How about "an inadvertent QSO'??
73,Jeff WB2SYK
--- On Sun, 10/19/08, Joe nss@mwt.net wrote:
From: Joe nss@mwt.net Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: WB9L cross-satellite again To: n3tl@bellsouth.net Cc: nigel@ngunn.net, jeffk13057@yahoo.com, sparkycivic@chaw.ca, AMSAT-BB@amsat.org Date: Sunday, October 19, 2008, 12:06 PM This is indeed a strange situation.
But in my mind a "QSO" did not happen.
I don't know.
This is making my Brain Hurt.
Cross bird doesn't fit. Cross bird I would say were if the output from one bird went into another and got relayed.
Again My brain is hurting here.
WB9L is intentionally working AO-51, which is thousands
of km away from and pretty much opposite AO-16, which N3TL is intentionally working. Indeed, both satellites have the same FM/VHF uplink. WB9L copies N3TL on AO-51 at 435.300 +/-, in FM. N3TL copies WB9L on AO-16 at 437.026 +/-, in SSB. It seemed clear to me that a complete contact between these two stations occurred across both satellites.
I'm open to any suggestions regarding a term more
accurate than cross-satellite for such contacts.
73 to all,
Tim - N3TL AMSAT Member No. 36820 Athens, Ga. - EM84ha
-------------- Original message from Nigel Gunn
G8IFF/W8IFF nigel@ngunn.net: --------------
Jeffrey Koehler wrote: > Wouldn't it have to
be, for true cross-satellite operation to occur, the
downlink of one satellite to be on the uplink of
another?
Yes
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:
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com