The gain increase for the antenna would be deltaG = (12/4)^2 = 9, or in dB = 10Log(9) = 9.5 dB. You get this gain in Tx and again in Rx so the total gain = 19 dB. So this means that the spacecraft will need to be 32-19 = 13 dB stronger than AO-40. So perhaps the S/C antenna would be larger and maybe the Tx higher power?
Ed - KL7UW
At 08:16 PM 7/2/2008, w7lrd@comcast.net wrote:
How would my 12 foot paraclips work for this exercise? 73 Bob W7LRD
-- "if this were easy, everyone would be doing it"
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com
The moon is roughly 360,000 to 400,000 km away. By comparison, AO-40 had a apogee of about 60,000km. At 2.4Ghz, that's about 16db difference
each way.
Put AO-40 at the moon, and if I'm doing this right, you'd need about 32 times the ground station antenna both coming and going to get
with a few db.
I'm gonna need a bigger rotor for sure! I'm sure smarter folks
will check my
math....
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe" To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" Cc: "Trevor" ; "AMSAT BB" Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
what would a sample average link budget be?
Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
As far as I can recall we are pursuing both Eagle and the P4 opportunity equally, concentrating on common elements until the details are ironed out. Neither has been identified as a primary or secondary objective.
I agree a package on a lunar orbiter would be neat, but also that it is not the best use of what volunteers we have. We need more folks
to step up
to do things, AND we need to make better use of them when they do.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Trevor" To: "AMSAT BB" Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:53 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
--- On Wed, 2/7/08, Dave hartzell wrote:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=25839 http://asmo.arc.nasa.gov/
Wouldn't it be fun to have a transponder on this! ;-)
Fun yes, but dare I say it, a waste of precious Volunteer resources.
All lunar orbits are inherently unstable and will impact after a couple of years. The link budget requirements would not attract a mass user base.
I suspect the number of Technically Capable volunteers is already being thinly stretched in trying to provide both the primary
objective Phase-IV
Lite (funded by Federal Government dollars) and the secondary objective the Eagle HEO.
73 Trevor M5AKA
Not happy with your email address?. Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html
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
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
Hi Ed, KL7UW
If we put AO40 at a distance of 400.000 km instead of 60.000 km from the earth the increase of isotropic attenuation at 2400 MHz is about 16 dB Supposing that the AO40 antennas are looking at the earth with the same squint angle try to remember with how many dB of (S+N)/N you was normally receiving the downlink of the S2 transponder. You should remember that the AO40 antenna for the S2 transponder was a RHCP Helix of only 5 turns with an estimated gain of 8 dBic By the way AO40 was also equipped with the S1 transponder using a Short-Backfire antenna RHCP designed by ON6UG with a gain of 18 dBic Unfortunately the S1 TX has been non-functional since 2001 aug 13 but when the S1 transponder was connected to the 18 dBic Short-Backfire the S1 downlink was really about 10 dB over the S2 transponder. If ipotetically we put AO40 at 400.000 km using the S1 transponder we gain 10 dB over the S2 transponder and this is like to have reduced the isotropic attenuation to 16 - 10 = 6 dB To compensate for the rest of 6 dB it is only necessary to double the diameter of the receiving dish. In my case if I increase the diameter of my dish from 1.2 to 2.4 meters i.e from 4 to 8 ft I will receive the S1 transponder from 400.000 km with the same signal level of the S2 transponder from a distance of 60.000 km
The problem here is the uplink depending on what band we are using for it. If we use the L band 1268 MHz then the difference in the isotropic attenuation between 400.000 km to 60.000 km is again about 16.5 dB If I want to put into the satellite receiver at 400.000 km the same signal level that I put on it at 60.000 km I am in trouble because the AO40 23 cm antenna was already a 18 dBic gain dish and so to compensate for the above increase of path loss for the uplink the only way is to increase the power or the antenna gain or both at the ground station. If I use a yagi array's every time I double the numbar of yagi's I gain 3 dB but only in theory and every time I double the power I gain 3 dB as well. In my situation in order to put the same signal level into the satellite receiver at 400.000 km and 60.000 km I should increase my power from the actual 120 watt at 1268 MHz to 240 watt to get 3 dB and I should enlarge the actual array of 4 x 23 element yagi to 16 x 23 element yagi to gain another 6 dB and in total 3+6= 9 dB but in the above situation I will be still 16.5 - 9 = 7.5 dB weeker than at 60.000 km
By the way I was looking at the many pictures taken on my Spectrum Analyser when AO40 was operational and using a 4 ft dish helix feed and an overall noise figure of 0.7 dB for my receiving system I see that the AO40 General Beacon was at 20 dB of (S+N)/N most of the time while the average of the SSB traffic was swinging in the range from 10 dB picking to 20 dB over the noise and sometime over 20 dB with LEILA.
