- AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

WD9EWK @ Williams AZ hamfest (17-18 July) and 19-22 July road trip
by Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK) 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hi! I will be at the ARRL Arizona State Convention and Hamfest in Williams, Arizona, on 17-18 July 2009 - a Friday and Saturday. I'll have an AMSAT table in the main hall, and will give a satellite-related presentation at 1100 local time on 17 July. During these two days, WD9EWK will be on FM satellites and also VO-52 for demonstrations (hamfest site is in grid DM35vg). More information on the hamfest is available at: http://www.arca-az.org/arca/main/convention.asp After the hamfest, I will hit the road for a few days. Similar to what I did last year after the Williams hamfest, except I will venture further north into Utah. I'll make a loop through that state, then head back toward Arizona so I'm home by the evening of 22 July. I have not finalized my route through Utah yet, but I have some idea of how I will make that drive. I'll post more about my travel plans in a week or so, and then post updates while I am on the road. As with last year's road trip and several other trips I've done where I've been on the birds, I will be happy to send QSLs for those working WD9EWK from wherever I operated from. I'll also send QSLs to anyone who works me during the demonstrations from Williams. Just drop me an e-mail after the trip with the QSO(s) listed in there, and - if you're in the log - I'll send the cards out. 73! Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK http://www.wd9ewk.net/

1 0

GJTRACKER Version 1.06, July 7, 2009
by Lance Collister, W7GJ 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hello! Thanks to the thoughtful feedback from Codrut, YO3DMU, I have learned that the GJAZEL.dat file generated by previous versions of GJTRACKER have shown the azimuth for the DX station instead of the HOME station. This of course is only noticed by somebody who is using an automatic tracking program to obtain aiming data from this file, which is updated every minute when GJTRACKER is run in REAL TIME mode. Codrut wrote such an automatic antenna tracking program, and I am grateful to him for bringing this error to my attention. The corrected version 1.06 of GJTRACKER does now correctly transfer the HOME STATION azimuth and elevation to the GJAZEL.dat file: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj/GJTRACKER.zip GL and DX to all! VY 73, Lance -- Lance Collister, W7GJ (ex: WN3GPL, WA3GPL, WA1JXN, WA1JXN/C6A, ZF2OC/ZF8, E51SIX) P.O. Box 73 Frenchtown, MT 59834 USA QTH: DN27UB TEL: (406) 626-5728 URL: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj 2m DXCC #11/6m DXCC #815 Interested in 6m EME? Ask me about subscribing to the MAGIC BAND EME email reflector!

1 0

AO-7???
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hello To all you AO-7 fans. We appear to have a sick bird. We should feel blessed in having such a well performing satellite for several years, considering it is older than some of it's users. The audio is distorted and cw sounds bad, running absolute minimum power. Any thoughts or suggestions are solicited. 73 Bob W7LRD Seattle

1 0

QUIETING in Echo-51 sat? !!
by Nader Omer 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hi All My 1st Questions is - What the reason of QUIETING in Echo-51 sat? Google gave me a good link of k0nr http://www.k0nr.com/rwitte/fmvhf.html k0nr wrote SIGNAL REPORTS FM signal reports are often given in terms of receiver quieting. A strong signal will fully quiet an FM receiver, while a weak one will be quite noisy. A "Full quieting" report is given to a signal which exhibits no background noise or hiss. Signal reports are often given in terms of "percent quieting" to give the transmitting station a better idea of the signal quality. Remember that when using a repeater there are two communication paths at work -- the path from the transmitting station to the repeater and the path from the repeater to the receiving station. Either one of these paths can exhibit noise due to a weak signal. If the receiving station has a strong S-meter indication but the transmitting station sounds noisy, the transmitting station is probably weak into the repeater. Remember that the signal strength indicated by your S meter is due to the repeater and not the transmitting station. A frequency modulated transmitter used on the VHF/UHF amateur bands should be set for a maximum frequency deviation of 5 kHz with full modulation. Unlike SSB transmitters, the signal strength of an FM signal is independent of modulation level. That is, a dead carrier produces just as much power as a fully-modulated signal. Excessive modulation of an FM transmitter does not improve the reception of the signal and often degrades it. On the other hand, inadequate FM deviation causes weak received audio. The level of audio heard on the receive end is relatively independent of received signal strength. This means that changing transmitter power does not affect the loudness of the audio at the receive end. What I have understood ………………………………………………. (FM signal reports are often given in terms of receiver quieting A strong signal will fully quiet an FM receiver) strong signal (from TX station or sat ) Quieting at receiver side (e.g. ground station) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A dead carrier produces just as much power as a fully-modulated signal PTT on!!! waste of power??? My 2nd Question is Why dose Echo-51 keep pump dead carrier that detected at ground station as quietness? 73's Nader, st2nh www.st2nh.com

1 0

Re: Richard Garriott on BBC Newsnight tonight
by Jim Jerzycke 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Oh? Works fine here in California.... Jim KQ6EA --- On Mon, 7/6/09, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel(a)ngunn.net> wrote: From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel(a)ngunn.net> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Richard Garriott on BBC Newsnight tonight To: m5aka(a)yahoo.co.uk Cc: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Date: Monday, July 6, 2009, 2:52 PM But only if youre ISP is in Britain. m5aka(a)yahoo.co.uk wrote: > The video interviews with Helen Sharman GB1MIR and Richard Garriot W5KWQ can be seen at > > Honour given to 'UK astronauts' > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8133056.stm > > 73 Trevor M5AKA > Daily Amateur Radio News: http://www.southgatearc.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

3 2

ILN... Is this our future ride to the moon? MM
by MM 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Yes Exactly! We need to form a proposal team that can evaluate the data to find out if an EME-Repeater is viable. Time is short. First ask Experts if building a transponder for the Moon is feasible with current technology. If it were, How many Amateur radio operators would be able to afford such a project? We know the are hundreds of Hams, which have used EME at one time, or another. If we build a working transponder, how many more hams would have access to and EME-Repeater? Based on the number of users that could build an EME-Repeater link, we would go ahead with the idea and take it to the next phase. There no sense in building an EME-Repeater project if only a hundred people would be able to access the EME-Repeater. So if the project looks feasible and there is a big enough potential group of Amateur Radio stations that would uses such a project, then we would start talking to all of our contacts at NASA, ESA, RSA to see if we can get some additional support to help with the project. Thanks Miles --- On Sun, 7/5/09, Armando Mercado <am25544(a)triton.net> wrote: > From: Armando Mercado <am25544(a)triton.net> > Subject: [amsat-bb] ILN... Is this our future ride to the moon? > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Date: Sunday, July 5, 2009, 2:48 PM > Greetings, > > The International Lunar Network appears > to be the unmanned landers NASA is planning > to put on the moon. The program is working to > put 2 landers on the moon in the 2012-2014 > time frame. > > Here are some excerpts from a Request for > Information by NASA regarding instruments > for its International Lunar Network (ILN). > Pay special note to the mass and power > limits. > > Is this what we are talking about putting a > transponder on? > > 73, Armando, N8IGJ > > ****** > > Date Released: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 > Source: Goddard Space Flight Center > NASA Solicitation: Instruments for U.S. International > Lunar Network (ILN) Lunar Missions > > > Description of Anticipated Requirement > > NASA expects to emplace the first two nodes (the "anchor" > nodes) of the ILN in the 2012-2014 timeframe with two > additional nodes to be emplaced roughly two years later, > depending on funds availability. All nodes will carry > identical core instrument payloads. The ILN mission > requires > long lived instruments which can be operated as a network > for six years (the anchor nodes will necessarily have to > last > longer). It is anticipated that a very small amount of > power > will be available to enable continuous operation through > the lunar night. > > Concept studies for the spacecraft are now under > development > at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center working with the > Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) of The Johns Hopkins > University. The mission will be tightly constrained in > both > mass and power. It is expected that the total available > mass > for all payload instruments will be approximately 15 kg, > although the precise mass available for the payload will > depend on the launch vehicle and other trades still being > considered. The total available payload power will be > approximately 15 W. > > The total budget for the ILN anchor nodes including > development and operations is $200M. Schedule and budget > constraints require that NASA mission planners focus on > relatively mature instruments. > > ****** > > See the following links for more info: > > http://www.moontoday.net/news/viewsr.html?pid=29834 > (The full Request for > Information) > > http://iln.arc.nasa.gov/welcome (General info on > ILN) > > > http://lunarscience.arc.nasa.gov/file_download/26/ILN+Final+Report.pdf > > (Detailed info > on ILN... Note: large file 13MB) > > Happy reading, > > Armando, N8IGJ > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >

3 2

Re: Richard Garriott on BBC Newsnight tonight
by m5aka＠yahoo.co.uk 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

The video interviews with Helen Sharman GB1MIR and Richard Garriot W5KWQ can be seen at Honour given to 'UK astronauts' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8133056.stm 73 Trevor M5AKA Daily Amateur Radio News: http://www.southgatearc.org/ ----

2 1

Fw: Re: Re: ILN... Is this our future ride to the moon? MM
by k0vty 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

I agree with John on the need for more data: Also the attached below suggests we might need to know more about any location selected on the moon. How deep the dust How rocky How illuminated and when. The differences between the poles and non poles areas. See video of moon: + The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has released the final still images taken by the onboard High Definition Television (HDTV) from Kaguya, just before it completed its mission by impact- ing the moon on June 11, 2009. An entire series of images were taken with an interval of about one minute by the HDTV (Teltephoto) while Kaguya maneuvered its way to impact in Gill Crater. See: http://tinyurl.com/mfg32w click on the arrow in top left to navi- gate to the next photo. (via UniverseToday.com) Joe K0VTY ================== On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 18:08:49 -0000 "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh(a)comcast.net> writes: > Hi Miles, > > Since the rest of us on this BB don't have any details about the > landers, it > would be useful if you could get a copy of any RFP (request for > proposal) > and find out how much DC power will be available for how long, how > much > weight and surface area could be allocated for the package and what > type of > experiments NASA is interested in. Then we could calculate what > could be > provided for an RF downlink to earth and how many people could use > it. > > 73, > > John > KD6OZH Clip : > ____________________________________________________________ Largest network of startups. Find new startup opportunities. Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTEJJpIwfNeXSdHSVRRvcHOM RvMGE9qvungwW51nQ9xtBc7W2cdAkw/

1 0

Re: Information.
by Trevor . 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hi John, I couldn't see any references to the Russian Federation "pulling the plug on the ISS". As I understood it they are keen to extend the lifespan of the ISS although the current agreement is that the station is burnt up in the atmosphere when the funding ends, which I believe is 2015 but hopefully may become 2020 or later. Anatoly Zak also had one of his articles published in May on the BBC website regarding the possibility of detaching the Russian modules from the ISS and adding the ball-shaped compartment with docking ports, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8064060.stm 73 Trevor M5AKA

1 0

Re: ILN... Is this our future ride to the moon? MM
by MM 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

The Amateur radio community does not have the resources to build a better communication system than a professional commercial company. So we have two options, use existing lander hardware for communication or design our own stand alone transceiver project that just uses existing power and or antennas. After the lander has released the Rover, the lander “May” have some unused resources. Lets see if any of these unused resources (if any) can be used for Amateur Radio projects. How is the Lander going to be powered? Batteries only: If so, there will be no power for projects. The lander telemetry will stop after a few days. This is not a likely scenario. Solar Panels and Batteries: In this option, there may be some available power during lunar days to run other projects. This is the most sensible solution. Atomic Battery: This is the best option, however it’s politically sensitive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_battery The power source is one of the keys to designing a possible Amateur Radio project. Let’s ping our contacts at NASA and see what we can learn about the Moon Lander projects. Flash Back: On ISS, the Russian team proposed that we re-use navigation antennas from the FGB modules for Amateur Radio (1996). The idea worked and on the very first ISS mission we had access to an already installed antenna. It was a simple idea and it worked. Education Spin: Contributing to the project from a scientific nature may be difficult, we will have to get some universities involved, or we could focus on the educational nature of the project. Lets try to put the educational spin that School and university are communication via the Moon, with radio station designed and built by the schools. I am not saying that NASA would approve this project, but until we try we will not know. This project does not have to be an AMSAT project, we can make it a University project. Sincerely Miles WF1F --- On Mon, 7/6/09, James French <w8iss(a)wideopenwest.com> wrote: > From: James French <w8iss(a)wideopenwest.com> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] ILN... Is this our future ride to the moon? MM > To: "MM" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org, "Armando Mercado" <am25544(a)triton.net> > Date: Monday, July 6, 2009, 9:33 AM > On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 05:53 -0700, MM > wrote: > > Yes Exactly! > > > > We need to form a proposal team that can evaluate the > data to find out > > if an EME-Repeater is viable. > > > > Time is short. > > One thing, Miles. > > Frank Bauer commented: > On another topic, WRT the Lunar ILN, if you read the > solicitation, they > are discussing *15 kg* payloads. And these need to > accomplish some > scientific objective to further lunar > exploration. Given this, I do > not think the ILN is a viable AMSAT project. > > What would be the SCIENTIFIC payload that we would be > providing? > > I know that I mentioned in previous replies that we MIGHT > be able to > land a chance on something that A government would be doing > if we could > MAYBE provide a communications package for a craft. Going > by Frank's > statement and putting it into the context of what we are > planning, I > would NOT be surprised that we got turned down because we > are not prov- > iding something that contributes to the SCIENTIFIC nature > of the > mission. The government probably ALREADY has a contractor > to build and > provide the communications package(s) for these missions. > > Is there anything else that is being proposed that we can > get in on the > ground floor to provide this knowledge and equipment? I > haven't seen > anything and personally I didn't even know about the ILN > even. > > I am NOT trying to be the one to burst the bubble here. > This subject > HAS been brought up a number of times over the past four > years of putt- > ing something on the lunar surface. Each time, the answers > and suggest- > ions have gotten better as we have gotten more people that > know what it > takes climb on board the discussion. Hopefully this time > this discussion > will get past just that, discussion, and progress to an > Idea of Concept > stage that can then be taken to the next step, finding a > suitable candi- > date for this. > > James W8ISS > >

2 1

Original 13 Colonies
by Peter 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Tim, I want to personally thank you for your efforts in making the contact and arranging the inaugural satellite 13 colonies event. I enjoyed the opportunity to represent NY as WB2OQQ/K2A and all the stations that contacted us, in Tim's words "it was a hoot", thank you. 73, Pete, WB2OQQ

1 0

Information.
by John Hackett 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hello Dave, Certainly, just follow the additional information from the main page of ... <http://www.russianspaceweb.com/index.html> Have a good day. 73 John <la2qaa(a)amsat.org> ............................................................................................ > From: n4csitwo(a)bellsouth.net > To: la2qaa(a)amsat.org > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] An alternative ... or ... competition !!!. > Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 16:07:08 -0400 > > Hi John, > This is very interesting. Do you know the official news source of this > information? I would like to read more about it. > > Dave, AA4KN > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Hackett" <archie.hackett(a)hotmail.com> > To: <eu-amsat(a)yahoogroups.com> > Cc: <allan_gm1sxx(a)hotmail.com>; <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 6:46 AM > Subject: [amsat-bb] An alternative ... or ... competition !!!. > > > > Ladies and Gentlemen, > For those that don't know it, The chief of > RosKosmos, the Russian Space Agency *confirmed* last week the Russian > intention to pull the plug on the ISS in the 2015 - 2020 timeframe and to > construct another dedicated Russian > space station. > > According to Anatoly Zak RosKosmos informed NASA of these plans 14 days ago. > > The new Russian station is *NOT* intended to be a laboratory like the ISS > but > more of an in-orbit contruction platform for future Mars-like and outer > space > missions. > > The station will comprise a maintainable 'ball' section with several docking > ports > with attachable modules. > > I propose that amateur radio satellite operators get together and form a > group to suggest/try to influence/impliment an ARISS type of project for > this space station. > > A Strela type frame could be attached to the underside of the 'ball' and > since the station is planned for a Molinya type orbit the coverage would be > suitable for DX. > > The planned orbit would put the station predominently over Russia - as > opposed to the current ISS equatorial orbit. > > Personally, I would suggest an RS-10/11 RS-12/13 clone with a ROBOT ... > (read: propagation tester) - as these satellites were without the shadow of > a > doubt the best for recruiting newcomers. > > It would, in my opinion, be a viable concept and an alternative to some of > the > latest 'ideas' of a transponder on the moon ... which wouldn't 'catch' many > potential newcomers but would (*IN MY OPINION*) only serve a few dedicated > 'experts' ... leading to the demise of amateur satellite communications in > general. > > Comments, monies and praise to LA2QAA. > > Criticisms, horsewhipping and flaming to GM1SXX. > > 73 John. <la2qaa(a)amsat.org> > > Interested parties may read the following ... > > > ................................................................................................................ > The OPSEK project > > By > 2008, the Russian successor to the International Space Station, ISS, > was identified as Orbitalniy Pilotiruemyi Eksperimentalniy Kompleks, > OPSEK, or Orbital Manned Assembly and Experiment Complex in English.* > Unlike previous designs of Mir, Mir-2 and the ISS, > the heart of the station would be a four-ton ball-shaped node module. > Equipped with six docking ports, this relatively small and simple > element would be the only permanent element of the station. All other > modules would come and go as their lifespan and mission requires. > > The initial architecture of the OPSEK complex could be built out of > modules originally planned for the Russian segment > of the ISS. The exact scenario of the OPSEK assembly would depend on > the end of the ISS and the readiness of the latest Russian modules. > According to a 2008 scenario, the MLM multipurpose module, the node module > and a pair of NEM power platforms could be first launched to the ISS in > 2011, 2013 and 2014-2015, > respectively. With the deorbiting of the ISS looming around 2020, these > modules could separate from the old outpost to form the core of the new > Russian station. Another, more controversial scenario considered the > separation of the practically entire Russian segment, including the MIM-2 > docking compartment and the Zvezda service module, > prior to the ISS deorbiting. In this case, the 20-year-old service > module would temporarily take a responsibility for the flight control > of the OPSEK, until its replacement with a 40-ton versatile core > module, UMB, launched by a next-generation rocket from yet-to-be built > launch site in Vostochny during 2020s. > > The > separation of the Russian segment from the ISS would leave the rest of > the outpost without effective orbital maneuvering capabilities, leaving > the European ATV spacecraft > as a likely candidate to perform the tasks of attitude control and > deorbiting. To achieve this the ATV would have to be modified to enable > its docking with the US segment of the ISS. > > Depending > on the operational orbit selected for the OPSEK, it might be necessary > to change the orbital inclination of the modules departing the ISS and > forming the new station. The lowest inclination accessible from > Vostochny is 51.7 degrees, while the ISS is orbiting the Earth with the > inclination 51.6 degrees toward the Equator. It is estimated that one > or two Progress cargo ships would be necessary to push the modules from one > inclination to another. > > From > official statements during 2008 and 2009, it is clear that the one of > the chief objectives of the OPSEK complex would be the support for > expedition to Mars. All major elements of the Martian expeditionary > complex, such as main habitation module, Mars lander and > nuclear-powered space tug would dock to the station before its > departure from the low-Earth orbit toward Mars. The Martian expedition > would at the OPSEK as well. > > The station would also play a similar role in lunar exploration. > Reusable space tugs could link OPSEK with the Lunar Orbital Station, LOS, in > orbit around the Moon, thus creating a transport chain for a permanent lunar > base. Such tasks as servicing of modular satellites by orbital tugs based > at the OPSEK complex were also cited. > > In > broader terms, TsNIIMash research institute, a chief strategist of the > Russian space agency, formulated the OPSEK concept as a foundation of > the nation's space strategy. By 2009, the new station was seen as a > cornerstone of a new space exploration plan, which extended four > decades into the 21st century. An ambitious program apparently included > manned missions to the Moon, Mars and beyond. (344) > > Cooperation with Europe and the US > > In > 2008, Russian plans for maintaining presence in the low-Earth orbit in > general and the creation of a successor to the ISS in particular had > been met enthusiastically in Europe. As ESA had little hope to match > the US effort to return to the Moon at the beginning of the 21st century, > preserving a destination in the low-Earth orbit seemed critical for the > political support of the manned space flight on the continent. > > In > June 2009, Simonetta Di Pippo, ESA director of human space flight told > the editor of RussianSpaceWeb.com that she shared the Russian vision of > the future space station as a platform for deep space missions. "I have > continuous consultations with officials in Russia. We meet every month, > month and a half, and now > we are going to start jointly, the study how to proceed beyond 2025, Di > Pippo said, ..."and we have a common idea that we would like to > preserve presence in the lower orbit. We are studying different > scenarios, whether we need permanent presence or, maybe, a human-tended > capability, and we can end up with a totally different solution in the > end, but I don’t believe we can leave Earth orbit." > > Di Pippo also said that although current NASA plans for return to the > Moon > reserved no essential role for the station, it could change in the > future. "Even on the NASA side, they have too many different > developments (associated with the Earth orbit), including commercial > involvement, which they can not immediately give up," Di Pippo said. > > By the end of 2010, > all partners in the ISS project were expecting to agree on the > extension of the ISS lifespan from 2015 to 2020 or even 2025. Once end > of life for the ISS was decided an active planning for post-ISS manned > space flight could begin in Russia, Europe and possibly the US. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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

