February 2014 - AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

ICE/ISEE-3 to return to an Earth no longer capable of speaking to it
by ka2pbt 08 Feb '14

08 Feb '14

>From Emily Lakdawalla of The Planetary Society: "So ISEE-3 will pass by us, ready to talk with us, but in the 30 years since it departed Earth we've lost the ability to speak its language. I wonder if ham radio operators will be able to pick up its carrier signal -- it's meaningless, I guess, but it feels like an honorable thing to do, a kind of salute to the venerable ship as it passes by." http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2014/02070836-isee-3.html

4 4

FUNcube Data Warehouse Server disruption
by David A B Johnson 08 Feb '14

08 Feb '14

Hi, You may experience some outages to the server this weekened as I make some changes to it's database and operation. These are to improve the accuracy of the date and time receords in the database and hence the reporting / graphing. If the outages are short-lived, the Dashboard will retry and perform the upload. If possible, please capture bin files for later replay. 73 and thanks, Dave, G4DPZ

1 0

Re: 150 cubesats to provide global WIFI multicasting
by Andre 08 Feb '14

08 Feb '14

On 08-02-14 14:24, Robert Bruninga wrote: > Already Ham Radio has the technology, bandwidth, and evreything needed to > implement distribution of over 70 megabytes of Ham Radio data to every > mobile and handheld operator every day. That's a lot of content. > > And the frequencies exist, and the sites exist. THink about it. Every > single VOICE repeater is sitting there with an INPUT channel that NOONE is > listenitng to. Therefore, that repeater can stream at 9600 baud this 50 > megabytes of ham radio data all day long using existing radios, existing > packet and existing TNC's from that repeater site on its input. > > Every second, it drops the stream for 100ms to listen to see if any VOICE > user wants to use the repeater. If no carrier is there, then the stream > continues. If a voice user has keyed up, then the repeater acts normally, > bringing up its voice transmitter for the duration of the voice contact. > When the repeater evntually drops, it goes back to streaming the megabytes > of ham data. > > Any ham wanting to collect this content simply puts his 96000 baud radio > listing to that repeaer INPUT to join the net! An AP runs together > building a buffer of that 70 megabytes of ham radio content per day, which > is then instantly accessible at any time with is browser. > > Again, we have the sites, the atnennas, the freqs and the radios. > > Just a thought. > Bob, WB4APR > > Nice idea but won't work because in a lot of areas the geochraphical spacing between sites is to close and the 9600 baud signal will cause other repeaters to open even when used with ctcss because of the nature of a 9k6 signal. It might work on duplex packet sites but in that case you might just as well stream the data on the output. with 1k2 2k4 or maybe 4k8 it might work but even then the question comes up, why not stream on the output and only transmit ctcss when there is voice trafic, that would be simpler to implement on all repeater sites and not just the ones that use 2 transievers. And to get back on topic of this list, that would also work on cubesats. 73 de Andre PE1RDW

