- AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

HITSAT 1639 UTC
by Mike Rupprecht 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

AOS 1639 UTC Sep 25 (JN49lr) ... still no signal :-( LOS 1649 UTC 73, Mike DK3WN

2 1

Re: Anousheh Ansari on Ham Radio
by M0ZLB 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

Hi Drew, This morning she was using NA1SS call! Does 3rd party traffic rules spread as far as Iran? David M0ZLB -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Glasbrenner [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:54 PM To: M0ZLB; amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Anousheh Ansari on Ham Radio She doesn't have a license of her own, so when using the RS0ISS call she has to observe Russian third party traffic rules. Or at least that's what I read somewhere ;-) 73, Drew KO4MA AMSAT LM 2332 ----- Original Message ----- From: "M0ZLB" <m0zlb(a)btinternet.com> To: <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 4:28 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Anousheh Ansari on Ham Radio > Hi Luc, > > Nice picture, nothing else there! > > Anyway, what I was trying to ascertain was that just before she went up > there was an article somewhere that said that she was only going to be > making contacts with US stations! I just wondered why the selectivity! At > 7.00am this morning she was calling for an Iranian station so she was > certainly over Europe and was on the radio! > > Just curious! > > David > M0ZLB/KG4ZLB > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Luc Leblanc VE2DWE > Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:01 PM > To: AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Anousheh Ansari on Ham Radio > > On 25 Sep 2006 at 20:31, M0ZLB wrote: > >> I wonder if there is any reason why Anousheh is only making random > contacts >> with US and Canadian hams......? >> >> David >> M0ZLB/KG4ZLB > > > Matter of taste could be? You could check why on www.qrz.com for a partial > explanation:) Just type > VE2DWE in the call sign search box... >>"-" > The medium is the message...The content is the audience...;) > > Luc Leblanc VE2DWE > WAC basic,CW,Phone,Satellite > Skype VE2DWE > www.qsl.net/ve2dwe > _______________________________________________ > 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: Anousheh Ansari on Ham Radio
by Tom Clark, K3IO 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

Peter -- there is (jumpy) video with good audio of her classroom QSO here in the Washington, DC area available at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1789656846413123353 73, Tom

2 1

AO-51 38k4
by Viktor Kudielka 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

Today, Monday, I followed three passes of AO-51. Downlink seems to be perfect with antenna mounted pre-amp activated and LHC polarisation: Four to five times "PB: Empty." followed by "Open ABCD: B: 96373368" No sign of any successful uplink. I tried directory requests with different output levels and different circular polarisations on 145.86 MHz, to no avail. Anybody else successful ? Vy 73, Viktor, OE1VKW

1 0

Items for sale!
by Stefan Wagener 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

This might be of interest: 1. FT-847 + FC-20 + MD-100; 2. MFJ-1278B Multi Mode TNC; 3. PSK-1 Satellite Modem; 4. Kansas City Tracker Rotor interface; 5. Three (3) new (unmodified) California Amplifier 31-Channel downconverter (for S-band); 6. SSB UEK-3000 (S-band) downconverter (new), 144Mhz out; 7. Timewave DSP-59+; 8. MFJ-1214 Multi Mode Computer Interface; Information on everything can be found on the web. Will ship worldwide. Have photos of all items upon request. If interested, please reply off-line to: VE4NSA(a)amsat.org 73, Stefan VE4NSA

1 0

Re: SO50
by Wayne Estes 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

I couldn't hear anything from SO-50 tonight, around 0425 UTC. No response after sending the turn-on tone and then transmitting high power with the squelch PL tone. Usually I hear it very well after I remember to switch on the mast-mounted preamp. Wayne Estes W9AE Oakland, OR, USA, CN83ik

1 1

HITSAT 1509 UTC
by Mike Rupprecht 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

AOS 1509 UTC Sep 25 (JN49lr) ... nothing heard :-( LOS 1515 UTC 73, Mike DK3WN

1 0

GO-32 house party this AM
by Andrew Glasbrenner 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