AO-7 distortion
by w7lrd＠comcast.net 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hello Has anyone else noticed distorted audio from AO-7. This last pass there was only Larry-WA6DIR and me on both his and my downlink was almost uninteligible. Tried lowest power and Larry tried switching polarity. Any thoughts. This is our current HEO. 73 Bob W7LRD

3 2

Re: I just curious
by Art McBride 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

LeRoy, This has been done with the RS birds (2M/10M). 6M and 1 1/4M are not allowed in all Regions (1-3) which leaves only 10M and 2M for an all VHF Satellite. The major draw back to this mode is during peak Sunspot activity, signals from the Satellite can not get through the Ionosphere on 10M. Art, KC6UQH -----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of kd8bxp(a)aol.com Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 12:07 PM To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] I just curious This is probably one of those questions that has a very simple answer maybe something I wasn't thinking of. On the FM birds how come the split is V/U or U/V? Are there any V/V birds? I mean if doppler doesn't effect the vhf as much wouldn't it make since to have some V/V? Wouldn't have to worry about doppler anyways I know there is a reason, so I am curious that is all! LeRoy, KD8BXP http://www.HamOhio.com Sent on the Now Network from my SprintR BlackBerry __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4218 (20090705) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4219 (20090705) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com

1 0

In between the moon and the moonnist..
by Luc Leblanc 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

While a fierce moonist thread from the Lunar Conspiracy grouip is raging i just copy this telemetry from AO-51. I try TLMECHO program but i get an error 9 window telling that data is out of something data space area? As soon as the program start to decode some data he freeze with this error #9? Is it normal as telemetry seems to be transmitted only when the satellite is in eclipse? Is it this who make's the program crashing? Thank's for your lights PACB-1>TIME-1/2: <UI>: PHT: uptime is 047/20:35:4mon 7. Time is Sun Jul 05 22:32:29 2009 PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. MONITOR ON/ON cmd:PACB-1>TLMI-1/2: <UI>: ý)QJ~_l_ÿ _) : 7 7 _z_D_ ___[ W x_Û «_'_ ( ' 8_û æÙî_¼æ_6÷_Ã_3_ÿ ÿ !ÿ "ÿ #ù_$~%ÿ_&ÿ_'(j )ÿ_*I+º,Ë-u.è_/j0z_1 ' ä?@A>BWCDøEøFðG;HI_JKLMPACB-1>TLMS-1/2: <UI>: C0:05 C1:44 C2:76 C3:2F C4:04 C5:01 PACB-1>LSTAT/2: <UI>: I P:0x13A8 o:0 l:29262 f:29262, d:0 st:5 e:3b PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PACB-1>TIME-1/2: <UI>: PHT: uptime is 047/20:36:27. Time is Sun Jul 05 22:33:09 2009 PACB-1>TLMS-1/2: <UI>: C0:05 C1:44 C2:76 C3:2F C4:04 C5:01 PACB-1>TLMD-1/2: <UI>: WOD:2 ATP:0 BMW:1 BMS:0 CTS:1 CTN:120 CTL:96 CTE:Thu Jul 09 23:09:32 2009 PACB-1>AMSATN-1/2: <UI>: >04 July 2009 ... FM Repeater ON ... L-Band uplink PBBS OFF Telemetry On ...In eclipse period 73, WA4SXM PACB-1>LSTAT/2: <UI>: I P:0x13A8 o:0 l:29262 f:29262, d:0 st:5 e:4c PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PECHO-11>STATUS/2: <UI>: B: 14550443 PACB-1>TIME-1/2: <UI>: PHT: uptime is 047/20:36:37. Time is Sun Jul 05 22:33:19 2009 PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PACB-1>TLMS-1/2: <UI>: C0:05 C1:44 C2:76 C3:2F C4:04 C5:01 PACB-1>TLMD-1/2: <UI>: WOD:2 ATP:0 BMW:1 BMS:0 CTS:1 CTN:120 CTL:96 CTE:Thu Jul 09 23:09:32 2009 PACB-1>LSTAT/2: <UI>: I P:0x13A8 o:0 l:29262 f:29262, d:0 st:5 e:4c PACBLS-8>PACBLS-8/2: <UI>: PACBLS S Meter = 0 PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PACB-1>TIME-1/2: <UI>: PHT: uptime is 047/20:36:47. Time is Sun Jul 05 22:33:29 2009 PACB-1>TLMS-1/2: <UI>: C0:05 C1:44 C2:76 C3:2F C4:04 C5:01 PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PACB-1>TIME-1/2: <UI>: PHT: uptime is 047/20:36:57. Time is Sun Jul 05 22:33:39 2009 PACB-1>TLMS-1/2: <UI>: C0:05 C1:44 C2:76 C3:2F C4:04 C5:01 PACB-1>LSTAT/2: <UI>: I P:0x13A8 o:0 l:29262 f:29262, d:0 st:5 e:5d PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PACBLS-8>PACBLS-8/2: <UI>: PACBLS S Meter = 0 PECHO-12>BBSTAT/2: <UI>: Open ABCD: PECHO-11>STATUS/2: <UI>: B: 14550443 PACB-1>TIME-1/2: <UI>: PHT: uptime is 047/20:37:07. Time is Sun Jul 05 22:33:49 2009 PACB-1>TLMS-1/2: <UI>: C0:05 C1:44 C2:76 C3:2F C4:04 C5:01 PACB-1>LSTAT/2: <UI>: I P:0x13A8 o:0 l:29262 f:29262, d:0 st:5 e:6e PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PACB-1>TLMD-1/2: <UI>: WOD:2 ATP:0 BMW:1 BMS:0 CTS:1 CTN:120 CTL:96 CTE:Thu Jul 09 23:09:32 2009 PACB-1>LSTAT/2: <UI>: I P:0x13A8 o:0 l:29262 f:29262, d:0 st:5 e:6e PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PACB-1>TIME-1/2: <UI>: PHT: uptime is 047/20:37:27. Time is Sun Jul 05 22:34:09 2009 PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. PECHO-12>BBSTAT/2: <UI>: Open ABCD: PECHO-11>PBLIST/2: <UI>: PB: Empty. "-" Luc Leblanc VE2DWE Skype VE2DWE www.qsl.net/ve2dwe WAC BASIC CW PHONE SATELLITE

1 0

Uncommon/Rare Michigan Grids This Week
by Doug Papay 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

All, I am operating portable this week, July 5th-9th, from Northeast Lower and Eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan. I will activate: EN84 (July 5th), EN85 (July 5th & 6th), EN76 (July 7th), EN86 (July 7th, 8th, & 9th), and EN74 (July 9th). My operations will be limited to FM satellites for all grids except EN86. I plan to operate on both FM & SSB satellites from EN86 (Drummond Island) to make this rare grid available to as many as possible. I am operating handheld with TH-D7A and arrow antenna and will use TS-2000 (with doppler tuning) & arrow in EN86. I hope to work many of you during my trip. 73, Doug KD8CAO/P Alpena, MI USA EN85 Ps. For those of you who are chasing 6m grids, I brought a 6m moxon with me and will try to spend a little time on 6 from EN86.

1 0

Original 13 Colonies - thanks to all!
by n3tl＠bellsouth.net 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

Hey everyone, Thank you all for participating in the Original 13 Colonies special event. I regret that we only had 11 of the 13 colonies active on the satellites, and hope we can have them all for the 2010 event. It appears as though many satellite operators were looking for the special call signs on virtually all the satellites. Here, as N3TL/K2G, I completed contacts on AO-7, AO-27, AO-51, FO-29, SO-50 and VO-52. I also digipeated a general greeting via packet through the ISS, but did not complete a 2-way contact. My log to KU2US includes the following details. 82 contacts that include: 24 states 2 Canadian provinces - Ontario and Quebec 3 DX entities - Honduras, Mexico and the U.K. 50 grid squares Last Thursday, I got an email from Jim, G3WGM, asking whether I'd be interested in tyring to make a contact with "the Motherland" during the special event. We made it happen at 00:54 UTC on July 4th, from the southernmost of the Original 13. Thanks, Jim, for staying up so late! Thanks again to everyone for participating. Remember to visit Ken's page at www.qrz.com/KU2US for all the details on getting a certificate. 73 to all, Tim - N3TL/K2G - Georgia

2 1

Re: I just curious
by Tony Langdon 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

At 05:06 AM 7/6/2009, kd8bxp(a)aol.com wrote: >On the FM birds how come the split is V/U or U/V? Are there any V/V birds? <snip> >I know there is a reason, so I am curious that is all! Yes, there is a reason. V/V would make the satellite work much like a terrestrial repeater. Terrestrial repeaters on 2m require bulky, heavy cavities, which are impractical to launch on a satellite. There's also the issue of possible detuning, due to the vibration of launch and thermal cycling while in space. One way a V/V satellite _could_ be made to work is to have separate receiver and transmitter satellites joined by a tether. A very low powered link on another band could pass the signal between the 2 sats, just as is done for some terrestrial repeaters. However, this configuration is also more expensive to launch, and any in band birds take away one of the big advantages of working crossband - being able to hear your own downlink, and monitor the channel while transmitting. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com

1 0

Re: dream your own sat
by Trevor . 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

The recently launched TerreStar-1 is designed to provides emergency comms capability http://www.southgatearc.org/news/july2009/terrestar_1_launched.htm The basic problem is that Amateurs want linear transponder satellites in orbits above 1400 km in order to provide reasonable DX opportunities and pass times greater than 20 minutes. But "cheap" launches only seem to be available for 500-800 km orbits, so we need to find a way to increase the orbit of say a triple-cubesat from 700 km to 1400 km using a non-combustive technology so as not to upset the cheap launch provider. Providing the radio communications is by comparison a trival exercise it's finding a means (solar powered thrusters ?) to increase orbital height that's the tricky part. 73 Trevor M5AKA --- On Sun, 5/7/09, John B. Stephensen <kd6ozh(a)comcast.net> wrote: > From: John B. Stephensen <kd6ozh(a)comcast.net> > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: dream your own sat > To: kc6uqh(a)cox.net, "'rupert red'" <rupert.red(a)live.it>, amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Date: Sunday, 5 July, 2009, 9:54 PM > The problem is that amateur radio > doesn't significantly reduce the cost of a > satellite. Any interest by the Red Cross would not be in > the satellite but > in human volunteers that might come with it. Unfortunately, > the LEO > satellites that hams can afford generate little interest in > this forum. > > 73, > > John > KD6OZH > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Art McBride" <kc6uqh(a)cox.net> > To: "'rupert red'" <rupert.red(a)live.it>; > <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 19:00 UTC > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: dream your own sat > > > > Rupert, > > I think that is a fair assumption on your part, but > only because the are > > no > > new ideas being presented that have commercial > potential that can use > > Amateur Radio as an inexpensive to proof of concept. > > In the present Amateur Radio community only Emergency > Communications is > > getting the publicity. Perhaps FEMA or the Red Cross > might help pay for an > > emergency communication satellite otherwise it is > LEO's forever! > > > > Art, KC6UQH > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org > [mailto:[email protected]] > On > > Behalf Of rupert red > > Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 4:47 AM > > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > > Subject: [amsat-bb] dream your own sat > > > > > > Hallo all... > > > > from a while I'm hearing about MANY different and > interesting satellite > > solutions... > > > > LEO, MEO, HEO, GEO... MOON !!! > > > > The problem is only ONE ! > > > > Amateur radio community has no money for this project, > and will never > > have! > > > > Amsat & Co will never be able to collect > millions.... I red on this bb > > that > > hams has no money for an expensive ground station... > then how can they > > send > > many money to Amsat? > > > > Public and private organizations all over the world > have not an high > > consideration of hams, and will never invest founds > for them. > > > > The conclusion is only ONE... we will never see a new > oscar satellite in > > the > > sky (at least some student's cube). > > > > Let's all dream together guys. > > > > > > > > Best 73 Rupert > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Condividi e organizza le tue immagini con > Windows Live Foto. > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/photos.aspx > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, > version of virus > > signature > > database 4217 (20090704) __________ > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, > version of virus > > signature > > database 4218 (20090705) __________ > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 >

3 2

Re: dream .. Universal Text Messaging
by Bob Bruninga 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

> I had an idea of setting up a pager network. > That could be used for national or local > emegrancy.... There is a man in MI doing this > with his APRS group and emegancy coms now. > I like the idea of being able to text any call > sign by just knowing the call sign - Yes, that is the goal of the Universal Text Messaging Initiative. www.aprs.org/aprs-messaging.html > doesn't DStar offer a way to do this? Yes via client software called D-Rats. It cross connects messages from D-Rats laptops to the APRS system, where for years text messages are delivered to the front panel of any APRS mobile or hand held radio, cellphones, pagers or anything via any callsign @ARRL.net or @AMSAT.org etc > It would or shouldn't be too hard to setup > a way for someone to know the call and have it > routed to a pager. Yes, that is the goal, any message to any call, using any device for sending or receiving. > It is still an idea but at this point it > is just an idea. No it is more than that, it is an Initiative that we hope more authors and systems will get on board. We have been trying to get an article into QST on this subject since last November, and it will finally appear in the Septermber EMCOM issue of QST. (initiall they rejected it because it was not "broad enough to appeal to a majority of readers" or something like that. But with over two dozen text messaging systems in Amateur Radio already, we have just got to start linking them otogether seamlessly! > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > Sent on the Now Network? > from my Sprint® BlackBerry Yes! That's the idea! Bob, WB4APR >-----Original Message----- >From: "Bob Bruninga " <bruninga(a)usna.edu> > >Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 18:01:25 >To: John B. Stephensen<kd6ozh(a)comcast.net>; <kc6uqh(a)cox.net>; 'rupert red'<rupert.red(a)live.it>; <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> >Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: dream your own sat > > >> Any interest by the Red Cross would not be in the >> satellite but in human volunteers that might come >> with it. Unfortunately, the LEO satellites that >> hams can afford generate little interest in this forum. > >I wish we could some how better influence the dozens of cubesat satellites being built with AX.25 packet comm systems to at least consider a backup digipeater comm system. If just six of these allowed for a possibility of user digipeating, we would have a constellation that would provide worldwide text messaging capability from mobiles and handhelds with delays no more than 30 minutes. > >What a fantastic emergency comm system we could have. If ten of them were available, then the coverage would be nearly continuous. > >Amateur Radio needs to recognize its trememdous legacy of over a century of wireless text messaging and our ability to bring that connectivity to the field any time anywhere. We simply need to link them together to meet our overall "Universal Amateur Radio Text Messaging Initiative", that is, any ham, any where, any time, able to text message any other ham anywhere using any hardware device, commercial or amateur by callsign alone. > >Please see www.aprs.org/aprs-messaging.html > >I count over 2 dozen existing amateur radio text messaging systems few of which are currently crossconnected. Most talk only within their own constituents. APRS and some others are already cross connected at the email level which then connects to cellphones and other wireless devices. So crossconnecting at the APRS internetwork or at the email level is easy to do. We just need all authors to consider transparent cross connection as a goal as per the above web page. > >This has already been done for all APRS satellites and even the ARISS system when it came over the the Satellite APRS channel 145.825. When ARISS is in packet mode, it enables text messaging and Email to and from the front panel of any APRS radio in the world via our existing network of APRS ground stations. See the downlinks on www.ariss.net > >We have tried to get other packet satellites on that channel, SUNSAT, PCSAT1, PCSAT2, ANDE, RAFT and ISS all of which supported this universal text messaging. We need more, and longer lived satelites. And most any AX.25 cubesat could do it as a secondary mission. We need to look for opportunities there. > >We had GO32 also for a year or so until its recent demise, though it's frequency was different. > >Bob, WB4APR > >_______________________________________________ >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

An alternative ... or ... competition !!!.
by Frank H. Bauer 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