1 0

Re: Listening on USB when operating CW
by Kevin M 07 Feb '14

07 Feb '14

> Many times I have been engaged in a QSO only to have someone CQ'ing on > CW drift across my existing QSO. Anyone who operates satellites has > probably had this happen to them many times. Sometimes myself or > others in QSO may try to tell the CW operator "Hello - QSO in > progress" but it is apparent they are not hearing us. > > My question is, does it make sense for people using CW on the > satellites to have their receiver set to USB? Do some operators do > this? At first I was a little confused by the question... CW receive on almost any rig I have ever used IS USB receive (as opposed to LSB), just a different dial setting, perhaps with a slightly narrower bandwidth. Then I realized you are asking because of the passband inverting... Since CW is neither LSB or USB, just a carrier, then yes, the norm is to listen for CW with the down link set to CW or USB depending on preference. But to address the issue of who is passing over who... is it not also possible from the prospective of the CW op that it is the SSB QSOs that are passing over them causing QRM? I've tried about four times now to write an explanation of how one used to operate, but the bottom line is, if a station is running with manual doppler correction and sending CW, my experience is he doesn't adjust the transmit VFO while sending... the receiving station adjusts the receive VFO while copying and then on the 'over' as he starts to send adjusts his transmit to match where he heard the other station last in the downlink. (It's also my experience that manual tuning SSB stations did the exact same thing.) So compared to doppler correction and possibly the one true rule, the manual tuning stations drifted... BUT, please understand that part of my confusion in remembering is that I mostly worked mode K, which was a different animal; you never adjusted uplink due to being on an HF band... you might drift into a terrestrial QSO. I did work a little mode A for a while and we sometimes had mode KA active. But, it was never a problem that I could tell because the lower half of the passband was CW and the upper half was SSB and usually they were equally occupied. Nowadays SSB far outnumbers CW. (I would work more CW if more stations were on... I prefer it; guess that's a catch 22 thing now, huh.) I am merely suggesting that a CW op is more likely to be an 'old school op' and more likely to use 'manual correction'... in other words, more likely to 'tune the old way'. I may be way off base here, but it's my honest estimation/recollection. However, if I am right, then your characterization of the CW drifting across the SSB QSO as opposed to the SSB stations drifting across a CW QSO (which happened to me many times last summer) is perspective biased. It boils down to what is considered a 'stable frequency' as another poster said... relative to ground reception or passband edges. It is a very old discussion in ham radio... AM versus SSB was one of the earliest issues of group norms versus emerging technology. Meaning, the evolving technology began to force a change in accepted norms as the technology was adopted. And the points of view were equally biased... 'SSB does not have good sound quality'... 'AM takes up too much bandwidth'. But people still operate AM today. Room is still made for both and they can co-exist. However, I must admit it is a quandary when the practice in question involves shifting frequencies and how to do it. I'm merely saying, for you the CW station is the offender and for a "seasoned manual tuning op" the fancy computer doppler guys are the offenders. The question is whether to argue or how to co exist? But to address what I think you were actually asking... As a CW op I can tell you that you will hear a CW signal sweep by with greater "ease" because the intelligence is communicated by simple on/off keying and can therefore be heard and copied over a greater time period. But from the CW ops point of view, sweeping SSB is charlie brown's teacher sounds changing pitch and the period in which the speech is intelligible is a fleeting amount of time... In other words what the ear catches is, "Wub-wub-wub-in QSO-squeak-squeak-squeak", where as you hear the beeping all the way through. Because like most any male we still draw on the genetically passed down ability to narrow our focus to only that prey which we seek to the ignorance of all else. =^D 73 and hope to see you back on the birds soon... Kevin, N4UFO

