| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 05.06.08 23:54l 833 Lines 28561 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 8212_CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V3 285
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<DB0GOS<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 080605/2159Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:8212 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:8212_CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna, more info
(Michael Tondee)
2. Re: DO-64 heard over VK (Andrew Glasbrenner)
3. Re: DO-64 heard over VK (john heath)
4. Re: Kenwood THD7AG availability (edcollins(AT)att.net)
5. UNI_TRAC 2003 AND WISP ??? HELP (CWBILL(AT)bellsouth.net)
6. Remoted rotator controller (Scott Townley)
7. Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna (Greg D.)
8. Beyond Telemtry.... (great trouble)
9. SEEDS doing fine (CW) (June 6, 7:50utc) (Henk, PA3GUO)
10. Re: Remoted rotator controller (mvm)
11. Re: Remoted rotator controller (i8cvs)
12. Re: Remoted rotator controller (Lowell White)
13. Rainer, DJ9BV SK (i8cvs)
14. PO-28 (Vincenzo Mone)
15. Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna (i8cvs)
16. Re: beyond telemetry (andy thomas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 15:06:36 -0400
From: "Michael Tondee" <mat_62(AT)netcommander.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna, more
info
To: "AMSAT-BB BBs" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <012f01c8c676$1d01b1b0$6500a8c0(AT)w4hij1>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
My thanks to Sebastian and all the other kind folks who have reponded to my
query. A little more information seems to be in order. My rigs here are an
Icom 820H and a 706 MKIIG. I can test with either. The antenna used to work
when I had a TS-2000X and An ARR preamp. I had to get out of the radio game
awhile and sold both those. In addition to the rigs mentioned above my mast
mount preamp is now an Icom AG-35.
I did do some swapping around of cables between when it worked and now but
I've checked all of that I know to check. The cable between the shack and
preamp reads good with continuity in the center conductor and the shield and
no shorts in between.
If you are familiar with the driven element design on Kent Britains's
"cheap yagi" antennas you will understand that the coax between it and the
receive preamp will read a dead DC short. However, I have disconnected the
coax from the element and I have continuity in the center conductor and
continuity in the shield with no shorts between them..
The behavior of my 820's meter is such that if I key the rig on 70cm on high
power, the needle of the meter pins to the max. It's always been my
experience that this can sometimes be an indication of some type of problem
in the antenna circuit. I don't really wish to leave either rig keyed until
the SWR protection kicks in.
It's not hard to get to the antenna so I guess I'll go over everything
again. Unfortunately there is not a 70cm. repeater within range of my QTH
for me to test with. At least not one with published frequencies that I can
find.
BTW I don't even own a dummy load, HF or otherwise, I know I need one but my
budget is very tight right now and I'm lucky to have the gear I've got. I'm
also kind of a lone wolf, I don't belong to any clubs where I can borrow
equipment. Years ago when I used to work at HRO and needed a meter, I'd just
borrow the store display model overnight! I miss those days...hi hi
Tnx and 73,
Michael, W4HIJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sebastian" <w4as(AT)bellsouth.net>
To: "AMSAT-BB BBs" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 10:20 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna
> Michael, I doubt a 2 meter SWR meter will give you any type of useful
> information for 440. Many are rated for 1.8 Mhz - 148 Mhz or similar.
>
> Before you blame the antenna, take a look at your coax, primarily the
> connectors. Make sure the connectors and the coax don't twist if you
> attempt to move them.
>
> You didn't mention what type of rig you are using. Or how difficult
> it would be for you to get a close look at the antenna. Since it's
> homebrew, whatever system you used to match it, might have moved.
> Consider testing it on the FM part of the band, and see if your rig
> complains.
>
> If it doesn't, then that's your answer. Your tuning method isn't
> working. Or, try using a local 440 repeater and see if a local ham
> will loan you an SWR meter that will work on 440.