All, So that you all know, there is a lot of international discussion and dialog going on right now on the next steps for ISS. The current international commitment is to fly ISS to 2015. But given that several of the international partners, most notably Europe and Japan, have just gotten their modules on-orbit, there is discussion, dialog and debate on extending ISS to 2020 and beyond. In the USA, some of this dialog is occurring through the Obama-chartered Human Spaceflight Review Committee, let by Norm Augustine, where they have a sub-group looking at ISS Schedule, ISS Utility and ISS Cost. See: http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/home/index.html While the statement, below, might have been made, I would wait until all the ISS Partners get together to modify their future ISS strategy in writing. And remember that ISS has done a fantastic job of international collaboration..they all (US, Russia, Europe, Canada, and Japan) all depend upon each other to ensure a robust ISS system. So separating one segment from the others will have great repercussions for all parties. On another topic, WRT the Lunar ILN, if you read the solicitation, they are discussing *15 kg* payloads. And these need to accomplish some scientific objective to further lunar exploration. Given this, I do not think the ILN is a viable AMSAT project. 73, Frank Bauer, KA3HDO Message: 5 Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 12:46:08 +0200 From: John Hackett <archie.hackett(a)hotmail.com> Subject: [amsat-bb] An alternative ... or ... competition !!!. To: <eu-amsat(a)yahoogroups.com> Cc: allan_gm1sxx(a)hotmail.com, amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Message-ID: <BLU141-W15D0416BC901BCBCAA5F4D912A0(a)phx.gbl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Ladies and Gentlemen, For those that don't know it, The chief of RosKosmos, the Russian Space Agency *confirmed* last week the Russian intention to pull the plug on the ISS in the 2015 - 2020 timeframe and to construct another dedicated Russian space station. According to Anatoly Zak RosKosmos informed NASA of these plans 14 days ago. The new Russian station is *NOT* intended to be a laboratory like the ISS but more of an in-orbit contruction platform for future Mars-like and outer space missions. The station will comprise a maintainable 'ball' section with several docking ports with attachable modules. I propose that amateur radio satellite operators get together and form a group to suggest/try to influence/impliment an ARISS type of project for this space station. A Strela type frame could be attached to the underside of the 'ball' and since the station is planned for a Molinya type orbit the coverage would be suitable for DX. The planned orbit would put the station predominently over Russia - as opposed to the current ISS equatorial orbit. Personally, I would suggest an RS-10/11 RS-12/13 clone with a ROBOT ... (read: propagation tester) - as these satellites were without the shadow of a doubt the best for recruiting newcomers. It would, in my opinion, be a viable concept and an alternative to some of the latest 'ideas' of a transponder on the moon ... which wouldn't 'catch' many potential newcomers but would (*IN MY OPINION*) only serve a few dedicated 'experts' ... leading to the demise of amateur satellite communications in general. Comments, monies and praise to LA2QAA. Criticisms, horsewhipping and flaming to GM1SXX. 73 John. <la2qaa(a)amsat.org> Interested parties may read the following ... ............................................................................ .................................... The OPSEK project By 2008, the Russian successor to the International Space Station, ISS, was identified as Orbitalniy Pilotiruemyi Eksperimentalniy Kompleks, OPSEK, or Orbital Manned Assembly and Experiment Complex in English.* Unlike previous designs of Mir, Mir-2 and the ISS, the heart of the station would be a four-ton ball-shaped node module. Equipped with six docking ports, this relatively small and simple element would be the only permanent element of the station. All other modules would come and go as their lifespan and mission requires. The initial architecture of the OPSEK complex could be built out of modules originally planned for the Russian segment of the ISS. The exact scenario of the OPSEK assembly would depend on the end of the ISS and the readiness of the latest Russian modules. According to a 2008 scenario, the MLM multipurpose module, the node module and a pair of NEM power platforms could be first launched to the ISS in 2011, 2013 and 2014-2015, respectively. With the deorbiting of the ISS looming around 2020, these modules could separate from the old outpost to form the core of the new Russian station. Another, more controversial scenario considered the separation of the practically entire Russian segment, including the MIM-2 docking compartment and the Zvezda service module, prior to the ISS deorbiting. In this case, the 20-year-old service module would temporarily take a responsibility for the flight control of the OPSEK, until its replacement with a 40-ton versatile core module, UMB, launched by a next-generation rocket from yet-to-be built launch site in Vostochny during 2020s. The separation of the Russian segment from the ISS would leave the rest of the outpost without effective orbital maneuvering capabilities, leaving the European ATV spacecraft as a likely candidate to perform the tasks of attitude control and deorbiting. To achieve this the ATV would have to be modified to enable its docking with the US segment of the ISS. Depending on the operational orbit selected for the OPSEK, it might be necessary to change the orbital inclination of the modules departing the ISS and forming the new station. The lowest inclination accessible from Vostochny is 51.7 degrees, while the ISS is orbiting the Earth with the inclination 51.6 degrees toward the Equator. It is estimated that one or two Progress cargo ships would be necessary to push the modules from one inclination to another. From official statements during 2008 and 2009, it is clear that the one of the chief objectives of the OPSEK complex would be the support for expedition to Mars. All major elements of the Martian expeditionary complex, such as main habitation module, Mars lander and nuclear-powered space tug would dock to the station before its departure from the low-Earth orbit toward Mars. The Martian expedition would at the OPSEK as well. The station would also play a similar role in lunar exploration. Reusable space tugs could link OPSEK with the Lunar Orbital Station, LOS, in orbit around the Moon, thus creating a transport chain for a permanent lunar base. Such tasks as servicing of modular satellites by orbital tugs based at the OPSEK complex were also cited. In broader terms, TsNIIMash research institute, a chief strategist of the Russian space agency, formulated the OPSEK concept as a foundation of the nation's space strategy. By 2009, the new station was seen as a cornerstone of a new space exploration plan, which extended four decades into the 21st century. An ambitious program apparently included manned missions to the Moon, Mars and beyond. (344) Cooperation with Europe and the US In 2008, Russian plans for maintaining presence in the low-Earth orbit in general and the creation of a successor to the ISS in particular had been met enthusiastically in Europe. As ESA had little hope to match the US effort to return to the Moon at the beginning of the 21st century, preserving a destination in the low-Earth orbit seemed critical for the political support of the manned space flight on the continent. In June 2009, Simonetta Di Pippo, ESA director of human space flight told the editor of RussianSpaceWeb.com that she shared the Russian vision of the future space station as a platform for deep space missions. "I have continuous consultations with officials in Russia. We meet every month, month and a half, and now we are going to start jointly, the study how to proceed beyond 2025, Di Pippo said, ..."and we have a common idea that we would like to preserve presence in the lower orbit. We are studying different scenarios, whether we need permanent presence or, maybe, a human-tended capability, and we can end up with a totally different solution in the end, but I don?t believe we can leave Earth orbit." Di Pippo also said that although current NASA plans for return to the Moon reserved no essential role for the station, it could change in the future. "Even on the NASA side, they have too many different developments (associated with the Earth orbit), including commercial involvement, which they can not immediately give up," Di Pippo said. By the end of 2010, all partners in the ISS project were expecting to agree on the extension of the ISS lifespan from 2015 to 2020 or even 2025. Once end of life for the ISS was decided an active planning for post-ISS manned space flight could begin in Russia, Europe and possibly the US.

1 0

Re: dream your own sat
by Bob Bruninga 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

> Any interest by the Red Cross would not be in the > satellite but in human volunteers that might come > with it. Unfortunately, the LEO satellites that > hams can afford generate little interest in this forum. I wish we could some how better influence the dozens of cubesat satellites being built with AX.25 packet comm systems to at least consider a backup digipeater comm system. If just six of these allowed for a possibility of user digipeating, we would have a constellation that would provide worldwide text messaging capability from mobiles and handhelds with delays no more than 30 minutes. What a fantastic emergency comm system we could have. If ten of them were available, then the coverage would be nearly continuous. Amateur Radio needs to recognize its trememdous legacy of over a century of wireless text messaging and our ability to bring that connectivity to the field any time anywhere. We simply need to link them together to meet our overall "Universal Amateur Radio Text Messaging Initiative", that is, any ham, any where, any time, able to text message any other ham anywhere using any hardware device, commercial or amateur by callsign alone. Please see www.aprs.org/aprs-messaging.html I count over 2 dozen existing amateur radio text messaging systems few of which are currently crossconnected. Most talk only within their own constituents. APRS and some others are already cross connected at the email level which then connects to cellphones and other wireless devices. So crossconnecting at the APRS internetwork or at the email level is easy to do. We just need all authors to consider transparent cross connection as a goal as per the above web page. This has already been done for all APRS satellites and even the ARISS system when it came over the the Satellite APRS channel 145.825. When ARISS is in packet mode, it enables text messaging and Email to and from the front panel of any APRS radio in the world via our existing network of APRS ground stations. See the downlinks on www.ariss.net We have tried to get other packet satellites on that channel, SUNSAT, PCSAT1, PCSAT2, ANDE, RAFT and ISS all of which supported this universal text messaging. We need more, and longer lived satelites. And most any AX.25 cubesat could do it as a secondary mission. We need to look for opportunities there. We had GO32 also for a year or so until its recent demise, though it's frequency was different. Bob, WB4APR

1 0

dream your own sat
by rupert red 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

Hallo all... from a while I'm hearing about MANY different and interesting satellite solutions... LEO, MEO, HEO, GEO... MOON !!! The problem is only ONE ! Amateur radio community has no money for this project, and will never have! Amsat & Co will never be able to collect millions.... I red on this bb that hams has no money for an expensive ground station... then how can they send many money to Amsat? Public and private organizations all over the world have not an high consideration of hams, and will never invest founds for them. The conclusion is only ONE... we will never see a new oscar satellite in the sky (at least some student's cube). Let's all dream together guys. Best 73 Rupert _________________________________________________________________ Condividi e organizza le tue immagini con Windows Live Foto. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/photos.aspx

3 2

Subject: Re: Antenna Question
by Mike Ryan 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

Hello all, Now that I was remionded to look, my qhtenna units came with a 1 page assemby instructions and drawing that includes lengths of rods and phasing harness. I'd be glad to scan/post it somewhere if anyone wants it. Mike WB1AAT ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 20:45:22 +0000 From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel(a)ngunn.net> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna Question To: George Henry <ka3hsw(a)att.net> Cc: amsat bb <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org>, Jim Jerzycke <kq6ea(a)pacbell.net> Message-ID: <4A4FBF62.3090406(a)ngunn.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed I would suggest that you don't need a phasing line if the dipoles are spaces a quarter wave and that both are fed by equal length cables. George Henry wrote: > Looking at the pictures, it appears that the dipoles are separated by about > 1/4 wave in free space, which is physically longer than a 1/4 wave phasing > line would be. And I'd think that the phasing line would have to be 1/2 > wavelength, after introducing a 1/4 wave offset between the dipoles, > correct?

2 1

ILN... Is this our future ride to the moon?
by Armando Mercado 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

Greetings, The International Lunar Network appears to be the unmanned landers NASA is planning to put on the moon. The program is working to put 2 landers on the moon in the 2012-2014 time frame. Here are some excerpts from a Request for Information by NASA regarding instruments for its International Lunar Network (ILN). Pay special note to the mass and power limits. Is this what we are talking about putting a transponder on? 73, Armando, N8IGJ ****** Date Released: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 Source: Goddard Space Flight Center NASA Solicitation: Instruments for U.S. International Lunar Network (ILN) Lunar Missions Description of Anticipated Requirement NASA expects to emplace the first two nodes (the "anchor" nodes) of the ILN in the 2012-2014 timeframe with two additional nodes to be emplaced roughly two years later, depending on funds availability. All nodes will carry identical core instrument payloads. The ILN mission requires long lived instruments which can be operated as a network for six years (the anchor nodes will necessarily have to last longer). It is anticipated that a very small amount of power will be available to enable continuous operation through the lunar night. Concept studies for the spacecraft are now under development at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center working with the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) of The Johns Hopkins University. The mission will be tightly constrained in both mass and power. It is expected that the total available mass for all payload instruments will be approximately 15 kg, although the precise mass available for the payload will depend on the launch vehicle and other trades still being considered. The total available payload power will be approximately 15 W. The total budget for the ILN anchor nodes including development and operations is $200M. Schedule and budget constraints require that NASA mission planners focus on relatively mature instruments. ****** See the following links for more info: http://www.moontoday.net/news/viewsr.html?pid=29834 (The full Request for Information) http://iln.arc.nasa.gov/welcome (General info on ILN) http://lunarscience.arc.nasa.gov/file_download/26/ILN+Final+Report.pdf (Detailed info on ILN... Note: large file 13MB) Happy reading, Armando, N8IGJ

1 0

Molinya
by John Hackett 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

David, My use of the word Molniya was ambiguous. I should !!! have emphisised *LEO* elliptical. Let me explain ... The word Molinya in Russian means (literally) 'lightning' but in a space context it is accepted to mean ELLIPTICAL ... as per their TV satellite orbits which are in English dialogue would be classified as *HIGHLY* elliptical. The planned space station is envisaged in a 70 degree LEO orbit. I apologise for my misleading remarks. 73 John. <la2qaa(a)amsat.org> From: G0MRF(a)aol.com Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 11:32:56 -0400 Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] An alternative ... or ... competition !!!. To: la2qaa(a)amsat.org In a message dated 05/07/2009 15:17:02 GMT Standard Time, archie.hackett(a)hotmail.com writes: The new Russian station is *NOT* intended to be a laboratory like the ISS but more of an in-orbit contruction platform for future Mars-like and outer space missions. The station will comprise a maintainable 'ball' section with several docking ports with attachable modules. I propose that amateur radio satellite operators get together and form a group to suggest/try to influence/impliment an ARISS type of project for this space station. A Strela type frame could be attached to the underside of the 'ball' and since the station is planned for a Molinya type orbit the coverage would be suitable for DX. Hi John. Just wondering.... Is a Molinya orbit highly elliptical ?? If so, then it cant really go above 1000km high or the crew will get zapped by the protons in the lower van Allen belt. Thanks David

1 0

Hi to the 13 Original 13 Colonies - Motherland Calling !!
by Jim Heck 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

HI Folks, About 36 hours ago, I had an excellent QSO with Tim, N3TL via FO-29 on SSB. We had about a two minute window, so we did't have much time for rag chewing!!! According to my investigations, there are only a few orbits of FO-29 (my favorite satellite at present, and I think the only one high enough to reach many of the Eastern States). One of them occurs in about 12 hours, at 0044 (UTC) 5 July. Bearing in mind Tim is in quite far south, it should be possible for addition States to be worked from here. Please note that I can only do SSB (CW is far to rusty, I'm sorry to say) If anyone in the 13 States would like to make a sked for this orbit of FO-29, please email me off list at g3wgm(a)amsat.org 73s, and Happy Holidays! Jim G3WGM

1 0

An alternative ... or ... competition !!!.
by John Hackett 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

Ladies and Gentlemen, For those that don't know it, The chief of RosKosmos, the Russian Space Agency *confirmed* last week the Russian intention to pull the plug on the ISS in the 2015 - 2020 timeframe and to construct another dedicated Russian space station. According to Anatoly Zak RosKosmos informed NASA of these plans 14 days ago. The new Russian station is *NOT* intended to be a laboratory like the ISS but more of an in-orbit contruction platform for future Mars-like and outer space missions. The station will comprise a maintainable 'ball' section with several docking ports with attachable modules. I propose that amateur radio satellite operators get together and form a group to suggest/try to influence/impliment an ARISS type of project for this space station. A Strela type frame could be attached to the underside of the 'ball' and since the station is planned for a Molinya type orbit the coverage would be suitable for DX. The planned orbit would put the station predominently over Russia - as opposed to the current ISS equatorial orbit. Personally, I would suggest an RS-10/11 RS-12/13 clone with a ROBOT ... (read: propagation tester) - as these satellites were without the shadow of a doubt the best for recruiting newcomers. It would, in my opinion, be a viable concept and an alternative to some of the latest 'ideas' of a transponder on the moon ... which wouldn't 'catch' many potential newcomers but would (*IN MY OPINION*) only serve a few dedicated 'experts' ... leading to the demise of amateur satellite communications in general. Comments, monies and praise to LA2QAA. Criticisms, horsewhipping and flaming to GM1SXX. 73 John. <la2qaa(a)amsat.org> Interested parties may read the following ... ................................................................................................................ The OPSEK project By 2008, the Russian successor to the International Space Station, ISS, was identified as Orbitalniy Pilotiruemyi Eksperimentalniy Kompleks, OPSEK, or Orbital Manned Assembly and Experiment Complex in English.* Unlike previous designs of Mir, Mir-2 and the ISS, the heart of the station would be a four-ton ball-shaped node module. Equipped with six docking ports, this relatively small and simple element would be the only permanent element of the station. All other modules would come and go as their lifespan and mission requires. The initial architecture of the OPSEK complex could be built out of modules originally planned for the Russian segment of the ISS. The exact scenario of the OPSEK assembly would depend on the end of the ISS and the readiness of the latest Russian modules. According to a 2008 scenario, the MLM multipurpose module, the node module and a pair of NEM power platforms could be first launched to the ISS in 2011, 2013 and 2014-2015, respectively. With the deorbiting of the ISS looming around 2020, these modules could separate from the old outpost to form the core of the new Russian station. Another, more controversial scenario considered the separation of the practically entire Russian segment, including the MIM-2 docking compartment and the Zvezda service module, prior to the ISS deorbiting. In this case, the 20-year-old service module would temporarily take a responsibility for the flight control of the OPSEK, until its replacement with a 40-ton versatile core module, UMB, launched by a next-generation rocket from yet-to-be built launch site in Vostochny during 2020s. The separation of the Russian segment from the ISS would leave the rest of the outpost without effective orbital maneuvering capabilities, leaving the European ATV spacecraft as a likely candidate to perform the tasks of attitude control and deorbiting. To achieve this the ATV would have to be modified to enable its docking with the US segment of the ISS. Depending on the operational orbit selected for the OPSEK, it might be necessary to change the orbital inclination of the modules departing the ISS and forming the new station. The lowest inclination accessible from Vostochny is 51.7 degrees, while the ISS is orbiting the Earth with the inclination 51.6 degrees toward the Equator. It is estimated that one or two Progress cargo ships would be necessary to push the modules from one inclination to another. From official statements during 2008 and 2009, it is clear that the one of the chief objectives of the OPSEK complex would be the support for expedition to Mars. All major elements of the Martian expeditionary complex, such as main habitation module, Mars lander and nuclear-powered space tug would dock to the station before its departure from the low-Earth orbit toward Mars. The Martian expedition would at the OPSEK as well. The station would also play a similar role in lunar exploration. Reusable space tugs could link OPSEK with the Lunar Orbital Station, LOS, in orbit around the Moon, thus creating a transport chain for a permanent lunar base. Such tasks as servicing of modular satellites by orbital tugs based at the OPSEK complex were also cited. In broader terms, TsNIIMash research institute, a chief strategist of the Russian space agency, formulated the OPSEK concept as a foundation of the nation's space strategy. By 2009, the new station was seen as a cornerstone of a new space exploration plan, which extended four decades into the 21st century. An ambitious program apparently included manned missions to the Moon, Mars and beyond. (344) Cooperation with Europe and the US In 2008, Russian plans for maintaining presence in the low-Earth orbit in general and the creation of a successor to the ISS in particular had been met enthusiastically in Europe. As ESA had little hope to match the US effort to return to the Moon at the beginning of the 21st century, preserving a destination in the low-Earth orbit seemed critical for the political support of the manned space flight on the continent. In June 2009, Simonetta Di Pippo, ESA director of human space flight told the editor of RussianSpaceWeb.com that she shared the Russian vision of the future space station as a platform for deep space missions. "I have continuous consultations with officials in Russia. We meet every month, month and a half, and now we are going to start jointly, the study how to proceed beyond 2025, Di Pippo said, ..."and we have a common idea that we would like to preserve presence in the lower orbit. We are studying different scenarios, whether we need permanent presence or, maybe, a human-tended capability, and we can end up with a totally different solution in the end, but I don’t believe we can leave Earth orbit." Di Pippo also said that although current NASA plans for return to the Moon reserved no essential role for the station, it could change in the future. "Even on the NASA side, they have too many different developments (associated with the Earth orbit), including commercial involvement, which they can not immediately give up," Di Pippo said. By the end of 2010, all partners in the ISS project were expecting to agree on the extension of the ISS lifespan from 2015 to 2020 or even 2025. Once end of life for the ISS was decided an active planning for post-ISS manned space flight could begin in Russia, Europe and possibly the US.