1 0

Re: Listening on USB when operating CW
by Clayton Coleman 07 Feb '14

07 Feb '14

Hi Tim, I completely agree that different methods of Doppler shift correction yield slightly different results. The "one true rule" is a good source for guidance however some don't follow it -- even remotely. I do apologize if my generalization rubbed you the wrong way. Since your direct email indicated to me you adjust your transmit frequency on AO-7 mode B, that would indicate you are following a good practice of correction. Likely meaning you are NOT one of the stations who drift during their entire sequence of calling CQ for five minutes..... Not everyone plays nice in the schoolyard. I've been known to screw up and probably am not immune from it in the future. I still wonder if the offenders listened on USB would they realize they've come onto a frequency being used by two or more stations engaged in a voice QSO? 73 Clayton W5PFG On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 3:45 PM, <tim(a)n3tl.com> wrote: > I'm hoping this post makes it to the AMSAT-BB, although I have sent Mr. > Coleman a longer response directly. > > I have to take issue with this statement, Mr. Coleman, which begins your > second sentence in response to Mr. Ng: > > "A station not adjusting properly for Doppler shift...." > > Computer-control stations and manual-control stations are adjusting for > Doppler differently. I have done - and will continue to do - both. In my > opinion, neither is incorrect; they simply differ from each other. > > 73 and God Bless, > Tim - N3TL > Evansville, Ind. - EM68 > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Listening on USB when operating CW > From: Clayton Coleman <kayakfishtx(a)gmail.com> > Date: Fri, February 07, 2014 2:04 pm > To: "Ng, Peter" <Peter.Ng(a)bccdc.ca> > Cc: "amsat-bb(a)amsat.org" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > > Peter, > > That is correct and what I have attempted to describe. A station not > adjusting properly for Doppler shift will appear to "move" across the > passband into stations who are making corrections. (voice or CW) > > There are several categories for correction, as I see it by order of > occurrence...(and there may be more) > > 1 - People who use "full" Doppler correction via software, adjusting > both TX and RX to stay on the satellite's frequency. > > 2 - People who use "half" Doppler correction by tuning the higher of > two frequencies. This is common for people who are portable or want > the simplest method of staying on another station. In the mode, you > will move slightly. I do this often in the field. It's not perfect. > > 3 - People who use "TX only" correction. I see this often and I > believe it's an incorrect practice to always tune TX because sometimes > that means on mode J you'll likely move across QSO's in progress. > > 4 - Probably the least common I observe, people who use "full" Doppler > correction manually. I believe it is a little more difficult to do > this on fast moving LEO's, especially on CW. > > My original email was trying to discover whether or not listening on > USB while transmitting on CW might make it easier for "CW drifters" to > know they are part of a problem. Occasionally when this problem > occurs with USB voice, the perpetrating stations are not able to hear > well enough to know they are causing a problem. > > 73 > Clayton > W5PFG > > On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Ng, Peter <Peter.Ng(a)bccdc.ca> wrote: >> Yes, the frequency in use by the CW station that is not adjusting for >> doppler will appear to be moving for stations that are adjusting for >> doppler....right? >> >> Peter ve7ngp >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On >> Behalf Of John Becker >> Sent: February 7, 2014 09:27 >> To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Listening on USB when operating CW >> >> >> On 2/7/2014 11:18 AM, Ng, Peter wrote: >>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't automatic doppler corrections >>> dynamically change your frequency to compensate for doppler? Would this mean >>> anyone engaging in doppler correction are actually drifting into a stable >>> frequency? >>> >> by "stable" do you mean a freq already being used? >> >> John, W0JAB >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 1

SO-50 sat//Arctic/n6spp
by Eric T-N6SPP 07 Feb '14

07 Feb '14

Hi guys(+bcc list here too)-Portable with Ft-530 and anli800 tele whip from grid- BQ40SI76 Will try for the following passes: (All AK local time) 2/7 friday 1849-1900 ,good w.usa/kl7 2/7 friiday 2027-2037, AK only pass? 2/8 saturday 1916-1926 2/9 sunday 1803-1815 (All times are within 2min accuracy) Work schedule and wx permitting, I will be on these passes.. There is a chance that I will move to another work qth in a few days (new grid?!)about 40miles west of here). Hope to wk you 73 Eric n6spp ~via iP5

1 1

Listening on USB when operating CW
by Clayton Coleman 07 Feb '14

07 Feb '14

I assume many home station satellite operators utilize some kind of full-duplex radio or combination of two radios for CW on the current satellites. Lately, as I have been listening a lot more with my FUNcube Dongle Pro+, I have observed many CW stations drifting across the satellites' passband. I realize this is not a new phenomenon. I would assume these drifting stations are NOT using any type of computer Doppler correction. If they were using computer control, I would assume their CW would stay on the same place in the transponder's passband. It is visually apparent when the stations manually make larger frequency movements because of the curve displayed on my SDR application's waterfall display. Many times I have been engaged in a QSO only to have someone CQ'ing on CW drift across my existing QSO. Anyone who operates satellites has probably had this happen to them many times. Sometimes myself or others in QSO may try to tell the CW operator "Hello - QSO in progress" but it is apparent they are not hearing us. My question is, does it make sense for people using CW on the satellites to have their receiver set to USB? Do some operators do this? If listening on a VFO with USB and had your transmit VFO set to CW, would this help make it easier for CW ops to know when they have drifted into an existing voice QSO? 73 Clayton W5PFG

