| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 04.07.08 00:50l 478 Lines 17276 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 15016_CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V3 331 (1/2)
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<ON0AR<HS1LMV<CX2SA
Sent: 080703/2252Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:15016 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:15016_CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... (Dave hartzell)
2. Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... (Anthony Monteiro)
3. Re: Best type of coax to use ... in ... AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol
3, Issue 326 (Jim Wright)
4. Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... (w7lrd(AT)comcast.net)
5. Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... (Tony Langdon)
6. Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... (Edward Cole)
7. Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter... (Edward Cole)
8. Re: Commercial Mode L Antenna sources (Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
9. Comment on ASMO (American Student Moon Orbiter) (James Whitfield)
10. Re: Comment on ASMO (American Student Moon Orbiter) (Joe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 19:09:54 -0700
From: "Dave hartzell" <hartzell(AT)gmail.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
To: "Amsat BB" <amsat-bb(AT)AMSAT.Org>
Message-ID:
<1c096fd70807021909w5e0d0694g82843f448b03e0ec(AT)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Drew-
Your math is feasible (e.g. too lazy to check it), but with advances
in digital comms and personal computing, forward error correcting
schemes can result in a huge "digital gain" of 6, 12 even 20+ dB
towards the link budgets.
That is of course if you don't want to do SSB voice... ;-)
73,
Dave
AF6KD (ex n0tgd)
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Andrew Glasbrenner
<glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com> wrote:
> 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" <nss(AT)mwt.net>
> To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>
> Cc: "Trevor" <m5aka(AT)yahoo.co.uk>; "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
> 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" <m5aka(AT)yahoo.co.uk>
>>>To: "AMSAT BB" <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
>>>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 <hartzell(AT)gmail.com> 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(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
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 2
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:42:26 -0400
From: Anthony Monteiro <aa2tx(AT)comcast.net>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>, "Joe"
<nss(AT)mwt.net>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <20080703024255.8732gt100EK2U(AT)mailbox5.ucsd.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 08:28 PM 7/2/2008, Andrew Glasbrenner wrote:
>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....
>
>7
Hi Drew,
Let me add a little about antenna size. You are correct, the path loss is
around 16 dB higher each way. This is about 40 times higher path loss.
Antenna gain is proportional to area (ignoring efficiency)
so to get 40 times the gain you would need a little more than
6 times the diameter for a dish antenna. So, if you could receive AO-40
on 2.4GHz with a 1 meter dish, you would need something around
a 6 meter diameter dish to receive AO-40 if it were on the moon.
73,
Tony AA2TX
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:34:08 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jim Wright <wrightjrjr(AT)verizon.net>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best type of coax to use ... in ... AMSAT-BB
Digest, Vol 3, Issue 326
To: hasan schiers <schiers(AT)netins.net>
Cc: joe cassano aka jmario <jmario(AT)fast.net>, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID:
<17328236.9113751215056048315.JavaMail.javamailuser(AT)localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Make sure you get the correct N connector. You may have to trim some
strands out of the center conductor if you get the wrong connector. I
had the problem with a local Ham store that had connectors for RG8/RG11.
Amphenol makes one for 9913 specifically.
73,
Jim
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 12:45 PM, hasan schiers wrote:
> I use them all the time, and have not had to use "trimming
> dimensions". It is very easy to see where to trim with these two piece
> connectors, just put the cable end near the connector and it's pretty
> obvious where to cut things (much like a PL-259). I have found them to
> be very acceptable N connectors and have done dozens of them without a
> trimming chart.
...hasan, N0AN
HARVEY VORDENBAUM wrote:
> Someone mentioned the 2-piece type N connector for 9913 type coax.?
> Does anyone have the trimming dimensions for those?? I had to make up
> my own and wonder how good they are.
> 73, Harvey
> K5HV
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "joe cassano aka jmario"
> <jmario(AT)fast.net <mailto:jmario(AT)fast.net> ?
<mailto:jmario(AT)fast.net> >
> To: <amsat-bb(AT)AMSAT.Org <mailto:amsat-bb(AT)AMSAT.Org> ?