1 0

More Future Thoughts
by Jeff Davis 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

It's interesting to watch how the desperation to have assets in high orbit has driven the ideas ever more grandiose here on the old -BB. We've moved from putting a "simple" transponder (as if there were such a thing) 35,000 miles over our head to landing a repeater a quarter million miles away on the Moon and using robotic rovers to lay directional antennas along the lunar surface... What's next, a Jovian constellation of amateur satellites? This is almost directly the result of having added the "government" into the fictional scenario. Whenever a new idea starts with, "maybe we can get the government to give us a ride..." then what follows can be as ostentatious as we like because of the perception that the government can afford to do really BIG things. And we invariably try to justify that they should want to do this because of "emergency communication". It would seem to be more constructive to substitute the words "big magical genie" in your plans everywhere you use the word "government" or "NASA". That way when you write, "if we could just get a big magical genie to give us a ride to the Moon..." the reality will sink in and it probably won't seem like such a grand idea before it sees the light of day. We need to disabuse ourselves of the ridiculous notion that the government is anxious and willing to stuff our pockets with cash just because "when all else fails". Need we be reminded that we're in the midst of the worst global economic recession since the great depression? Tax revenues are low while debt is unbelievably high. Politicians may be stupid but they're going to easily sniff out the nonsense of spending millions of dollars so a few hundred radio hams can enjoy their high-tech hobby. (And who really wants them to do that anyway? What would be your reaction if you read the news tomorrow that the government was going to spend $20 million tax dollars to help promote Frisbee golf, coin collecting, or some other hobby?) When life gives you lemons you make lemonade. We can't get to HEO, so what can we do? I think our best option is to create a lot more interesting things to do at LEO since we know we can get there; but let's make sure we aren't leaving a stone un-turned. What about other orbits that may not be as desirable as HEO but that offer better coverage than low-earth? I recall reading something from G0RMF about adapting a CubeSat to include some sort of a propulsion system to get to a mid-Earth orbit: http://g0mrf.com/MEOSAT.htm I have no idea if this is viable, but it seems to me that if we want to place assets higher than LEO these are the kinds of ideas we should be kicking around on the BB and perhaps leave the moon base installation ideas for AMSAT members in 2050 to figure out how to make work and to fund. -- 73 de Jeff, KE9V AMSAT-NA AMSAT-DL

4 4

Been A While
by jbblack68＠gmail.com 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

It's been quite a while since I have been on this BB. I got out of the hobby for about four years but I am working my way back in. I used to be KS4AW then K2SAT. Now I'm W4JBB. I don't even know if some of the folks who were involved in AMSAT are even still around. I do searches on their webpages and either get nothing or no updates in years - I don't dive past the first search results page. These are a few I remember: K5OE K6YK KF4FDJ N7SFI N8DEU WB6LLO There were many others too. I am getting my equipment slowly out of storage (I have it stored all over the house apparently). I had a FODtrack interface and found a partial build of the G6LVB tracker. I cannot remember if I finished the LVB tracker or not. I have a cutout for and LCD display, but no display in it. My dad has my '847, but he's not using it and I'll get it back in the next week. I left my tower up with my 2m/70cm antennas and the G5400 rotor. Feedline is still there too... partially. I guess my only question about gear is what should I use for auto-tracking with a Vista box? Like I said, I *had* a FODtrack interface, but I cannot find it. I also have a partially built LVB tracker. I have a parallel PCI card I can install in the Vista machine but I wonder if anyone has had any luck with that setup... I'm not opposed to booting up into Linux either. I have looked at the AMSAT homepage and there is only a small fraction of satellites still available. I have renewed my membership and am really looking forward to getting back on the birds. I think I have rambled enough. 73, Joel, W4JBB

3 2

The Moon is our Future / antennas
by G0MRF＠aol.com 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

In a message dated 03/07/2009 20:46:44 GMT Standard Time, kd6ozh(a)comcast.net writes: Building a prototype that works on Earth for project like this is only a few percent of the effort required. Treating it as a radio club project won't be effective as people need to sign up for a 5-year project. Hi all. John is absolutely right in saying the complexity cannot be easily compared to a terrestrial radio project. One other thing that stands an almost zero chance of succeeding is a dish antenna that needs to point towards the earth. If NASA and the ISS have trouble with moving parts on the solar array you can imagine how much more difficult it would be on the moon. However, how about this. The problem with the higher bands is power generation / path loss / antenna gain. Any higher band like 1.2, 2.4 or 5.8G would need a high gain antenna to offset the increased path loss. But, instead of a conventional steerable dish....with its unreliable moving joints...How about an electrically steerable array of patches / dipoles / or any other type of antenna element. But how to 'point' it? Well. actually I think Tom Clark provided the answer for that with his proposal of a few years ago. The principle is this: If you have 2 arrays. One say on 5.6G uplink and one on 5.8G downlink, then the receiving array can electrically look in different directions for a signal from the Earth. Once the receiver has identified a signal and optimised the RX Antenna, the information on the direction of the Earth i.e. the direction of the strongest incoming signal can be used to configure the transmit array which will then beam a signal back to earth with high ERP. Directional, high gain, and no moving parts. Thanks David G0MRF

6 5

controller and Rotator help
by myles landstein 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

Hoping to get some real world advice from those that are using MacDoppler and a compatible Rotor /Controller set up as this will be my first time getting a rotator and controller. I wanted to solicit some advice on two fronts, the rotor controller basically for ease of use with MacDoppler and rotor reliability. My first thoughts were towards a Yaesu 5500 and maybe the PrimeTec controller or maybe the LVB tracker as it's less costly. I read a few reviews but not much was out there in general but especially on the PrimeTec... What are you using as a controller? would appreciate any comparisons pro's cons tips tricks you might have My biggest concern really is the Rotator. I am in a situation such that after installation, getting back to the roof for repairs would be rather difficult. So i am trying to identify the 'best' small/moderate sized rotator (az/el) as possible /practical. Will be turning a small M2 2m and 440 circular pol beam Not really sure how reliable the 5500 is for long term use. so if there was a 'better' more reliable and or longer lasting rotor out there i'd strongly consider it The only thing I thought of as a alternative was the AlphaSpid but comparing reviews I seem to come out about the same between it and the 5500 Since this is all new stuff and I am not finding the usual quality 'google' results /reviews I would greatly appreciate any help or experience /advice on this from someone that went down this road already and willing to share some first hand info. thanks very much grateful for any advice. Going to Dayton '10 It will get better with more support! Myles D Landstein N2EHG myles.landstein(a)gmail.com

2 2

Antenna Question
by Joel Black 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

Happy Independence Day. Does anyone recognize the following antennas? I purchased them years ago and they were part of a system I never installed. Over the years, one of the elements has been damaged and, even though I can fix it myself, I'd like to know who made these. Doggonit, I cannot upload to my webpage (something else yet to figure out). Suffice it to say, my description may not do the antennas justice. There are two of them, a 2m and 70cm made out of sched 40 PVC. They appear to be a "turnstile" type antenna with two aluminum elements at the top and two at the bottom 90° out of phase from each other (top and bottom). In other words, if looking at a compass, the top two elements would be at N and S, the bottom two at E and W. This is the same on both antennas as they are a matching set. These antennas were in an old QST, but I have since gotten rid of all those magazines and cannot find the article online. Any ideas or suggestions? Tnx, Joel, W4JBB

4 3

Subject: Re: Antenna Question
by Mike Ryan 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

QHTenna was back for a little while in 2008 but is again no longer making antennas for Amateurs. This is the last website. http://www.qhtenna.com I have a pair of his antennas. They were your basic turnstile (no reflector ) made of aluminum rods and PVC. They did the job as omnis go and I'm still using them. Like most omnis a preamp greatly improves the experience. My primary antennas for LEO Sats now are the WAVJB cheap yagis. 8 element 440 and 3 elements 2M all on same boom at 15 degrees fixed elevation. I went with PVC instead of wood construction as it was easier to weather proof. As for other omnis, QST also recently (Nov 2008) reviewed a QFH (quadrifilar) from antennas.us and really liked it. Its more expensive than a turnstile. QFHs have a good reputation for performance and a bad reputation for construction, particularly on 440. I tried several times to build one to no avail though I've managed to build functional Eggbeater and Moxons. The Eggbeater (no reflector) performed about the same as the turnstile. The Moxon was fantastic over 30 degrees or so but pretty poor below that. Made sense since its similar to a 2 element beam pointing at the sky. I rather had my eye on the antennas.us model but havent gotten around to buying one yet. Mike WB1AAT ---------------- Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 11:54:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Jerzycke <kq6ea(a)pacbell.net> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna Question To: amsat bb <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org>, George Henry <ka3hsw(a)att.net> Message-ID: <237207.42610.qm(a)web80606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 The product review is in the August 2004 QST. If you have access to the reviews page you can find it under the "Q" listings by manufacturer. Jim? KQ6EA --- On Sat, 7/4/09, George Henry <ka3hsw(a)att.net> wrote: From: George Henry <ka3hsw(a)att.net> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna Question To: "amsat bb" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Date: Saturday, July 4, 2009, 8:51 AM Sounds like the "QHTennas", made by N4QH.? Reviewed in QST in 2005, then he stopped producing them just a few months later. Near as I could figure out, they are a conventional turnstile design, but with the 2 dipoles separated by the length of the phasing line, and no reflector. George, KA3HSW

1 0

Re: Antenna Question
by Jim Jerzycke 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

The product review is in the August 2004 QST. If you have access to the reviews page you can find it under the "Q" listings by manufacturer. Jim KQ6EA --- On Sat, 7/4/09, George Henry <ka3hsw(a)att.net> wrote: From: George Henry <ka3hsw(a)att.net> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna Question To: "amsat bb" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Date: Saturday, July 4, 2009, 8:51 AM Sounds like the "QHTennas", made by N4QH. Reviewed in QST in 2005, then he stopped producing them just a few months later. Near as I could figure out, they are a conventional turnstile design, but with the 2 dipoles separated by the length of the phasing line, and no reflector. George, KA3HSW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joel Black" <jbblack(a)charter.net> To: <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2009 9:50 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Antenna Question Happy Independence Day. Does anyone recognize the following antennas? I purchased them years ago and they were part of a system I never installed. Over the years, one of the elements has been damaged and, even though I can fix it myself, I'd like to know who made these. Doggonit, I cannot upload to my webpage (something else yet to figure out). Suffice it to say, my description may not do the antennas justice. There are two of them, a 2m and 70cm made out of sched 40 PVC. They appear to be a "turnstile" type antenna with two aluminum elements at the top and two at the bottom 90° out of phase from each other (top and bottom). In other words, if looking at a compass, the top two elements would be at N and S, the bottom two at E and W. This is the same on both antennas as they are a matching set. These antennas were in an old QST, but I have since gotten rid of all those magazines and cannot find the article online. Any ideas or suggestions? Tnx, Joel, W4JBB _______________________________________________ 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

3 2

Re: Antenna Question
by R. Chastain 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

Oh My! Somebody else has my warped sence of humor:-) Just ask my granddaughter. I goof with her all the time with stuff like this. Like when she asks to get on the computer and I tell her she will break it if she does:-) RoD KD0XX --- On Sat, 7/4/09, David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > From: David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb(a)googlemail.com> > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Antenna Question > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Date: Saturday, July 4, 2009, 11:28 AM > How can you upload a web page if you > have your "dog on it" ? Move the > dog first then try! ;-) > > Happy 4th all! > > 73 > > -- > David > KG4ZLB > www.kg4zlb.com > > > > > Joel Black wrote: > > Happy Independence Day. > > > > > > > > Doggonit, I cannot upload to my webpage (something > else yet to figure > > out). > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Forum videos from Dayton Hamvention
by Stephen E. Belter 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

Videos of the six presentations at the AMSAT Forum at the 2009 Dayton Hamvention are now on the AMSAT website. Click on this link http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/information/videoNews.php or go to the AMSAT website and click on AMSAT Video News about halfway down the page in the left column. The presentations are: 1. Richard Garriott's forum talk (mislabeled on the web site as the Banquet presentation, actual length about 15 minutes) on his visit to the ISS. 2. AMSAT Status report, Barry Baines, WD4ASW 3. SuitSat-2 Project Status, Gould Smith, WA4SXM 4. Satellite Operations Status, Drew Glasbrenner, KO4MA 5. ARISS Status, Will Marchant, KC6ROL 6. Columbus Module Antennas, Lou McFadin, W5DID 73, Steve, N9IP -- Steve Belter seb(a)wintek.com

4 3

SuitSat-II question
by Greg D. 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

Hi folks, I just watched the video of Gould Smith talking about SuitSat-II. Nice job. But it left me wondering... With a new battery, solar cells, custom electronics package, switches, and antennas, what is the Suit itself needed for? At least in the original SuitSat, we used the battery pack (I think), and even that's being replaced. Don't get me wrong, the use of the suit is a marketing master-stroke. But am I right that it's basically only there for support (both mechanically and politically)? Greg KO6TH _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™ SkyDrive™: Get 25 GB of free online storage. http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_SD_25GB_062009

3 2

Re: Kenpro-Yaesu 5400 5600B question
by John Kopala 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Bennett, I may be a little off on the following since I do not have a schematic for the G-5400, but here goes: The KR-500 elevation rotor did not have limit switches and the run cap was in the control box. The G400 did not have limit switches and the run cap was in the control box. The KR-500 and G-400 were combined to make the G-5400 which did not have the computer interface in the control box and did not have limit switches or run caps in the rotors. The G-5400B added limit switches and the run cap to the elevation rotor, but not the azimuth rotor. The G-5500 added limit switches and run caps to both rotors plus the special cable connector on the rotors. The G-5600B is the same as the G-5500 but with the screw type terminal strips on the rotors. I will send you PDF files for the KR-500, G-400, G-5400B/G-5600B, and G-5500 in a separate email. If you get 5500 rotors, I understand the connectors are rather pricey. The addition of the limit switches requires that the run cap be located in the rotor rather than the control box. Otherwise the motor would not run once a limit switch was opened. Placing the run cap after the limit switch provides the phase shifted voltage/current necessary to reverse the motor when the switch is opened. John Kopala N7JK Good day sat-guys: I have an old Kenpro G5400 without computer interface and a newer Yaesu G5600B control box. What are the differences in the motors between these 2 series other than the limit switches? In case of the control boxes, I see the G5400 has starter motor caps, but the G5600B control box doesn't. The old motors didn't work with the 5600B box until I added a starter cap to both the AZ and EL motor lines. I am planning to use the 5600B box with LVB tracker- any other issues? What do I need to do to use my old motors with the G5600B? Or, anyone have 5500 motors that they wish to sell? Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks, Bennett ko2ok

1 0

The Moon is our Future
by MM 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Theoretically we may have a free ride to the Moon for an Amateur radio repeater! In the past, the flight to the moon for a Amateur radio project has been cost prohibitive. We just could not afford to pay for the ride to the Moon. NASA is going to the moon with unmanned landers. NASA is open to the idea of flying some public service projects to the moon on their landers. Now there exists the possibility of getting a free ride to the moon, curtsy of NASA. What we need are the following: A stable club with funding to build a simple transponder project. A plan for a simple transponder (KISS no complex P3E). A link budget plan for a Moon transponder. One theory: We need a simple Mode-J transponder (2-meters up, 440 down). Low power consumption. Assume minimal antenna gain from the Lander (3 dBd on each antenna) Assume transmitter power 5-10 watts. Questions: What’s the link budget? How much gain will be needed on earth for such a setup? Can we build a working mockup in 1 year or less. The Moon is within Reach. Let’s Go for IT. Miles WF1F MarexMG.org --- On Wed, 7/1/09, Jack K. <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: Jack K. <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> > Subject: [amsat-bb] Rebuttal - Re: Unused sats > To: kg4zlb(a)gmail.com, amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 4:46 PM > I have to disagree in the strongest > of terms about disregarding HEOs "for > now" which in essence will mean to become forever. Until, > or unless, we > could come up with something along the lines of a "Cell" > system of leos, we > are missing one of the major advantages of Satellites and > that is almost > guaranteed communications for long periods (several hours) > at a time... I am > in no way denigrating LEOs as they have their place, but in > the major schema > of things HEOS will and always have rule given the state of > communications > art... > > I understand the desire to "do something" but I suggest > that the major > thrust should be directed at getting a transponder on the > moon (or Mars) or > some more KISS type HEOs up... Cubesats can take care of > themselves if we > do, Heck I would even join in and participate in something > like I just > mentioned, I just can not get excited about "Contest style" > contacts with a > 5-12 min window most of the time... I do that on 2 meters > scatter all I > want, > > DE Jack - KD1PE > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David - KG4ZLB" <kg4zlb(a)googlemail.com> > To: <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 4:09 PM > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Unused sats > > > > All good points but forget the HEO's for now - we just > need a good > > source of regularly launched easy sats in LEO to > augment the few working > > birds we have and replace what we have to as they fall > out of the sky or > > just stop working. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >

12 20

(no subject)
by WILLIAMS MICHAEL 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

It looks like I have a copy of VR-85. Please let me know if you need a copy. I'll have to fire up the C-128. I need to check it out anyway. Mike (K9QHO)

1 0

Re: Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO
by Armando Mercado 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Greetings, First of all, I appreciate the efforts of the dedicated few of AMSAT that actually go out and make things happen. You don't hear "Thank you" often enough. Being this early in the idea phase, there are a lot of questions and unknowns. What frequencies to use and what the link requirements will be can all be worked out. The bigger question for me is if the moon is a good platform for an amateur transponder. No doubt it is technically doable. If the decision is based only on launch availability--It's the moon or nothing at all--then to the moon we go. But let's all understand what we are getting into. To the best of my knowledge, NASA does not now have an unmanned lunar lander mission that has been approved, although there is a lander planned in the greater scheme of things. Perhaps someone could direct me to some current information. The last I knew, the plan called for a lander referred to as RLEP-2. It was going to be a lander/rover powered by RTG's with a 1 year mission to explore Shackleton crater near the moon's south pole. The cost was going to be in the $400-$750 million range. The launch vehicle was going to have excess capacity so it was proposed that 3-4 mini satellites be deployed in lunar orbit to do remote sensing AND provide a communication link for the lander. So, if this is the mission we are talking about putting our transponder on, it sounds like we won't hear it on earth once the rover drives into the crater. Putting our transponder on one of the mini satellites sounds like a better plan. Again, I had difficulty finding current information on NASA's unmanned lunar lander plans. The last I read anything about RLEP-2 was that it was in serious trouble because of cost and was going to be sharply cut back. If our NASA host spacecraft will take care of all the housekeeping and provided free power, then a low cost transponder sounds like something we can do (although AMSAT-NA currently does not have a satellite lab--we may need to contract out the transponder work). We just need to understand we will not have control of the on/off switch (the repeater on the ISS or the Planetary Society's microphone on the Mars Phoenix lander for example). The days of getting a free launch is over, and it is too bad the Intelsat ride share idea did not pan out for us. As I have said before, I am not opposed to a transponder on the moon, I just have a lot of unanswered questions. Thanks again to the dedicated few at AMSAT that make things happen. Armando, N8IGJ >Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 18:14:59 -0700 (PDT) >From: MM <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> >Subject: [amsat-bb] Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO >To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org >Message-ID: <228402.31352.qm(a)web56404.mail.re3.yahoo.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >High orbit launch prices >I can?t afford that and I do not know anyone at Huges, so I am looking into >the piggyback options. Let some other company pay the big bucks for the >flight >and navigation and just tag along for the ride.

