| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 04.04.08 20:00l 840 Lines 27638 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 57388-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V3 168
Path: IZ3LSV<IW2OHX<IQ0LT<I0TVL<HG8LXL<CX2SA
Sent: 080404/0506Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:57388 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:57388-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Re-purposing ATVs (Graham Shirville)
2. Re: Re-purposing ATVs (Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR])
3. Re: Re-purposing ATVs (Rick Mann)
4. Re: Re-purposing ATVs (richard(AT)g3rwl.demon.co.uk)
5. antenna opinion? (W0DXZ(AT)aol.com)
6. Best HT's for sats? (Bill Dzurilla)
7. Re: Best HT's for sats? (John Marranca, Jr)
8. Re: antenna opinion? (Ronald Nutter)
9. Re: Best HT's for sats? (Ronald Nutter)
10. Re: Best HT's for sats? (Jeff Mock)
11. Re: Best HT's for sats? (Mark Vandewettering)
12. Re: Best HT's for sats? (Jim Jerzycke)
13. relative noise figure meter (Tyler Harpster)
14. Re: Best HT's for sats? (Andrew Glasbrenner)
15. Re: Best HT's for sats? (Bill Dzurilla)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 20:06:36 -0000
From: "Graham Shirville" <g.shirville(AT)btinternet.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Re-purposing ATVs
To: <wa6ilt(AT)amsat.org>, <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <009c01c895c6$38bc58f0$0800a8c0(AT)allgood.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Nice idea but one of the major uses of the ATV is to fill it up with
literally tons of garbage before it is deorbited, I doubt NASA or ESA would
be happy to happy to do away with that facility:)
73
Graham G3VZV
----- Original Message -----
From: <wa6ilt(AT)verizon.net>
To: <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 5:50 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re-purposing ATVs
>I was reading about the Jules Verne docking at the ISS today and all of a
>sudden it occurred to me: instead of using the spacecraft fuel to de-orbit,
>what if it was placed in a higher orbit, and there was a ham package on
>board?
>
> Dave Reinhart
> wa6ilt(AT)amsat.org
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:49:05 -0500
From: "Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]" <kenneth.g.ransom(AT)nasa.gov>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Re-purposing ATVs
To: <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID:
<A2862DA1C49F4145AF6C2A45282940350175A3B2(AT)NDJSEVS21A.ndc.nasa.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Guess the same idea could be tossed to the Russians for their unmanned
Progress vehicle. It is a little bit smaller.
Kenneth - N5VHO
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces(AT)amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces(AT)amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 2:05 PM
To: Jeff Moore; amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Re-purposing ATVs
They already plan to fill it with garbage before undock and deorbit.
"The Jules Verne will remain at the station until August. Once the
station crew has unloaded it and repacked it with trash, the ATV will
undock and begin its final flight into the Earth's atmosphere, where it
will burn up over the Pacific Ocean. "
Source
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/atv_extraordinaire.h
tml
You might convince ESA to linger a bit before deorbit to conduct some
experimentation using amateur radio but I suspect they will want to
clear that double decker bus sized satellite from the sky.
Kenneth - N5VHO
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces(AT)amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces(AT)amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Jeff Moore
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 1:23 PM
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Re-purposing ATVs
They have to fill it with garbage first :-)
Jeff Moore -- KE7ACY
----- Original Message -----
From: <wa6ilt(AT)verizon.net>
I was reading about the Jules Verne docking at the ISS today and all of
a
sudden it occurred to me: instead of using the spacecraft fuel to
de-orbit,
what if it was placed in a higher orbit, and there was a ham package on
board?
Dave Reinhart
wa6ilt(AT)amsat.org
_______________________________________________
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: 3
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 14:40:57 -0700
From: Rick Mann <rmann(AT)latencyzero.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Re-purposing ATVs
Cc: AMSAT-BB Org <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <43B4CE0F-F9AE-4BD9-8604-4C02EB75E3D9(AT)latencyzero.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:06 PM, Graham Shirville wrote:
> Nice idea but one of the major uses of the ATV is to fill it up with
> literally tons of garbage before it is deorbited, I doubt NASA or
> ESA would
> be happy to happy to do away with that facility:)
No reason it can't be filled with garbage, and then parked in an orbit
that would be useful to amateur radio (assuming sufficient fuel
remains after ISS operations). It should have abundant power available
for a powerful transmitter(s), and if they hang on to a little bit of
fuel, it could be deorbited if it ever becomes a problem.
AMSat would have to pay for the radio equipment, and be willing to
lose it at a moment's notice. ESA would have to donate the mass, and
whatever time is necessary to accommodate our use.
The hardest part (aside from the convincing) is probably getting
approval for adequat antennas.
