March 2010 - AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

Adjust All Clocks!
by Clint Bradford 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

NASA scientist Richard Gross and his colleagues at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., calculated that Saturday's earthquake in Chile shortened the day by 1.26 microseconds. An earthquake can make Earth rotate faster by nudging some of its mass closer to the planet's axis. That's the same way that ice skaters speed up their spins by pulling in their arms. Please adjust your satellite passes accordingly. Clint, K6LCS http://www.work-sat.com

1 0

Re: Wish List, The Ideal VHF/UHF Sat Rig
by Tom Clark, K3IO 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

There is one US made radio on the market today that will meet >>>ALL<<< the desires & requirements discussed in this thread -- and it is made by an AMSAT member (K5SDR)! It was on view at last fall's AMSAT Symposium. I say "ALL" contingent on the release of one module RSN (Real! Soon! Now!). I'm talking about the software-defined Flex 5000 (see http://www.flex-radio.com/). When the new V/U module is released (by Dayton), the F5K can be used at the 100W level on 160-6M, and 60W on V=2M & U=70cm. It will operate Full-Duplex in any combination of V/U (+10 meters). Greg, K5GJ described the new V/U module fully at the AMSAT Symposium. Flex has offered significant door prizes (like half of a base 5K) at all the recent AMSAT & TAPR meetings (I won a prize that I converted to a V/U upgrade for my personal F5K; I eagerly expect it in the next month or so). For some more info, this is clipped from the Flex advertising describing the new V/U module: > The FLEX-5000 V/U module is a fully integrated all-mode, all-band > (144-148/430-450 MHz) full-duplex VHF/UHF module that adds both 2m and > 70 cm capabilities to the already outstanding FLEX-5000 family of > software defined radios. All of the FLEX-5000 V/U module's > oscillators are locked to the 500 MHz master oscillator in the > FLEX-5000, which in turn is locked to the internal 0.5ppm reference or > it may be connected to an external 10 MHz reference for even greater > frequency stability. If want additional HF capability, you can add a second receiver and/or automatic antenna tuner. You can tie the entire radio to a GPS or Rubidium frequency reference for accuracy/stability at levels better than a part per billion. For any of the microwave bands (23 cm and up), either the V or U channel can serve as the IF for a transverter. For the wider bandwidth modes discussed for the "HR-956-Pro", the F5K is capable of supporting anything up to a few hundred kHz. For these SDRs, new software support shows up daily, contributed (free) by a significant cadre of amateurs. If a modem for some different mode, is needed, IOS (It's Only Software! ). And the price for a fully decked out is less than half of that forecast for the "fictional HR-956-Pro" (even including a suitable PC). SUPPORT THE US MANUFACTURERS! THEY ARE A RARE BREED! 73, Tom

5 4

DXpedition 3W6C April 2010
by Michael Lipp HB9WDF 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

Dear satellite enthusiast and DXers The 3W6C-Team will activate Côn Có Island (AS-185) on satellite from April 10 to18. The crew use a FT-897 TRX with homebrewed "Easysat"-antenna for 2m and 70cm and a homebrewed 10m crossdipol. Following satellite will be use: - AO-07* - AO-51* - HO-68* - SO-50 - SO-67 (*first priority - not all overflights and sats will be use) Please note, that only AO-07 will be activate in SBB/CW-mode. All other satellite are use in FM-mode. The main areas in the Foodprint are: East-Asia, Japan, China, India, Australia and east part of Russia. If possible, so the 3W6C-Team will use some DX-Windows to near East and west part of Russia. Operation note: The main-operator for Satellite is HB9BXE, Hans-Peter. Hans-Peter don't use a CAT-Interface for doppler correction. The equipment is in full manual use. It is important to know, that Hans-Peter don't hear his own downlink. For AO-07, he made no doppler correction in the uplink. Hans-Peter will search some signals +/- 5kHz arround the downlinkfrequency. (quasi splitmode like shortwave). Is there a pileup on the sat, please use only callsign, signalstrenght and gridsquare. All Crewmembers are primary shortwave operators. So please be patient, if they have some troubles with the sat-operation. For additional information and operating-plan, please contact the 3W6C Website. www.3w6c.qrv.ch <http://www.3w6c.qrv.ch> Important: We still search Pilot-Station for coordinate the activities from following Areas: Australia, India and central Asia. If you like support the 3W6C-Team as pilot, please contact the team-leader hb9bxe (hb9bxe(a)web.de) Thanks for support of the 3W6C-DX-Pedition. 73 de Michael, hb9wdf Satellite coach of 3W6C unfortunately not on the DX-Pedition :-(