3 2

Re: KEP 09183 PROBLEM
by GW1FKY＠aol.com 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Hi, The keps obtained from the BBS today loaded and worked OK with SATPC32. However for some other software such as "ORBITRON" and SATSCAPE were I stripped out the header and footer I did run into a rather strange problem. These programmes would not list all of the satellites in the menu to tick for selection, I checked my source file was still OK and correct - unable to sort out the problem. I had saved my original and they loaded OK !!! Ken Eaton GW1FKY

2 1

sorry...old 6/25/09 keps without all the garbage
by Roger Kolakowski 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

SB KEPS @ AMSAT $ORB09176.N 2Line Orbital Elements 09176.AMSAT HR AMSAT ORBITAL ELEMENTS FOR AMATEUR SATELLITES IN NASA FORMAT FROM WA5QGD FORT WORTH,TX June 25, 2009 Send Subscribe/unsubscribe to KEPS at http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/keps BID: ORB09176.N DECODE 2-LINE ELSETS WITH THE FOLLOWING KEY: 1 AAAAAU 00 0 0 BBBBB.BBBBBBBB .CCCCCCCC 00000-0 00000-0 0 DDDZ 2 AAAAA EEE.EEEE FFF.FFFF GGGGGGG HHH.HHHH III.IIII JJ.JJJJJJJJKKKKKZ KEY: A-CATALOGNUM B-EPOCHTIME C-DECAY D-ELSETNUM E-INCLINATION F-RAAN G-ECCENTRICITY H-ARGPERIGEE I-MNANOM J-MNMOTION K-ORBITNUM Z-CHECKSUM TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS BT AO-07 1 07530U 74089B 09175.75015012 -.00000027 00000-0 10000-3 0 5121 2 07530 101.4266 200.1487 0011548 253.4118 106.5685 12.53575790583665 FO-29 1 24278U 96046B 09175.76747098 -.00000037 00000-0 50709-6 0 00863 2 24278 098.5539 048.7848 0350587 330.9181 027.2821 13.52944157634776 SO-33 1 25509U 98061B 09175.88466058 .00000381 00000-0 65939-4 0 04849 2 25509 031.4322 008.9480 0354276 045.8279 317.0947 14.28254882556932 RS-22 1 27939U 03042A 09175.58345773 .00000153 00000-0 38391-4 0 08247 2 27939 097.9444 050.1848 0014639 107.5940 252.6873 14.63325076306654 VO-52 1 28650U 05017B 09175.34334044 .00000376 00000-0 54172-4 0 02577 2 28650 097.7424 236.6888 0027183 008.8245 351.3438 14.81596988223705 AO-16 1 20439U 90005D 09175.47168576 -.00000018 00000-0 85527-5 0 06357 2 20439 098.2785 143.5419 0011258 144.6504 215.5414 14.31826786014190 LO-19 1 20442U 90005G 09175.45760117 .00000021 00000-0 22821-4 0 05559 2 20442 098.2408 150.7636 0012428 141.9606 218.2471 14.32062565014359 AO-27 1 22825U 93061C 09175.56625056 -.00000100 00000-0 -22655-4 0 02759 2 22825 098.4363 128.7578 0007725 237.6929 122.3504 14.29267387820962 IO-26 1 22826U 93061D 09176.74504781 -.00000019 00000-0 90005-5 0 23 2 22826 098.4300 130.6439 0008091 232.0525 127.9928 14.29519950821238 GO-32 1 25397U 98043D 09175.73599878 .00000118 00000-0 70396-4 0 09278 2 25397 098.3262 197.6718 0000667 180.5458 179.5710 14.23160891569204 NO-44 1 26931U 01043C 09175.70042414 .00000090 00000-0 67347-4 0 02020 2 26931 067.0532 044.9895 0005659 272.6391 087.4033 14.29560557403657 SO-50 1 27607U 02058C 09175.52809685 -.00000083 00000-0 91958-5 0 09182 2 27607 064.5582 002.7936 0066368 204.0590 155.7400 14.71442765349751 CO-55 1 27844U 03031E 09176.72554986 .00000011 00000-0 25192-4 0 6083 2 27844 098.7127 185.7703 0010937 115.9668 244.2612 14.20643376310470 CO-57 1 27848U 03031J 09175.57723077 .00000018 00000-0 28635-4 0 5551 2 27848 098.7141 183.6982 0010218 121.6656 238.5513 14.20444859310278 AO-51 1 28375U 04025K 09176.57690259 .00000003 00000-0 13263-4 0 4214 2 28375 098.0512 185.6902 0084770 099.1173 261.9616 14.40645546262166 CO-56 1 28941U 06005C 09176.55364702 .00065207 40470-5 20794-3 0 1975 2 28941 098.1393 352.5601 0082223 101.0558 259.9954 15.85707484188579 GENESAT1 1 29655U 06058C 09175.96435867 .00007422 00000-0 74015-4 0 07462 2 29655 040.0233 134.5766 0002092 231.9162 128.1467 15.65742955143691 CP3 1 31129U 07012N 09176.71624616 .00000102 00000-0 34509-4 0 182 2 31129 097.9885 229.3834 0101257 258.7852 100.1941 14.52141115116120 CO-65 1 32785U 08021C 09176.70268926 .00000096 00000-0 19000-4 0 4005 2 32785 097.9453 240.5990 0015235 008.3830 351.7612 14.81493670 62704 KKS-1 1 33493U 09002B 09176.88419017 .00000186 00000-0 31251-4 0 5081 2 33493 098.0580 289.1313 0019414 210.4079 149.6019 14.80688384 22759 SOHLA-1 1 33496U 09002E 09176.83034283 .00000002 00000-0 85078-5 0 4709 2 33496 098.0391 286.0037 0005305 254.2821 105.7805 14.69437775 22542 NOAA-10 1 16969U 86073A 09175.72772319 .00000084 00000-0 52192-4 0 06649 2 16969 098.6905 202.3341 0012293 171.0362 189.1022 14.27389512184583 NOAA-11 1 19531U 88089A 09175.49113686 -.00000001 00000-0 22039-4 0 06777 2 19531 098.7869 265.3322 0012413 089.4171 270.8423 14.14897749070559 NOAA-12 1 21263U 91032A 09175.96824484 .00000005 00000-0 20866-4 0 01898 2 21263 098.7709 184.0309 0013207 120.1820 240.0669 14.25583101941504 MET-3/5 1 21655U 91056A 09175.97408281 .00000051 00000-0 10000-3 0 07247 2 21655 082.5516 200.9922 0013420 155.9174 204.2578 13.17019186858651 MET-2/21 1 22782U 93055A 09175.55519873 .00000031 00000-0 14802-4 0 04941 2 22782 082.5466 176.1630 0021530 329.9082 030.0833 13.83635925798626 OKEAN-4 1 23317U 94066A 09175.72556791 .00000072 00000-0 59111-5 0 09446 2 23317 082.5393 327.4493 0021923 344.4490 015.6042 14.82704198793488 NOAA-14 1 23455U 94089A 09175.74336266 -.00000102 00000-0 -30207-4 0 06671 2 23455 098.9099 253.3970 0009753 164.3299 195.8158 14.13764053746998 NOAA-15 1 25338U 98030A 09175.56723357 .00000231 00000-0 11762-3 0 09807 2 25338 098.5834 164.6118 0011417 041.4774 318.7265 14.24769101577824 RESURS 1 25394U 98043A 09176.66111299 -.00000005 00000-0 15515-4 0 2456 2 25394 098.3403 208.5784 0001243 145.6858 214.4401 14.24184484569605 FENGYUN1 1 25730U 99025A 09175.95755151 -.00000296 00000-0 -14902-3 0 07909 2 25730 098.7559 145.8910 0019535 193.1400 166.9258 14.07910508521416 OKEAN-0 1 25860U 99039A 09176.52362912 -.00000001 00000-0 71323-5 0 7131 2 25860 097.7858 157.3718 0001574 101.9779 258.1597 14.73577805534376 NOAA-16 1 26536U 00055A 09175.51746078 -.00000240 00000-0 -10443-3 0 04574 2 26536 099.1751 179.3604 0009521 260.3387 099.6709 14.12521443451335 NOAA-17 1 27453U 02032A 09175.72931123 -.00000104 00000-0 -27140-4 0 04639 2 27453 098.4841 234.5396 0012832 101.2955 258.9659 14.24071269363820 NOAA-18 1 28654U 05018A 09175.77495941 -.00000064 00000-0 -10703-4 0 09523 2 28654 098.9075 118.9557 0014109 346.1912 013.8898 14.11264390211026 NOAA-19 1 33591U 09005A 09175.75659977 .00000369 00000-0 22915-3 0 01556 2 33591 098.7461 121.3211 0013431 218.6593 141.3620 14.10967917019502 HUBBLE 1 20580U 90037B 09174.09806668 .00000242 00000-0 57594-5 0 04110 2 20580 028.4694 063.7168 0003244 344.9911 015.0591 15.00810340850742 ISS 1 25544U 98067A 09176.70194252 .00010931 00000-0 79349-4 0 1041 2 25544 051.6411 263.1881 0008223 149.5961 346.7696 15.73976504607291 CO-58 1 28895U 05043F 09175.67237911 .00000208 00000-0 52977-4 0 03349 2 28895 098.0614 066.0811 0017335 327.9567 032.0595 14.59777232194827 FALCON 1 30776U 07006E 09176.79940574 .00000135 00000-0 12811-4 0 5985 2 30776 035.4341 047.1578 0001895 326.8877 033.1725 15.03259636126393 MAST 1 31126U 07012K 09175.60683167 .00000091 00000-0 31516-4 0 06269 2 31126 097.9878 230.0731 0093481 256.9784 102.0982 14.53502988116112 CAPE1 1 31130U 07012P 09176.82442862 .00000109 00000-0 36264-4 0 6326 2 31130 097.9885 229.3960 0101343 258.2616 100.7188 14.52066525115940 COMPASS 1 32787U 08021E 09176.81388957 .00000337 00000-0 49540-4 0 3926 2 32787 097.9420 240.5656 0016079 008.8095 351.3396 14.81617948 62727 AAUSAT2 1 32788U 08021F 09175.63305491 .00000324 00000-0 47758-4 0 03978 2 32788 097.9405 239.4526 0015832 013.9132 346.2550 14.81740836062558 DO-64 1 32789U 08021G 09176.73525739 .00000223 00000-0 35028-4 0 4033 2 32789 097.9472 240.7144 0016099 008.4001 351.7477 14.81728343 62710 CO-66 1 32791U 08021J 09176.85771567 -.00000022 00000-0 39697-5 0 3855 2 32791 097.9446 240.6417 0016252 007.2815 352.8608 14.81445218 62699 RS-30 1 32953U 08025A 09175.75582124 .00000010 00000-0 00000-0 0 03392 2 32953 082.5011 251.9048 0019640 158.5884 201.6028 12.43001863049335 TACSAT-3 1 35001U 09028A 09175.93379220 .00000878 00000-0 28137-4 0 00398 2 35001 040.4546 194.3312 0025115 222.1467 137.7416 15.38854406005542 PHARMSAT 1 35002U 09028B 09175.46165344 .00000788 00000-0 25273-4 0 00395 2 35002 040.4677 196.9365 0027767 222.7881 137.0772 15.39623457005465 HAWKSAT1 1 35003U 09028C 09174.48276175 .00000576 00000-0 19942-4 0 00382 2 35003 040.4696 202.7207 0028682 217.3307 142.5515 15.39876872005320 CP6 1 35004U 09028D 09176.16548937 .00001922 00000-0 52153-4 0 295 2 35004 040.4601 192.5592 0028371 231.4161 128.4108 15.40085915 5570 AEROCUB3 1 35005U 09028E 09175.71597130 .00001954 00000-0 53235-4 0 00304 2 35005 040.4761 195.3626 0028388 225.3310 134.5197 15.39903107005502 /EX _______________________________________________ Via the Keps mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/keps

1 0

Fw: [keps] orb09176.2l.amsat - old keps
by Roger Kolakowski 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Old keps 6/25/09 Roger WA1KAT ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ray Hoad" <r.hoad(a)att.net> To: "AMSAT KEP" <keps(a)amsat.org> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 10:29 PM Subject: [keps] orb09176.2l.amsat > SB KEPS @ AMSAT $ORB09176.N > 2Line Orbital Elements 09176.AMSAT > > HR AMSAT ORBITAL ELEMENTS FOR AMATEUR SATELLITES IN NASA FORMAT > FROM WA5QGD FORT WORTH,TX June 25, 2009 > Send Subscribe/unsubscribe to KEPS at > http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/keps > BID: ORB09176.N > > DECODE 2-LINE ELSETS WITH THE FOLLOWING KEY: > 1 AAAAAU 00 0 0 BBBBB.BBBBBBBB .CCCCCCCC 00000-0 00000-0 0 DDDZ > 2 AAAAA EEE.EEEE FFF.FFFF GGGGGGG HHH.HHHH III.IIII JJ.JJJJJJJJKKKKKZ > KEY: A-CATALOGNUM B-EPOCHTIME C-DECAY D-ELSETNUM E-INCLINATION F-RAAN > G-ECCENTRICITY H-ARGPERIGEE I-MNANOM J-MNMOTION K-ORBITNUM Z-CHECKSUM > > TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS BT > > AO-07 > 1 07530U 74089B 09175.75015012 -.00000027 00000-0 10000-3 0 5121 > 2 07530 101.4266 200.1487 0011548 253.4118 106.5685 12.53575790583665 > FO-29 > 1 24278U 96046B 09175.76747098 -.00000037 00000-0 50709-6 0 00863 > 2 24278 098.5539 048.7848 0350587 330.9181 027.2821 13.52944157634776 > SO-33 > 1 25509U 98061B 09175.88466058 .00000381 00000-0 65939-4 0 04849 > 2 25509 031.4322 008.9480 0354276 045.8279 317.0947 14.28254882556932 > RS-22 > 1 27939U 03042A 09175.58345773 .00000153 00000-0 38391-4 0 08247 > 2 27939 097.9444 050.1848 0014639 107.5940 252.6873 14.63325076306654 > VO-52 > 1 28650U 05017B 09175.34334044 .00000376 00000-0 54172-4 0 02577 > 2 28650 097.7424 236.6888 0027183 008.8245 351.3438 14.81596988223705 > AO-16 > 1 20439U 90005D 09175.47168576 -.00000018 00000-0 85527-5 0 06357 > 2 20439 098.2785 143.5419 0011258 144.6504 215.5414 14.31826786014190 > LO-19 > 1 20442U 90005G 09175.45760117 .00000021 00000-0 22821-4 0 05559 > 2 20442 098.2408 150.7636 0012428 141.9606 218.2471 14.32062565014359 > AO-27 > 1 22825U 93061C 09175.56625056 -.00000100 00000-0 -22655-4 0 02759 > 2 22825 098.4363 128.7578 0007725 237.6929 122.3504 14.29267387820962 > IO-26 > 1 22826U 93061D 09176.74504781 -.00000019 00000-0 90005-5 0 23 > 2 22826 098.4300 130.6439 0008091 232.0525 127.9928 14.29519950821238 > GO-32 > 1 25397U 98043D 09175.73599878 .00000118 00000-0 70396-4 0 09278 > 2 25397 098.3262 197.6718 0000667 180.5458 179.5710 14.23160891569204 > NO-44 > 1 26931U 01043C 09175.70042414 .00000090 00000-0 67347-4 0 02020 > 2 26931 067.0532 044.9895 0005659 272.6391 087.4033 14.29560557403657 > SO-50 > 1 27607U 02058C 09175.52809685 -.00000083 00000-0 91958-5 0 09182 > 2 27607 064.5582 002.7936 0066368 204.0590 155.7400 14.71442765349751 > CO-55 > 1 27844U 03031E 09176.72554986 .00000011 00000-0 25192-4 0 6083 > 2 27844 098.7127 185.7703 0010937 115.9668 244.2612 14.20643376310470 > CO-57 > 1 27848U 03031J 09175.57723077 .00000018 00000-0 28635-4 0 5551 > 2 27848 098.7141 183.6982 0010218 121.6656 238.5513 14.20444859310278 > AO-51 > 1 28375U 04025K 09176.57690259 .00000003 00000-0 13263-4 0 4214 > 2 28375 098.0512 185.6902 0084770 099.1173 261.9616 14.40645546262166 > CO-56 > 1 28941U 06005C 09176.55364702 .00065207 40470-5 20794-3 0 1975 > 2 28941 098.1393 352.5601 0082223 101.0558 259.9954 15.85707484188579 > GENESAT1 > 1 29655U 06058C 09175.96435867 .00007422 00000-0 74015-4 0 07462 > 2 29655 040.0233 134.5766 0002092 231.9162 128.1467 15.65742955143691 > CP3 > 1 31129U 07012N 09176.71624616 .00000102 00000-0 34509-4 0 182 > 2 31129 097.9885 229.3834 0101257 258.7852 100.1941 14.52141115116120 > CO-65 > 1 32785U 08021C 09176.70268926 .00000096 00000-0 19000-4 0 4005 > 2 32785 097.9453 240.5990 0015235 008.3830 351.7612 14.81493670 62704 > KKS-1 > 1 33493U 09002B 09176.88419017 .00000186 00000-0 31251-4 0 5081 > 2 33493 098.0580 289.1313 0019414 210.4079 149.6019 14.80688384 22759 > SOHLA-1 > 1 33496U 09002E 09176.83034283 .00000002 00000-0 85078-5 0 4709 > 2 33496 098.0391 286.0037 0005305 254.2821 105.7805 14.69437775 22542 > NOAA-10 > 1 16969U 86073A 09175.72772319 .00000084 00000-0 52192-4 0 06649 > 2 16969 098.6905 202.3341 0012293 171.0362 189.1022 14.27389512184583 > NOAA-11 > 1 19531U 88089A 09175.49113686 -.00000001 00000-0 22039-4 0 06777 > 2 19531 098.7869 265.3322 0012413 089.4171 270.8423 14.14897749070559 > NOAA-12 > 1 21263U 91032A 09175.96824484 .00000005 00000-0 20866-4 0 01898 > 2 21263 098.7709 184.0309 0013207 120.1820 240.0669 14.25583101941504 > MET-3/5 > 1 21655U 91056A 09175.97408281 .00000051 00000-0 10000-3 0 07247 > 2 21655 082.5516 200.9922 0013420 155.9174 204.2578 13.17019186858651 > MET-2/21 > 1 22782U 93055A 09175.55519873 .00000031 00000-0 14802-4 0 04941 > 2 22782 082.5466 176.1630 0021530 329.9082 030.0833 13.83635925798626 > OKEAN-4 > 1 23317U 94066A 09175.72556791 .00000072 00000-0 59111-5 0 09446 > 2 23317 082.5393 327.4493 0021923 344.4490 015.6042 14.82704198793488 > NOAA-14 > 1 23455U 94089A 09175.74336266 -.00000102 00000-0 -30207-4 0 06671 > 2 23455 098.9099 253.3970 0009753 164.3299 195.8158 14.13764053746998 > NOAA-15 > 1 25338U 98030A 09175.56723357 .00000231 00000-0 11762-3 0 09807 > 2 25338 098.5834 164.6118 0011417 041.4774 318.7265 14.24769101577824 > RESURS > 1 25394U 98043A 09176.66111299 -.00000005 00000-0 15515-4 0 2456 > 2 25394 098.3403 208.5784 0001243 145.6858 214.4401 14.24184484569605 > FENGYUN1 > 1 25730U 99025A 09175.95755151 -.00000296 00000-0 -14902-3 0 07909 > 2 25730 098.7559 145.8910 0019535 193.1400 166.9258 14.07910508521416 > OKEAN-0 > 1 25860U 99039A 09176.52362912 -.00000001 00000-0 71323-5 0 7131 > 2 25860 097.7858 157.3718 0001574 101.9779 258.1597 14.73577805534376 > NOAA-16 > 1 26536U 00055A 09175.51746078 -.00000240 00000-0 -10443-3 0 04574 > 2 26536 099.1751 179.3604 0009521 260.3387 099.6709 14.12521443451335 > NOAA-17 > 1 27453U 02032A 09175.72931123 -.00000104 00000-0 -27140-4 0 04639 > 2 27453 098.4841 234.5396 0012832 101.2955 258.9659 14.24071269363820 > NOAA-18 > 1 28654U 05018A 09175.77495941 -.00000064 00000-0 -10703-4 0 09523 > 2 28654 098.9075 118.9557 0014109 346.1912 013.8898 14.11264390211026 > NOAA-19 > 1 33591U 09005A 09175.75659977 .00000369 00000-0 22915-3 0 01556 > 2 33591 098.7461 121.3211 0013431 218.6593 141.3620 14.10967917019502 > HUBBLE > 1 20580U 90037B 09174.09806668 .00000242 00000-0 57594-5 0 04110 > 2 20580 028.4694 063.7168 0003244 344.9911 015.0591 15.00810340850742 > ISS > 1 25544U 98067A 09176.70194252 .00010931 00000-0 79349-4 0 1041 > 2 25544 051.6411 263.1881 0008223 149.5961 346.7696 15.73976504607291 > CO-58 > 1 28895U 05043F 09175.67237911 .00000208 00000-0 52977-4 0 03349 > 2 28895 098.0614 066.0811 0017335 327.9567 032.0595 14.59777232194827 > FALCON > 1 30776U 07006E 09176.79940574 .00000135 00000-0 12811-4 0 5985 > 2 30776 035.4341 047.1578 0001895 326.8877 033.1725 15.03259636126393 > MAST > 1 31126U 07012K 09175.60683167 .00000091 00000-0 31516-4 0 06269 > 2 31126 097.9878 230.0731 0093481 256.9784 102.0982 14.53502988116112 > CAPE1 > 1 31130U 07012P 09176.82442862 .00000109 00000-0 36264-4 0 6326 > 2 31130 097.9885 229.3960 0101343 258.2616 100.7188 14.52066525115940 > COMPASS > 1 32787U 08021E 09176.81388957 .00000337 00000-0 49540-4 0 3926 > 2 32787 097.9420 240.5656 0016079 008.8095 351.3396 14.81617948 62727 > AAUSAT2 > 1 32788U 08021F 09175.63305491 .00000324 00000-0 47758-4 0 03978 > 2 32788 097.9405 239.4526 0015832 013.9132 346.2550 14.81740836062558 > DO-64 > 1 32789U 08021G 09176.73525739 .00000223 00000-0 35028-4 0 4033 > 2 32789 097.9472 240.7144 0016099 008.4001 351.7477 14.81728343 62710 > CO-66 > 1 32791U 08021J 09176.85771567 -.00000022 00000-0 39697-5 0 3855 > 2 32791 097.9446 240.6417 0016252 007.2815 352.8608 14.81445218 62699 > RS-30 > 1 32953U 08025A 09175.75582124 .00000010 00000-0 00000-0 0 03392 > 2 32953 082.5011 251.9048 0019640 158.5884 201.6028 12.43001863049335 > TACSAT-3 > 1 35001U 09028A 09175.93379220 .00000878 00000-0 28137-4 0 00398 > 2 35001 040.4546 194.3312 0025115 222.1467 137.7416 15.38854406005542 > PHARMSAT > 1 35002U 09028B 09175.46165344 .00000788 00000-0 25273-4 0 00395 > 2 35002 040.4677 196.9365 0027767 222.7881 137.0772 15.39623457005465 > HAWKSAT1 > 1 35003U 09028C 09174.48276175 .00000576 00000-0 19942-4 0 00382 > 2 35003 040.4696 202.7207 0028682 217.3307 142.5515 15.39876872005320 > CP6 > 1 35004U 09028D 09176.16548937 .00001922 00000-0 52153-4 0 295 > 2 35004 040.4601 192.5592 0028371 231.4161 128.4108 15.40085915 5570 > AEROCUB3 > 1 35005U 09028E 09175.71597130 .00001954 00000-0 53235-4 0 00304 > 2 35005 040.4761 195.3626 0028388 225.3310 134.5197 15.39903107005502 > /EX > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Via the Keps mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA > http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/keps >