5 7

Colorado AMSAT net returns...
by Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK) 07 Feb '14

07 Feb '14

Hi! Last weekend, I saw a tweet that from Jeff K0JSC that AMSAT retweeted, saying that there would be a new AMSAT net starting up on Thursdays at 1900 local time (currently 0200 UTC Friday). I e-mailed Jeff for more information about the net, so I could update AMSAT's list of nets at: http://ww2.amsat.org/?page_id=2113 I was also hoping to be able to connect into the net. Jeff explained that the net was available on the Rocky Mountain Radio League's 146.940 MHz repeater near Denver, as well as on his system of repeaters in Colorado. After some back-and-forth e-mails, I was able to find a way to connect into the Allstar Link system and get to Jeff's repeater system as the net was starting up last night. The web site for Jeff's repeater system http://www.k0jsc.com/ provides an audio feed from the repeater system, for those wanting to listen in on the activity. The net control last night was Skyler KD0WHB, a 15-year-old ham. If I didn't hear it mentioned on the net, I wouldn't have realized this was the first time he had been a net control. Skyler read satellite-related news bulletins, took check-ins, and asked everyone who checked in if they had ever worked satellites. There were 10 check-ins to the net, 9 from around Colorado plus me. Congratulations to KD0WHB for running a great net, K0JSC and the Rocky Mountain Radio League for allowing those repeaters to be used for the net, and everyone who checked in. It was great to hear the discussion related to satellites. 73! Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK http://www.wd9ewk.net/

1 0

Ham Video
by Gaston BERTELS 07 Feb '14

07 Feb '14

HamTV Bulletin #6 Februari 7, 2014 Ham Video Commissioning postponed ESA postponed the Ham Video Commissioning to March 8. Possible dates for the four Commissioning steps are March 8 (step 1), March 9 (step 2), and March 16 (step 3). Step 3 could be turned into step 4. These dates are all on the weekend. With this agenda, we have just 1 week of blank transmissions. The agenda is still to be finalized. 73, Gaston Bertels, ON4WF ARISS Europe Chairman

1 0

NASA Announces Fifth Round of CubeSat Candidates
by Clint Bradford 06 Feb '14

06 Feb '14

NASA RELEASE 14-042 NASA Announces Fifth Round of CubeSat Space Mission Candidates NASA has selected 16 small satellites from nine states to fly as auxiliary payloads aboard rockets planned to launch in 2015, 2016 and 2017. The proposed CubeSats come from universities across the country, a primary school, non-profit organizations and NASA field centers. CubeSats are a class of research spacecraft called nanosatellites. The cube-shaped satellites measure about 4 inches on each side, have a volume of about 1 quart and weigh less than 3 pounds. The selections are from the fifth round of the agency's CubeSat Launch Initiative. After launch, the satellites will conduct technology demonstration, educational research or science missions. The selected spacecraft are eligible for launch after final negotiations, depending on the availability of a flight opportunity. The organizations sponsoring satellites are: -- Boston University, Boston -- Brown University, Providence, R.I. -- Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, Fla. -- Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, Md. -- Lincoln Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lexington, Mass. -- Marquette University, Milwaukee -- NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif. -- NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. -- New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, N.M. -- St. Thomas More Cathedral School, Arlington, Va. -- The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, Calif. -- University of California, Los Angeles -- University of Florida, Gainesville -- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor -- Utah State University, Logan (2 CubeSats) In the previous four rounds of the CubeSat Launch Initiative, 99 CubeSats from 28 states were selected. To date, 27 CubeSats have launched through the initiative as part of the agency's Launch Services Program's Educational Launch of Nanosatellite Program. This year, four separate launches will carry 17 CubeSats. For additional information on NASA's CubeSat Launch Initiative, visit: http://go.nasa.gov/CubeSat_initiative For information about NASA and agency programs, visit: http://www.nasa.gov -end-

1 0