In conclusion if AO40 is transmitting from 400.000 km using the S 1 transponder with the 18 dBic Short-Backfire we gain 10 dB over the S2 Helix antenna and if I double my dish from 4 ft to 8 ft I gain another 6 dB so that 10+6= 16 dB and the path loss for downlink is totally compensated. In this condition the General Beacon of AO40 would be received unchanged at 20 dB over the noise but the average of the SSB traffic would be received weeker and weeker because the most part of the users would not be able to increase the EIRP to compensate for the 16 dB more path loss in the uplink at 1268 MHz
In addition if I improve my own 1268 MHz array from 4 x 23 (24 dBi) to 8 x 23 element yagi (+3 dB) and using 240 watt (+3 dB) than I would compensate the path loss in uplink by only 6 dB and my SSB translated signal in comparison to 60.000 km will be received weeker by 16 - 6 = 10 dB but if before it was received 20 dB over the noise it still will be audible in SSB about 10 dB over the noise.
With only my actual 4 x 23 (24 dBi) element yagi and the actual 120 watt I shall receive my own CW from 400.000 km at about 20-16= 4 dB over the noise.
Without to increase my receiving dish from 4 ft to 8 ft I will loose 6 dB and my CW signal will be received with a (S+N)/N= - 2 dB but this is not a problem on CW because skilled operators are able to receive by ears signal levels that are even weeker.
Best 73" de
i8CVS Domenico
----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Cole" kl7uw@acsalaska.net To: "AMSAT BB" amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:28 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
The gain increase for the antenna would be deltaG = (12/4)^2 = 9, or in dB = 10Log(9) = 9.5 dB. You get this gain in Tx and again in Rx so the total gain = 19 dB. So this means that the spacecraft will need to be 32-19 = 13 dB stronger than AO-40. So perhaps the S/C antenna would be larger and maybe the Tx higher power?
Ed - KL7UW
At 08:16 PM 7/2/2008, w7lrd@comcast.net wrote:
How would my 12 foot paraclips work for this exercise? 73 Bob W7LRD
-- "if this were easy, everyone would be doing it"
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com
The moon is roughly 360,000 to 400,000 km away. By comparison, AO-40
had a
apogee of about 60,000km. At 2.4Ghz, that's about 16db difference
each way.
Put AO-40 at the moon, and if I'm doing this right, you'd need about
32
times the ground station antenna both coming and going to get
with a few db.
I'm gonna need a bigger rotor for sure! I'm sure smarter folks
will check my
math....
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe" To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" Cc: "Trevor" ; "AMSAT BB" Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
what would a sample average link budget be?
Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
As far as I can recall we are pursuing both Eagle and the P4
opportunity
equally, concentrating on common elements until the details are
ironed
out. Neither has been identified as a primary or secondary
objective.
I agree a package on a lunar orbiter would be neat, but also that it
is
not the best use of what volunteers we have. We need more folks
to step up
to do things, AND we need to make better use of them when they do.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Trevor" To: "AMSAT BB" Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:53 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
--- On Wed, 2/7/08, Dave hartzell wrote:
>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=25839 >http://asmo.arc.nasa.gov/ > >Wouldn't it be fun to have a transponder on this! ;-) > Fun yes, but dare I say it, a waste of precious Volunteer
resources.