1 0

KEP 09183 PROBLEM
by Doug Kuitula 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Hi all, Looks like there may be a problem with the latest 2 line dated for day 183. I tried inputting them and came up with numerous checksum failures. Has anyone else had the same problem?...........73 de Doug KA8QCU

4 4

AO27 Demonstration during Teachers Institute
by Mark Spencer 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

I will be giving a demonstration of ham radio satellites during the ARRL ETP Teachers Institute in Dayton, Ohio on July 7th. I will be using AO27 and the 1515 EST pass. The equipment will be an ARROW and HT. I will be using the call W1AW/8. If you hear us, please give a shout. For those that make contact, if you would like a QSL, send your card to me, WA8SME, and I'll get you a card. Mark Spencer, WA8SME ARRL-The national association for Amateur Radio Education and Technology Program Coordinator mspencer(a)arrl.org <http://www.arrl.org/FandES/tbp/> http://www.arrl.org/FandES/tbp/ 530-495-9150

1 0

FW: Re: The Moon is our Future
by Dave 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Could the antenna be a launched in the craft as piece of small, folded reflective plastic that when activated by gas or ??, expands to a dish shape, and becomes a super large plastic large dish? The dish then could be any size we wanted it to be and not be a hindrance to the launch craft size. I've seen these but have trouble no putting my finger on the name. We could make the dish 30ft around and folded it could be 4 inches square. Dave DM78qd // KA0SWT If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony Langdon Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:07 PM To: James French; AMSAT-BB Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future At 02:30 AM 7/3/2009, James French wrote: >Why not use a L/s, U/L. or a U/s transponder for this? >Why limit ourselves to V/u for everything? >Aren't we supposed to 'experiment' with the higher frequencies we have >allocated? I agree. I believe the Moon is a job for the microwave bands. Antenna gain on both ends is easier to produce (for a fixed dish/array, the Moon end will be gain limited by the need to have the beam cover for the varying position of the Earth due to libration). Comeing up with a method to align the antenna initially will be an interesting challenge. That will have to be automated, even if it's a one off process. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com _______________________________________________ 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: The Moon is our Future
by Jack K. 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

I heard the same things when the first HEOs went up. It takes to much money, it takes to much specialized equipment, it takes to much knowledge, it is for elitists only... The bottom line is a LOT of hams used them and it took some ingenuity, some new equipment, and yes we all had to learn now things to use them. the bottom line is they worked and worked well... My suggestion is quit looking at pitfalls and problems as reasons not to do something, but as opportunities to learn to accomplish new things (or improved 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! DE - KD1PE ----- Original Message ----- From: <kd8bxp(a)aol.com> To: <bruninga(a)usna.edu>; "'Joe'" <nss(a)mwt.net>; "'MM'" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> Cc: "'Jack K.'" <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com>; <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org>; <kg4zlb(a)gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:28 AM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future > Don't want to get a whole new thing started here but - I don't think we > ever went to the moon in 1969 and I don't think we will ever goto the > moon - in 2012 or whenever they proposed a "return" to the moon > > I would love to see an amatuer repeater on the moon thou - from my > understanding EME is expensive to do, so I think it would leave most of us > out > > Where as and bringing things back around - LEOs are realitive low cost to > use to the normal everyday day > > I will put my two cents in for more LEOs - :-) > > Hey are there any geosynchinze amatuer sats up? >

6 6

FW: Re: The Moon is our Future
by Dave 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

I do not understand and am asking for help understanding, why a long, slow, slingshot path to the moon isn't feasible. We don't need a direct shot, do we, unless we do this all ourselves? If we go with someone else, we ride their mission so it doesn't matter what we want. But for total usefulness, it starts it's mission as a LEO, transitions to an HEO, and then becomes a lander. Three different missions, three different antenna systems, three different opportunities to use it. What's wrong with that concept? Nuc fuel, utilizing a tethered antenna floating above craft held in position by magnetics or coax, but not affixed to craft so that it can be adjusted without affecting the lander. A 4x4x4 plastic sheet for an antenna that when expanded becomes a 20m semi-rigid antenna. Might as well use products already here tied to dreams. This can work albeit slowly. Dave DM78qd // KA0SWT If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff Davis Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 9:35 AM To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org 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 space...? 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. Whatever. -- Jeff, KE9V 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

1 0

ISS Visual Siting over the US
by Bauer, Frank H. (GSFC-5900) 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

All, There will be some outstanding ISS Visual Passes over the US this weekend. See the article link below for more info. I hope the weather in your area will be good for viewing. Enjoy!! 73, Frank Bauer, KA3HDO http://www.space.com/spacewatch/090630-space-station-spotting.html

1 0

KEP 09183 PROBLEM
by Perry Yantis 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

I had no errors with the new keps but the orbit numbers are wrong, and comparing them with the Amsat online forecasts they are way off. I just wish I hadn't deleted the old set. Perry WB8OTH

1 0

Lunar link budget
by Howie DeFelice 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Hi Domenico, I could be wrong but I think your budget is correct for a regenerative transponder but for a bent pipe transponder we need to add the uplink noise to the downlink noise where C/N (total) = 1/((1/C-Nup)+(1/C-Ndn)) which in this case would be about 6.7 dB. Still pretty good, but would probably be better even at the lower microwave freqs. If we used PSK31 exlusively, even 2.5 KHz many simultaneous QSO's. Howie AB2S _________________________________________________________________ Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail®. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutor…

2 1

FW: Re: G-5500 and LVB tracker question.
by Pierre van Deventer 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

I found that the regulator output voltage inside the G-5500 drifted slightly. The problem was resolved by changing the value of C9, 0.01 MFD, at output of the regulator to a 0.1 MFD capacitor. Before the mod the azimuth values varied by 15 degrees from switch on to final operating temperature, after the mod the Azimuth and Elevation values are steady. Hope that helps. 73, Pierre ZS6BB -----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Allan Saul Sent: 03 July 2009 11:13 To: 'racer5039'; amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 and LVB tracker question. Hi Howard and Marv, I had exactly the same problem. The issue revolved around the 7806 regulator the is used in the G-5500 control box that supplied the 6V DC to the position feedback potentiometers on the rotators. If you monitor the output voltage of the regulator, you will find they drift down considerably as the box warms up. Maybe they had a bad batch. I replaced the 7806 with a LM317T set for 6V and that solved the problem. 73's Allan Saul ZS1LS -----Original Message----- From: Howard Long [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 30 June 2009 10:09 AM To: 'racer5039'; amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: G-5500 and LVB tracker question. Hi Marv. If you have the LCD fitted, do both the left and right Az/El readings move too? I am assuming you don't have the problem if the LVB Tracker is unplugged. 73, Howard G6LVB -----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of racer5039 Sent: 30 June 2009 00:13 To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] G-5500 and LVB tracker question. I have the G-5500 and a LVB Tracker on my antenna set. I have noticed that when the pair are just setting there the LVB tracker will loose its place. By that I mean if the G-5500 box is at 180* the LVB will start out at 180 but as it sets there it will soon be at 178, 174, 172 and so on. I also noted the meter on the g-5500 is going down too. Where do I start looking ? Marv N0FJP _______________________________________________ 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

Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO, Thanks for the Data
by MM 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

He Everyone. thank you for your good input. Lets slow down this thread for a few days, while i recompile all of the Great information you have sent me. Then I will post a memo to the marex web page for your review later next week. I do need 2 more key items. Link budget: Assume SSB Moon to Earth on 2.4 Gig Earth to Moon on 1.2 gig (note, under curret ITU rules we can not use 1.2 gig for Moon to Earth, is this still valid?) Thanks Miles WF1F --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BARRIOS TECHNOLOGY] <kenneth.g.ransom(a)nasa.gov> wrote: > From: Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BARRIOS TECHNOLOGY] <kenneth.g.ransom(a)nasa.gov> > Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO > To: "MM" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com>, "amsat-bb(a)amsat.org" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 10:29 PM > I realize this is still very early in > the dreaming stage but it would be nice to start seeing some > realistic proposals soon. How about starting with a blank > worksheet that outlines the desirements and requirements. > This would give folks some specifics to address. > > *LUNAR System* > Modulation type: > Mode: > Power source: > Lunar transmitter (type, output power and band): > Lunar TX antenna (type and gain): > Lunar receiver (type and band): > Lunar RX antenna (type and gain): > Lunar controller (type and capability): > > Delivery deadline for flight certified hardware to be > launched: > Length of time the system is expected to operate: > Periods that the system is expected to be available for > use: > > Once you have some general ideas as to what the items are > then you will have a good idea of the total weight, size and > what it will cost to buy, build and certify for spaceflight. > It would also be nice to know what sort of station equipment > would be needed to use this lunar system. > > *EARTH Station* > Description of minimal Earth station capable of operation > through above mentioned lunar system: > Transmitter (type, output power and band): > TX antenna (type and gain): > Receiver (type and band): > RX antenna (type and gain): > Antenna tracking system: > > The above should allow for a realistic guess at the number > of users willing to and capable of operating through the > system. > > Kenneth > ________________________________________ > From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org > [amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org] > On Behalf Of MM [ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:14 PM > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO > > High orbit launch prices > > It is hard to find exact values for the price per kilo to a > geo-stationery orbit. I did find a few old numbers on > the web suggesting that around the year 2000 prices were > approximately 25,000 to 35,000 USD per kilo. I can > only assume it will cost more today’s 2009 dollars. > If we were to build our own Geo-stationary satellite and > were able to keep the weight down to the same weight of > AO-40 (244 kilos), that would only cost us $8.5 USD million > in launching fees (plus inflation). That is not > including the cost of the satellite. A ballpark > Geo-stationary amateur radio satellite and launching fees > would be in the 20-40 million-dollar range per satellite > (SWAG). > > If you have an extra 40 million kicking around then go > ahead and build us a Geo satellite. Or if you work at Huges > and can talk them into attaching a Micro Satellite to the > next geo satellite for Free great, go for it. > > I can’t afford that and I do not know anyone at Huges, so > I am looking into the piggyback options. Let some > other company pay the big bucks for the flight and > navigation and just tag along for the ride. > > In this case NASA wants to send Un-manned Landers to the > Moon. All we need to do is convince them to let us > attached a 1-2 kilo micro-satellite to the moon lander and > use some of their power and antennas, etc. > > Just look at the Huge Savings $$$ > No navigation system (we have never had much luck at > building our own rocket motors (AO-10- damaged satellite, > AO-13 Miss fired and caused a premature reentry and AO-40 > Kaboom) > > No command and control RF links (just command between the > Microsat and existing command and control system) > > NASA will pay for the rocket (we hope) > > Assuming a good landing, there will not be any need for > periodic orbital changes. > > It’s true that our resources for building new satellites > are very limited. > I believe that Putting the effort into building a Moon > qualified micro satellite seems to be the most economical > path to take. And will provide the greatest return on > our investment. > > Sincerely > > Miles WF1F 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

1 0

Re: Software Commodore 64
by Rich Dailey (iPhone 3GS OS 3.0.3) 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

>Hey, I'm not crazy... Hi !! I'm looking for satellite prediction software or similar for Commodore 64. Anybody know where I can find this !?!? You might want to contact John Magliacane, kd2bd - as I recall he wrote some early basic code for the c-64 that later was incorporated into PREDICT. Rich, N8UX

1 0

How you do DOPPLER correction in Linear Transponders?
by Fabiano Moser 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Dear friends, We know that some Satellite Operators use diferent system to doppler control. For Linear Transponder 1) Adjust uplink and downlink automatic by CAT? (Not always woks, some times I´m up or down from the computer adjust) 2) Adjust uplink and downlink manual 3) Keep Uplink fixed and adjust only the Downlink frequency. What is the more indicate method to use? FT-847 have knob to adjust Uplink without change downlink VFO, and I´m using it to keep my voice in downlink at same downlink much I can. But I know some operators use fixed uplink. How you do? -- 73 Fabiano Moser CR7/PY5RX ARISS-PORTUGAL (Amateur Radio on the International Space Station) Representative at Teleconference and Portugal Telebridge Coordinator. AMRAD/AMSAT-CT http://www.amrad.pt/ariss.php "There is no great talent without great will. (Honoré de Balzac)"

7 9

Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO
by MM 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

High orbit launch prices It is hard to find exact values for the price per kilo to a geo-stationery orbit. I did find a few old numbers on the web suggesting that around the year 2000 prices were approximately 25,000 to 35,000 USD per kilo. I can only assume it will cost more today’s 2009 dollars. If we were to build our own Geo-stationary satellite and were able to keep the weight down to the same weight of AO-40 (244 kilos), that would only cost us $8.5 USD million in launching fees (plus inflation). That is not including the cost of the satellite. A ballpark Geo-stationary amateur radio satellite and launching fees would be in the 20-40 million-dollar range per satellite (SWAG). If you have an extra 40 million kicking around then go ahead and build us a Geo satellite. Or if you work at Huges and can talk them into attaching a Micro Satellite to the next geo satellite for Free great, go for it. I can’t afford that and I do not know anyone at Huges, so I am looking into the piggyback options. Let some other company pay the big bucks for the flight and navigation and just tag along for the ride. In this case NASA wants to send Un-manned Landers to the Moon. All we need to do is convince them to let us attached a 1-2 kilo micro-satellite to the moon lander and use some of their power and antennas, etc. Just look at the Huge Savings $$$ No navigation system (we have never had much luck at building our own rocket motors (AO-10- damaged satellite, AO-13 Miss fired and caused a premature reentry and AO-40 Kaboom) No command and control RF links (just command between the Microsat and existing command and control system) NASA will pay for the rocket (we hope) Assuming a good landing, there will not be any need for periodic orbital changes. It’s true that our resources for building new satellites are very limited. I believe that Putting the effort into building a Moon qualified micro satellite seems to be the most economical path to take. And will provide the greatest return on our investment. Sincerely Miles WF1F MarexMG.org

5 4

Re: DO-64 software support for PSK-1(T) hardware?
by Wouter Jan Ubbels 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Hi Greg, actually, when we developed RASCAL, we had PSK-1 (or another KISS TNC that could do PSK) support in mind. However, PSK TNC's such as the PSK-1 have become a scarce item:) Furthermore, COM port access in JAVA can be tricky sometimes, especially when you want to preserve the cross platform capability. In the meantime, I had started work on a 1200bd BPSK soundcard demod in JAVA (contrary to the PSK-1, PC's with soundcards are abundant in today's ham shacks hi). The Warbler software was my first try at this. In the end we decided to integrate this demod with RASCAL and abandon the KISS TNC support in favour of the soundcard solution. So, unfortunately, KISS TNC support is not included in RASCAL. 73 on behalf of the DO-64 / Delfi-C3 team, Wouter Jan PE4WJ

1 0

G-5500 and LVB tracker question.
by racer5039 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

I have the G-5500 and a LVB Tracker on my antenna set. I have noticed that when the pair are just setting there the LVB tracker will loose its place. By that I mean if the G-5500 box is at 180* the LVB will start out at 180 but as it sets there it will soon be at 178, 174, 172 and so on. I also noted the meter on the g-5500 is going down too. Where do I start looking ? Marv N0FJP

3 2

Yaesu LVB Nova issues - Help
by bpn518＠aol.com 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Thanks for those answering my questions on my odd 5400 motors 5600B control box situation. Now I have it working with LVB Tracker and Nova. But the motors stop tracking after a few minutes. First it seems to track fine, with motors turning as Nova instructs. But after a few minutes of activating and turning motors here and there, the motors don't seem to respond to the Nova software to move any more. I have to shut down Nova (getting a cannot write to file error), reboot the computer (otherwise when I go to Nova I get an error msg that the device is already connected? (but no response)), and restart Nova.? Then the motors will seem to track as Nova directs, but only for a few minutes and then motors stop working again.? I cannot tell if it is a computer problem (IBM T41 laptop, Win XP), or LVB (just got), or what? Any clues?? Thanks for the space. Bennett ko2ok