--
Rick
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 23:14:58 +0100
From: richard(AT)g3rwl.demon.co.uk
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Re-purposing ATVs
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <E1JhXhy-000Bpp-Ms(AT)pr-webmail-1.mail.demon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
> I was reading about the Jules Verne docking at the ISS today and all of a
sudden it occurred to me: instead of using the spacecraft fuel to de-orbit,
what if it was placed in a higher orbit, and there was a ham package on board?
What a wonderful idea.
> You might convince ESA to linger a bit before deorbit to conduct some
experimentation using amateur radio but I suspect they will want to clear that
double decker bus sized satellite from the sky.
And what goes up comes down. Bump Jules Verne up to 500km and it'll be back
down at the ISS altitude in about ten years; if theres enough fuel for 1000 km
the chances get better. But they'd probably want an inclination change at the
very least.
73
Richard G3RWL
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 19:40:37 EDT
From: W0DXZ(AT)aol.com
Subject: [amsat-bb] antenna opinion?
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <d45.2691d452.3526c4f5(AT)aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I am going to put up a simple satellite antenna system. Simple means, that I
won't be able to control the polarization, I am going to use linear 144-432
beams. I will be able to rotate AZ of course, AND elevation.
Question is,,, how big of beams (how much gain) do I need for each band. I
don't want the pattern to be so tight I am constantly changing the rotor,,,
would something like 8 ele on 2 and 16 el on 432 do the job? I can use a
pre-amp on receive (separate coax lines) Any recommendations for antennas?
I
just don't want to go through polarization switching.
And,,, would it be any benefit to turn the beams somewhere between
horizontal and vertical,,, at a 45 degree angle, for polarization? Or is that
a waste
of time, or would it make things worse.
Bob W0DXZ DM-33 AZ
**************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.
(http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 17:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Best HT's for sats?
To: fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com
Cc: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <251589.43268.qm(AT)web51102.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
I've made many sat contacts with my VX-2R but am
thinking about upgrading to something with 5 watts
output. I used a borrowed IC-W32A and Swan Island and
it worked fine, although I could not hear my downlink
in full duplex mode, too much desensing. Not sure
full duplex is even worth the extra money, as it seems
that most duplex HTs have a similar desensing problem.
I was thinking about trading in the VX-2R for an FT-60
or a VX-6R, any comments on these or other
sat-friendly HTs?
73, Bill NZ5N
______________________________________________________________________________
______
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 20:38:41 -0400
From: "John Marranca, Jr" <KB2HSH(AT)amsat.org>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID:
<8edcdb130804031738h2bdae8dbrf01e2b1fdfa86456(AT)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
TH-D7A.
Full Duplex...AND APRS capable.
Ordering mine tomorrow.
John KB2HSH
--
_______________________________
John Marranca, Jr
PBX Technician/Shop Steward CWA Local 1122
BN Systems, Inc
Orchard Park, NY
(716)972-2006
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:57:59 -0500
From: Ronald Nutter <rnutter(AT)networkref.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: antenna opinion?
To: W0DXZ(AT)aol.com
Cc: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <47F57D17.9010702(AT)networkref.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I use a 5 element on 2 meters and 9 element on 440. I have mine
permanently parked at 25 degrees because of some ground clutter I have
to clear. I have the 2 meter set for horizontal polarization and 440
set for vertical polarization. I would suggest preamps for both bands.
Ron
KA4KYI
W0DXZ(AT)aol.com wrote:
> I am going to put up a simple satellite antenna system. Simple means, that
I
> won't be able to control the polarization, I am going to use linear 144-432
> beams. I will be able to rotate AZ of course, AND elevation.
>
> Question is,,, how big of beams (how much gain) do I need for each band. I
> don't want the pattern to be so tight I am constantly changing the rotor,,,
> would something like 8 ele on 2 and 16 el on 432 do the job? I can use a
> pre-amp on receive (separate coax lines) Any recommendations for
antennas? I
> just don't want to go through polarization switching.
>
> And,,, would it be any benefit to turn the beams somewhere between
> horizontal and vertical,,, at a 45 degree angle, for polarization? Or is
that a waste
> of time, or would it make things worse.
>
> Bob W0DXZ DM-33 AZ
>
>
>
> **************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.
> (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-
states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 9
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:58:57 -0500
From: Ronald Nutter <rnutter(AT)networkref.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
To: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
Cc: fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <47F57D51.8000305(AT)networkref.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I dont know of any handheld that is full duplex. You might have to use
2 handhelds and a filter on the uhf downlink to cut down the desensing
depending on how close the antennas are.
Ron
KA4KYI
Bill Dzurilla wrote:
> I've made many sat contacts with my VX-2R but am
> thinking about upgrading to something with 5 watts
> output. I used a borrowed IC-W32A and Swan Island and
> it worked fine, although I could not hear my downlink
> in full duplex mode, too much desensing. Not sure
> full duplex is even worth the extra money, as it seems
> that most duplex HTs have a similar desensing problem.