>
> 73 de W4AS
> Sebastian
>
> On Jun 3, 2008, at 8:33 PM, Michael Tondee wrote:
>
>> I'm having some problems with a homebrew lineasrly polarized "cheap
>> yagi" for 70cm. I don't have any success hearing myself on VO-52 or
>> AO-7. This antenna used to work reasonably well for both. The way
>> the power out meter on my radio acts, it leads me to believe I may
>> have an SWR issue. Unfortunately I don't own or have access to an
>> SWR meter or anylyzer capable of working at 70Cm.
>> I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark here and ask the bb
>> because I sure don't know. Would it be possible to put my 2 meter
>> SWR meter in the 70cm line and at least get a ballpark figure of
>> SWR? Or would the reading be so far off, it would be useless?
>> I'm not intending to try and tune the antenna in this manner, I just
>> want to get some indication as to if SWR is indeed the problem.
>> I must confess I don't know what the frequency range determining
>> elements of an SWR bridge are. I must have missed that at some point
>> or the other.
>> Any other ways to determine if I have an SWR problem without a
>> meter? It's just not in the budget to buy one right now.
>> Any suggestions are appreciated.
>> Tnx and 73,
>> Michael, W4HIJ
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 15:34:51 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
From: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DO-64 heard over VK
To: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs(AT)tin.it>, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF
<nigel(AT)ngunn.net>, john heath <g7hia(AT)btinternet.com>
Cc: amsat <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID:
<6570364.1212608092406.JavaMail.root(AT)mswamui-
valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Maybe everyone in this discussion should take note that DO-64 has a working
transponder onboard. Should we travel back in time and rescind the Oscar
numbers for DO-17 and UO-11 while we are at it?
73, Drew KO4MA
-----Original Message-----
>From: i8cvs <domenico.i8cvs(AT)tin.it>
>Sent: Jun 4, 2008 2:08 PM
>To: Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF <nigel(AT)ngunn.net>, john heath
<g7hia(AT)btinternet.com>
>Cc: amsat <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DO-64 heard over VK
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel(AT)ngunn.net>
>To: "john heath" <g7hia(AT)btinternet.com>
>Cc: "amsat" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 6:12 PM
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DO-64 heard over VK
>
>> How about stop whinging.
>> If you don't want to know about the "non transponder" sats then edit them
>out of your keps download.
>> Spacetrack allows you to compile a favourites list.
>>
>>
>> john heath wrote:
>> > How about Oscar numbers issued only for satellites with working
>> > transponders.
>> >
>> > 73 John g7hia
>> >
>Hi John, G7HIA
>
>For Oscar numbars issued only for satellites with working transponders
>I suggest to use the "imaginary numbars" as for example OSCAR j73
>
>73" de
>
>i8CVS Domenico
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sent via AMSAT-BB(AT)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
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:02:36 +0100
From: "john heath" <g7hia(AT)btinternet.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: DO-64 heard over VK
To: "Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF" <nigel(AT)ngunn.net>
Cc: amsat <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <001601c8c686$52624b70$4101a8c0(AT)MainPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hi Nigel,
In suggesting we reserve OSCAR numbers for satellites with transponders does
not mean that I have any problems with cubesats and others.
I am certainly not whinging.
Personally, I enjoy monitoring cubesats telemetry regularly, and also have
the privilage of being involved in a UK university cubesat.
The purpose of the mail is simply to set the record straight. I certainly
don't want to create a lot of unwelcome traffic on bb.
Wishing you all the best.
John G7HIA
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:36:38 +0000
From: edcollins(AT)att.net
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Kenwood THD7AG availability
To: joe cassano aka jmario <jmario(AT)fast.net>, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID:
<060520080236.18872.48475134000A5AF3000049B822230650029B0A02D29B9B0EBF9C
02070404010C0B0A(AT)att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Hi All,
I talked to the Kenwood national sales manager at Dayton Hamvention about
the shortage of TH-D7Ag HTs. He told me that one of their parts suppliers had
stopped making some of the ICs and that he doubted if they would produce more
large production runs. Some parts were to become available, however this
would most likely satisfy the outstanding backorders. After that it was
doubtful that anymore TH-D7Ag s would be made. A quick check for the HT at
Dayton turned up some at HRO, AES and R&L. Many other dealers were out of
stock and had units on back order.