2 1

FW: Re: The Moon is our Future
by Dave 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Could the antenna be a launched in the craft as piece of small, folded reflective plastic that when activated by gas or ??, expands to a dish shape, and becomes a super large plastic large dish? The dish then could be any size we wanted it to be and not be a hindrance to the launch craft size. I've seen these but have trouble no putting my finger on the name. We could make the dish 30ft around and folded it could be 4 inches square. Dave DM78qd // KA0SWT If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony Langdon Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:07 PM To: James French; AMSAT-BB Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future At 02:30 AM 7/3/2009, James French wrote: >Why not use a L/s, U/L. or a U/s transponder for this? >Why limit ourselves to V/u for everything? >Aren't we supposed to 'experiment' with the higher frequencies we have >allocated? I agree. I believe the Moon is a job for the microwave bands. Antenna gain on both ends is easier to produce (for a fixed dish/array, the Moon end will be gain limited by the need to have the beam cover for the varying position of the Earth due to libration). Comeing up with a method to align the antenna initially will be an interesting challenge. That will have to be automated, even if it's a one off process. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com _______________________________________________ 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: Software Commodore 64
by Jim Jerzycke 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

*Somewhere* in this grand mess of mine I have a program called "Super VR85 Tracker" that I used for pass predictions when I ran a C=64 and C=128. I worked perfectly, and was what I used to track the MIR so I could make packet contacts with it. I'd print out the passes on my dot-matrix printer, and then run the DigiCom64 software to control my A&A Engineering W2UP modem for packet use. I couldn't afford the PK-64 until years later, but somehow it all worked, and I made numerous packet contacts with the MIR. Amazing what you could do with an 8-bit machine back then! *IF* I can find the disk, I'll fire up the C=128 and make you a copy. 73, Jim KQ6EA --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Jean-François Ménard <va2ss(a)me.com> wrote: From: Jean-François Ménard <va2ss(a)me.com> Subject: [amsat-bb] Software Commodore 64 To: "AMSAT Mailing list" <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 4:09 PM Hi, Hey, I'm not crazy... Hi !! I'm looking for satellite prediction software or similar for Commodore 64. Anybody know where I can find this !?!? 73 From an old fashion guy of the '80 -- Jean-François Ménard VA2SS =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= AMSAT www.amsat.org ARRL www.arrl.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

1 0

Original 13 Colonies update
by n3tl＠bellsouth.net 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hey everyone, I've just heard from Gary, N2AUO, who is interested in activating Pennsylvania on the satellites during the Original 13 Colonies special event this week. That gives us 10 of the Original 13 Colonies that will be active on the satellites during this event! Thanks to Gary for his interest in participating. At the request of the event's organizer (Ken. KU2US), those of us active on the satellites will be IDing with our own call sign/special event call. For example, I will be IDing as N3TL/K2G. I'll add that I'm the station in Georgia for the special event, just to be clear. Ken also has advised that he is adding a special satellite designator to the certificates for those who earn them via satellite contacts. Thanks to him for doing this. For the latest information on the Original 13 Colonies Special Event, please go to www.QRZ.com/ku2us. The event begins at 1300 UTC July 1 and ends at 0359 UTC on July 5. 73 to all, Tim - N3TL

3 3

The Moon is our Future
by MM 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi James: I am in favor of any band that has the desired results. I just used the 2/440 bands as the opener. Remember the higher in frequency the less affordable the system becomes and the fewer Amateur Radio operators and Short Wave listeners will have access to those frequencies. We do not want to design a system that only 2 people can afford. Goals: Uplink to the Moon with an antenna system that would cost less than $1000 USD. Receive from the Moon with an Antenna system that would cost less than $1000 USD. An Off the Shelf transceiver system that cost less than $2000 USD. With a properly designed repeater and properly selected Amateur Radio bands, it should be possible to meet these goals. I have seen some project proposals for ISS for example, that when reviewed it was discovered that no one could afford the project (2 megabit fast TV, the link budget, Antenna, Receiver requirement and precision rotor made the project only affordable by a government). If we are going to seriously think about a Moon repeater, we need to make sure the Earth stations are practical and affordable. It would also be helpful if we had more Amateur Radio band with ITU approved Satellite segments. Anyone interested in going to the next WARC meeting to petition for downlink access to 1.2 Gig and wider band access on 70cm. Thanks Miles WF1F MarexMG.org --- On Thu, 7/2/09, James French <w8iss(a)wideopenwest.com> wrote: > From: James French <w8iss(a)wideopenwest.com> > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future > To: "AMSAT-BB" <AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org> > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 12:30 PM > On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 10:52 -0500, tosca005(a)umn.edu > wrote: > > As far as the dreaming goes, wouldn't an L/S > transponder be better than a > > V/U or U/V transponder? Granted, the path loss is > greater, but the antenna > > gain is easier to produce... > > Miles, > > Why not use a L/s, U/L. or a U/s transponder for this? > Why limit ourselves to V/u for everything? > Aren't we supposed to 'experiment' with the higher > frequencies we have > allocated? > > Its in the AMSAT by-laws to support the higher > frequencies. > >From the AMSAT-NA by-laws Section three, subsection E: > Encouraging the more effective and expanded use of the > higher frequency > amateur radio frequency bands. > > This would mean smaller antennas with MUCH better gain and > beamwidth. > > I vote in favor of at least a L/s transponder for this. > > James W8ISS > > _______________________________________________ > 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

Re: The Moon is our Future
by tosca005＠umn.edu 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

On Jul 2 2009, kd8bxp(a)aol.com wrote: > Don't want to get a whole new thing started here but - I don't think we > ever went to the moon in 1969 and I don't think we will ever goto the > moon - in 2012 or whenever they proposed a "return" to the moon With that level of disbelief I can certainly see why you are predisposed to discount the possibility of a moon-based transponder. > I would love to see an amatuer repeater on the moon thou - from my > understanding EME is expensive to do, so I think it would leave most of > us out Not necessarily. Remember, with conventional EME, you send as large a signal as you can muster towards the moon, incur huge path losses along the way, then incur a huge loss because the moon is a very imperfect reflector of RF energy, then incur the huge path loss back from moon to earth. With a moon-based repeater, you send as large a signal as you can muster towards the moon, incur the same path loss from earth to moon; BUT, THEN you enlarge the signal with a gain antenna at the repeater, and then have a sensitive receiver that can detect and amplify the signal. The repeater then transponds the signal to a different frequency band, amplifies it as much as equipment weight and power availability allow, transmit it through a gain antenna, and only THEN incur the huge path loss from moon to earth. Because the path loss is only in a single direction, and instead of an inefficient (lossy) passive reflector, you have gain antennas for reception and transmission, plus amplification on receive and on transmit, the net earth station requirements should be much less than conventional EME. That's not to say it would be easy, just that it should be easier than conventional EME in terms of station requirements on earth. As has been mentioned numerous times already, the station requirements for the space end of the system are enormously more difficult than anything we've ever tackled so far with either LEO or HEO satellites. But there's no harm in DISCUSSING the idea, and learning about the pitfalls and possibilities as part of the discussion. Even if it never comes to pass, we should all be a bit more knowledgeable after having had the discussion. As far as the dreaming goes, wouldn't an L/S transponder be better than a V/U or U/V transponder? Granted, the path loss is greater, but the antenna gain is easier to produce... While I am a firm believer in the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid!), I am getting a little tired of hearing people complain endlessly about the downfall of AO-40 being due to its complexity. Uhh, the downfall of AO-40 was human error, which will ALWAYS be an issue. The only reason that AO-40 was ever usable at all was BECAUSE of its complexity, i.e., the redundancy of multiple transponders that could be switched into place after initial failures, etc. OF COURSE, a mission to the moon needs to be as light and compact as it can be made, and therefore much simpler than AO-40, but due to the harsh environment in which it would be asked to operate, it needs to be as complex as necessary to get the job done, i.e. not as simple as AO-10 or AO-13. 73 de W0JT AMSAT-NA LM#2292

5 4

AO-40 telemetry
by Mark L. Hammond 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi Jim, Is this what you are looking for? ftp://ftp.amsat.org/amsat/telemetry/ao40/ 73, Mark N8MH ___ I'm looking for an online repository of AO-40 housekeeping telemetry for a space weather study. May I ask for any pointers to such a database? Jim jim(a)coloradosatellite.com wd0e(a)amsat.org Mark L. Hammond [N8MH]

1 0

Re: AO-40 telemetry database
by Rodney Waln 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

this page has some info, good luck http://www.amsat.org/amsat/sats/ao40/ao40-tlm.html

1 0

13 colonies baloney
by Thomas McGrane 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Mr. Semple I could not be bothered logging into QRZ.com for your email address. I did not appreciate being bumped off echo while trying to reach w8mrr. Your lame excuse of celebrating the 13 colonies to hog the satellite was inappropriate. Please dont bump me again. America is nothing like what fought the original revolution. Who are you kidding, not me. pat n2oeq

2 1

AO-40 telemetry database
by Jim White 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

I'm looking for an online repository of AO-40 housekeeping telemetry for a space weather study. May I ask for any pointers to such a database? Jim jim(a)coloradosatellite.com wd0e(a)amsat.org

1 0

Software Commodore 64
by Jean-François Ménard 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi, Hey, I'm not crazy... Hi !! I'm looking for satellite prediction software or similar for Commodore 64. Anybody know where I can find this !?!? 73 From an old fashion guy of the '80 -- Jean-François Ménard VA2SS =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= AMSAT www.amsat.org ARRL www.arrl.org =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

2 1

Re: The Moon is our Future
by Armando Mercado 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi Nigel, Indeed, I can hear the ker-chunking and cordless phone calls now. :-) Armando, N8IGJ >Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:23:08 +0000 >From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel(a)ngunn.net> >Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future >To: Armando Mercado <am25544(a)triton.net> >Cc: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org >Message-ID: <4A4CECFC.6070504(a)ngunn.net> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed >It would be the only repeater anywhere that I've seen that would get >sufficient use to justify it's existance. >Armando Mercado wrote: >> Not to be a wet blanket, but what is the >> advantage of an amateur repeater on the moon?

1 0

Re: The Moon is our Future
by G0MRF＠aol.com 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

In a message dated 02/07/2009 13:42:15 GMT Standard Time, ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com writes: Right now this is the concept theory phase. Is a 2m/440 SSB transponder practical? If our analysis proves that it is not, then we can move on higher in frequency until we find an affordable solution (within the ITU guidelines 2m to 440. ? No, too much noise from Earth on 2m and too much path loss on 440. 440 to 2m is a much better solution David

1 0

Re: The Moon is our Future
by Armando Mercado 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi Dave, Thanks for your comments. If the "international project" approach were a successful model we would have a constellation of amateur satellites in HEO/GEO flying now. But, different space groups have different priorities. I am not opposed to a lunar repeater, but I think we can get a bigger bang for the buck by pursuing other opitions. To me this sounds like a one time stunt that will take most of our already limited resources. 73's Armando N8IGJ ----- Original Message ----- From: D R Mynatt To: Armando Mercado Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future A moon repeater/datacom/SSTV/cw whatever else we can do, could be coordinated with *all* the various amateur groups, not just AMSAT-NA. This could make this an international project, similar to ESMO and ASMO projects under way now. It would be financially feasible if, for instance, we landed first (probably not going to happen) and, if I remember correctly, collect the cash prize for the first non-commercial moon landing. I think that's still out there, isn't it? Dave//KA0SWT

2 1

Re: Has anyone considered???
by MM 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Yes, Digital is an option. However, i would want it to pass through the analog transponder unprocessed. The reason is that we can't afford the Million dollar Radiation hardened chips to support digital processing required on satellites. DSP or SDR will add to the Cost and add many years to the project. WE need projects much faster than have been delivered in the past, 1-2 year schedules not 10 year schedules. Miles --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Jack K. <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: Jack K. <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Has anyone considered??? > To: bruninga(a)usna.edu, "'Joe'" <nss(a)mwt.net>, "'MM'" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org, kg4zlb(a)gmail.com > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 8:40 AM > Has anyone considered the notion that > the communications from a HEO or Moon or Mars need not be > analog? Has anyone considered a digital mode such as WSJT > for comms? I know for a fact people are running meteor > scatter and EME using a single beam (albeit a long one) and > 150 watts. This is not out of the reach of most hams and it > is not non-viable communications mode... Heck the US Navy > even ran RTTY in the 60's from Hawaii to Maryland as a > normal mode of communications (yes it was big and wieldy, I > just mentioned it as an aside). > > DE - KD1PE - Jack > > > > >> Why go with the minimal antenna gain? > >> ... any antenna with a 3 db point that exceeds > >> 6.5 degrees is just wasting transmitter power. > > > > I think that would be about a 24 dB gain > antenna. Pretty big > > and would take some careful alignment... Kinda > like a realy big > > EME array > > > >> Just remember what an Oscar 10 station took > >> to have reliable communications, At Apogee > >> it was only 35,000 miles away, the Moon is ...] > >> [250,000 miles] > > > > Which is 7 times farther, squared or 50 times more > power (about > > 17 dB). > > > >

2 1

Moon project: why not a passive refeector?
by andy thomas 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Guys, taking a tip from ECHO, why not improve the EME link budget by building a structure of resonant cavities at 2m or 70cm, and above? Such a structure could be built by a metallic (reflective) polymer surface "bubble" or pyramid, and an automatic system to inject hardening-foam to give it rigidity. Our beams on earth would point to the structure at a target frequency and the increased reflectivity of the structure would bring EME possible for more modest arrays. Would bring OSCAR-0 into the backyard... justa thought... andy G0SFJ

1 0

Re: DO-64 software support for PSK-1(T) hardware?
by PE0SAT 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

On Thu, July 2, 2009 21:59, Greg Beat wrote: Hi Greg, > I see that DO-64 / Delfi-C3 has a 1200 baud BPSK downlink and their RASCAL software uses the computer's soundcard DSP for decoding. > > Does the RASCAL software have an ability to support data stream from the PacComm PSK-1 combo? Look for Warble, it can be found on http://members.casema.nl/b.ubbels/pe4wj.htm Goodluck > ==== > w9gb -- With regards PE0SAT Internet web-page http://www.ham.vgnet.nl/

1 0

24 Ghz stats
by Howie 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

In response to Joe, W9SBD, at 24 Ghz: 6' antenna = 51 dB gain, 3dB BW = .4 deg, EIRP @1W = 126 KW 4' antenna = 48 dB gain, 3dB BW = .6 deg, EIRP @1W = 63 KW 18" antenna = 39 dB gain, 3dB BW = 1.6 deg, EIRP @1W = 8 KW All figures rounded to next whole number, gains assume 65% efficiency. We have excellent space allocations at 3.4 GHz for downlink that would be very inexpensive to build. Even a high end 30 deg./K LNB with external 10 MHz. reference is less than $500 new and will convert 3.4 Ghz to 950 Mhz. The used price is much lower. I have sketched out some ideas to compensate and downconvert a really cheap ($50) DRO LNB to a 432 MHz. IF using mostly off the shelf parts. This band is great for space comms and can use very inexpensive commercial parts. There is very little terrestrial activity to worry about and this band is not allocated for commercial downlinks in this region. In areas where it is allocated, the frequencies below 3.410 don't seem to be popular commercially. Howie AB2S

1 0

DO-64 software support for PSK-1(T) hardware?
by Greg Beat 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

I see that DO-64 / Delfi-C3 has a 1200 baud BPSK downlink and their RASCAL software uses the computer's soundcard DSP for decoding. Does the RASCAL software have an ability to support data stream from the PacComm PSK-1 combo? DO-64 Frequencies: a.. Primary telemetry downlink: 145.870 MHz 1200 Baud BPSK AX.25 400mW b.. Backup telemetry downlink: 145.930 MHz 1200 Baud BPSK AX.25 400mW c.. Linear transponder passband downlink: 145.880 - 145.920 MHz (inverting) 400mW PEP d.. Linear transponder passband uplink: 435.570 - 435.530 MHz e.. Transponder mode beacon: 145.870 MHz CW (10dB below transponder PEP) ==== w9gb

1 0

Re: The Moon is our Future
by MM 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi W0JT: I like your simple explanation of the path loss; it should help many understand that an Active Repeater on the Moon will not require as big of an antenna system as passive Moon EME station. Now we just need to run the path loss numbers a few different ways to see which Amateur Radio Band option works the best. If we are able to piggyback on a NASA funded Unmanned Moon lander, then we have the possibility of the least expensive flight to High orbit possible. This is an opportunity we just can not miss trying for. Our only other option for affordable high orbit flight may be with China. I believe the High orbit flights with NASA and EAS are now cost prohibitive. 73 Miles WF1F MarexMG.org --- On Thu, 7/2/09, tosca005(a)umn.edu <tosca005(a)umn.edu> wrote: > From: tosca005(a)umn.edu <tosca005(a)umn.edu> > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 11:52 AM > On Jul 2 2009, kd8bxp(a)aol.com > wrote: > > > Don't want to get a whole new thing started here but - > I don't think we > > ever went to the moon in 1969 and I don't think we > will ever goto the > > moon - in 2012 or whenever they proposed a "return" to > the moon > > With that level of disbelief I can certainly see why you > are predisposed to > discount the possibility of a moon-based transponder. > > > I would love to see an amatuer repeater on the moon > thou - from my > > understanding EME is expensive to do, so I think it > would leave most of > > us out > > Not necessarily. Remember, with conventional EME, you send > as large a > signal as you can muster towards the moon, incur huge path > losses along the > way, then incur a huge loss because the moon is a very > imperfect reflector > of RF energy, then incur the huge path loss back from moon > to earth. > > With a moon-based repeater, you send as large a signal as > you can muster > towards the moon, incur the same path loss from earth to > moon; BUT, THEN > you enlarge the signal with a gain antenna at the repeater, > and then have a > sensitive receiver that can detect and amplify the signal. > The repeater > then transponds the signal to a different frequency band, > amplifies it as > much as equipment weight and power availability allow, > transmit it through > a gain antenna, and only THEN incur the huge path loss from > moon to earth. > > Because the path loss is only in a single direction, and > instead of an > inefficient (lossy) passive reflector, you have gain > antennas for reception > and transmission, plus amplification on receive and on > transmit, the net > earth station requirements should be much less than > conventional EME. > > That's not to say it would be easy, just that it should be > easier than > conventional EME in terms of station requirements on earth. > As has been > mentioned numerous times already, the station requirements > for the space > end of the system are enormously more difficult than > anything we've ever > tackled so far with either LEO or HEO satellites. > > But there's no harm in DISCUSSING the idea, and learning > about the pitfalls > and possibilities as part of the discussion. Even if it > never comes to > pass, we should all be a bit more knowledgeable after > having had the > discussion. > > As far as the dreaming goes, wouldn't an L/S transponder be > better than a > V/U or U/V transponder? Granted, the path loss is greater, > but the antenna > gain is easier to produce... > > While I am a firm believer in the KISS principle (Keep It > Simple, Stupid!), > I am getting a little tired of hearing people complain > endlessly about the > downfall of AO-40 being due to its complexity. Uhh, the > downfall of AO-40 > was human error, which will ALWAYS be an issue. The only > reason that AO-40 > was ever usable at all was BECAUSE of its complexity, i.e., > the redundancy > of multiple transponders that could be switched into place > after initial > failures, etc. OF COURSE, a mission to the moon needs to be > as light and > compact as it can be made, and therefore much simpler than > AO-40, but due > to the harsh environment in which it would be asked to > operate, it needs to > be as complex as necessary to get the job done, i.e. not as > simple as AO-10 > or AO-13. > > 73 de W0JT > AMSAT-NA LM#2292 > > _______________________________________________ > 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

Richard Garriott qsl
by Perry Yantis 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

I received my qsl today from Richard Garriott. Perry WB8OTH

1 0

AMSAT Journal
by Ed Long 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Everyone, The May/June issue of The AMSAT Journal was just uploaded to the printer. This one was a bit late too due to some content delays, but it is finished and I think it's a great issue. Hope you enjoy it. The Editorial team worked hard on it. 73 and have a very happy and safe July 4th (for those of you in the US), Ed Long WA4SWJ Editor, The AMSAT Journal ----

1 0

Re: The Moon is our Future
by Armando Mercado 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Greetings, Not to be a wet blanket, but what is the advantage of an amateur repeater on the moon? >From a mid-latitude location, the moon is above the horizon 8.5 to 16 hours per day depending on the season. The repeater would be in darkness and presumably un-powered for 2 weeks each month. Even if it was located in a permently illuminated point near the poles, librations would take it out of view of earth at times. Link margins would be large, but not insurmountable. Designing a comm package to survive the temperature extremes would be difficult but not impossible. The US and USSR had unmanned landers that survived many lunar day night cycles. We do have experience flying amateur repeaters on manned space missions. There's one on the ISS right now. It is turned off on a regular basis because of crew time availability and flight safety rules. One can only imagine what constraints would be imposed with a comm package on the moon. There would be many technical, logistical and financial challenges for a lunar amateur repeater to overcome...and all from an international organization that has yet to replace AO-40. 73, Armando, N8IGJ >Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 04:31:45 -0700 (PDT) >From: MM <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> >Subject: [amsat-bb] The Moon is our Future >To: kg4zlb(a)gmail.com, amsat-bb(a)amsat.org, "Jack K." ><kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> >Message-ID: <878811.97851.qm(a)web56408.mail.re3.yahoo.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >Theoretically we may have a free ride to the Moon for an Amateur radio >repeater!