All lunar orbits are inherently unstable and will impact after a
couple
of years. The link budget requirements would not attract a mass
user
base.
I suspect the number of Technically Capable volunteers is already
being
thinly stretched in trying to provide both the primary
objective Phase-IV
Lite (funded by Federal Government dollars) and the secondary
objective
the Eagle HEO.
73 Trevor M5AKA
OK. You provided much more info about the path link parameters than was originally given.
I find it interesting that you ran 120w into 4x 23-elem yagis to obtain S/N of 20-dB on mode-LS with S2 on AO-40. I ran 9.5w to a single 20-dBi loop-yagi and obtained 10-dB S/N on SSB on S2
That seems like quite a difference. Your EIRP=120x251 = 30,120w; My EIRP=9.5x200 = 1900w a ratio of 15.8:1 or 12-dB So rounding off it seems that our experience on AO-40 matches.
I guess running 240w on 1296 is a bit beyond the norm for satellite operators though it about right for eme. You could keep 120w and increase dish to 16-feet to get the same results, but most would balk at puttinng up such a dish.
It would seem that a better solution would be having a Moon orbiter with more EIRP or bigger receiving antenna.
Perhaps the uplink solution would be better at higher frequencies, but isotropic path loss increases in step with dish gain increase in freq. balancing out any improvement in S/N.
of course running a narrowband mode takes care of the problem, whether it be CW or WSJT (or some FEC digital voice mode).
73 Ed
At 05:14 PM 7/3/2008, i8cvs wrote:
Hi Ed, KL7UW
If we put AO40 at a distance of 400.000 km instead of 60.000 km from the earth the increase of isotropic attenuation at 2400 MHz is about 16 dB Supposing that the AO40 antennas are looking at the earth with the same squint angle try to remember with how many dB of (S+N)/N you was normally receiving the downlink of the S2 transponder. You should remember that the AO40 antenna for the S2 transponder was a RHCP Helix of only 5 turns with an estimated gain of 8 dBic By the way AO40 was also equipped with the S1 transponder using a Short-Backfire antenna RHCP designed by ON6UG with a gain of 18 dBic Unfortunately the S1 TX has been non-functional since 2001 aug 13 but when the S1 transponder was connected to the 18 dBic Short-Backfire the S1 downlink was really about 10 dB over the S2 transponder. If ipotetically we put AO40 at 400.000 km using the S1 transponder we gain 10 dB over the S2 transponder and this is like to have reduced the isotropic attenuation to 16 - 10 = 6 dB To compensate for the rest of 6 dB it is only necessary to double the diameter of the receiving dish. In my case if I increase the diameter of my dish from 1.2 to 2.4 meters i.e from 4 to 8 ft I will receive the S1 transponder from 400.000 km with the same signal level of the S2 transponder from a distance of 60.000 km
The problem here is the uplink depending on what band we are using for it. If we use the L band 1268 MHz then the difference in the isotropic attenuation between 400.000 km to 60.000 km is again about 16.5 dB If I want to put into the satellite receiver at 400.000 km the same signal level that I put on it at 60.000 km I am in trouble because the AO40 23 cm antenna was already a 18 dBic gain dish and so to compensate for the above increase of path loss for the uplink the only way is to increase the power or the antenna gain or both at the ground station. If I use a yagi array's every time I double the numbar of yagi's I gain 3 dB but only in theory and every time I double the power I gain 3 dB as well. In my situation in order to put the same signal level into the satellite receiver at 400.000 km and 60.000 km I should increase my power from the actual 120 watt at 1268 MHz to 240 watt to get 3 dB and I should enlarge the actual array of 4 x 23 element yagi to 16 x 23 element yagi to gain another 6 dB and in total 3+6= 9 dB but in the above situation I will be still 16.5 - 9 = 7.5 dB weeker than at 60.000 km
By the way I was looking at the many pictures taken on my Spectrum Analyser when AO40 was operational and using a 4 ft dish helix feed and an overall noise figure of 0.7 dB for my receiving system I see that the AO40 General Beacon was at 20 dB of (S+N)/N most of the time while the average of the SSB traffic was swinging in the range from 10 dB picking to 20 dB over the noise and sometime over 20 dB with LEILA.