The TH-D7A been in production since 1996. There has always been a shortage
of these units and production has seldom kept up with demand. A few years
ago I waited 5 or 6 weeks for one of the radios to be shipped to my dealer.
Lesson: If you want one and find it at a dealer, don't hesitate! Buy it
right away. There will not be any TH-D7As available when current stocks are
sold out.
Ed Collins
N8NUY
Dayton AMSAT Hamvention Coordinator
-------------- Original message from joe cassano aka jmario
<jmario(AT)fast.net>: --------------
> All
>
> I've wanted to purchase a Kenwood THD7AG for several weeks but the place
> that I usually purchase from has been saying (on their web site) that
> the D7 is out of stock for more than a month. I called them and I was
> told that Kenwood is basically noncommittal and perhaps even evasive
> when asked about future THD7 shipments. Did anyone who attended Dayton
> happen to engage any Kenwood reps in a conversation about the THD7? If
> so would you tell us what you heard?
>
> The THD7AG is presently listed on the Kenwoodusa'a web site.
>
> Inquiring minds would like to know what is going on here...
>
> My list of possibles are RoHS compliance issues (aka tin whiskers are in
> your future), someone is trying to avoid the classic Osborne-I to
> Osborne-II sales and marketing debacle prior to introducing a follow on
> to the D7, or perhaps the market is too small to justify continued
> manufacturing...
>
>
> JoeC K3FMA
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB(AT)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
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:50:33 +0000
From: CWBILL(AT)bellsouth.net
Subject: [amsat-bb] UNI_TRAC 2003 AND WISP ??? HELP
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID:
<060520080250.13118.484754790006C1780000333E22193100029B0A02D2089B9A019C
04040A0DBFB4B4B7BDA9BC(AT)att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
HI ALL, TRYING TO SET UP MY NEW UNI_TRAC 2003 WITH MY WISP PROGRAM. HAS
ANYONE TRYED THIS? MY WISP PROGRAM KEEPS TELLING ME THAT THE TWO BIRDS I
PUT IN THE KEPS DATABASE THAT THE GSC. CANNOT FIND THESE SATELLITES, GO-32
AND AO-51. I CHECKED THE DATABASE AND BOTH BIRDS ARE THERE. I AM ENTERNG THE
NORAD 2-LINE ELEMENTS IN THE DATABASE MY UNI_TRAC DIRECTIONS. IF THER IS
CHANGES I HAVE TO DO TO THE WISP PROGRAM IN USING THE UNI_TRAC 2003 I SURE
WOULD THANKFUL FOR SO HELP. BILL [WD4DHJ]...
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 20:51:38 -0700
From: Scott Townley <nx7u(AT)cox.net>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Remoted rotator controller
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20080604204426.027b36a0(AT)pop.west.cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Contemplating my Yaesu G-5400 and not so fond of the idea of running 2x
6x18AWG cables nearly 200'...(more accurately, paying for them).
Has anyone ever put the controller at the antenna base and instead ran the
computer<->controller wires the long distance between the computer
interface and the control box? Seems like it would be a lot cheaper, in
the sense of fewer wires of a smaller gauge, and not so much worry about
voltage drop etc. My setup is low to the ground, so the control box would
be ground-mounted in a weatherproof shelter. The "digital" run would be
the 200' or more, and the "analog" or "power" run only 20' or so. If done
the traditional way these lengths would be reversed.
Or is this a stunningly dumb idea for reasons yet-unknown to me?
Scott Townley NX7U
Gilbert, AZ DM43di
mailto:nx7u(AT)arrl.net
http://members.cox.net/nx7u
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:34:40 -0700
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg(AT)hotmail.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna
To: <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <BLU133-W538D116874494609A646FA9B40(AT)phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
----------------------------------------
> From: rogerkola(AT)aol.com
> To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 08:01:27 -0400
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna
>
> "... The way
>>> the power out meter on my radio acts, it leads me to believe I may
>>> have an SWR issue. Unfortunately I don't own or have access to an
>>> SWR meter or anylyzer capable of working at 70Cm..."