2 1

Chinease sat any news?
by Luc Leblanc 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

>From my archives did any one get fresh news about this Chinease sat? SB SAT @ AMSAT $ANS-279.02 October 4 2008 First Chinese Amateur Radio Satellite to be launched in June 2009 AMSAT News Service Bulletin 279.02 From AMSAT HQ SILVER SPRING, MD. October 5, 2008 To All RADIO AMATEURS BID: $ANS-279.02 Michael Chen, BD5RV/4, reports that he recently received an update from Alan, BA1DU, on the progress of the first Chinese amateur satellite. Things are now going smoothly. This satellite was formerly named CAS-1 and is now XW-1. It carries a beacon and three cross band transponders: FM, linear, and digital. The satellite is planned to be launched into a Sun synchronous orbit in June 2009 by a CZ-2C rocket in Taiyuan Satellite Launch Center in North China. [ANS thanks Michael, BD5RV/4, for the above information] /EX "-" Luc Leblanc VE2DWE Skype VE2DWE www.qsl.net/ve2dwe WAC BASIC CW PHONE SATELLITE

2 1

I: How you do DOPPLER correction in Linear Transponders?
by Francesco Grappi 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi Fabiano, In my opinion for sure keep fixed downlink frequency and adjust uplink frequency. So on this way you don't "slip" on the transponder downlink..... 73 Frank IW4DVZ -----Messaggio originale----- Da: amsat-bb-bounces(a)amsat.org [mailto:[email protected]] Per conto di Fabiano Moser Inviato: giovedì 2 luglio 2009 18.20 A: amsat-bb Oggetto: [amsat-bb] How you do DOPPLER correction in Linear Transponders? Dear friends, We know that some Satellite Operators use diferent system to doppler control. For Linear Transponder 1) Adjust uplink and downlink automatic by CAT? (Not always woks, some times I´m up or down from the computer adjust) 2) Adjust uplink and downlink manual 3) Keep Uplink fixed and adjust only the Downlink frequency. What is the more indicate method to use? FT-847 have knob to adjust Uplink without change downlink VFO, and I´m using it to keep my voice in downlink at same downlink much I can. But I know some operators use fixed uplink. How you do? -- 73 Fabiano Moser CR7/PY5RX ARISS-PORTUGAL (Amateur Radio on the International Space Station) Representative at Teleconference and Portugal Telebridge Coordinator. AMRAD/AMSAT-CT http://www.amrad.pt/ariss.php "There is no great talent without great will. (Honoré de Balzac)" _______________________________________________ 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: The Moon is our Future
by David - KG4ZLB 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

OK, I just love conspiracy theories :-D Are you really Michael Moore ? :-D kd8bxp(a)aol.com wrote: > I don't think man will ever walk on the moon. And I really didn't want to start a whole thing on this - > Someone said that a man would have to roll out an antenna for a amatuer project - I just don't think that will ever happen > A small robotic rover could do it but then you are talking expensive unless nasa was willing to give "us" time on a rover that was going to do experiments for nasa > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com >

2 1

Re: The Moon is our Future
by Robert Bruninga 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

> But doesn't it have to be above ground? > Yes the moon is dry and probably the > poorest conducting dirt there is, But > just like on Earth it can't be laying > on the ground yes? Good question... Even if the ground was a perfect reflector and conductor, then the antenna would only have to be 19" above the ground at 2 meters. Next consider that the moon is rock and extremely dry... And rock has about 1/1000 the conductivity of moist soil... So where the "true" reflection in the ground of the moon is surely many feet down. So sitting it on the ground" of the moon is probably 99% as effective as trying to hang it 19" up. > Robert Bruninga wrote: > > > BUT one easy way to get gain is to use just a long coaxial gain > cable. I think it takes about 22 feet of coaxial dipole > elements at 2 meters to give about 6 dB of gain. So laying down > 6 dB gain segments on the rock of the moon is as easy as > unrolling a spool of cable. Unrolling 8 of these with the right > spacing could yield about 17 dB. > > Of course this woiuld only point straight up, so it would need > to be on a moon base in the middle of the earth facing side. > But since there is a lot of interest in moon bases near the > poles where there might be water, then a similar array of layed > down coaxial cable arrays could be phased horizontally to point > at earth. Actually, just about any direction can be obtained > with the right spacing. > > ONLY problem of course is there has to be someone with legs to > roll out the cables. > > Just a thought. > Bob, WB4APR > > > ________________________________ > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.2/2214 - > Release Date: 07/02/09 05:54:00 > > > >

1 0

Re: The Moon is our Future
by David - KG4ZLB 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Just a question but if you do not think the US got to the Moon in 1969 and neither do you think they will get back to the Moon in 2012, how do you propose seeing an amateur repeater on the Moon? Get the crew of the ISS to toss out a repeater, like SuitSat, but throw it really, really hard in the general direction of the Moon and hope it lands? I don't understand your logic. 73 David KG4ZLB kd8bxp(a)aol.com wrote: > Don't want to get a whole new thing started here but - I don't think we ever went to the moon in 1969 and I don't think we will ever goto the moon - in 2012 or whenever they proposed a "return" to the moon > > I would love to see an amatuer repeater on the moon thou - from my understanding EME is expensive to do, so I think it would leave most of us out > > Where as and bringing things back around - LEOs are realitive low cost to use to the normal everyday day > > I will put my two cents in for more LEOs - :-) > > Hey are there any geosynchinze amatuer sats up? > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > -

2 1

Re: The Moon is our Future
by MM 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Of course, lets get more Universities involved and build more Leos satellites to fill those small ballast spots on new satellites. The Moon option could be cheaper than a HEO's, if we can get it in as Public Relations NASA project. The cost to get a ride on a HEO satellite is multiple millions just for the ride into space. Amsat paid over a million dollars just to ride a Prototype Rocket (AO-4). If you want to ride a Non-prototype rocket to high orbit, add another 20 million. Cheap High orbit rocket rides are few and far between. The Moon is the most affordable ride option this decade. 20 years ago NASA was looking for ballast for the TDRS satellites. We had the opportunity to put a ham project on a few GEO satellites and missed the opportunity. Lets not miss the Moon. http://www.marexmg.org/fileshtml/ArissRebuild.html --- On Thu, 7/2/09, David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > From: David - KG4ZLB <kg4zlb(a)googlemail.com> > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 11:15 AM > On the contrary, we need more LEO's > to augment and replace the existing > aged fleet. > > Whilst AMSAT works on the HEO's lets put some of our > efforts towards the > Universities who seem to regularly put up 2/70 satellites! > > -- > David > KG4ZLB > www.kg4zlb.com > > > > Jack K. wrote: > > I heard the same things when the first HEOs went up. > It takes to much > > money, it takes to much specialized equipment, it > takes to much > > knowledge, it is for elitists only... The bottom line > is a LOT of hams > > used them and it took some ingenuity, some new > equipment, and yes we > > all had to learn now things to use them. the bottom > line is they > > worked and worked well... My suggestion is quit > looking at pitfalls > > and problems as reasons not to do something, but as > opportunities to > > learn to accomplish new things (or improved > 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! > > > > DE - KD1PE > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: <kd8bxp(a)aol.com> > > To: <bruninga(a)usna.edu>; > "'Joe'" <nss(a)mwt.net>; > "'MM'" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> > > Cc: "'Jack K.'" <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com>; > <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org>; > > > <kg4zlb(a)gmail.com> > > Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:28 AM > > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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

[Fwd: Re: Re: The Moon is our Future]
by n0jy＠lavabit.com 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Somehow I sent this in reply to Bob instead of the group. Sorry, Bob. > BUT one easy way to get gain is to use just a long coaxial gain > cable. I think it takes about 22 feet of coaxial dipole > elements at 2 meters to give about 6 dB of gain. So laying down 6 dB gain segments on the rock of the moon is as easy as > unrolling a spool of cable. Unrolling 8 of these with the right spacing could yield about 17 dB. > > Of course this woiuld only point straight up, so it would need > to be on a moon base in the middle of the earth facing side. > But since there is a lot of interest in moon bases near the > poles where there might be water, then a similar array of layed > down coaxial cable arrays could be phased horizontally to point > at earth. Actually, just about any direction can be obtained > with the right spacing. > > ONLY problem of course is there has to be someone with legs to > roll out the cables. How about, if the location is very near the pole, an array that extends up like a push-pole vertically from the craft, with tape measure type dipoles that spring out horizontally when the pole goes up? You might need a small rotator on the base of the pole then to make sure the dipoles point at Earth depending on the orientation of the craft when it lands, but that would only need to be turned once I believe, when it is deployed. Jerry N0JY

2 1

Re: The Moon is our Future
by MM 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Dear Jack: Thank you for your great comments. Let’s find the problems and find the solutions. We solved the difficulties for working AO-10 and AO-13. The Moon is the Next Generation. Lets work together to find an affordable solution. Which band will work the best (assuming limited antenna and power recourses from an Un-manned Moon lander.) The Moon will not be an “Easy-Sat”, it will be a challenge. However, it should be much easier to access than true EME. Thanks all Miles WF1F MarexMG.org --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Jack K. <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: Jack K. <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: The Moon is our Future > To: kd8bxp(a)aol.com, bruninga(a)usna.edu, "'Joe'" <nss(a)mwt.net>, "'MM'" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org, kg4zlb(a)gmail.com > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 8:48 AM > I heard the same things when the > first HEOs went up. It takes to much money, it takes to much > specialized equipment, it takes to much knowledge, it is for > elitists only... The bottom line is a LOT of hams used them > and it took some ingenuity, some new equipment, and yes we > all had to learn now things to use them. the bottom line is > they worked and worked well... My suggestion is quit looking > at pitfalls and problems as reasons not to do something, but > as opportunities to learn to accomplish new things (or > improved 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! > > DE - KD1PE > >

1 0

Re: The Moon is our Future
by MM 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hello Joe: Thank your comments. My EME experience is minimal. I have only been able to hear a few signals from the Moon and have yet to complete a full 2-way EME (new antenna in progress). I am sure there are some people on this emailing forum that have more experience than I have with EME communications. The reason for a small antenna setup on the NASA lander proposal is because I believe it will be harder to convince NASA to allow us to install a 20 foot boom on the lander. Right now this is the concept theory phase. Is a 2m/440 SSB transponder practical? If our analysis proves that it is not, then we can move on higher in frequency until we find an affordable solution (within the ITU guidelines). The ground stations will need to be Oscar class or better (12-15+ dBd). The question is, which frequency combination will give us the best bang for the buck and provide access to the most users? A Moon repeater will never be accessible via a HT. And with the exception of one (1) truck I saw, it will not be accessible to mobile SSB systems. --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Joe <nss(a)mwt.net> wrote: > From: Joe <nss(a)mwt.net> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] The Moon is our Future > To: "MM" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: kg4zlb(a)gmail.com, amsat-bb(a)amsat.org, "Jack K." <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 9:20 AM > > > MM wrote: > > > Theoretically we may have a free ride to the Moon for > an Amateur radio repeater! > > > [snip] > > > > > > > One theory: > > We need a simple Mode-J transponder (2-meters up, 440 > down). > > Low power consumption. > > Assume minimal antenna gain from the Lander (3 dBd on > each antenna) > > Assume transmitter power 5-10 watts. > > > > > Why go with the minimal antenna gain? From the moon > the whole Earth only displays less than 2 degrees in the > sky. ( Moon shows 0.5 degrees from earth) > Why spill all the power where people are not? > > In addition, once the antennas are positioned, > that's more or less it. There is a slight wobble > (Libration) of 6.5 degrees So any antenna with a > 3 db point that exceeds 6.5 degrees is just wasting > transmitter power. > > And with this link budget even an active bird that has > landed and not flying it still will need some pretty hefty > power to not need a major antenna setup on the earth side of > the system. > > Just remember what an Oscar 10 station took to have > reliable communications,, At Apogee it was only 35,000 > miles away, the Moon is almost a ten fold > increase in distance, to keep the lander from having > to run hundreds of watts to be heard on the earth, > ever DB of antenna gain will be needed for sure! > > Joe WB9SBD >

1 0

Re: The Moon is our Future
by MM 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

>From WF1F: Yes, that is one of the many challenges we have to plan for. 14 days of pure sunlight (Lunar-Day) and 14 days of freezing darkness (Lunar-Night). We also have some unknown questions about our power source. Will we be able to run during the 14 days of darkness or will we be operating during the Lunar days only? What I mean by Simple, is the design of the transponder needs to be Simple (KISS). Strictly analog circuits for the transponder, NO DSP, NO CPU’s, No SDR to run the transponder. We need the reliability of the AO-10 transponder and not the complexity of AO-40. --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel(a)ngunn.net> wrote: > From: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel(a)ngunn.net> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] The Moon is our Future > To: "MM" <ka1rrw(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: kg4zlb(a)gmail.com, amsat-bb(a)amsat.org, "Jack K." <kd1pe.1(a)gmail.com> > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 8:56 AM > There is nothing simple about a > project that can withstand the extreme temperature changes > and eclipse periods that exst on the moon. It's probably the > most hostile environment we're likely to build for. > > > MM wrote: > > > A plan for a simple transponder (KISS no complex > P3E). >

1 0

Re: Antenna Question
by Jim Jerzycke 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

I'd have to say "It Depends". A 'regular' QHA has about zip for gain on the horizon where you really need the it, although I've read where the "extended" QHA's have a 'flatter' pattern, with the gain squeezed down towards the horizon. Same with eggbeaters. I have a pair of the M2 units, and even with good quality preamps, they leave a LOT to be desired on low-elevation passes, which is what most passes wind up being. Jerry, K5OE, has a modified eggbeater-II design that pulls the pattern down towards the horizon quite a bit. I built a pair of these years ago, and they seemed to work well. Unfortunately I no longer have them, so I can't do an "A-B" comparison against my M2 units. An altenative would be to build a Lindenblad like Tony AA2TX designed. I have the parts collected to do just that, but won't have the time to build one for a few weeks. 73, Jim KQ6EA --- On Wed, 7/1/09, Steve Bluemel <stevebluemel(a)gmail.com> wrote: From: Steve Bluemel <stevebluemel(a)gmail.com> Subject: [amsat-bb] Antenna Question To: AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 5:17 PM Hello All, Just a quick Question. Quadrifilar Helix or Eggbeater? All other options considered, which would you chose? Thanks! Steve KI6OQU _______________________________________________ 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

QSL card?
by Scott Smith 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi, has anyone received there QSL card from Richard Garriott? when he was aboard the ISS?. 73 de VE6ITV Scott

5 5

Unused sats
by Howie 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

While the opportunity to ride share on a GEO sat is probably our best chance at a HEO transponder, it is still a very slim chance in my opinion. I have worked in the commercial satellite industry for over 25 years and the most valuable piece of real estate in existence is located in the Clark Belt. Commercial satellites are very much a "for profit" business and every watt of power and ounce of weight has a dollar value beyond comprehension. Even if we offered to pay our share of weight and power, it would not be enough because the loss of return on investment for the non revenue generating "hitch hiker" must be factored in as well. I now work for a subsidiary of the second largest satellite operator in the world who is expanding their business to offer "hosted payloads" to customers who want to orbit specialized payloads without having to launch their own satellite. One of my co-workers was invited to participate in a meeting of the group working on this offering. When I found out, I suggested he bring up the idea of launching a very small amateur payload as a demonstration of the great utility that can be achieved with a very small, cost effective payload. He did and the response was "You mean for free ?" He was never invited back. If we want to get on a commercial sat, we need to have something to "sell", i.e. a good reason for them to orbit something that may help them generate revenues in the near future. I can say with reasonable confidence that an analog bent pipe transponder will not be very interesting. Something along the lines of the Advanced Communications Package might. Even though I was not a big fan, the P-25 over satellite might be another good one if we could prove a good scenario. If we want a ride into HEO, we need to earn it. Howie AB2S

5 4

Re: qsl card
by Scott Smith 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

Tnx folks, i'll keep wating like the others, guess he must be quite busy. 73 de VE6ITV Scott

4 3

NASA Kills Ulysses
by Clint Bradford 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

After 18 years of operation, NASA has switched off Ulysses, the space probe designed to study the properties of solar wind, the heliosphere magnetic field, and the solar radio bursts that can greatly affect our gadgets, telecommunications, and every electronic system here on planet Earth. It was the first object to see and study our Sun's poles. Read Ulysses Mission Operations Manager Nigel's email message to the Ulysses community ... http://tinyurl.com/mvneu4 Clint Bradford, K6LCS 909-241-7666

7 7

Antenna Question
by Steve Bluemel 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

Hello All, Just a quick Question. Quadrifilar Helix or Eggbeater? All other options considered, which would you chose? Thanks! Steve KI6OQU

1 0

Re: NASA Kills Ulysses
by Armando Mercado 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

Hi All, The title of this post paints an inaccurate picture of this joint ESA/NASA mission. Ulysses power supply (RTG) is not producing enough power anymore to run its instruments and heaters to keep its propellant from freezing. Ulysses was due to be retired last year, but controllers devised a clever method of firing its thrusters every 2 hours to keep things warm. The tanks are virtually empty now. Also its X-band transmitter failed leaving only it S-band transmitter running at 512 bps. Ulysses is currently 5 AU from earth with a 45 min. 1-way light time..to far away to act as an amateur communication satellite in its decommissioned after live, but it's an interesting mental exercise. See the follow for more: http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMWHF1P0WF_index_0.html > Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:00:01 -0700 > From: Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d(a)earthlink.net> > Subject: [amsat-bb] NASA Kills Ulysses > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Message-ID: <B95E6E7F-69B9-49F0-B639-ACD8527B1D87(a)earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > After 18 years of operation, NASA has switched off Ulysses, the space > probe designed to study the properties of solar wind, the heliosphere > magnetic field, and the solar radio bursts that can greatly affect our > gadgets, telecommunications, and every electronic system here on > planet Earth. It was the first object to see and study our Sun's poles. > > Read Ulysses Mission Operations Manager Nigel's email message to the > Ulysses community ... > > http://tinyurl.com/mvneu4 > > Clint Bradford, K6LCS > 909-241-7666

1 0