1 0

ND9M Road Trip Update #17
by claryco＠aol.com 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

I'll be on the DM91 / DM92 line for tomorrow's SO50 pass at 02/1857Z as well as both AO27 passes with go VOX at 02/1943Z and 2124Z. >From there, we're hoping road conditions will allow us to get up to the DM93 / EM03 line for the AO51 pass at 02/2300Z. We'll be visiting relatives in Dallas on Wednesday so that'll be an off day. 73, Jim, ND9M / VQ9jC San Angelo, TX / DM91

1 0

NASA - 2011/2012 CubeSat Launch Opportunities
by Trevor . 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

See http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/eps/synopsis.cgi?acqid=139845 73 Trevor M5AKA

12 14

More Evidence For Water On The Moon
by B J 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/mar/HQ_10-055_moon_ice.html 73s Bernhard VA6BMJ @ DO33FL __________________________________________________________________ The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

1 0

Re: AO-51
by Stephen Melachrinos 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

Drew - But remember that this is three-dimensional; your example is 2-D. I'm pretty sure that "39 meters radial" is referencing the instantaneous radius of the orbit; that means that at the closest approach, the predicted altitude of one spacecraft was 39 meters higher than the other. Pythagoras tells us that if the hypotenuse of a right triangle is 893 meters, and the height (=radial distance) is 39 meters, then the length of the base of the triangle is just over 892 meters. View this as the radius of a circle, centered on one satellite but 39 meters either above or below it, and the other satellite flies by, in the plane of and tangent to the circle. AO-51 has an inclination of about 100 degrees; Formosat-3D has an inclination of (I believe) 72 degrees. Without going through the calculations I'm not sure of the actual trajectories, but my modification of your visualization is the following: The two satellites are each "driving" along interstate highways (at 17,500 mph). The two highways do cross each other (at some angle which is determined by the inclinations and trajectories as mentioned above), but one highway is elevated 39 meters (about 128 feet) above the other. When the two vehicles get to their closest point, there's 892 meters between them horizontally, and 39 meters between them vertically. Now I'm not making light of how uncomfortable this approach is. Even though space is big (that's why they call it space), this is definitely uncomfortably close. The reason is that our ability to predict exactly where a spacecraft is at a precise time in the future is not perfect. The uncertainties are small from the perspective of antenna pointing angles on the ground, but they're large compared to the dimensions of this example. Instead of viewing the orbits as roadways, where you know that a car is exactly in a lane that's ten feet wide, a better view is that these are tubes whose internal radius is a hundred meters or so; the vehicle can be anywhere within the tube's cross-section. (Those are known as radial and cross-track errors.) And its position lengthwise in the tube (the "in-track" position) at any precise moment in time is only known to a hundred meters or so. So if two orbits are only separated by 39 meters, their tubes actually intersect for a large portion of their cross-sections. And when you add in the in-track uncertainties, that 893 meter separation gets eaten up really quick. Steve W3HF Mar 1, 2010 03:40:54 PM, glasbrenner(a)mindspring.com wrote: > It's all predictive until they smack together, but the estimates this > morning said 893m overall, but only 39m radially. I'm visualizing that > as one car merging on a highway at 17,500 mph, with one 3000 feet in > front of, and 120 feet left or right of the other. Scale the 17,500 mph > to 70 mph, and the distances in the analogy would be 12 feet in front > of, and 6 inches abreast. Just to put the velocity and distances in > perspective! > 73, Drew KO4MA