>
> You don't mention what rig you have but many of the modern transceivers have
> High SWR protection circuits and will cut back on the power as evidenced by
> the meter already in the rig in the presence of return power.
Actually, I've seen the reverse - the meter on my Yaesu 767GX seems to read
higher when the match is going bad. Seems like it's reading both the forward
and reverse power and adding them together. So, you get a higher number when
in fact the transmitter is putting out less. Counting some of the the watts
twice.
But, back to the original problem, you might consider making something simple
as a 1/4 wave ground plane antenna, or using the rubber duckie from your HT,
and putting it in place of the suspect one. Think of it as a slightly
radiating dummy load, which it is. Just watch the power rating if you use
your HT antenna.
Greg KO6TH
_________________________________________________________________
Now you can invite friends from Facebook and other groups to join you on
Windows Live? Messenger. Add now.
https://www.invite2messenger.net/im/?source=TXT_EML_WLH_AddNow_Now
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:37:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: great trouble <bigjuniour2(AT)yahoo.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Beyond Telemtry....
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <657919.39655.qm(AT)web52511.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hello,
I almost complete the down link chain to receive telemetry. (feeling good as i
do it 1st time)
Now I am looking forward to get images as well but don't know how to perform
this interesting and valuable task.
Following were the questions that disturbin me
QUESTIONS
How can I receive images?
what are the required equipments necessary to accomplish the task?
There are some satellites which provide images using CCD.
Is it possible to receive and process their images?
Kindly guide me.
Regards,
What lies behind us....&.....what lies before us.......
are tiny matters compared to what lies
within us.
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:59:32 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Henk, PA3GUO" <hamoen(AT)iae.nl>
Subject: [amsat-bb] SEEDS doing fine (CW) (June 6, 7:50utc)
To: <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Cc: pa3guo(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <1298.212.61.85.173.1212652772.squirrel(AT)webmail.iae.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Just a snapshot taken while sat was <5 degrees elevation (437.475MHz)
Seeds-II CW telemetry:
jq1ygu seeds
g401ed964dd42ffe77a08fd000d31ad1a8a649b2ad5ade1100000001000100015803b64034
jq1ygu seeds g401ed99c9d3fffe6950d0c7b3e3138170a4c99aac2acb11000000010001
Henk, PA3GUO
http://www.qsl.net/pa3guo
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 11:25:54 +0200
From: mvm <amvm(AT)skynet.be>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Remoted rotator controller
To: Scott Townley <nx7u(AT)cox.net>, amvm(AT)skynet.be, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <4847B122.6060902(AT)skynet.be>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Scott,
I assume you are using RS232 from the PC to the controller? It would be
challenging to have a 200' serial connection on copper. The first RS232
specification talks about 50' maximum length at 19k2 but in practice
this can be higher when speed is dropped. However, worth a try and if it
doesn't work you can consider RS232 extenders. These typically use Cat5
cable.
BR,
--
/\/\arc
Scott Townley schreef:
> Contemplating my Yaesu G-5400 and not so fond of the idea of running 2x
> 6x18AWG cables nearly 200'...(more accurately, paying for them).
> Has anyone ever put the controller at the antenna base and instead ran the
> computer<->controller wires the long distance between the computer
> interface and the control box? Seems like it would be a lot cheaper, in
> the sense of fewer wires of a smaller gauge, and not so much worry about
> voltage drop etc. My setup is low to the ground, so the control box would
> be ground-mounted in a weatherproof shelter. The "digital" run would be
> the 200' or more, and the "analog" or "power" run only 20' or so. If done
> the traditional way these lengths would be reversed.
> Or is this a stunningly dumb idea for reasons yet-unknown to me?