There was quite the party on GO-32 this AM. I saw the following stations on the satellite: KE4ZXW, KT2Q, N0NTX, N8BBQ, KC4LPL, KX4Y, WA4SXM, and N5UXT. I can't recall seeing that many on one pass before. 73, Drew KO4MA

1 0

Re: Galileo interference on L band
by Tom Clark, K3IO 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

Sorry -- I've been away from home on business while the latest flack occurred under the general topic heading "Galileo interference on L band". First off, just so everyone can read the presentation materials that we used during the San Diego meeting, please take a look at the EaglePedia web site at http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/eagle/EaglePedia/index.php/San_Diego_Digital…. Then take a look at my presentation "Frequency Considerations for Eagle" at http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/eagle/EaglePedia/uploads/1/19/Microwave_Freq…. You will see (my slide 6) that I present the arguments pro/con about why (IMHO) L-band is at jeopardy as a long-term uplink band. Let me add a few comments about why I'm so concerned. The reason that the Galileo E6 (functionally the same as GPS L2, and overlaying the amateur 1260-70 MHz uplink allocation) is important for some uses is that it, when used in combination with the primary 1.57± GHz "L1" frequency (which is what all your cheap hand-held GPS receivers use), can be used to correct the ionospheric errors; the ionosphere adds upwards of 10 meters to the pseudo-range for each GPS satellite. Because of geometric factors (expressed quantitatively in VDOP), this can in turn yield errors in height of up to about 30 meters. [The WAAS and EGNOS signals provide some correction for these biases to the few meter level, but cannot be relied on during severe ionospheric storms.] There is a lot of factual evidence that when dual-frequency geodetic GPS receivers (costing ~$25,000 -- hardly cheap!) have been used in proximity to terrestrial amateur L-band stations, the GPS performance is seriously degraded. I direct your attention to several reports on the topic: * Must reading -- GPS/GLONASS vs L-band digipeaters (Also see GPS World, Oct.2002) (warning contains numbers and equations, as well as uncomplimentary comments about digipeaters) http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/opus/volltexte/1999/278/pdf/278.pdf#search=%22… * Amateur and Radar QRM reported at a 1999 technical meeting: http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/cgsic/meetings/summaryrpts/33rdmeeting/Presentat… * A tutorial that shows how interfering signals can affect a spread spectrum GPS rcvr (caution -- contains more numbers): http://www.rin.org.uk/SITE/UPLOAD/DOCUMENT/Vuln-Owen.pdf#search=%22gps%20am… Even though US amateurs may feel that Galileo is a "European only" problem, read carefully Rick's (W2GPS) comments -- in his real life for many years he was a VP with ARINC (the people who worry about standards in the airline industry) and was on many FAA and ICAO committees that decide on airline safety. Also realize that the Europeans are absolutely determined to develop their own GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) call Galileo -- in part because they don't really trust a system that depends on the US Military, and in part because they see a giga-Euro business opportunity for the EC. Who knows how long it will survive, but the Russians have their competing GLONASS system. And both the Chinese and Japanese see that they need to enter into the GNSS race is they are to be world-class technical competitors. We, the Eagle technical team, have never said that L-band won't work NOW or 5 years from now. But our vision for Eagle is that when the first one flies 4-5 years from now, we want it to be a useful resource for at least a 10 year lifetime. We are very concerned about making a several million dollar (after you count the volunteer builder's blood, sweat & tears) investment only to have it blown away right after launch by the GNSS cartels just because we picked L-band to be anything like a "primary" uplink. 73, Tom

14 27

Fuel on the emergency communications(satellite)fire
by Dave Guimont 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

It is quite apparent that some on here have never been on either end of a need for communications, either in the form of a drill for training, or more importantly on the receiving end in an ACTUAL emergency... Some of us have been on both ends. And, PARTCULARLY, when you need an assist, ANY method of communications, no matter how brief, may be the one you need... Jungle drums, smoke signals, a five minute satellite pass, cell phone, indian code talkers, I'll take anything I can get!! 73, Dave wb6llo(a)amsat.org Disagree: I learn.... Pulling for P3E... -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 9/22/2006

5 4