I'd like to add some comments and corrections to this thread. I certainly would have prefered that the League recommend using the least power required, same as outlined in the FCC regulations. Recommending excessive power only escalates the very problem we are trying to avoid, whether Field Day or not. AMSAT discontinued use of the 67 Hz tone on AO-51 for similar reasons.
I also would have preferred that the ARRL would make a point of recommending full duplex for ALL satellite operating, not just the transponder birds. The article also recommended only tuning the downlink for both FO-29 and VO-52. For VO-52 and Mode U/V this is contrary to recommended practice and the least efficient means of doppler tuning in terms of bandwith usage and courtesy to other operators. If a station cannot implement full doppler tuning, it is always recommended they tune the higher of the two frequencies.
The table describing the frequencies to use for AO-27 and AO-51 is also in error. The receive recommendations are on the money, but apply the same amount of tuning for Doppler shift to the uplink frequency. Total Doppler shift on 2m from those orbits is only ~3 kHz, while the article recommends 10 kHz.
I would also be VERY careful about recommending plenty of "RF muscle" while discussing manually pointing VHF and UHF antennas without an az/el rotor. RF burns and glaucoma are not on my to do list for that weekend.
Satellite operators looking to make a quick FM contact should pay careful attention to SO-50. It wasn't mentioned at all in the article and probably will not have as much traffic. I also expect the L/U repeater running concurrently with V/U on AO-51 to be useable to those with full doppler tuning without much QRM. AO-7 may also provide QSOs for those who have experience with that satellites particular quirks. Command stations are also working on reviving AO-16 for use as a digipeater on FD, but there are certainly no guarantees after 17 yrs in orbit.
I'd be glad to help avoid these mistakes for future articles on satellite operations.
73, Drew KO4MA AMSAT-NA VP of Operations
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ford, Steve, WB8IMY" sford@arrl.org To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 5:04 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: This comment is INSANE...
Stephan:
I am the person at the ARRL that authored the statement in question. It appeared in a Field Day special insert published in the June issue of QST.
The statement is part of a section that discusses how to make a successful Field Day contact on OSCAR 51, a satellite that presently functions as a single-channel FM repeater. The suggestion to use as much power as available applied to Field Day stations, not everyday operating. But more importantly, the suggestion was intended to apply to AO-51 *only.* I would never suggest such a practice for communicating through an SSB/CW linear transponder satellite, during Field Day or at any other time.
I apologize for any misunderstanding. The article should have made this point clearer.
73 . . . Steve Ford, WB8IMY
QST Editor
From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org on behalf of Stephan Andre' Sent: Thu 6/14/2007 3:11 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: This comment is INSANE...
I would agree that the comment below is rather nuts, but it is important to remember that this is an *unattributed statement* at the current time. We cannot know that this was a true statement.
I am hoping that someone connected with the ARRL can get someone there to comment on this. Obviously this is a false statement, but I don't believe that an ARRL official said that. If someone can produce an actual quote thats Googled, that is different.
Either way the ARRL really ought to make some kind of statement about this.
--STeve Andre' wb8wsf en82
On Thursday 14 June 2007 14:37:35 Ernest Erickson wrote:
After reading several articles posted by menbers, this particular line really stood out.
How can someone supposedly 'responsible' make such a stupid comment?
They obviously have no idea that more power than neccessary robs power from ALL users on the satellites. (snip) Someone from the ARRL, who shall
remain nameless, is actually recommending as much uplink power as possible to improve one's
chances,(/snip)
This is especially true with SSB/CW transponders.
This is thoughtless commenting in general, and must be ignored, but such a person should be informed that making statements such as this is NOT what we need from a 'reputable' organization, if indeed, it actually came from someone within the ARRL.
Just my .02C on the subject.
73!
Ernest A. Erickson, KA9UCE Applied Electronic Communications, AEC 10711 East Verbina Lane Florence, AZ. 85232 520.723.0602 aec9823@yahoo.com
Sent via AMSAT-BB@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@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