Yes, I can, but I'm not complaining about performance. The point of the TH-D72A vs. IC-02AT test was to see if evidence existed to support the notion that there might be some anomaly with the new ISS APRS system that might explain why some operators (Scott, K4KDR and others apparently) are unable to decode packets now when they could previously, either on 70 cm or 2 m. If my comparison test had come up, say, 13 to 2 packets decoded in favor of the TH-D72A, that would lend credence to the notion that such an anomaly might exist but is masked by the better performance of purpose-built (i.e. designed for packet/APRS) equipment like Kenwood and Yaesu transceivers.
When you have a measure of experience with something like ISS APRS reception, it's easy to brush off reports like Scott's and just chalk them up to operator ignorance, operator incompetence, simply forgetting a step or two in a setup process, etc. But Scott is asking for some help (a sanity check), and I was just trying to perform a few independent tests. There are plenty of other operators who could do the same thing.
So now the question would seem to turn to things like:
What do Scott's station and the others have in common (if anything)? Are they all SDR type stations? If they are SDR stations, are typical SDR stumbling blocks handled properly (offset, center spike at 0 Hz offset, etc.) Are the station components and transmission lines well shielded? Have local interference sources come into existence on or near 145.825 MHz since the ISS was previously on that frequency?
Todd AL0I
On 4/27/2017 9:18 AM, Norm n3ykf wrote:
Can you record the RF on an SDR and make multiple tries decoding?
Norm n3ykf