1 0

Re: Wish List, The Ideal VHF/UHF Sat Rig
by Clint Bradford 02 Mar '10

02 Mar '10

When Clint wins the lottery ... I am going to have 10,000 or so handhelds (sorry, guys) made that are truly useable by the visually-impaired - and give 'em away to that community. Voice prompts and voice when any key is touched. An intelligently-laid-out keypad that gets spec'd to me by HandiHams. Something TRULY appreciated by that community. I have seen visually-impaired hams work with the old ADI AT-600 - which was well-received. But there's so much more than can be put into an HT. I mean, hams liked the AT-600 (and Kenwood TH-F6a) because it "beeped" at certain points when programming (like when you scrolled CTCSS and hit 100.0hz). But we need to build voice into every step of programming. The technology is there. OK. Enough for Clint's off-topic rant. But if you ever see me on CNN as a lottery winner - expect a GREAT handheld radio for the visually-impaired about six months thereafter. Clint, K6LCS

1 0

Re: Wish List, The Ideal VHF/UHF Sat Rig
by Ken Ernandes 01 Mar '10

01 Mar '10

I'm not normally one to throw cold water on creative ideas, but I will put myself in the position of the potential manufacturer. What any manufacturer would need to even contemplate this project is good answers to a few basic questions: 1. Can I come up with a design to these specifications that I can sell in the realistic price range of the typical amateur operator? 2. Is there a large enough market out there that I can make a profit on this exercise? My guess is the manufacturers wouldn't touch this one with 3.048-meter pole without at least one functioning high altitude satellite on orbit. I realize these are frustrating times, but I think you'll need to come up with more than just a wish list. Perhaps a group could get together and prototype portions to make a plausible case that this can be built economically. Can it be done? Probably... But those who really want it will probably need to invest a lot of sweat equity to prove it. 73, Ken N2WWD -----Original Message----- >From: "Mark L. Hammond" <marklhammond(a)gmail.com> >Sent: Mar 1, 2010 1:55 PM >To: MM <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> >Cc: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org >Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Wish List, The Ideal VHF/UHF Sat Rig > >How about IF tap (10.7MHz) and high speed packet ready (up to say, 76k >or faster)? > >(Maybe I missed it, but I don't think I saw those 2 features...) > >73, > >Mark N8MH > >On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:44 PM, MM <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> My Ideal Competition Grade VHF/UHF Radio Wish list. >> >> It seems we are long over do for a Competition grade high performance VHF/UHF transceiver, which can also be used for Satellite operations. There are several competition grade HF transceivers on the market, however there are no high end competition grade VHF/UHF/Satellite systems on the marker. >> >> Most of the rigs I have seen which support VHF/UHF are either HF rigs that have had VHF/UHF slapped on, or low end VHF/UHF rigs, with HF slapped on. >> >> If we want the Amateur Radio manufactures to build us a "GREAT" VHF/UHF/Satellite system, then we need to tell them what we need. >> >> Here are some suggestions. Constructive comments welcome. >> >> This radio does not exist. >> If the manufactures are interested in providing a new state of the art VHF/UHF radio to the Amateur Radio community, here is one opinion of what should be in next Competition Grade VHF/UHF Transceiver and what should not be in the radio. >> >> I am going to give this fictional radio a name HR-956-Pro. >> >> >> What do we need: >> >> • We need a competition grade VHF/UHF transceiver that will support Terrestrial-DX, Satellite and EME operations (Voice, CW and Digital-JT65). >> • The HR-956-Pro, needs to be able to interface with modern computers (HTML Browser, USB and or CAT-5). >> • The HR-956-Pro, needs to able to interface with modern Externally mounted Pre-amplifier (both power feeds and transmitter sequencing). >> • The HR-956-Pro, need to be able to interface with modern Solid State Amplifiers and Tube based amplifiers. The RF output per band needs