| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 28.11.08 14:44l 723 Lines 23954 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 52987_CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V3 616
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<HB9TVW<DB0ANF<CX2SA
Sent: 081128/1240Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:52987 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:52987_CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: AO-51 mode L/U (Alan P. Biddle)
2. Re: First SAt QSO (Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ)
3. Re: soundcard modems for pactorIII (Oscar Diez)
4. Receiveing satellites beacon with soundcard! (nader omer)
5. Re: soundcard modems for pactorIII (JoAnne Maenpaa)
6. Re: LVB tracker (WILLIAMS MICHAEL)
7. Re: BBsat Call for ideas (Greg D.)
8. SO-50 eludes me (Mark Lunday, WD4ELG)
9. On soundcard modems for pactorIII and the current economic
issues (David Donaldson)
10. Re: LVB tracker ( Dirgantara R YF0EEE)
11. Re: SO-50 eludes me (Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ)
12. Re: soundcard modems for pactorIII (Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ)
13. Re: SO-50 eludes me (John Marranca, Jr)
14. Re: SO-50 eludes me (francesco messineo)
15. Re: SO-50 eludes me (Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:04:08 -0600
From: "Alan P. Biddle" <APBIDDLE@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-51 mode L/U
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <409F36893FE444B5B019B8FB0A012927@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
After you get your computer control working, highly recommended for both you
and the people you work, you will need to tweak or at least verify your
uplink. Most ham gear is pretty good about frequency and stability, but the
local oscillator frequencies may not be quite on, and few hams have digital
counters which are highly accurate at a GHz or so. If accessible, the LO
output can be measured, usually more accurately. Also, the rigs in the
satellites drift a small amount.
What I have done is take advantage of times when I was the only one on mode
LU or LS by changing the uplink by +/- 5 kHz at minimum usable TX power.
Usually one will sound better than the other. So move in that direction 2-3
kHz and repeat, reducing the TX power as needed. You should be able to box
the best uplink frequency quickly. Then you can either change the uplink
frequency in your control program, or adjust the LO frequency stored in your
program. I do the latter. Of course, always be alert for someone else
wanting to use the bird.
I have a system roughly equivalent to Drew's and once I get out of the
horizon clutter it only takes 5 watts or so for full quieting under most
conditions.
Alan
WA4SCA
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:28:38 +0000
From: Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ <gordonjcp@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: First SAt QSO
To: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <492F1F16.5080006@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Sebastian wrote:
> I don't know the history of SO-50, but my guess is that it was decided
> to use a PL tone, because of QRM from non-licensed hams using high
> powered 'cordless phones' sold in some countries, and perhaps some
Is that why I've sometimes heard DTMF and ringing tones on AO-51? I
just put it down to general repeater abuse idiocy...
Gordon
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 23:30:10 +0100
From: "Oscar Diez" <hbottiki@xxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: soundcard modems for pactorIII
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <005a01c950df$b5fd1140$0b01a8c0@xxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
George Henry wrote:
> Perhaps you are unaware that, even after you purchase an SCS Pactor modem,
you must purchase a license to use the Pactor III protocol... and trying to
circumvent the licensing requirement is probably illegal just about anywhere
in the world, not just in the U.S.
>
> You *have* heard of intellectual property rights, haven't you?
Yes, sure we have!
But in this very particular case the owner of these rights can only enforce
them in those countries where they have got granted patents and they are
still active/maintained (periodic fees paid to local patent offices).
I am not aware of the list of countries in which they filed their PACTOR III
related patents, but since SCS is a relatively small company I would guess
they only cover the most important countries, where possible competition
could pop-up or where most of the users would be located: e.g. USA & Europe
and eventually for strategic reasons Japan, China and very selectively a few
more (= cost, cost, cost)...