>
> I was thinking about trading in the VX-2R for an FT-60
> or a VX-6R, any comments on these or other
> sat-friendly HTs?
>
> 73, Bill NZ5N
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster
Total Access, No Cost.
> http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 10
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:15:10 -0700
From: Jeff Mock <jeff(AT)mock.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
To: amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <47F5811E.9080507(AT)mock.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I used my old W32A with an Arrow-II on vacation last month and I was
able to hear to the AO-51 downlink while transmitting really well. I can
do the same with a local 70cm/2m repeater. It's pretty good for such an
old HT.
I don't know how much a used W32A goes for, but I think it's a pretty
good radio for portable FM satellites. The only extra features that I
would like are smaller tuning steps and AFC to track doppler on the
downlink, but I don't think any HT can do that.
jeff
Bill Dzurilla wrote:
> I've made many sat contacts with my VX-2R but am
> thinking about upgrading to something with 5 watts
> output. I used a borrowed IC-W32A and Swan Island and
> it worked fine, although I could not hear my downlink
> in full duplex mode, too much desensing. Not sure
> full duplex is even worth the extra money, as it seems
> that most duplex HTs have a similar desensing problem.
>
> I was thinking about trading in the VX-2R for an FT-60
> or a VX-6R, any comments on these or other
> sat-friendly HTs?
>
> 73, Bill NZ5N
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster
Total Access, No Cost.
> http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 3 Apr 2008 18:51:29 -0700
From: Mark Vandewettering <mvandewettering(AT)gmail.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
To: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
Cc: fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <A9540764-E634-47B1-A3D0-6EA17C1A579F(AT)gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Apr 3, 2008, at 5:11 PM, Bill Dzurilla wrote:
> I've made many sat contacts with my VX-2R but am
> thinking about upgrading to something with 5 watts
> output. I used a borrowed IC-W32A and Swan Island and
> it worked fine, although I could not hear my downlink
> in full duplex mode, too much desensing. Not sure
> full duplex is even worth the extra money, as it seems
> that most duplex HTs have a similar desensing problem.
>
> I was thinking about trading in the VX-2R for an FT-60
> or a VX-6R, any comments on these or other
> sat-friendly HTs?
>
> 73, Bill NZ5N
I've been using a TH-D7A and an Arrow antenna. Works
great, no problem with desense, and it's fun to use
the APRS stuff to bounce packets off ISS, Go-32 and NO-44.
It's not the most glamorous, but it works very well for
satellites, and I have no hesitation in recommending it
for that.
I find the full-duplex to be really useful. I put a
splitter on the sound output, and run half to some
cheap earbuds and the other to a voice recorder. That
way, I can record both my voice and others without
difficulty. Scan back through my blog (AT) http://brainwagon.org
for example mp3s.
Mark KF6KYI
>
>
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of
> Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
> http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 12
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 19:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Jerzycke <kq6ea(AT)pacbell.net>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
To: Ronald Nutter <rnutter(AT)networkref.com>, Bill Dzurilla
<billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
Cc: fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <406503.86114.qm(AT)web80607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
The Kenwood TH-D7 is full-duplex, along with several
others (ICom W32a) that are no longer available new.
Jim KQ6EA
--- Ronald Nutter <rnutter(AT)networkref.com> wrote:
> I dont know of any handheld that is full duplex.
> You might have to use
> 2 handhelds and a filter on the uhf downlink to cut
> down the desensing
> depending on how close the antennas are.
>
> Ron
> KA4KYI
>
> Bill Dzurilla wrote:
> > I've made many sat contacts with my VX-2R but am
> > thinking about upgrading to something with 5 watts
> > output. I used a borrowed IC-W32A and Swan Island
> and
> > it worked fine, although I could not hear my
> downlink
> > in full duplex mode, too much desensing. Not sure
> > full duplex is even worth the extra money, as it
> seems
> > that most duplex HTs have a similar desensing
> problem.
> >
> > I was thinking about trading in the VX-2R for an
> FT-60
> > or a VX-6R, any comments on these or other
> > sat-friendly HTs?
> >
> > 73, Bill NZ5N
> >
> >
> >
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
> > You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you
> one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
> > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 13
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 22:39:02 -0400
From: "Tyler Harpster" <tyler881(AT)comcast.net>
Subject: [amsat-bb] relative noise figure meter
To: <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Message-ID: <009201c895fd$0b6bae50$14f23a47(AT)DD9MR751>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Since I didn't pick the correct numbers for last week's big Mega Millions
drawing, I am again looking for cheap equipment.
I remember seeing a home brew "relative" noise figure meter somewhere. It
would not give you an absolute noise figure number, but it would move a
needle one way or another to show how your tweaks are affecting the noise
figure of the device under test.