> <mailto:amsat-bb(AT)AMSAT.Org> >
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 12:38 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best type of coax to use ... in ... AMSAT-BB
> Digest, Vol 3, Issue 326
>
>
> Installing a classic clamp type N connector like the Amphenol 82-202
> (UG-21D/U) on flexible coax with a real copper center conductor
> (RG-8,RG-213) is both easier and has a much higher probability of
> success than installing the common PL-259.? You only have to make one
> easily accessible solder connection.
>
> Take a look at
> http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/assemblyInstructions/280.pdf
> <http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/assemblyInstructions/280.pdf> ?
> <http://www.amphenolrf.com/products/assemblyInstructions/280.pdf> ?to
> see
> what is involved in attaching classic clamp style N connector.
>
> You also might want to read the reviews listed here:
> http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/7
> <http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/7> ?
> <http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/7> ?before you make any purchase
> decisions.
>
>
> Regards,
> JoeC - K3FMA
>
> ??
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 12
>> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:49:00 -0500
>> From: Ronald Nutter <rnutter(AT)networkref.com
>> <mailto:rnutter(AT)networkref.com> ? <mailto:rnutter(AT)networkref.com> >
>> Subject: [amsat-bb]? Best type of coax to use between preamps and
>> antennas
>> To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org <mailto:amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org> ?
>> <mailto:amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org> Message-ID:
>> <48697EFC.5010100(AT)networkref.com
>> <mailto:48697EFC.5010100(AT)networkref.com> ?
>> <mailto:48697EFC.5010100(AT)networkref.com> >
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> After problems I had on Field Day in trying to operate the
>> satellites, I
>> am looking to upgrade the coax I use between the preamps and the
>> antennas.? I am using 9913FX from the IC-910H and the preamps.? I had
>> been using RG Mini 8/U for the connection between the preamps and
>> antennas.? Should I also use 9913FX between the preamps and the
>> antennas?? The run between the radio and the preamp is 50 ft.? The
>> run
>> from the preamp to the antennas is about 10 - 15 ft depending on
>> where I
>> set the antennas up.? I am concerned about how flexible the 9913FX
>> would
>> be in terms of the antennas rotating back and forth.? I was planning
>> on
>> ordering the cables pre-made from CableXperts since working with N
>> connectors isnt my strong point and dont want to worry about my
>> soldering and having a good connection on both ends of the cable.
>>
>> Any suggestions appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ron
>> KA4KYI
>>
>>
>> ????
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB(AT)amsat.org. <mailto:AMSAT-BB(AT)amsat.org> ?
> <mailto: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
> <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> ?
> <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB(AT)amsat.org. <mailto:AMSAT-BB(AT)amsat.org> ?
> <mailto: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
> <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> ?
> <http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.134 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1529 -
> Release Date: 7/1/2008 7:23 PM
> ??
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.134 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1529 - Release Date: 7/1/2008
7:23 PM
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB(AT)amsat.org. <mailto:AMSAT-BB(AT)amsat.org> ?
<mailto: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
<http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb> ?
<http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:16:10 +0000
From: w7lrd(AT)comcast.net
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>, "Joe"
<nss(AT)mwt.net>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID:
<070320080416.493.486C5289000E3B79000001ED22155786740B9D04C999(AT)comcas
t.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
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(AT)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(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
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 03 Jul 2008 14:57:31 +1000
From: Tony Langdon <vk3jed(AT)gmail.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: NASA's American Student Moon Orbiter...
To: Anthony Monteiro <aa2tx(AT)comcast.net>, "Andrew Glasbrenner"
<glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>, "Joe" <nss(AT)mwt.net>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <486c5c48.29578c0a.5ea5.68aa(AT)mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 12:42 PM 7/3/2008, Anthony Monteiro wrote:
>Antenna gain is proportional to area (ignoring efficiency)
>so to get 40 times the gain you would need a little more than
>6 times the diameter for a dish antenna. So, if you could receive AO-40
>on 2.4GHz with a 1 meter dish, you would need something around
>a 6 meter diameter dish to receive AO-40 if it were on the moon.
But if, instead of SSB, you used a mode which was able to cope with a
16dB weaker signal (plenty of weak signal data modes to choose from),
then the 1m dish would work.
73 de VK3JED
http://vkradio.com
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
