-BB@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 <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>

2 1

source for LMR 400 UF connectors
by Jim Danehy 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

Can someone give me the contact information for a source selling connectors for LMR products ? Jim W9VNE Cincinnati, Ohio

5 4

Re: re best transceiver for sats
by Edward Cole 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

Having started out on AO-10 with an IC-211 for 2m receive and a TS-180S+mm432/28+50w amp for 70cm, then a FRG-100+IC215mod as rec conv plus a TenTec Scout+DEMI 28/432+50w amp, Finally a FT-847, I'll take the FT-847 every time! The IC-910 is probably comprable! To avoid transmitting into your preamps or downconverters, modify the radio for Rx only. I did that for the FT-847: http://www.kl7uw.com/FT-847RXANT.htm 73 Ed - KL7UW At 09:08 AM 7/4/2008, w7lrd(a)comcast.net wrote: >My flavor for S band is- I use an old TS700A 2 meter xcvr with the >transmitter dissabled. It is so easy that when in the heat of >battle to accidently transmit into the dc. These and similar radios >are fairly cheap (less than $200), and depending on the dc cost is >well worth it. The TS700 is now my stand alone, designated S band receiver. >73 Bob W7LRD > >-- >"if this were easy, everyone would be doing it" > >-------------- Original message -------------- >From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(a)tin.it> > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Angus" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 1:41 PM > > Subject: [amsat-bb] re best transceiver for sats > > > > > Hi all, > > > just wondering what you think is the best transceiver or > transceivers for > > the satellites. By this I mean to be able to TX and RX at the same time > > (covering from 144mhz, 70cm and 23cm), was thinking possibly > something like > > the ICOM IC910 (with 23cm board added) so that USB downlink and LSB uplink > > can be done (can the TS2000 do this also). Or is it better to have 2 > > seperate radios altogether, and use one for the uplink and one for the > > downlink? > > > Any thoughts or what do you think is the ultimate set up, doing > quite well > > here with very simple FT817 and old FT480R but using transverter > for 23cms. > > > regards > > > Gus M0IKB > > > > Hi Gus, M0IKB > > > > In my experience 2 separate radios altogheter, and use one for the uplink > > and one for the downlink is better ! > > > > If you are doing quite well with very simple FT817 and FT480R and using 23 > > cm transverters I suggest you do not change your setup. > > > > 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

1 0

Re: re best transceiver for sats
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

My flavor for S band is- I use an old TS700A 2 meter xcvr with the transmitter dissabled. It is so easy that when in the heat of battle to accidently transmit into the dc. These and similar radios are fairly cheap (less than $200), and depending on the dc cost is well worth it. The TS700 is now my stand alone, designated S band receiver. 73 Bob W7LRD -- "if this were easy, everyone would be doing it" -------------- Original message -------------- From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(a)tin.it> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Angus" > To: > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 1:41 PM > Subject: [amsat-bb] re best transceiver for sats > > > Hi all, > > just wondering what you think is the best transceiver or transceivers for > the satellites. By this I mean to be able to TX and RX at the same time > (covering from 144mhz, 70cm and 23cm), was thinking possibly something like > the ICOM IC910 (with 23cm board added) so that USB downlink and LSB uplink > can be done (can the TS2000 do this also). Or is it better to have 2 > seperate radios altogether, and use one for the uplink and one for the > downlink? > > Any thoughts or what do you think is the ultimate set up, doing quite well > here with very simple FT817 and old FT480R but using transverter for 23cms. > > regards > > Gus M0IKB > > Hi Gus, M0IKB > > In my experience 2 separate radios altogheter, and use one for the uplink > and one for the downlink is better ! > > If you are doing quite well with very simple FT817 and FT480R and using 23 > cm transverters I suggest you do not change your setup. > > 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

1 0

AMSAT New Mexico Area Coordinator?
by Robert L Lasso 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

Is there an AMSAT area coordinator/rep for New Mexico? Need an area AMSAT person to help with a SAT forum at Albuquerque Hamfest August 15 & 16. I have been asked to do it but still am a bit of a novice/intermediate level operator at it compared to a more dedicated SAT operator that is involved with AMSAT. 73, Robert Lasso W6RQR

1 0

re best transceiver for sats
by Angus 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