Does anyone know what this is or where I can find a link to it?
Thanks,
Tyler
KM3G
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 23:00:53 -0400
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
To: "Ronald Nutter" <rnutter(AT)networkref.com>, "Bill Dzurilla"
<billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
Cc: fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <0C216C2AECD24A0ABC243C2FD3EC7FD5(AT)Andrewlaptop>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
The Kenwood D7 is the only full duplex still sold new AFAIK and it is a fine
rig with no desense. If you can find a Yaesu FT-530, it is really good for
FM satellite use, especially because of the subband tune function. Never had
any desense on the two 530s I've had either. FT-470 ain't half bad either,
and I've picked a few up for $100 used in the recent past.
Full duplex is the best way to go, and once you hear the difference, and
learn to use it to benefit with an antenna like the arrow, you'll wonder why
you ever doubted needing it.
73, Drew KO4MA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronald Nutter" <rnutter(AT)networkref.com>
To: "Bill Dzurilla" <billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
Cc: <fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com>; <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 8:58 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
>I dont know of any handheld that is full duplex. You might have to use
> 2 handhelds and a filter on the uhf downlink to cut down the desensing
> depending on how close the antennas are.
>
> Ron
> KA4KYI
>
> Bill Dzurilla wrote:
>> I've made many sat contacts with my VX-2R but am
>> thinking about upgrading to something with 5 watts
>> output. I used a borrowed IC-W32A and Swan Island and
>> it worked fine, although I could not hear my downlink
>> in full duplex mode, too much desensing. Not sure
>> full duplex is even worth the extra money, as it seems
>> that most duplex HTs have a similar desensing problem.
>>
>> I was thinking about trading in the VX-2R for an FT-60
>> or a VX-6R, any comments on these or other
>> sat-friendly HTs?
>>
>> 73, Bill NZ5N
>>
>>
>>
>>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
>> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster
>> Total Access, No Cost.
>> http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 15
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 20:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>, Ronald Nutter
<rnutter(AT)networkref.com>
Cc: fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com, amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org
Message-ID: <568525.54459.qm(AT)web51105.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Andrew,
Can the FT-530 and/or FT-470 work cross-band in
non-duplex mode? I had an IC-W2A (predecessor to the
IC-W32A) and it worked great for full duplex sat
operation, but only in full duplex. That is, there
was no way to turn the 70cm off while transmitting on
2m, so it could only be used with headphones. Granted
that this is the best way to operate the sats, but
sometimes headphones are unavailable or impractical,
so I'd like to at least have the option of working the
sats in non-duplex with the speaker.
One thing to look out for if, like me, you are
interested in a 5 watt HT. Many HTs that are
advertised as "5 watt" will only produce 5 watts if
connected to an external 13v p/s or a special battery,
with the supplied battery giving much less output.
73, Bill NZ5N
--- Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner(AT)mindspring.com>
wrote:
> The Kenwood D7 is the only full duplex still sold
> new AFAIK and it is a fine
> rig with no desense. If you can find a Yaesu FT-530,
> it is really good for
> FM satellite use, especially because of the subband
> tune function. Never had
> any desense on the two 530s I've had either. FT-470
> ain't half bad either,
> and I've picked a few up for $100 used in the recent
> past.
>
> Full duplex is the best way to go, and once you hear
> the difference, and
> learn to use it to benefit with an antenna like the
> arrow, you'll wonder why
> you ever doubted needing it.
>
> 73, Drew KO4MA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ronald Nutter" <rnutter(AT)networkref.com>
> To: "Bill Dzurilla" <billdz.geo(AT)yahoo.com>
> Cc: <fm-satellite(AT)yahoogroups.com>;
> <amsat-bb(AT)amsat.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 8:58 PM
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Best HT's for sats?
>
>
> >I dont know of any handheld that is full duplex.
> You might have to use
> > 2 handhelds and a filter on the uhf downlink to
> cut down the desensing
> > depending on how close the antennas are.
> >
> > Ron
> > KA4KYI
> >
> > Bill Dzurilla wrote:
> >> I've made many sat contacts with my VX-2R but am
> >> thinking about upgrading to something with 5
> watts
> >> output. I used a borrowed IC-W32A and Swan
> Island and
> >> it worked fine, although I could not hear my
> downlink
> >> in full duplex mode, too much desensing. Not
> sure
> >> full duplex is even worth the extra money, as it
> seems
> >> that most duplex HTs have a similar desensing
> problem.
> >>
> >> I was thinking about trading in the VX-2R for an
> FT-60
> >> or a VX-6R, any comments on these or other
> >> sat-friendly HTs?
> >>
> >> 73, Bill NZ5N
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
> >> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you
> one month of Blockbuster
> >> Total Access, No Cost.
> >>
> http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
______
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 168
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
