I had previously used an ELK, with a az/el rotor. Seemed to work fine for ao91, ao92, so50, and fo29.Decided to upgrade to the M2 Leo Pack. It works fine, but frankly no better than my ELK. Is the major. (only?) advantage of the m2 system the circular polarization? If I had to do it again, Im not sure I would have spent nearly $600 for the system, as opposed to my cheaper ELK, but, I thought more is better, any comments?Bob Wa7dxzDm33
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
When things are loud, almost any antenna will work. I think you will find the LEO Pack will shine when you need to work a satellite that's a bit harder to reach. Uplink into AO-85, downlinks from AO-7 mode B, FO-29, etc. As long as you can aim the antennas, larger is pretty much always better, and for satellites, circular is nearly always better than linear.
I've actually not been too impressed with the Elk's pattern, especially outside the 2m band. Been contemplating switching to an Arrow, but like the Elk's configuration where both up and downlink bands in the same polarization (so one doesn't have to do the wrist flipping thing). I also use the antenna at community support events, where I need to have both bands available, and both needing to be vertically polarized. So, the Elk stays, but for at-home satellite operation, I always use the big antennas, circularly polarized.
Greg KO6TH
wa7dxz via AMSAT-BB wrote:
I had previously used an ELK, with a az/el rotor. Seemed to work fine for ao91, ao92, so50, and fo29.Decided to upgrade to the M2 Leo Pack. It works fine, but frankly no better than my ELK. Is the major. (only?) advantage of the m2 system the circular polarization? If I had to do it again, Im not sure I would have spent nearly $600 for the system, as opposed to my cheaper ELK, but, I thought more is better, any comments?Bob Wa7dxzDm33
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. 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
Of course reality trumps theory every time, but the LEO pack circular polarization SHOULD get you more consistent results as a satellite turns during a pass and from one pass to another. Since the LEO pack should have more gain then the Elk, I would also expect that, as KO6TH says, you would have much better luck at low elevations and maybe better reception on weak transmitters like SO-50. And finally you did not say what radio you were using, but I'd guess that you could also turn the power down and get the same results with the LEO pack vs the Elk.
Oh, one other thing: I think that AO-7 actually has a circularly polarized antenna (would have to look up which bands). If you are using that band, you might get much better and you might get much worse behavior depending on the directional match of the Rx vs Tx antenna.
Just a thought: With the LEO Pack, getting the aiming right is more important than with the Elk. I wonder if your rotator might be a bit off, and the better performance of the LEO Pack is being offset by its narrower beam being not aimed quite right.
73,
Burns WB1FJ
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 12:47 PM wa7dxz via AMSAT-BB amsat-bb@amsat.org wrote:
I had previously used an ELK, with a az/el rotor. Seemed to work fine for ao91, ao92, so50, and fo29.Decided to upgrade to the M2 Leo Pack. It works fine, but frankly no better than my ELK. Is the major. (only?) advantage of the m2 system the circular polarization? If I had to do it again, Im not sure I would have spent nearly $600 for the system, as opposed to my cheaper ELK, but, I thought more is better, any comments?Bob Wa7dxzDm33
participants (3)
-
Burns Fisher -
Greg D -
wa7dxz