Hi all, just wondering what you think is the best transceiver or transceivers for the satellites. By this I mean to be able to TX and RX at the same time (covering from 144mhz, 70cm and 23cm), was thinking possibly something like the ICOM IC910 (with 23cm board added) so that USB downlink and LSB uplink can be done (can the TS2000 do this also). Or is it better to have 2 seperate radios altogether, and use one for the uplink and one for the downlink? Any thoughts or what do you think is the ultimate set up, doing quite well here with very simple FT817 and old FT480R but using transverter for 23cms. regards Gus M0IKB -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 932 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len

4 3

Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
by Edward Cole 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

The gain increase for the antenna would be deltaG = (12/4)^2 = 9, or in dB = 10Log(9) = 9.5 dB. You get this gain in Tx and again in Rx so the total gain = 19 dB. So this means that the spacecraft will need to be 32-19 = 13 dB stronger than AO-40. So perhaps the S/C antenna would be larger and maybe the Tx higher power? Ed - KL7UW At 08:16 PM 7/2/2008, w7lrd(a)comcast.net wrote: >How would my 12 foot paraclips work for this exercise? >73 Bob W7LRD > >-- >"if this were easy, everyone would be doing it" > >-------------- Original message -------------- >From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner(a)mindspring.com> > > > The moon is roughly 360,000 to 400,000 km away. By comparison, AO-40 had a > > apogee of about 60,000km. At 2.4Ghz, that's about 16db difference > each way. > > Put AO-40 at the moon, and if I'm doing this right, you'd need about 32 > > times the ground station antenna both coming and going to get > with a few db. > > I'm gonna need a bigger rotor for sure! I'm sure smarter folks > will check my > > math.... > > > > 73, Drew KO4MA > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Joe" > > To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" > > Cc: "Trevor" ; "AMSAT BB" > > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 6:05 PM > > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... > > > > > > > what would a sample average link budget be? > > > > > > Andrew Glasbrenner wrote: > > > > > >>As far as I can recall we are pursuing both Eagle and the P4 opportunity > > >>equally, concentrating on common elements until the details are ironed > > >>out. Neither has been identified as a primary or secondary objective. > > >> > > >>I agree a package on a lunar orbiter would be neat, but also that it is > > >>not the best use of what volunteers we have. We need more folks > to step up > > >>to do things, AND we need to make better use of them when they do. > > >> > > >>73, Drew KO4MA > > >> > > >>----- Original Message ----- > > >>From: "Trevor" > > >>To: "AMSAT BB" > > >>Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:53 PM > > >>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>>--- On Wed, 2/7/08, Dave hartzell wrote: > > >>> > > >>>>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=25839 > > >>>>http://asmo.arc.nasa.gov/ > > >>>> > > >>>>Wouldn't it be fun to have a transponder on this! ;-) > > >>>> > > >>>Fun yes, but dare I say it, a waste of precious Volunteer resources. > > >>> > > >>>All lunar orbits are inherently unstable and will impact after a couple > > >>>of years. The link budget requirements would not attract a mass user > > >>>base. > > >>> > > >>>I suspect the number of Technically Capable volunteers is already being > > >>>thinly stretched in trying to provide both the primary > objective Phase-IV > > >>>Lite (funded by Federal Government dollars) and the secondary objective > > >>>the Eagle HEO. > > >>> > > >>>73 Trevor M5AKA > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> __________________________________________________________ > > >>>Not happy with your email address?. > > >>>Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available > > >>>now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html > > >>> > > >>>_______________________________________________ > > >>>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 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 2

P3E
by Trevor 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

At HAM RADIO 2008 AMSAT-DL gave presentations on the P3E and P5A projects http://www.southgatearc.org/news/july2008/p3e_update.htm 73 Trevor M5AKA __________________________________________________________ Not happy with your email address?. Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html

1 0

AO-51 FM UHF Downlink Power Output?
by Brien McCrea 04 Jul '08

04 Jul '08

I read a posting somewhere that said that because of eclipse AO-51's downlink power would be progressively decreased and then increased over time. I am unable to find information on what the UHF FM Downlink power has been set too since the end of May 2008. The reason this is off interest to me is that up until the beginning of June I was able to easily hear and work the bird at above 40 degrees, using an M2 Eggbeater antenna, with minimal drop out. Now even on the highest passes reception is very poor. I get good reception on all other satellite beacons so I know the station is working properly. Can anyone tell me what the ouput power curve was during the June time frame. Thanks, Brien KE7WB

1 0