It should be therefore easy for one of those very talented Russian or
Ukranian programmers to write a software PACTOR III modem variant and
publish it on a Russian web-server to make it publicly available and this
even fully legal in case there is no patent granted in Russia (which I think
is quite unlikely that it was filed there)
Then only the people downloading it in the States or Europe (or other
patented countries) for instance and starting to use it are infringing the
patents (not the programmer/distributor in this case) and SCS could
theoretically sue them. (but would become extremely complicated to manage in
real life due to various factors)
Actually it would be a very similar story to some of the MP3-Encoders
floating around on internet - infringing some German Fraunhofer Institute
audio compression patents in many countries.
Sorry for this off-topic posting, but I could not leave the bold IP rights
statement of George uncommented, hi !
Oscar, DJ0MY
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:38:09 -0800 (PST)
From: nader omer <st2nh@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Receiveing satellites beacon with soundcard!
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <906829.88439.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
HI
?
Many friends ask about my setup for receiving satellites TLM by
soundcard AWGPE and UISS software's at speed of 9600 bps.
?
I think most of the data at 9600 bps ruin or not reach the sound card
if you use interface with audio isolation transformer (1:1) or interface with
Optical? isolation IC?as in most of the ready made brand interfaces!
(still I'm testing this hypothesis with homemade interface and commercial
brand interfaces ).
?
Actually you do not need interface at all? to receive TLM data!
Just take the (sound!) (data) from the your Rig data socket
(Make sure it's pin for 9600) and feed it direct to the soundcard mike input.
Configure the AGWPE to work at 9k6 bps.
(If you face any problem delete the? ini file and start again)
Make sure your Rig at 9600 bps rate.
AWGPE do all the show behind screen.
If your rig has AFC put it on.
?
If you have a simple soundcard keying circuit, key your
Rig and listen to your transmission at 9600 your will hear
dumb soft sound .Compare that to 1200 with other setup to AWGPE
to see if AWGPE works ok at 9600 speed .you need other radio to listen.
You can make several copy of the AWGPE each with deferent setup
?for baud speed. I'm using none pro edition of awgpe . Make many copies on the
desktop? and play with them. Avoid using the same AWGPE to set many com
and on air baud rate on the same copy. I have here 4 copies one for 1200 bps
one for 9k6 bps other for TNC .
?
I'm using IC-910 with AFC that help to correct Doppler and did a great job
for receiving Data. OS is XP .CPU 500.soundcard from Creative.
Antenna Homebrew 12 EL?UHF Yagi vertical polarization with PRE-AMP
?
I wish if WISP?and ?EchoTLM softwares work under AWGPE !!
?
more info at my webside link
http://www.st2nh.com/satellites
?
73 de Nader st2nh
www.st2nh.com
?
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:24:05 -0600
From: "JoAnne Maenpaa" <k9jkm@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: soundcard modems for pactorIII
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <001901c950f8$01ace7b0$0506b710$@xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On the topic of software piracy, Oscar DJ0MY mentioned ...
> owner of these rights can only enforce them in those countries ...
> It should be therefore easy for one of those very talented ...
> ... programmers to write a software PACTOR III modem variant and
> publish it on a [overseas] web-server to make it publicly available
> ... blah blah blah ...
Oh yes, so easy to justify if you skip all of the steps. Usually one needs
to decide WHAT one is doing before one decides HOW one will do it.
WHAT: Steal software that is protected under legal rights
HOW: Just do it overseas whether other amateurs in USA or overseas
condone stealing and bragging about it on amsat servers.
Most would stop at WHAT ... the stealing ...
> could not leave the bold IP rights statement ...
And, I could not leave the bold stealing IP rights statement uncommented.
There are so many good people on the -bb, where do these others come from?
--
73 de JoAnne K9JKM
k9jkm@xxxxx.xxx
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 18:16:06 -0800 (PST)
From: WILLIAMS MICHAEL <k9qho6762@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LVB tracker
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <84625.36269.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Sir:
?
I modified an old Wilson WR-500 rotor (azimuth) to work with the LVB tracker.