>
> Scott Townley NX7U
> Gilbert, AZ DM43di
> mailto:nx7u(AT)arrl.net
> http://members.cox.net/nx7u
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB(AT)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
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 12:06:21 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(AT)tin.it>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Remoted rotator controller
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>, "Scott Townley" <nx7u(AT)cox.net>
Message-ID: <003301c8c6f3$ceb0b960$0201a8c0(AT)tin.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Townley" <nx7u(AT)cox.net>
To: <amsat-bb(AT)AMSAT.Org>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 5:51 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Remoted rotator controller
> Contemplating my Yaesu G-5400 and not so fond of the idea of running 2x
> 6x18AWG cables nearly 200'...(more accurately, paying for them).
> Has anyone ever put the controller at the antenna base and instead ran the
> computer<->controller wires the long distance between the computer
> interface and the control box? Seems like it would be a lot cheaper, in
> the sense of fewer wires of a smaller gauge, and not so much worry about
> voltage drop etc. My setup is low to the ground, so the control box would
> be ground-mounted in a weatherproof shelter. The "digital" run would be
> the 200' or more, and the "analog" or "power" run only 20' or so. If done
> the traditional way these lengths would be reversed.
> Or is this a stunningly dumb idea for reasons yet-unknown to me?
>
> Scott Townley NX7U
> Gilbert, AZ DM43di
> mailto:nx7u(AT)arrl.net
> http://members.cox.net/nx7u
>
Hi Scott, NX7U
Theoretically it should work but are you sure that your antennas will always
moving in AZ and EL according to your computer program or are you obliged
to go time to time upstairs over the roof just in doubt to verify the
situation ?
When the control box is normally installed in the shack you run wires that
are 24 Vac for the motors and wires that are 0 to 5 V dc for the
potentiometers.
If you install the control box over the roof you must run a 200' cable
between the rear 8 pin External Control DIN connector and your PC but pins
4-2-5-3 are the high impedance wires connected to your PC to switch the
relays RY1-RY2-RY3-RY4 located into the control box.
Only less than 1 mA between each pin 4-2-5-3 and ground is enough by
your PC to activate each relay so that the above long run wires are more
suscettible to get noise or RF interference or low insulation by the umidity
disturbing the system operation.
Best 73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 07:42:35 -0500
From: "Lowell White" <whiteld(AT)usa.net>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Remoted rotator controller
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <658mFempj7548S09.1212669755(AT)cmsweb09.cms.usa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
In my "someday stack" I have about 50 fiber-optic to DB-15 opto-isolator
transceivers. I have flirted with the idea of using them and (some long run
of) fiber optic cable (when found cheap enough) to run remote control for
rotors. This does, of course, presume AC power is available at the tower and
that there has been appropriate interface creation for either end. If someone
wants to give that a go I will provide a pair or two of the transceivers.
Kind regards,
Lowell
K9LDW
------ Original Message ------
Received: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 06:09:25 AM CDT
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(AT)tin.it>
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>, "Scott Townley" <nx7u(AT)cox.net>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Remoted rotator controller
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Townley" <nx7u(AT)cox.net>
> To: <amsat-bb(AT)AMSAT.Org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 5:51 AM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Remoted rotator controller
>
> > Contemplating my Yaesu G-5400 and not so fond of the idea of running 2x
> > 6x18AWG cables nearly 200'...(more accurately, paying for them).
> > Has anyone ever put the controller at the antenna base and instead ran
the
> > computer<->controller wires the long distance between the computer
> > interface and the control box? Seems like it would be a lot cheaper, in
> > the sense of fewer wires of a smaller gauge, and not so much worry about
> > voltage drop etc. My setup is low to the ground, so the control box
would
> > be ground-mounted in a weatherproof shelter. The "digital" run would be
> > the 200' or more, and the "analog" or "power" run only 20' or so. If
done
> > the traditional way these lengths would be reversed.
> > Or is this a stunningly dumb idea for reasons yet-unknown to me?
> >
> > Scott Townley NX7U
> > Gilbert, AZ DM43di
> > mailto:nx7u(AT)arrl.net
> > http://members.cox.net/nx7u
> >
> Hi Scott, NX7U
>
> Theoretically it should work but are you sure that your antennas will
always
> moving in AZ and EL according to your computer program or are you obliged
> to go time to time upstairs over the roof just in doubt to verify the
> situation ?
