Technical papers are solicited for presentation at the 26th Annual ARRL
and TAPR Digital Communications Conference to be held September 28-30,
2007 in Hartford, Connecticut. These papers will also be published in
the Conference Proceedings (you do NOT need to attend the conference to
have your paper included in the Proceedings). The submission deadline is
July 31, 2007. Please send papers to:
225 Main St
Newington, CT 06111
or you can make your submission via e-mail to: maty(a)arrl.org
Papers will be published exactly as submitted and authors will retain
73 . . . Steve, WB8IMY
I have both a commercial and a homebrew Eggbeater and am disappointed with both, especially in light of its rather high price. Connected to my IC-7000 via an ARR mast-mounted preamp, performance is far less than with an HT and an Arrow. Guess an omni can't cut it, at least not from my QTH.
Maybe if I could get it up higher, clear of all roofs, it would do better. I can make contacts at relatively high sat elevations, but can do just as well with a $10 dual band ground plane. My friend has an Eggbeater and the same preamp at a clearer QTH, and he hears substantially better, down to 10 degrees elevation in some directions.
Good luck and 73,
> > Hi Steve,
> > It is surprising to read that you are not hearing
> anything. I have
> > repeatedly used a 2m and 70cm Eggbeater for the sats
> and have had no
> > problem hearing things. No pre-amp.
> > I was using a short cable (e.g. less than 10 meters).
> The rigs I
> > used were a FT-736r (deaf) and a FT-847 (so-so).
> > 73,
> > Dave
We have met the enemy and they are us. WE need to do something. Yes, $15m is
outta reach, but isn't there a cash prize for the first on-commercial moon
DM78qd // KA0SWT
If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be
eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson
From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Jeff Davis
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 9:35 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future
On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 06:48:51AM -0600, Jack K. wrote:
> communications anyway) and move forward... We can put up all the leos
> we want, but until someone makes something like B. Bruninga's cell
> concept work, we are only going to have more of the same, We don't
> need more of the same!
I couldn't agree more - we don't need more of the same.
If I want to sit back and have a two hour rag-chew with someone on the other
side of the planet I will use Skype or my cell phone!
Dreaming about what *might* be in space is a fun exercise. Actually doing
something about it requires sending things to LEO because reality has
dictated that's as far as we can afford to go.
How's about we use some of that frustrated *imagineering* to come up with
interesting new concepts at LEO? We don't need any more FM repeaters buzzing
overhead, but what about more cameras downloading HD images, scientific
payloads that monitor the ongoing climate change, payloads to study the
Earth's magnetic field, etc. etc. Our own 'Twitter' messaging network from
The Apollo 13 creed of "failure is not an option" has completely infected
the brains at AMSAT and this list. You want something at HEO or on the moon,
cut a check for $15 million dollars and let's get on with it. Been waiting
since 1996 for another AO-13 and I am getting too old to keep waiting.
AMSAT is becoming completely irrelevant as it strives without success for
the impossible mission and exhibits a shocking amount of leadership
malfesance as it stubbornly refuses to recognize and adapt to realities in
the launch business.
I know, I know maybe NEXT year someone rich will die and leave us a boatload
of cash. Or the bankrupt US government will suddenly cough up a billion
dollars for some orbiting emergency communication system. In the meantime we
have to stifle the truth because it might blow yet another *secret* deal
that's in the works and *almost* a done deal, so let's not complain publicly
and ruin it.
Heard the stories, heard the lies, got all the t-shirts and ball caps.
AMSAT-NA member since 1994,
Skeptic that we will ever go back to HEO since 2002
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
Well, just got through listening to a pass of AO-51. As several have
suggested, it was a pointing issue with the antenna.
I can't believe my memory has gotten to the point where I couldn't
remember where North was the last time I had the antennas up.
Thing is, I actually took a compass reading the other day and
compensated for declination but I must have misread something
somewhere. I was only about 20 degrees off! Declination here is only 4
degrees so it couldn't have been that. That's what I get for working on
stuff at dusk I guess. I'm slightly embarrassed!
BTW, I didn't mean to make anyone think that an 11 element yagi was
too narrow for LEO's. It's fine if you point the dang thing right!
Also, the reason why I went this route with the more complex antenna and
AZ/EL system is that I already had the stuff on hand from my last foray
into satellites. Only the preamp was new and I knew that everything had
worked before. I can certainly appreciate the suggestions on
simplification and I was about to do just that if I didn't have any
Now I just have to work out some of my cable issues and get something
going for transmit. My 2 meter "cheap yagi" has seen better days. Once I
get that, I'll raise the mast and get the antennas up to their normal
I'm just using HT's right now but I hope to have a new TS-2000X
sometime after the first of the year. I've been quite interested in the
TS-2000 vs. IC910H thread. I know that Icom has discontinued the 910
because of the 9100 but I was under the impression that Kenwood would
release a new rig at Dayton this year and wonder if that will mean the
demise of the TS-2000.