?
I believe any rotor?could be?homebrewed to work.
?
GL
?
Mike (K9QHO)
?
AMSAT 33589
?
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:25:51 +0700
From: " Dirgantara R YF0EEE" <enggi1401@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb]? LVB tracker
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <00c601c95061$69f34450$1c3d3a72@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi everyone
any body use LVB tracker use KR-500 and KR-400 rotator,
how about a performance and accuracy for elevasi and azimuth ?
73 de YF0EEE
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 18:16:40 -0800
From: "Greg D." <ko6th_greg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: BBsat Call for ideas
To: <cathrynm@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BLU133-W38F17F78F742C53569139A9040@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Ah, but how does one know that a time slot is not being used? With many
stations on the ground, there is a good chance that multiple stations will
pick the same "empty" slot to be theirs, and we're back to collisions.
So, this is what I was talking about when I suggested, as essentially you do,
to work on a prototype of the ACP messaging system that is being proposed for
Eagle. There are two significant technical challenges that I see, and the
protocol used to facilitate fair and resilient access to the satellite by all
the ground stations it overflies is one. Fair is making sure that everyone
has an equal share of the satellite, and resilient is that as the load on the
satellite goes up, the whole thing doesn't degrade to being unusable. I
haven't checked, but has the Eagle team published their protocol for doing
this? Perhaps we can start with that, simplifying as much as we can to make
it fit the limited cubesat environment.
The other challenge is the modulation system, which will be an interesting
study in engineering tradeoffs. As one poster noted, the more power you put
into the electronics, the less you have for the downlink transmitter. Better
modulation schemes can compensate for a lower transmit power, but if it takes
more power to do that modulation, its a wonder if you come out ahead...
Greg KO6TH
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:52:19 -0800
> From: cathrynm@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
> CC: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: BBsat Call for ideas
>
> How about this.
>
> 1. On the satellite there's a 9600 FSK regenerating repeater.
> If it hears a bit, it sends a bit without any other smarts.
> 2m up, 440 down.
>
> 2. Also there's a clock. It puts out a tick 8 times
> per second.
>
> 3. For the ground stations, we design a simple
> TDMA system. Each user gets a time slot for
> transmitting into the satellite. Let me see, 9600
> baud is 960 characters a second, so we break
> that into 8 blocks of 100 character or so every second and
> for up to 16 users for a 2 second time block. Enough
> bytes to do a small ax25 packet, or maybe we just
> stew up something new. Callsign + checksum + data.
>
> 3. Then we just make it a big chat room in the sky. The
> thing flies over, you type on your computer and then
> your software uses an unused time slot for
> sending the data. Everyone can read your message,
> and can chat back to you.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. 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
_________________________________________________________________
Color coding for safety: Windows Live Hotmail alerts you to suspicious email.
http://windowslive.com/Explore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_safety_11
2008
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:52:41 -0500
From: "Mark Lunday, WD4ELG" <mlunday@xx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] SO-50 eludes me
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <000201c9511d$86ca0de0$945e29a0$@xx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have worked every bird several times: AO7, AO16, AO27, AO51, FO29, VO52.
But I have never worked SO50. Tonight I had a pass DIRECTLY overhead. I
tried the standard initiation call with 74.4 CTCSS, and then calling with 67
Hz. Never heard a thing. In fact, I don't think I have ever heard SO50.
I triple-checked the Doppler, turned down the squelch, turned up the RF
gain. Not a peep. Even with only my Arrow yagi fixed at 30 degrees EL, I
should have heard something. All I heard was the rush of static. I know
this bird is lower orbit and smaller power out, but I should hear something,
right?
Mark Lunday
WD4ELG
wd4elg@xxxx.xxx
http://wd4elg.net
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 23:58:31 -0600 (CST)
From: "David Donaldson" <wb7dru@xxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] On soundcard modems for pactorIII and the current
economic issues
To: "'JoAnne Maenpaa'" <k9jkm@xxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <024401c9511e$7abc4f80$01fea8c0@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
"On the topic of software piracy, Oscar DJ0MY mentioned ...