In conclusion if AO40 is transmitting from 400.000 km using the S 1 transponder with the 18 dBic Short-Backfire we gain 10 dB over the S2 Helix antenna and if I double my dish from 4 ft to 8 ft I gain another 6 dB so that 10+6= 16 dB and the path loss for downlink is totally compensated. In this condition the General Beacon of AO40 would be received unchanged at 20 dB over the noise but the average of the SSB traffic would be received weeker and weeker because the most part of the users would not be able to increase the EIRP to compensate for the 16 dB more path loss in the uplink at 1268 MHz
In addition if I improve my own 1268 MHz array from 4 x 23 (24 dBi) to 8 x 23 element yagi (+3 dB) and using 240 watt (+3 dB) than I would compensate the path loss in uplink by only 6 dB and my SSB translated signal in comparison to 60.000 km will be received weeker by 16 - 6 = 10 dB but if before it was received 20 dB over the noise it still will be audible in SSB about 10 dB over the noise.
With only my actual 4 x 23 (24 dBi) element yagi and the actual 120 watt I shall receive my own CW from 400.000 km at about 20-16= 4 dB over the noise.
Without to increase my receiving dish from 4 ft to 8 ft I will loose 6 dB and my CW signal will be received with a (S+N)/N= - 2 dB but this is not a problem on CW because skilled operators are able to receive by ears signal levels that are even weeker.
Best 73" de
i8CVS Domenico
----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Cole" kl7uw@acsalaska.net To: "AMSAT BB" amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:28 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
The gain increase for the antenna would be deltaG = (12/4)^2 = 9, or in dB = 10Log(9) = 9.5 dB. You get this gain in Tx and again in Rx so the total gain = 19 dB. So this means that the spacecraft will need to be 32-19 = 13 dB stronger than AO-40. So perhaps the S/C antenna would be larger and maybe the Tx higher power?
Ed - KL7UW
At 08:16 PM 7/2/2008, w7lrd@comcast.net wrote:
How would my 12 foot paraclips work for this exercise? 73 Bob W7LRD
-- "if this were easy, everyone would be doing it"
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" glasbrenner@mindspring.com
The moon is roughly 360,000 to 400,000 km away. By comparison, AO-40
had a
apogee of about 60,000km. At 2.4Ghz, that's about 16db difference
each way.
Put AO-40 at the moon, and if I'm doing this right, you'd need about
32
times the ground station antenna both coming and going to get
with a few db.
I'm gonna need a bigger rotor for sure! I'm sure smarter folks
will check my
math....
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe" To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" Cc: "Trevor" ; "AMSAT BB" Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
what would a sample average link budget be?
Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
As far as I can recall we are pursuing both Eagle and the P4
opportunity
equally, concentrating on common elements until the details are
ironed
out. Neither has been identified as a primary or secondary
objective.
I agree a package on a lunar orbiter would be neat, but also that it
is
not the best use of what volunteers we have. We need more folks
to step up
to do things, AND we need to make better use of them when they do.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message ----- From: "Trevor" To: "AMSAT BB" Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:53 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
>--- On Wed, 2/7/08, Dave hartzell wrote: > >>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=25839 >>http://asmo.arc.nasa.gov/ >> >>Wouldn't it be fun to have a transponder on this! ;-) >> >Fun yes, but dare I say it, a waste of precious Volunteer
resources.
> >All lunar orbits are inherently unstable and will impact after a
couple
>of years. The link budget requirements would not attract a mass
user
>base. > >I suspect the number of Technically Capable volunteers is already
being
>thinly stretched in trying to provide both the primary
objective Phase-IV
>Lite (funded by Federal Government dollars) and the secondary
objective
>the Eagle HEO. > >73 Trevor M5AKA
participants (2)
-
Edward Cole -
i8cvs