>
> When the control box is normally installed in the shack you run wires that
> are 24 Vac for the motors and wires that are 0 to 5 V dc for the
> potentiometers.
>
> If you install the control box over the roof you must run a 200' cable
> between the rear 8 pin External Control DIN connector and your PC but pins
> 4-2-5-3 are the high impedance wires connected to your PC to switch the
> relays RY1-RY2-RY3-RY4 located into the control box.
>
> Only less than 1 mA between each pin 4-2-5-3 and ground is enough by
> your PC to activate each relay so that the above long run wires are more
> suscettible to get noise or RF interference or low insulation by the
umidity
> disturbing the system operation.
>
> Best 73" de
>
> i8CVS Domenico
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB(AT)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
>
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:30:37 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(AT)tin.it>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Rainer, DJ9BV SK
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <001401c8c710$576ca040$0201a8c0(AT)tin.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi All,
I just received the sad news that Rainer Bertelsmeier, DJ9BV , has become
silent key.
He was a famous yagi designer and the formal editor of DUBUS magazine.
for many years.
To get more information about Rainer's activity put only DJ9BV on Google
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:50:36 +0200
From: "Vincenzo Mone" <vimone(AT)alice.it>
Subject: [amsat-bb] PO-28
To: "Amsat - BBs" <amsat-bb(AT)Amsat.org>
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAABj5ABzur+1LmLYjZR+cX9PCgAAAEAAAAK7+Z4xpv9pFtXY1
G7VxKtABAAAAAA==(AT)alice.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hi to the list,
I would like to know if the PO-28 is still alive and if it can be heard.
I just had a pass with an elevation of 90 degreese but could not heard
nothing on 429.950 Mhz.
Anybody can give me more information abt it?
Thanks in advance.
73 de Enzo IK8OZV
EasyLog 5 BetaTester
EasyLog PDA BetaTester
WinBollet BetaTester
D.C.I. CheckPoint Regione Campania
Skype: ik8ozv8520
***************************************
***** GSM +39 338 9749786 *****
***** SMS +39 338 9749786 *****
***** FAX +39 328 7244294 *****
*** 2nd e-mail: vimone(AT)tin.it ***
***************************************
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:44:12 +0200
From: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(AT)tin.it>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb(AT)AMSAT.Org>
Message-ID: <003001c8c733$c4625fa0$0201a8c0(AT)tin.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Heisler -K3VDB-" <ceheisler(AT)comcast.net>
To: "i8cvs" <domenico.i8cvs(AT)tin.it>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 1:41 AM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Possible SWR problems with 70cm antenna
> At 01:56 PM 6/4/2008, you wrote:
>
> >To measure the VSWR with accuracy you can build by your self a set of
> >inexpensive directional couplers ranging from 100 MHz to 10 GHz using
> >semirigid coax cables as described into the RSGB Microwave Handbook
Volume 2
> >pages 10.13 to 10.18
> >
> >73" de
> >
> >i8CVS Domenico
>
> Hello Domenico
>
> I am interested in building the directional coupler that you
> mentioned above
>
> Thanks for any help
> Charlie
> K3VDB
> FM19qv
>
Hi Charlie K3VDB
Unfortunately all messages sent to you and to other people via (AT)comcast.net
are bouncing back because apparently there is not compatibility between
(AT)comcast.net and (AT)tin.it
Please send me another email address.
73" de
i8CVS Domenico
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 18:38:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: andy thomas <andythomasmail(AT)yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: beyond telemetry
To: amsat <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <730804.9898.qm(AT)web25608.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Friend,
AS far as I know, the only satellite sending SSTV at the moment is SEEDS. You
will need to doppler track the saetllite and use a downloaded program like
MMSSTV. Receive in FM, good luck!
You will see some historic images from Mir on my website
http://www.andythomas.eu
and the system is not set up yet on the ISS.
Weather satellites are outside the Amateur bands, on 136 MHZ or near, and need
a wide IF bandwidth receiver and a different progra-rm -this is not sstv.
best wishes
andy G0SFJ
__________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 3, Issue 285
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