There are so many good people on the -bb, where do these others come from?
--
73 de JoAnne K9JKM
k9jkm@xxxxx.xxx "
All,
I want to respond to this whole thing but all I see is that it would be best
to just delete it. But I must for the following reason beg that we DROP IT!
1) PACTOR III is not a practical protocol for ham sats so extended
discussion is not appropriate
2) 99.9999% of the nice people on this bb do not code protocol emulators so
we don't need to hear about stealing over priced technology (even if it's
fine German engineering).
3) A simple question was asked about sound card with P-III and we are now
beating each over the head.
In the US tomorrow is Black Friday so lets all help the economy and buy
something we don't need...and not talk about this subject anymore...
:>)
Flames on satellite topics are always welcome (well sort of) :>)
Dave
WB7DRU
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. 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
--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 15:09:06 +0700
From: " Dirgantara R YF0EEE" <enggi1401@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LVB tracker
To: <k9qho6762@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <001f01c95130$95e62da0$efc5517c@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
hi Mike
thanks for the response, I want to try LVB tracker, just for now i have
KR-400 and KOPEAK rotator
73 de YF0EEE
----- Original Message -----
From: "WILLIAMS MICHAEL" <k9qho6762@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 9:16 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LVB tracker
Sir:
I modified an old Wilson WR-500 rotor (azimuth) to work with the LVB
tracker.
I believe any rotor could be homebrewed to work.
GL
Mike (K9QHO)
AMSAT 33589
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:25:51 +0700
From: " Dirgantara R YF0EEE" <enggi1401@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] LVB tracker
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <00c601c95061$69f34450$1c3d3a72@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi everyone
any body use LVB tracker use KR-500 and KR-400 rotator,
how about a performance and accuracy for elevasi and azimuth ?
73 de YF0EEE
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. 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: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 08:24:44 +0000
From: Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ <gordonjcp@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SO-50 eludes me
To: "Mark Lunday, WD4ELG" <mlunday@xx.xx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <492FAACC.1040300@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Mark Lunday, WD4ELG wrote:
> I have worked every bird several times: AO7, AO16, AO27, AO51, FO29, VO52.
>
> But I have never worked SO50. Tonight I had a pass DIRECTLY overhead. I
> tried the standard initiation call with 74.4 CTCSS, and then calling with 67
> Hz. Never heard a thing. In fact, I don't think I have ever heard SO50.
>
> I triple-checked the Doppler, turned down the squelch, turned up the RF
> gain. Not a peep. Even with only my Arrow yagi fixed at 30 degrees EL, I
> should have heard something. All I heard was the rush of static. I know
> this bird is lower orbit and smaller power out, but I should hear something,
> right?
>
It's not used very much, and I think they two-PL-tone thing puts people
off. I've been able to get in and work it, confirmed by my gf at the
far end of the garden with another aerial and receiver, but found that
there's just no-one else coming out to play.
Gordon
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 08:30:50 +0000
From: Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ <gordonjcp@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: soundcard modems for pactorIII
To: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <492FAC3A.7060801@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
JoAnne Maenpaa wrote:
> On the topic of software piracy, Oscar DJ0MY mentioned ...
Who mentioned software piracy? In nearly all of the world *outside* the
US, it's perfectly legal to implement PACTOR III. I think Japan is the
only other country with software patents. There may be some European
countries that attempt to have software patents, but under EU law they
shouldn't.
Here in the UK, we do not have software patents. You can't patent
imaginary property.
>> owner of these rights can only enforce them in those countries ...
>> It should be therefore easy for one of those very talented ...
>> ... programmers to write a software PACTOR III modem variant and
>> publish it on a [overseas] web-server to make it publicly available
>> ... blah blah blah ...