Thanks everyone for the suggestions and also allowing me to "vent" a
bit last night.I was getting pretty frustrated.
This is now WAY out in crazy thinking. But we all know how a wind speed
anemometer works right? The flat side has more resistance to the
"Wind" than the rounded front side, so it has greater pressure exerted
on it right? This would even work with not so much half spheres as in a
traditional anemometer but with like pyramids shapes i would also think.
Now does solar "Wind' have pressures similar to air "Wind"? obviously
it does or they wouldn't be thinking if trying to use it right?
I know it's exceedingly small amounts of pressure. but if we were to
launch into an orbit that is as close to the equator as possible and the
bird deploys as large as possible equivalent of an anemometer cup and
it's positioned so that it's base is perpendicular to the solar wind
when it is directly at right angles to the earth and sun.
This tiny push, and then 180 deg later less push then 180 deg later
more push etc.
think this bird could ever so slowly in a spiral raise it's orbit?
Crazy? what's anyone think?
*The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Being a recent newbie to the LEOs it had never even occurred to me that too
narrow a beam width could present a problem with staying pointed at those
satellites. Thanks, Reid, for bringing that thought up in my mind. I wasn't
taking it out of context. I was just wondering if it was an unforeseen
problem (by me) that I needed to address. It's things like this that allow
us to learn.
It appears that a narrow beam width is not normally a problem and I thank
John and others who pointed that out.
> I have used a Cushcraft 13B2 (13 elements) on 2m and a Cushcraft 719B (19
elements) on 70cm on the
> satellites with no problem. Didn't experience either as being too narrow
beamwidth for sat use.
> 73s John AA5JG
> I am amazed at how many people take things stated out of context on this
> reflector. I never said that any of the arrays would not work due to
> problem they were having hearing the satellites and it was stated that
> if none of the other suggestions worked to consider that the arrays they
> are using are pointed correctly in the correct direction of the
> satellite. Pointing being off, the nulls could easily block the
> satellite's reception. The larger the array the more this might be
> evident. The larger the array, stacked arrays and even dish antennas,
> pointing becomes a bit more critical.
> Reid, W4UPD
I've been trying to get my receive setup going the last few days but I'm
having horrible results. I have my 11 element 70cm "cheap yagi" back up
on the mast and my homebrew SaebrTrack and OR-360 AZ/EL TV rotator
system interfaced to SatPC32.
I have an ARR preamp mounted at the mast fed with a seperate 12VDC
feed and about a 40 foot run of JEFA brand LMR 400. Once I get into
the shack there is a bit of patchwork to the cables. I'm using a Yaesu
VX3 to receive and due to the SMA connector on the HT and not wanting to
strain it I have a 4 foot adapter cable of LMR 100 that goes from an
SMA to a SO-239. I then have to use a short length of coax with a PL-259
to N male to mate up with a N barrel connector connected to my LMR 400
coming from outside. Now obviously, I know this isn't optimum and eats
up valuable RF and I intend to change it ASAP but I'm hearing
absolutely nothing on AO-51 passes. Not even the hint of signals.
I'm thinking with that preamp in the line I should at lest hear
something discernible besides noise regardless of the patchwork of
cables. Am I off base in thinking this? I did catch just a bit of
discernible signal off SO-50 last night but it was almost overhead.
I'm not a beginner at this but I'm frustrated. Perhaps I'm putting too
much faith in the preamp to push the signals through my hodgepodge of
adapters and cables? Any thoughts are appreciated.
Thanks for all of the great information. Since both the TS2000 and IC910H
have been around a while I believe that most of their 'problems' have been
at least discovered. So, in that respect, I'm leaning away from the "still
to be debugged" IC-9100. Also new rigs always are priced high in the
beginning of their life, as we all know. I know that some of the ham dealers
are offering "Closeout" prices on the 910H but I didn't see much difference
from previous pricing.
Not to prolong this thread but Jerry's append (below) brings up another
question. How much antenna is "too much" for satellite operation. Someone
earlier mentioned that an 11 element yagi might have a beam width too narrow
to closely follow an LEO bird. I had planned on using yagis with 13 elements
on 2M and 18 els on 70cm. Is that a bad plan?
> Hi; I have owned the Ft-736 R and the Ft-847, which I am using now.
> No matter which rig you decide to buy the most important thing
> is the antenna system.
> I use KLM,s with switchers and pre amps.
> I switch my pre amps off and on from the shack.
> My 847 has a pre amp built in too.
> Nothing is better than MAST MOUNTED PRE AMPS THOUGH.
> If my 847 goes bad I will replace it with another used 847.
> I also work a lot of HF too.
> I run barefoot on HF all the time.
> I also get through all the pile ups because I have a good
> with gain.
> Through the years I have made over 15,000 satellite
> contacts alone.
> 73,s Jerry w0sat