to be standardized with the Amplifier manufactures to prevent transceiver and amplifier failures due to sequencing problems and RF mismatching. >> • TX/RX Sequencer built-in, to control external Preamps, Amplifies and other accessories (programmable). >> >> Receiver: >> Of course we need a "Great" receiver, not another mediocre receiver. >> Each receiver for each band needs to be a "Great" performer. >> >> No Birdies: >> On a HF rig, a few Birdies do not usually cause serious issues, since the HF users are often listening to signals "Above" the noise floor. On a Satellite Radio, we are often listening to signals 10-30 dB, "Below" the Noise floor. Internally generated birdies are a serious problem for weak signal VHF/UHF operations. >> >> Filters: >> Each mode will need its own selection of DSP filters. The filters would also affect one of the Line-level outputs to the external PC. There are times when want to send Filtered or unfiltered audio to your external PC for Digital signal processing. One of the line-level outputs should be taped before the HR-956-Pro Filters, the other line-level output should be taped after the HR-956-Pro filters. The TX and RX filters should be independently selectable. >> The Filters need to be tested to verify they will support Satellite Mode-J (TX on 2-meters while listening on 435-438) >> >> Example: >> FM-5k, Filters 15k, 10k and 8k filters. >> AM Filters 10k, 6k, 3k, etc. >> SSB Filters 4.0k, 3.0k, 2.5k, 2.0k, etc. >> >> Other Modes: >> CW, FM-2.5k, Data >> >> Audio Quality: >> Life is too short for QRP or Poor Audio. >> It's not the number of contacts that’s important, it’s the quality of the contact. >> On the audio side, the HR-956-Pro needs to be able to support a wider range of audio through most of the stages. Of course the radio needs to meet FCC and other requirements, however we can still design the radio to deliver a wider bandwidth of good sounding audio. >> Let's shoot for 100-4000 Hz, on both TX and RX audio circuits. This will also mean, that a better stock microphone design will be required. >> >> >> VHF / UHF Bands built-in, with competition grade TX/RX: >> 6-meters 50-54 >> 2-meters 144-148 >> 70-cm 420 - 450 >> 23-cm 1280 - 1300 >> (All frequencies localized for each country) >> >> Transmitter outputs: >> A high power transceiver is less desirable than a low power transceiver. >> >> Let me explain: >> For serious Terrestrial DX and EME you need to run more than 100 watts. A VHF/UHF transceiver designed for high power ( 100 watt range) transmitting, would not be compatible with third-party amplifiers or pre-amplifiers. >> >> Most VHF/UHF amps are designed for 25 or 50 watts maximum input. >> >> The manufactures of Transceivers and Amplifies need to agree upon a set of standard power level so the third-party amplifier manufactures can design properly matched Amplifiers and pre-amplifiers. This will also help reduce the number of transceiver and amplifier failures caused by mismatched RF settings. >> >> Suggested standards for VHF/UHF bases stations: >> 6 Meters 50 watts >> 2 Meters 25 watts >> 70 cm 25 watts >> 900 mc 10 watts >> 1.2 gig 10 watts >> >> The duty cycle of the competition grade system, will also need to be greater than a 70% duty cycle. >> A typical EME link running JT65 requires a 50% for 10-30 minutes at a time. The transistors and cooling system needs to be designed accordingly to meet the competition grade requirements. >> >> >> HR-956-Pro Must have list: >> >> Spectrum display screen: >> I can't imagine building a new competition grade system without this feature. >> It would be nice to see the band pass, before and after the filter stages. >> >> Full computer remote control: >> Memory read/Read and save. All memory channels options must be exportable to a CSV or similar file, including TX and RX frequencies, settings, including Repeater or split frequency settings. >> All protocols must be Public protocols, no propriety software or licenses. >> >> >> Doppler Control (Manual): >> >> LEO SSB satellites are some of the hardest satellites two work because of the amount of Doppler frequency change per second. Satellite Mode-B is very hard (70 cm Uplink and 2-meter Downlink). While you are talking through a SSB Mod-B satellite, you need to