Oh, boy, I just gotta open my big yap on this one.... I don't mean to insult anyone here, but C'mon, Steve! I have a 350 watt amp and a 30-element CP antenna, and I have a 750 Watt amp easily "available" to me. I also have access to a 1500 Watt amp, although I'd get nervous running that much to the antenna. Does this mean I should drag it out for Field Day? I don't think so, and I'm sure (well, at least I *hope*) that you didn't mean to imply that in the article. I know there will be some big guns on the FM satellites; there always are on Field Day. And I know the FM sats get overloaded on Field Day, and making your one, 100-point bonus contact can be very trying. Been there, done that, and it's no fun, especially for people trying it with an HT and Arrow-type antenna. It's one thing to run your FM mobile rig at 35, 50, 75 Watts or whatever it will do, but the blanket statement "As Much Power As You Have Available" is bit over-the-top. 73, Jim KQ6EA
--- "Ford, Steve, WB8IMY" sford@arrl.org wrote:
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