>
> Oh yes, so easy to justify if you skip all of the steps. Usually one needs
> to decide WHAT one is doing before one decides HOW one will do it.
>
> WHAT: Steal software that is protected under legal rights
You can't steal imaginary property, either. You can make an unlicenced
copy of it, but that's not the same thing. If you physically went into
a shop and stole a PACTOR III modem, that would be different.
> HOW: Just do it overseas whether other amateurs in USA or overseas
> condone stealing and bragging about it on amsat servers.
>
> Most would stop at WHAT ... the stealing ...
>> could not leave the bold IP rights statement ...
>
> And, I could not leave the bold stealing IP rights statement uncommented.
I'll care about SCS and their patent when they stop "stealing" GPLed
software.
> There are so many good people on the -bb, where do these others come from?
No idea where you come from. The planet Ad-Hominem, perhaps?
Gordon
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 03:35:20 -0500
From: "John Marranca, Jr" <KB2HSH@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SO-50 eludes me
To: amsat-bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<8edcdb130811280035n44de02bfu86c6a380c075caff@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Good Morning, all...
Also, it's worth mentioning that AT TIMES, it seems as though the downlink
frequency is off...by as much as 5 KC.
Anyone else notice that...or am I going crazy?
John KB2HSH
--
_______________________________
John Marranca, Jr
PBX Technician/Shop Steward CWA Local 1122
BN Systems, Inc
Orchard Park, NY
(716)972-2006
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:42:36 +0100
From: "francesco messineo" <francesco.messineo@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SO-50 eludes me
To: "Mark Lunday, WD4ELG" <mlunday@xx.xx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<d9f2bc20811280042h7500ef78n94e29c218b917708@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hello
On 11/28/08, Mark Lunday, WD4ELG <mlunday@xx.xx.xxx> wrote:
> I have worked every bird several times: AO7, AO16, AO27, AO51, FO29, VO52.
same here, plus FO-20, UO-14 and maybe some other I don't remember now...
>
> But I have never worked SO50. Tonight I had a pass DIRECTLY overhead. I
> tried the standard initiation call with 74.4 CTCSS, and then calling with
67
> Hz. Never heard a thing. In fact, I don't think I have ever heard SO50.
are you working full duplex? I always found SO-50 very easy to work
(well at least to hear myself back), the 74.4 tone must be sent for
one or two seconds continuously then switch to 67 Hz tone. I work with
handeld homemade dual V/U yagi usually and I noticed that this bird is
particularly sensitive to polarization, so I need to rotate often the
yagi to find the best signal. I didn't try recently anyway, beeing on
other bands :-)
>
> I triple-checked the Doppler, turned down the squelch, turned up the RF
> gain. Not a peep. Even with only my Arrow yagi fixed at 30 degrees EL, I
> should have heard something. All I heard was the rush of static. I know
> this bird is lower orbit and smaller power out, but I should hear
something,
> right?
if nothing is wrong with the bird yes, you should at least hear
yourself. Activity was low even in Europe on this bird.
73
Francesco IZ8DWF
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 08:51:01 +0000
From: Gordon JC Pearce MM3YEQ <gordonjcp@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: SO-50 eludes me
To: "John Marranca, Jr" <KB2HSH@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <492FB0F5.4090902@xxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
John Marranca, Jr wrote:
> Good Morning, all...
>
> Also, it's worth mentioning that AT TIMES, it seems as though the downlink
> frequency is off...by as much as 5 KC.
>
> Anyone else notice that...or am I going crazy?
>
I put it down to Doppler weirdness, but yes I have noticed that I've had
to tune a good bit below - more than I'd expect. Since my HT only has
5kHz steps, it's quite hard to judge exactly how many "notches" to
retune by, but on a high pass I've found that AO-51 is three up, three
down from its nominal centre frequency and SO-50 is two up, four down...
Gordon
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx. 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 616
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