be simultaneously adjusting your transmitter with every other word, in order to keep your downlink signal centered inside the transponder. >> >> The Yasue FT-736R Satellite control knob, seems to work very well with dual VFO's and provides you the ability to quickly change either TX or RX to compensate for Doppler (among other features). The Knob style is much easier to use than "Buttons". I found the Doppler VFO correction on some newer radios to be very frustrating. >> The new HR-956-Pro must have the Yasue FT-736R control Knob and it must be functional for both VFO's and Memory Channels. >> >> >> DSP Noise tools: >> The usual stuff. >> >> >> FM Center Tuning Meter: >> Many of the new satellites are LEO's (Low Earth Orbit), and many of these satellites are running FM-5k. The reason for FM is because the Doppler causes the 70cm band to drift over 20, kHz during a 10-20 minute pass. The LEO SSB satellites using Mode J or Mode B are difficult to use because of the large Doppler change. The FM mode, helps reduce the impact caused by the higher Doppler. >> >> The FM Center Tuning Meter feature is a "must have" for a Satellite radio. >> When the FM satellite comes in range, just look at the FM meter and tune the receiver until the needle is centered and you now know the exact downlink for that Satellite. If the needle is left, turn the RX knob slowly Right, If the needle is Right, turn the RX knob slowly left, very simple. >> The Yaesu FT-736R has a FM Center Tuning Meter and it makes working FM satellites much easier. The IC-910 has a blinking light to tell you your FM satellite receiver frequency has drifted. Unfortunately, the blinking light is useless in telling you if your frequency is high or low. >> >> >> HR-956-Pro, Nice to have list: >> >> General coverage receiver (50 - 1000 megacycles): >> The addition of a general coverage receiver would help with the sales of the HR-956-Pro. However, it is very important that the general coverage receiver, NOT degrade the performance of the satellite receivers. We are not trying to build a super police scanner. One possible suggestion would-be to make the general coverage receiver a separate circuit board, which would be connected to a separate antenna port and thus would not degraded from the performance of the satellite receivers. >> >> VHF / UHF Optional bands or Transverter: >> The Amateur radio community is constantly experimenting with new bands. It would be nice to have a Transverter module or expansion module for future bands. In the USA these bands are becoming popular, 220mc, 900 mc, etc >> >> (All frequencies localized for each country) >> >> >> Size is important: >> To hold the hardware, band scope, filters and make the buttons easily accessible, a box about the size of the IC-756 product seems to be the right size. >> >> What should not be in the HR-956-Pro. >> >> No HF: >> No access to frequencies below 50 megacycles. >> The addition of HF to a satellite radio would only degrade the performance of the weak signal satellite receivers. >> HF would also add to the cost of the transceiver and reduce its sales potential. >> A competition grade VHF/UHF transceiver has no use for HF. >> HF would result in the radio being just another mediocre transceiver. >> >> No obsolete Serial ports: >> No RS-232 or TTL. >> These devices are so last century. >> >> DSTAR: >> The DSTAR mode is fun, I use it often and I have even been pushing ARISS to install it on the International Space Station. As much as I like this mode, it is not a requirement for a competition grade satellite system. I would much rather have the money put into making the VHF/UHF receivers the best possible. >> >> >> How much are we willing to pay for the HR-956-Pro: >> >> That depends on the performance, suggest price $2000 - $3000 USD >> >> Closing: >> >> If anyone knows of such a radio I would be interested to know who makes it. >> >> >> Sincerely >> >> WF1F Miles >> www.marexmg.org >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > >-- >Mark L. Hammond [N8MH] > >_______________________________________________ >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

4 3

AO-51
by Alan P. Biddle 01 Mar '10

01 Mar '10

Morning, AO-51 heard well south of the TCA with Fromosat 3D. Alan WA4SCA

3 3