I am a bit disturbed that Dave Jordan's fine article on FOX-1A in July's QST is being misrepresented by the quote that is purely out of context. Anyone who read the full article can clearly see that Dave is NOT advocating using half duplex to communicate with FOX-1A. The full text of the excerpt reads "With a minimum power output of 400mW, Fox1A should be easy to work with an ordinary VHF/UHF FM handheld transceiver and a dual-band handheld Yagi antenna. Most VHF/UHF handhelds can only communicate in "half duplex." This means they cannot receive simultaneously while transmitting. A half-duplex rig ill be adequate for Fox satellites, but a "full duplex" transceiver is even better. A full duplex transceiver receives and transmits at the same time. This allows you to monitor the quality of your signal through the satellite so that you can make antenna and frequency adjustments as needed."
As I read this it seems the author makes the statement as to why full duplex is superior and preferred over half duplex. A nice teachable moment for the newbie to understand that while FOX-1A and other FM satellites can in fact be worked half duplex it is best understand why full duplex is the preferred method. My first contacts were half duplex and I quickly learned that full duplex was not only preferred but is the acceptable way to communicate through any satellite. At the time I got started I was influenced by an article on the web titled "Work FM Satellites with your HT!" advocating that all I needed was a single handheld and a tape measure antenna. I notice that the article has been since updated to include "Ideally, we should be working the satellites in full duplex mode, where we can simultaneously listen to the downlink as we are transmitting." Thank you for clarifying this. However, I am confused, especially seeing this recent criticism, that the article just mentiend continues the previous sentence with " Although this method is preferred, it is not mandatory:"
I commend Dave for his article and efforts to keep us all informed and educated.
73,
EMike E. Michael McCardel, KC8YLD V.P. for Educational Relations, AMSAT-NA
Have you donated to get your Fox-1 Challenge Coin Yet? http://www.amsat.org/?p=3275
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Clint Bradford [email protected] wrote:
I was startled reading AA4KN's proclamation in his July, 2015 QST article that " ... a half-duplex rig will be adequate for the Fox satellites, but a "full duplex" transceiver is even better ... "
Gawd, if I had published that, I would have crosses burning on my front lawn.
Confirming we should still be teaching that "Working FOX-1A in true, full duplex mode is preferred ... " - and suggesting methods to accomplish just that?
Clint K6LCS
Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb