[amsat-bb] Re: Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO
Sometimes it pays to go on vacation (600+ back e-mail). The lunar link analysis has been done on Amsat-bb at least 4 or 5 times in the last ten years. I have a spreadsheet program that can be used for any point to point communication in space (plug in your own numbers) http://www.kl7uw.com/MROCalc.xls Since we assume to ride to the Moon with NASA (manned flight) it could be buried on the Moon with only antenna exposed (solves some of the temperature and radiation issues). Make it the emergency comm system for the astronauts like ARISS provides on the ISS (selling point to NASA). Make it a digital passband or multi-channel system. NOT a single-channel FM repeater like AO-51 (consider have the world's hams trying to use that channel at the same time!). Microwave only make sense. Maybe use the CC-rider concept from Eagle. Now it has Emcomm potential. as well. With the 2.5 second RTLT time delay text modes make more sense. Digital voice at minimum. 30 to 50w uplink transmitter would do it (play with the calculator, above). Try for 2-foot dish on the earth station. Moon gravity is 1/6 earth and no wind (light weight dish will work). Or perhaps a electronically steared panel array. Auto-tracking by carrier from NASA DSN tracking network (let them have 3-4 channels exclusive use). 73, Ed - KL7UW At 08:43 PM 7/2/2009, Greg D. wrote: >Hi Kenneth, et al, > >Would this be a good opportunity to dust off the >low data rate digital package that was planned >for Eagle? If I recall, it was to be >multi-service and operate at relatively low s/n >levels. Replace the antennas, of course, and >the radio power amps. The resulting Earth >station should still be quite affordable. > >Just a thought, > >Greg KO6TH > > > > From: kenneth.g.ran...@nasa.gov > > To: ka1...@yahoo.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org > > Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 21:29:47 -0500 > > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO > > > > I realize this is still very early in the > dreaming stage but it would be nice to start > seeing some realistic proposals soon. How about > starting with a blank worksheet that outlines > the desirements and requirements. This would > give folks some specifics to address. > > > > *LUNAR System* > > Modulation type: > > Mode: > > Power source: > > Lunar transmitter (type, output power and band): > > Lunar TX antenna (type and gain): > > Lunar receiver (type and band): > > Lunar RX antenna (type and gain): > > Lunar controller (type and capability): > > > > Delivery deadline for flight certified hardware to be launched: > > Length of time the system is expected to operate: > > Periods that the system is expected to be available for use: > > > > Once you have some general ideas as to what > the items are then you will have a good idea of > the total weight, size and what it will cost to > buy, build and certify for spaceflight. It > would also be nice to know what sort of station > equipment would be needed to use this lunar system. > > > > *EARTH Station* > > Description of minimal Earth station capable > of operation through above mentioned lunar system: > > Transmitter (type, output power and band): > > TX antenna (type and gain): > > Receiver (type and band): > > RX antenna (type and gain): > > Antenna tracking system: > > > > The above should allow for a realistic guess > at the number of users willing to and capable of operating through the system. > > > > Kenneth > > > > From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org > [amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On Behalf Of MM [ka1...@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:14 PM > > To: amsat-bb@amsat.org > > Subject: [amsat-bb] Moon can cost less than HEO/GEO > > > > High orbit launch prices > > > > It is hard to find exact values for the price > per kilo to a geo-stationery orbit. I did find > a few old numbers on the web suggesting that > around the year 2000 prices were approximately > 25,000 to 35,000 USD per kilo. I can only > assume it will cost more todays 2009 > dollars. If we were to build our own > Geo-stationary satellite and were able to keep > the weight down to the same weight of AO-40 > (244 kilos), that would only cost us $8.5 USD > million in launching fees (plus > inflation). That is not including the cost of > the satellite. A ballpark Geo-stationary > amateur radio satellite and launching fees > would be in the 20-40 million-dollar range per satellite (SWAG). > > > > If you have an extra 40 million kicking > around then go ahead and build us a Geo > satellite. Or if you work at Huges and can talk > them into attaching a Micro Satellite to the > next geo satellite for Free great, go for it. > > > > I cant afford that and I do not know anyone > at Huges, so I am looking into the piggyback > options. Let some other company pay the big > bucks for the flight and navigation and just tag along for the ride. > > > > In this case NASA wants to send Un-
[amsat-bb] Re: AO-7???
On Tue, July 7, 2009 03:41, w7...@comcast.net wrote: > Hello Hi Bob, > To all you AO-7 fans. We appear to have a sick bird. We should feel > blessed in having such a well performing satellite for several years, > considering it is older than some of it's users. The audio is distorted > and cw sounds bad, running absolute minimum power. I used AO-7 yesterday evening and all seems well except the normal AO-7 gargle. But when you take this in consideration and don't use to must power or talk the fast is it still a nice bird to use. > Any thoughts or suggestions are solicited. > > 73 Bob W7LRD > > Seattle 73's PE0SAT / JO21ho ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] FT-530 Wanted
I'm looking for a Yaesu FT-530 in working condition to be used with an Arrow as a loan AO-51 station by DXpeditions in Southern Africa. Dies anyone have one that isn't being used at a reasonable cost? I can make arrangements for it to be hand-carried down to me in about ten days. 73 - Hal ZS6WB ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] GJTRACKER Version 1.06, July 7, 2009
Hello! Thanks to the thoughtful feedback from Codrut, YO3DMU, I have learned that the GJAZEL.dat file generated by previous versions of GJTRACKER have shown the azimuth for the DX station instead of the HOME station. This of course is only noticed by somebody who is using an automatic tracking program to obtain aiming data from this file, which is updated every minute when GJTRACKER is run in REAL TIME mode. Codrut wrote such an automatic antenna tracking program, and I am grateful to him for bringing this error to my attention. The corrected version 1.06 of GJTRACKER does now correctly transfer the HOME STATION azimuth and elevation to the GJAZEL.dat file: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj/GJTRACKER.zip GL and DX to all! VY 73, Lance -- Lance Collister, W7GJ (ex: WN3GPL, WA3GPL, WA1JXN, WA1JXN/C6A, ZF2OC/ZF8, E51SIX) P.O. Box 73 Frenchtown, MT 59834 USA QTH: DN27UB TEL: (406) 626-5728 URL: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj 2m DXCC #11/6m DXCC #815 Interested in 6m EME? Ask me about subscribing to the MAGIC BAND EME email reflector! ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream)
>> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly >> legal like any other radio. It all boils down to >> use. If you use it for setting up a one-way >> systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is >> clearly illegal. If you use it as part of your >> overall local communications network of amateur >> radio volunters it is just one more tool in the >> tool box. > > Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is > that most pager transmissions to an individual are > illegal under §97.111(b), as it is a "one way" > transmission that, in most cases, would not > qualify under the "legal" list. Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day? When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one way, until the person gets his system going and responds. In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY TWO-WAY amateur network. There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the radio art. >> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who >> have nothing better to do than nit-pick ways >> to prevent other hams from developing useful >> applications of technology. A pager is simply >> the text-to-user device integrated into the >> normal local 2-way amateur radio communications >> system. > > The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't > be used beyond QSTs, telemetry, or "necessary" > emergency communications. Could I get away with > setting up such a system? Likely. Do I foot to > stand on when my local OO comes knocking? > Not so much. Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution... >> An amateur satellite would make a great downlink >> to these pagers. Again, the goal should simply >> be, any message, any time, anywhere >> using any device to any user by callsign alone. Bob, WB4APR ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Fw: Re: Re: ILN... Is this our future ride to the
One landing site will be on the western limb of moon near the equator, the 2nd will be in the NE highlands. Both locations will exprience 2 weeks of day and 2 weeks of night. 73, Armando, N8IGJ >Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 14:20:31 CDT >From: k0vty >Subject: [amsat-bb] Fw: Re: Re: ILN... Is this our future ride to the >moon? MM >To: amsat-bb@amsat.org >Message-ID: <20090706.122112.11225.13...@mailpop04.vgs.untd.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >I agree with John on the need for more data: >Also the attached below suggests we might need to know more about any >location >selected on the moon. >How deep the dust >How rocky >How illuminated and when. >The differences between the poles and non poles areas. ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] FT-736R won't send CW
I posted this to the 736R forum but have not received any good answers. I know I must be missing something obvious but I can't get my FT-736R to work in CW mode. I plug in the same key I use with my FT-767GX, press the CW button, turn on the VOX, press down the key and nothing happens. Rig works fine on SSB and FM. Before I open up the case and dig in, what am I missing?? Thanks! Al W8KHP ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bob Bruninga wrote: *snip* We'll agree to disagree regarding your take of the rules as almost everyone else did on APRSSIG. ;) > There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one > way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I > think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't > see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one > can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the > radio art. Considering that they've recently ruled on whether contesters should give blanket "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad to rule on something interesting and relevant. :) >>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better >>> to do than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing >>> useful applications of technology. A pager is simply the >>> text-to-user device integrated into the normal local 2-way >>> amateur radio communications system. >> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond >> QSTs, telemetry, or "necessary" emergency communications. Could I >> get away with setting up such a system? Likely. Do I foot to stand >> on when my local OO comes knocking? Not so much. > > Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution... Then the solution has presented itself. Get a ruling from the FCC regarding the use of transmissions to receive-only devices such as pagers. Then we can finally put this issue to rest and if anyone comes knocking regarding the legality of these transmissions, we can have something concrete to cite. Again, I'd love to set up something like this, but I'd be hard pressed to spend a chunk of money on a system that could be taken down if someone files a complaint to the FCC. Let's take any further discussion about this offline. - -- Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA bbj innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJKU2ejAAoJEAQiWVsfSvVvhxwH/29Y5oXeLMTfZXholTV4gSdF IQmEBb3wBQbZK/V9ltjNQZhVnH1senvo8M1eYH/Cb60H3e+3bimuj1awAEZc+ACX EIuUI+l88+vABjjkv0YGzES3tDobFPMIgyP1pUWdlbrG3c8ZRBUxu3dFUbYWNMaB zothv8yGChMIFF+S60h/StmNpA4lEKm+J4hBsHlFhoBhjiX0kVD3G6IOxZGworIa RNwCwbQ4M1NNG62hp3a8YWF3y7qgjO6hTaq2hz3hTx9ktb4ajyCeMZYesNXByQ2A eFepP7fNTTD4ga9wVTX5xZeQ9+saREFxU0NcFS/GeCkWeAwy9FcJczfJWBVnha0= =AgEy -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this I think part 97 is vauge and vauge for a reason What we need is to setup a confrance call or something so we can get a well written letter together and get it off to someone who can make a ruleing at the FCC Skype, echolink, dstar or something where those that are interested can all join in - Define a system and descuss the possablities of doing call sign routing, sending the pages up to a satellite ect ect But before "we" put a lot of time and effort and money into this I think we need a ruleing I know for a fact that our local repeater is cabable of doing 2 tone paging - and was in use back when I was very young and not a ham - the elders of the local club say it was able to send alerts for weather, pages for people to get on the radio, ect. It was all done with tones at the time - "our" pagers are far more advanced and can display the text of whatever No one in the club can tell me why they stopped using pagers - a couple of the guys thought it was because cell phones became small and able to be carried in your hand. But at around the same time they stopped paging, kantronics also stopped modify pagers for 2 meters, and I think they stopped making the tncs that were able to do POCSAG - so my thinking was that a rule had changed making pagers illegal in the ham bands. Or at very least questionable. From the kantronics point of view the may not have been selling many of them and just didn't want to put the time and resources into making them anymore. But something happended - As I said our local repeater is cabable of doing two tone - it was built like that from the beginning We need to setup something and get as many people as we can write up a well written paper and get a ruleing. That is bottom line on it - I am on the fence as far as if it is legal or not - on one hand an agrument can be made for telemetery - which is aloud - on the other hand pagers can be used to send one way personal pages which is where I am unclear I think as we see here agurements can be made on both sides. Which is why we need a ruleing. When rules are written this vauge some one needs to decide and stand by the decision LeRoy, KD8BXP http://www.HamOhio.com --Original Message-- From: Ben Jackson To: Bob Bruninga Cc: kd8...@aol.com Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: [amsat-bb] Re:dream) Sent: Jul 7, 2009 11:20 AM -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bob Bruninga wrote: *snip* We'll agree to disagree regarding your take of the rules as almost everyone else did on APRSSIG. ;) > There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one > way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I > think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't > see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one > can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the > radio art. Considering that they've recently ruled on whether contesters should give blanket "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad to rule on something interesting and relevant. :) >>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better >>> to do than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing >>> useful applications of technology. A pager is simply the >>> text-to-user device integrated into the normal local 2-way >>> amateur radio communications system. >> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond >> QSTs, telemetry, or "necessary" emergency communications. Could I >> get away with setting up such a system? Likely. Do I foot to stand >> on when my local OO comes knocking? Not so much. > > Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution... Then the solution has presented itself. Get a ruling from the FCC regarding the use of transmissions to receive-only devices such as pagers. Then we can finally put this issue to rest and if anyone comes knocking regarding the legality of these transmissions, we can have something concrete to cite. Again, I'd love to set up something like this, but I'd be hard pressed to spend a chunk of money on a system that could be taken down if someone files a complaint to the FCC. Let's take any further discussion about this offline. - -- Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA bbj innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJKU2ejAAoJEAQiWVsfSvVvhxwH/29Y5oXeLMTfZXholTV4gSdF IQmEBb3wBQbZK/V9ltjNQZhVnH1senvo8M1eYH/Cb60H3e+3bimuj1awAEZc+ACX EIuUI+l88+vABjjkv0YGzES3tDobFPMIgyP1pUWdlbrG3c8ZRBUxu3dFUbYWNMaB zothv8yGChMIFF+S60h/StmNpA4lEKm+J4hBsHlFhoBhjiX0kVD3G6IOxZGworIa RNwCwbQ4M1NNG62hp3a8YWF3y7qgjO6hTaq2hz3hTx9ktb4ajyCeMZYesNXByQ2A eFepP7fNTTD4ga9wVTX5xZeQ9+saREFxU0NcFS/GeCkWeAwy9FcJczfJWBVnha0= =AgEy -END PGP SIGNATURE- Sent on the Now Ne
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream)
But traditionally we've always transmitted to receive only devices. In the early days, you had a general coverage receiverand a seperate crystal controlled transmitter with, in the days of battery supplies, nothing connecting the two. They are definately both one way only devices. And where in the rules does it say that the reply to a transmission has to be instant. It rarely was using the AX25 packet network. Whilst with packet or TOR there is usually an ACK packet, that's for housekeeping and not communication between the stations. A reply tomorrow to a message today is valid. Ben Jackson wrote: Get a ruling from the FCC regarding the use of transmissions to receive-only devices ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
No we don't. The FCC are obviously happy to allow us to do what we do now. If you stir up trouble and get things banned, there are going to be an awful lot of pissed amameurs after your arse. kd8...@aol.com wrote: > Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this I think part 97 is vauge and vauge for > a reason > > What we need is to setup a confrance call or something so we can get a well > written letter together and get it off to someone who can make a ruleing at > the FCC ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
"Whenever you get in bed with the Federal government, you often get more than just a good night's sleep." Ronald Regan. Translation: Don't ask for a ruling unless prepared to hear something you won't like. Better to proceed in good faith and sort out the matter only if needed. I hope this helps. 73, art. W4ART/4 Miami FL On 7-Jul-2009, at 11:42 AM, kd8...@aol.com wrote: > Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this I think part 97 is vauge and > vauge for a reason > > What we need is to setup a confrance call or something so we can get > a well written letter together and get it off to someone who can > make a ruleing at the FCC > > Skype, echolink, dstar or something where those that are interested > can all join in - > Define a system and descuss the possablities of doing call sign > routing, sending the pages up to a satellite ect ect > > But before "we" put a lot of time and effort and money into this > I think we need a ruleing > > I know for a fact that our local repeater is cabable of doing 2 tone > paging - and was in use back when I was very young and not a ham - > the elders of the local club say it was able to send alerts for > weather, pages for people to get on the radio, ect. It was all done > with tones at the time - "our" pagers are far more advanced and can > display the text of whatever > > No one in the club can tell me why they stopped using pagers - a > couple of the guys thought it was because cell phones became small > and able to be carried in your hand. > > But at around the same time they stopped paging, kantronics also > stopped modify pagers for 2 meters, and I think they stopped making > the tncs that were able to do POCSAG - so my thinking was that a > rule had changed making pagers illegal in the ham bands. Or at very > least questionable. From the kantronics point of view the may not > have been selling many of them and just didn't want to put the time > and resources into making them anymore. But something happended - > As I said our local repeater is cabable of doing two tone - it was > built like that from the beginning > > > We need to setup something and get as many people as we can write up > a well written paper and get a ruleing. That is bottom line on it - > I am on the fence as far as if it is legal or not - on one hand an > agrument can be made for telemetery - which is aloud - on the other > hand pagers can be used to send one way personal pages which is > where I am unclear > I think as we see here agurements can be made on both sides. Which > is why we need a ruleing. When rules are written this vauge some one > needs to decide and stand by the decision > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > > --Original Message-- > From: Ben Jackson > To: Bob Bruninga > Cc: kd8...@aol.com > Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Subject: Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: [amsat- > bb] Re:dream) > Sent: Jul 7, 2009 11:20 AM > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Bob Bruninga wrote: > > *snip* > > We'll agree to disagree regarding your take of the rules as almost > everyone else did on APRSSIG. ;) > >> There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one >> way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I >> think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't >> see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one >> can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the >> radio art. > > Considering that they've recently ruled on whether contesters should > give blanket "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad to rule on > something interesting and relevant. :) > You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio communications system. >>> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond >>> QSTs, telemetry, or "necessary" emergency communications. Could I >>> get away with setting up such a system? Likely. Do I foot to stand >>> on when my local OO comes knocking? Not so much. >> >> Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution... > > Then the solution has presented itself. Get a ruling from the FCC > regarding the use of transmissions to receive-only devices such as > pagers. Then we can finally put this issue to rest and if anyone comes > knocking regarding the legality of these transmissions, we can have > something concrete to cite. > > Again, I'd love to set up something like this, but I'd be hard pressed > to spend a chunk of money on a system that could be taken down if > someone files a complaint to the FCC. > > Let's take any further discussion about this offline. > > - -- > Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA > bbj innismir.net - http:/
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
Wow I am honestly surprised by this attiude. This is the 2nd email that I have seen saying don't ask the FCC anything I the rules are vauge at best - why else would so many people disagree about what can and can not be done I don't have the time or money to go into a legal battle with FCC - and I don't want to loose my license if this is in their minds illegal. I am just not willing to do that - A judgement for or against is the only way to settle the question once and for all. If I personally don't like the ruleing then I would just have to live with it - or file for an appeal. There is no reason that I can see to break the law (maybe) and let it sort itself out latter. I am really surprised by this - Truely surprised A judgement needs to be made - some people may not like it - but if that is the rules - we can make reasoned arguments as to why the rules need to be changed. Not just break the rules and then sort it out later LeRoy, KD8BXP http://www.HamOhio.com Sent on the Now Network� from my Sprint® BlackBerry -Original Message- From: W4ART Arthur Feller Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:13:59 To: Cc: Ben Jackson; Bob Bruninga; Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream) "Whenever you get in bed with the Federal government, you often get more than just a good night's sleep." Ronald Regan. Translation: Don't ask for a ruling unless prepared to hear something you won't like. Better to proceed in good faith and sort out the matter only if needed. I hope this helps. 73, art. W4ART/4 Miami FL On 7-Jul-2009, at 11:42 AM, kd8...@aol.com wrote: > Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this I think part 97 is vauge and > vauge for a reason > > What we need is to setup a confrance call or something so we can get > a well written letter together and get it off to someone who can > make a ruleing at the FCC > > Skype, echolink, dstar or something where those that are interested > can all join in - > Define a system and descuss the possablities of doing call sign > routing, sending the pages up to a satellite ect ect > > But before "we" put a lot of time and effort and money into this > I think we need a ruleing > > I know for a fact that our local repeater is cabable of doing 2 tone > paging - and was in use back when I was very young and not a ham - > the elders of the local club say it was able to send alerts for > weather, pages for people to get on the radio, ect. It was all done > with tones at the time - "our" pagers are far more advanced and can > display the text of whatever > > No one in the club can tell me why they stopped using pagers - a > couple of the guys thought it was because cell phones became small > and able to be carried in your hand. > > But at around the same time they stopped paging, kantronics also > stopped modify pagers for 2 meters, and I think they stopped making > the tncs that were able to do POCSAG - so my thinking was that a > rule had changed making pagers illegal in the ham bands. Or at very > least questionable. From the kantronics point of view the may not > have been selling many of them and just didn't want to put the time > and resources into making them anymore. But something happended - > As I said our local repeater is cabable of doing two tone - it was > built like that from the beginning > > > We need to setup something and get as many people as we can write up > a well written paper and get a ruleing. That is bottom line on it - > I am on the fence as far as if it is legal or not - on one hand an > agrument can be made for telemetery - which is aloud - on the other > hand pagers can be used to send one way personal pages which is > where I am unclear > I think as we see here agurements can be made on both sides. Which > is why we need a ruleing. When rules are written this vauge some one > needs to decide and stand by the decision > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > > --Original Message-- > From: Ben Jackson > To: Bob Bruninga > Cc: kd8...@aol.com > Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Subject: Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: [amsat- > bb] Re:dream) > Sent: Jul 7, 2009 11:20 AM > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Bob Bruninga wrote: > > *snip* > > We'll agree to disagree regarding your take of the rules as almost > everyone else did on APRSSIG. ;) > >> There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one >> way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I >> think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't >> see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one >> can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the >> radio art. > > Considering that they've recently ruled on whether contesters should > give blanket "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad to rule on > something interesting and r
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
Having been the recipient of many OO reports during my Novice Days (I used to tune my Globe Scout for maximum smoke into a 60 watt light bulb as a dummy load and then just switch to my 80 meter antenna...)and a rabid satellite APRS user... ...I volunteer to be the first person to send out pager data on the satellites as the test station...not having changed callsigns in 40+ years, some of the OOs will probably recognize me as already being in their logs... My Mom can forward the cards from my original address if the OO's don't have up to date Callbooks. Roger WA1KAT - Original Message - From: "Ben Jackson" To: "Bob Bruninga" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:20 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream) > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Bob Bruninga wrote: > > *snip* > > We'll agree to disagree regarding your take of the rules as almost > everyone else did on APRSSIG. ;) > > > There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one > > way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I > > think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't > > see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one > > can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the > > radio art. > > Considering that they've recently ruled on whether contesters should > give blanket "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad to rule on > something interesting and relevant. :) > > >>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better > >>> to do than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing > >>> useful applications of technology. A pager is simply the > >>> text-to-user device integrated into the normal local 2-way > >>> amateur radio communications system. > >> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond > >> QSTs, telemetry, or "necessary" emergency communications. Could I > >> get away with setting up such a system? Likely. Do I foot to stand > >> on when my local OO comes knocking? Not so much. > > > > Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution... > > Then the solution has presented itself. Get a ruling from the FCC > regarding the use of transmissions to receive-only devices such as > pagers. Then we can finally put this issue to rest and if anyone comes > knocking regarding the legality of these transmissions, we can have > something concrete to cite. > > Again, I'd love to set up something like this, but I'd be hard pressed > to spend a chunk of money on a system that could be taken down if > someone files a complaint to the FCC. > > Let's take any further discussion about this offline. > > - -- > Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA > bbj innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/ > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJKU2ejAAoJEAQiWVsfSvVvhxwH/29Y5oXeLMTfZXholTV4gSdF > IQmEBb3wBQbZK/V9ltjNQZhVnH1senvo8M1eYH/Cb60H3e+3bimuj1awAEZc+ACX > EIuUI+l88+vABjjkv0YGzES3tDobFPMIgyP1pUWdlbrG3c8ZRBUxu3dFUbYWNMaB > zothv8yGChMIFF+S60h/StmNpA4lEKm+J4hBsHlFhoBhjiX0kVD3G6IOxZGworIa > RNwCwbQ4M1NNG62hp3a8YWF3y7qgjO6hTaq2hz3hTx9ktb4ajyCeMZYesNXByQ2A > eFepP7fNTTD4ga9wVTX5xZeQ9+saREFxU0NcFS/GeCkWeAwy9FcJczfJWBVnha0= > =AgEy > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > Sent via amsat...@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...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: FT-746T won't send CW
I am following all the steps in the manual. The problem seems to be beyond that. Al W8KHP ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: FT-736R won't send CW
I know it's a simple anwser but make sure the CW plug is wired the same. It might be a stereo plug and wired differently for the 736R and the 767. 73's RoD --- On Tue, 7/7/09, Allen Vinegar wrote: > From: Allen Vinegar > Subject: [amsat-bb] FT-736R won't send CW > To: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Date: Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 10:26 AM > I posted this to the 736R forum but > have not received any good answers. I know I must be missing > something obvious but I can't get my FT-736R to work in CW > mode. I plug in the same key I use with my FT-767GX, press > the CW button, turn on the VOX, press down the key and > nothing happens. Rig works fine on SSB and FM. Before I open > up the case and dig in, what am I missing?? > > Thanks! > > Al W8KHP > ___ > Sent via amsat...@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...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WASRe:Re:dream)
Listen to the MANY years of experience here on the forum and approach the FCC with nothing except an appeal for a previous decision you don't agree with. We have been told to, and allowed the privilege to "police" ourselves...a privilege extended to very few "services." Asking the FCC for the "Right Way" only forces them to choose a "Right Way" even though the differences between alternatives may be miniscule. FCC rules were established to protect "commercial interests" thus no broadcasting, no music, no advertisements and before phone calls were so cheap, no inter LATA phone patch on repeaters. Phone patch was self regulated, and it solved itself...paging can be self regulated, and, now that paging companies have been killed (except in the Medical sector) the problem will solve itself. We have been self regulated for 75+ years...lets leave it that way. Roger WA1KAT - Original Message - From: To: "W4ART Arthur Feller" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:28 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WASRe:Re:dream) > Wow I am honestly surprised by this attiude. This is the 2nd email that I have seen saying don't ask the FCC anything > > I the rules are vauge at best - why else would so many people disagree about what can and can not be done > ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream)
Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense of the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe... Dave DM78qd // KA0SWT If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson + -Original Message- From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Bob Bruninga Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM To: Ben Jackson Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream) >> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any >> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up >> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly >> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications >> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the >> tool box. > > Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager > transmissions to an individual are illegal under §97.111(b), as it is > a "one way" > transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal" > list. Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day? When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one way, until the person gets his system going and responds. In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY TWO-WAY amateur network. There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the radio art. >> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do >> than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful >> applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user >> device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio >> communications system. > > The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond QSTs, > telemetry, or "necessary" > emergency communications. Could I get away with setting up such a > system? Likely. Do I foot to stand on when my local OO comes knocking? > Not so much. Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution... >> An amateur satellite would make a great downlink to these pagers. >> Again, the goal should simply be, any message, any time, anywhere >> using any device to any user by callsign alone. Bob, WB4APR ___ Sent via amsat...@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...@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
[amsat-bb] From The Twisted Pair (!).
For those who don't read 'OBSERVATIONS' ... (you should !!!, it's FREE). 73 John. Joint Observations 07 July 2009 GM1SXX & LA2QAA The problem with Space Stations... and a possible Opportunity. When the International Space Station is scrapped probably in the 2015-2018 time frame, a valuable space asset will be lost. It needn't have been that way, and the Russians have wakened up to a new possibility, one that was sadly missed on the ISS. ISS is built around MIR-2 hardware. The core, the Zvezda module, is essentially unchanged from the old MIR design, a tubular cylindrical living area with solar arrays attached to a docking 'ball' with five docking ports available. Once Zveda becomes life-expired, the whole assembly is useless. A more practical approach would have been to fly a 'passive' six-port docking ball, to which active modules can be docked. In this way, station elements could be detached and discarded as they reached the end of their design lives while the docking ball remains a 'permanent fixture' in space. Enter 'Orbitalniy Pilotiruemyi Eksperimentalniy Kompleks', OPSEK, or the 'Orbital Manned Assembly and Experiment Complex' This is a plan for a future space station unveiled by the Russians in 2007, and documented by Anatoly Zak on his web-pages. It centres around the use of a passive 4 ton 'docking ball' with six ports, to which additional modules can be attached. Such a docking ball in LEO would have the primary purpose of 'tying a space station together', by providing passive docking ports, but it could equally well serve as a long-lived platform for a 'parasite radio package' in the same way that the old RS10/11 and RS12/13 'satellites' worked. For those not old enough to know, these were 'parasite' transponder packages attached to spacecraft that were powered from the main craft. So long as the packages antenna(s) could be mounted on the ball's -Z axis, it could serve as a useful radio relay (transponder) in LEO. Such a package would have a fairly small physical footprint and would require very little driving power from the 'mother-ship' or solar panels (if fitted). It would obviously be desirable to derive power from the mother-ship in the interests of simplicity and longevity. With launches becoming increasingly difficult to find on cost grounds, this would be one possible way to provide a future new transponder in LEO. If the package was small and light enough, it could possibly be carried to the (new) space station by a progress cargo vehicle as freight, and attached to the docking ball structure during a space walk. What is more, it could function for a long time, limited only by the overall life of the space complex. Several people in the UK already have a track record in building space-rated hardware in addition to another amateur in Holland, who has built space qualified hardware including the backup transponder for HM-1 AKA VUSAT, as well as a new linear 'Pico-Transponder'. They know who they are... you don't need to know, at least not right now :-) The expertise already exists to supply space rated hardware to fly on such a mission. and we do feel that the possibility of flying such a mission should not be passed over. I'm sure there are people in Russia (from the old RS satellite team) who would be just as keen to see this idea fly. 73 AL & John GM1SXX & LA2QAA ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
Good afternoon to all - On the subject of amatuer paging While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call) I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly legal in the ham bands Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network up and running :-) I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe off a bit There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to use it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part 97 limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it specifically say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do. I can't remember all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie are trying to make a QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national emergancy, dx reports, would fit without question into the telemetery area - each can be set on its own capcode and every amateur pager can have those cap codes programmed into it - However Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting all of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal capcode is legal to use - We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I said I am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have to establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use it to establish a QSO - So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z" I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about the techonolgy of it being a oneway device LeRoy, KD8BXP http://www.HamOhio.com Sent on the Now Network� from my Sprint® BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Dave" Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27 To: ; 'Bob Bruninga ' Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream) Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense of the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe... Dave DM78qd // KA0SWT If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson + -Original Message- From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Bob Bruninga Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM To: Ben Jackson Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream) >> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any >> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up >> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly >> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications >> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the >> tool box. > > Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager > transmissions to an individual are illegal under §97.111(b), as it is > a "one way" > transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal" > list. Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day? When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one way, until the person gets his system going and responds. In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY TWO-WAY amateur network. There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the radio art. >> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do >> than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful >> applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user >> device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio >> communications system. > > The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond QSTs, > telemetry, or "necessary" > emergency communications. Could I
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
Don't forget the 6 meter Model control frequencies... Roger WA1KAT - Original Message - From: To: ; ; "'Bob Bruninga '" Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:05 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream) > Good afternoon to all - > On the subject of amatuer paging > > While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call) > I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly legal in the ham bands > > Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network up and running :-) > > I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe off a bit > > There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie > > Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered > POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to use it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered > > The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part 97 limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it specifically say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do. I can't remember all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie are trying to make a QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national emergancy, dx reports, would fit without question into the telemetery area - each can be set on its own capcode and every amateur pager can have those cap codes programmed into it - However > Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting all of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal capcode is legal to use - > We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I said I am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have to establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use it to establish a QSO - > So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z" > > I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about the techonolgy of it being a oneway device > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > > Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint® BlackBerry > > -Original Message- > From: "Dave" > > Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27 > To: ; 'Bob Bruninga ' > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: > dream) > > > Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense of > the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe... > > > Dave > DM78qd // KA0SWT > If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be > eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson > + > > > > > -Original Message- > From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On > Behalf Of Bob Bruninga > Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM > To: Ben Jackson > Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: > dream) > > >> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any > >> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up > >> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly > >> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications > >> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the > >> tool box. > > > > Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager > > transmissions to an individual are illegal under §97.111(b), as it is > > a "one way" > > transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal" > > list. > > Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only > under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all > kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses > different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds > of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and > the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day? > When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one way, > until the person gets his system going and responds. > > In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is > NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY > TWO-WAY amateur network. > > There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way) to > the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think everyone > can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one > nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking > initiative to better their use of the radio art. > > >> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do >
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
In 97.111 the following one-way transmissions are authorized: (2) Brief transmissions necessary to establishing two-way communications with other stations. (6) Transmissions necessary to distribute information bulletins. 73, John KD6OZH - Original Message - From: To: ; ; "'Bob Bruninga '" Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 18:05 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream) > Good afternoon to all - > On the subject of amatuer paging > > While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call) > I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly > legal in the ham bands > > Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network > up and running :-) > > I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe > off a bit > > There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie > > Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered > POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to > use it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered > > The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part > 97 limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it > specifically say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do. > I can't remember all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie > are trying to make a QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national > emergancy, dx reports, would fit without question into the telemetery > area - each can be set on its own capcode and every amateur pager can have > those cap codes programmed into it - However > Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting > all of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not > recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal > capcode is legal to use - > We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I > said I am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have > to establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use > it to establish a QSO - > So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up > now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z" > > I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about > the techonolgy of it being a oneway device > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > > Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint® BlackBerry > > -Original Message- > From: "Dave" > > Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27 > To: ; 'Bob Bruninga ' > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: > Re: > dream) > > > Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense > of > the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe... > > > Dave > DM78qd // KA0SWT > If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still > be > eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson > + > > > > > -Original Message- > From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On > Behalf Of Bob Bruninga > Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM > To: Ben Jackson > Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: > Re: > dream) > >>> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any >>> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up >>> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly >>> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications >>> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the >>> tool box. >> >> Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager >> transmissions to an individual are illegal under §97.111(b), as it is >> a "one way" >> transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal" >> list. > > Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only > under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all > kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses > different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds > of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and > the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day? > When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one > way, > until the person gets his system going and responds. > > In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is > NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY > TWO-WAY amateur network. > > There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way) > to > the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think > everyone > can tell when it is blatanly illegal.
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
If I remember right - telemetery is specifical meantioned, and CW training is also meantioned I guess the wording "brief" transmission to establish a QSO could be left to interptation - but a normal paging signal lasts less the a few seconds the longest I have ever heard one from a comerical pagin company was about 20 to 25 seconds. I would call that brief. I think it all about content now and now so much on the techonolgy of the pager being a one way device LeRoy, KD8BXP http://www.HamOhio.com Sent on the Now Network� from my Sprint® BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "John B. Stephensen" Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:36:52 To: ; ; ; 'Bob Bruninga ' Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream) In 97.111 the following one-way transmissions are authorized: (2) Brief transmissions necessary to establishing two-way communications with other stations. (6) Transmissions necessary to distribute information bulletins. 73, John KD6OZH - Original Message - From: To: ; ; "'Bob Bruninga '" Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 18:05 UTC Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream) > Good afternoon to all - > On the subject of amatuer paging > > While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call) > I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly > legal in the ham bands > > Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network > up and running :-) > > I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe > off a bit > > There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie > > Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered > POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to > use it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered > > The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part > 97 limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it > specifically say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do. > I can't remember all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie > are trying to make a QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national > emergancy, dx reports, would fit without question into the telemetery > area - each can be set on its own capcode and every amateur pager can have > those cap codes programmed into it - However > Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting > all of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not > recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal > capcode is legal to use - > We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I > said I am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have > to establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use > it to establish a QSO - > So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up > now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z" > > I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about > the techonolgy of it being a oneway device > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > > Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint® BlackBerry > > -Original Message- > From: "Dave" > > Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27 > To: ; 'Bob Bruninga ' > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: > Re: > dream) > > > Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense > of > the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe... > > > Dave > DM78qd // KA0SWT > If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still > be > eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson > + > > > > > -Original Message- > From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On > Behalf Of Bob Bruninga > Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM > To: Ben Jackson > Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: > Re: > dream) > >>> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any >>> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up >>> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly >>> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications >>> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the >>> tool box. >> >> Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager >> transmissions to an individual are illegal under §97.111(b), as it is >> a "one way" >> transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal" >> list. > > Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only > under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all > kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side
[amsat-bb] missing a drop cord
Picked up my satellite station from Geep's place this afternoon. Seems all is there except one heavy drop cord. It is black I believe and about 25 foot long. It goes in my camper. It is #12 wire. If you have one and don't know were it is supposed to live please let me know. If you think of anyone else that might have had stuff to pack up please let me know. Thanks << John -- N4QWF Amateur Radio Operator AO-7,AO-27,FO-29,SO-50,AO-51,VO-52,ISS Email n4...@amsat.org Echolink nodes #110903 -L #388463 http://home.comcast.net/~n4qwf/site/ Formerly KC4AHW VK3FEZ Amsat Member #27845 DXCC #33,478 VUCC SAT #135 WAS SAT #296 51 on AO-51 #13 LON -79.256 LAT 37.459 Grid FM07il >From the Foothills of the Blueridge *Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming - "WOW, What a ride!" ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
Hi, LeRoy, First of all, if an issue arises, FCC will discuss the matter with affected folks long before taking action against a license. Legal actions, both theirs and yours, cost a lot of money. Talking over an issue is far more practical and less expensive. Not to worry. A wonderful thing about amateur radio is that it's only for individual people to learn and try ideas. We have both a great deal of flexibility and the responsibility that goes with the flexibility. Gives us wonderful possibilities!!! Enjoy!! 73, art. W4ART/4 Miami FL On 7-Jul-2009, at 12:28 PM, kd8...@aol.com wrote: > Wow I am honestly surprised by this attiude. This is the 2nd email > that I have seen saying don't ask the FCC anything > > I the rules are vauge at best - why else would so many people > disagree about what can and can not be done > > I don't have the time or money to go into a legal battle with FCC - > and I don't want to loose my license if this is in their minds > illegal. I am just not willing to do that - > > A judgement for or against is the only way to settle the question > once and for all. > If I personally don't like the ruleing then I would just have to > live with it - or file for an appeal. > > There is no reason that I can see to break the law (maybe) and let > it sort itself out latter. > > I am really surprised by this - > > Truely surprised > > A judgement needs to be made - some people may not like it - but if > that is the rules - we can make reasoned arguments as to why the > rules need to be changed. Not just break the rules and then sort it > out later > > LeRoy, KD8BXP > http://www.HamOhio.com > Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint® BlackBerry > > > From: W4ART Arthur Feller > Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:13:59 -0400 > To: > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers > (WAS Re: Re:dream) > > "Whenever you get in bed with the Federal government, you often get > more than just a good night's sleep." Ronald Regan. > > Translation: Don't ask for a ruling unless prepared to hear > something you won't like. > > Better to proceed in good faith and sort out the matter only if > needed. > > I hope this helps. > > 73, art. > W4ART/4 Miami FL > > > On 7-Jul-2009, at 11:42 AM, kd8...@aol.com wrote: > >> Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this I think part 97 is vauge and >> vauge for a reason >> >> What we need is to setup a confrance call or something so we can >> get a well written letter together and get it off to someone who >> can make a ruleing at the FCC >> >> Skype, echolink, dstar or something where those that are interested >> can all join in - >> Define a system and descuss the possablities of doing call sign >> routing, sending the pages up to a satellite ect ect >> >> But before "we" put a lot of time and effort and money into this >> I think we need a ruleing >> >> I know for a fact that our local repeater is cabable of doing 2 >> tone paging - and was in use back when I was very young and not a >> ham - the elders of the local club say it was able to send alerts >> for weather, pages for people to get on the radio, ect. It was all >> done with tones at the time - "our" pagers are far more advanced >> and can display the text of whatever >> >> No one in the club can tell me why they stopped using pagers - a >> couple of the guys thought it was because cell phones became small >> and able to be carried in your hand. >> >> But at around the same time they stopped paging, kantronics also >> stopped modify pagers for 2 meters, and I think they stopped making >> the tncs that were able to do POCSAG - so my thinking was that a >> rule had changed making pagers illegal in the ham bands. Or at very >> least questionable. From the kantronics point of view the may not >> have been selling many of them and just didn't want to put the time >> and resources into making them anymore. But something happended - >> As I said our local repeater is cabable of doing two tone - it was >> built like that from the beginning >> >> >> We need to setup something and get as many people as we can write >> up a well written paper and get a ruleing. That is bottom line on >> it - >> I am on the fence as far as if it is legal or not - on one hand an >> agrument can be made for telemetery - which is aloud - on the other >> hand pagers can be used to send one way personal pages which is >> where I am unclear >> I think as we see here agurements can be made on both sides. Which >> is why we need a ruleing. When rules are written this vauge some >> one needs to decide and stand by the decision >> >> LeRoy, KD8BXP >> http://www.HamOhio.com >> >> --Original Message-- >> From: Ben Jackson >> To: Bob Bruninga >> Cc: kd8...@aol.com >> Cc: amsat-bb@amsat.org >> Subject: Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: >> [amsat-bb] Re:dream) >> Sent: Jul 7, 2009 11:20 AM >> >> -B
[amsat-bb] W1AW/8
Thanks to all who helped out with the satellite demonstration during the ARRL teachers institute held in Dayton OH today. The contacts were on AO27 during the 1515 EST pass. For those that contacted me (I was using W1AW/8) that would like a QSL, just send me a card at my call book address and I will return the favor (no SASE required). 73 and CU again from HQ (Newington) July 28th on AO27 and the afternoon pass (EST), there I will of course use W1AW. Mark Mark Spencer, WA8SME ARRL-The national association for Amateur Radio Education and Technology Program Coordinator mspen...@arrl.org http://www.arrl.org/FandES/tbp/ 530-495-9150 ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] That was GREAT!
Hi All, It sure was nice to see everyone recognize a rare grid on the bird, work it, and back off to let everyone else work it. I'm referring to the A0-51 pass just now (2238utc) with Doug - KD8CAO in EN86. I was very proud of all the operators during the peak time (the after work crowd) pass of the bird. It shows it can be done. and thanks to all those that make the effort to activate those rare grids. 73 all from Memphis, Rick - WA4NVM ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] EN86 Drummond Island MI
Doug, KD8CAO, is now active from EN86, Drummond Island, MI. He worked 17 stations on the last AO51 pass at 2240Z, 7 July 09. He will be active soon on the ssb birds. EN86 is a very rare grid; XE2AT, who is at the top of the VUCC leader board with 900 grids confirmed, still needs it! Doug should be active on Wednesday from EN86 and will be heading back through EN76 Thursday. He only made a few contacts today on his way through EN76. He reports that he has no internet connection on the island but his cellphone is working. He has been using his TH-D7AG and the Arrow on the FM birds but plans to set up the TS2000 with doppler control now that he is on the island. Hope you can make a contact. John K8YSE k8...@amsat.org ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re: dream)
At 11:55 PM 7/7/2009, Bob Bruninga wrote: >In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe >intent is NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as >part of a CLEARLY TWO-WAY amateur network. For me, the use of modified pagers has a LOT of advantages. There are times when I don't get to listen to the radio much, or wander off at the wrong moment, when someone's looking for me. Having a pager facility would fill those gaps, and it sounds like it's not too difficult to integrate that into the APRS network. I'm also an easy case, because I spend a lot of time in the same general area (around here). Anyway, might be a way to recycle some redundant hardware that's lying around. >There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one >way) to the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I >think everyone can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't >see the FCC cares one nit about some of these debates when any one >can see that hams are taking initiative to better their use of the radio art. Besides, it's easier to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission, when it comes to the rules, if you breached them unknowingly, while acting in good faith. We had some similar issues in the past with a local club wanting to do an innovative amateur related (i.e. club and local ham goings on) news broadcast, and one of the rules that was brought into play was about 1 way transmissions, so the news broadcasters came up with a clever solution. It was to be an extended test transmission, with signal reports from those "participating" in the "test" before and afterwards. :) While the news broadcast lasted only 3 years, due to participant burnout, it did lead to a significant change in the regulations here, for the better. I participated as a relay station and also automatically recorded each news broadcast as it went to air. There are archives lurking around somewhere. Should also have them on a hard disk and on the web too. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
At 02:06 AM 7/8/2009, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote: >No we don't. >The FCC are obviously happy to allow us to do what we do now. I agree. I believe it's counterproductive going off and making noise to the relevant Government authority (FCC, Ofcom, ACMA, Industry Canada, etc). The rules are there for a reason, but the rules can't keep pace with the level of technological change and innovation. WHat we do need to focus on is operating within the _spirit_ of the rules. Sending a page to establish a QSO is another means of selective calling, and that's already available on other modes (e.g. callsign squelch on D-STAR). In fact, a very clever gateway might be able to route a D-STAR call to a pager, and alert the recipient that someone on D-STAR is looking to make contact. >If you stir up trouble and get things banned, there are going to be >an awful lot of pissed amameurs after your arse. Agree. Nothing worse than the nit pickers getting something banned, because they made noises, rather than letting events develop. Now, if the pages were being used for commercial reasons, fair enough, but that's already covered in the rules, no further action needs to be taken. POCSAG is a readily available protocol, so no problem there, and the majority of pages are going to be to initiate a QSO. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
At 02:28 AM 7/8/2009, kd8...@aol.com wrote: >I don't have the time or money to go into a legal battle with FCC - >and I don't want to loose my license if this is in their minds >illegal. I am just not willing to do that - Well, the worst case scenario I see is that because you acted in good faith, not with intent to break the rules, the FCC would write to you advising that they consider what you're doing to be illegal, please stop. If you have any questions, please contact... So, all you'd have to do if you got the letter would be to stop operating your pager transmitter, and THEN, since they initiated contact, give the FCC a call and discuss it further. >There is no reason that I can see to break the law (maybe) and let >it sort itself out latter. The rules are sometimes vague for a reason. The FCC (or whoever) don't have a crystal ball, and can't fully predict which way technology will be develop or used. If they see a problem, they will advise those they judge to be of concern. I can't see them slapping a fine on you without warning, when you're not doing anything malicious. Worst I'd expect is a cease and desist letter (and if you got one of those, THEN you'd better stop what they asked you to stop doing! :) ). Speaking of rules, in Australia, there has been a trend towards taking out specifics (such as modes allowed on each band) and replacing them with more general limits, such as bandwidth. This is another sign of the authorities saying we should organise our own sandpit to play in (they just tell us where we can play), but play nice and don't give anyone a "free ride" where they aren't allowed to go. :) 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream)
At 04:05 AM 7/8/2009, kd8...@aol.com wrote: >So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a >call up now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z" > >I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not >about the techonolgy of it being a oneway device I'd agree with this logic. It is establishing a QSO, albeit on a different frequency. Similarly, a pager could be used to send signal reports, when there's only a 1 way path. For example, I can hear someone on HF, but they can't hear me, I could send a page saying "UR 5x1, can't reply, amp no go" . Now this is becoming a real time, cross band, cross mode QSO, and those ARE legal. :) 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] AMSAT Field Day Summary Sheets Due
If you participated in AMSAT Field Day and would like your efforts to count towards AMSAT Field Day, you have until Monday, July 13, 2009 at 11:59PM CDT to submit your entries. They can be emailed to me at kk...@arrl.net or kk...@amsat.org You can also send them in the mail but give plenty of time for them to arrive or you will be out of luck. I will send you a confirmation email when I receive your entry (might take a day depending on my work schedule). Photos and neat descriptions of your field day antics and events are welcome. 73...bruce -- Bruce Paige, KK5DO AMSAT Director Contests and Awards ARRL Awards Manager (WAS, 5BWAS, VUCC), VE Houston AMSAT Net - Wed 0100z on Echolink - Conference *AMSAT* Also live streaming MP3 at http://www.amsatnet.com Podcast at http://www.amsatnet.com/podcast.xml or iTunes Latest satellite news on the ARRL Audio News http://www.arrl.org AMSAT on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/amsat ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] down converter
Hi : would anyone be interested in buying my non modified AIDC 3731 down converter ??? Jerry w0sat ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: AO-7???
Could the solar panels on one particular side be failing? Are there any regular patterns to the performance? ... and so continues the next chapter of most interesting satellite we have! - Original Message - From: "PE0SAT" To: Cc: Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:08 AM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO-7??? On Tue, July 7, 2009 03:41, w7...@comcast.net wrote: > Hello Hi Bob, > To all you AO-7 fans. We appear to have a sick bird. We should feel > blessed in having such a well performing satellite for several years, > considering it is older than some of it's users. The audio is distorted > and cw sounds bad, running absolute minimum power. I used AO-7 yesterday evening and all seems well except the normal AO-7 gargle. But when you take this in consideration and don't use to must power or talk the fast is it still a nice bird to use. > Any thoughts or suggestions are solicited. > > 73 Bob W7LRD > > Seattle 73's PE0SAT / JO21ho ___ Sent via amsat...@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 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.7/ - Release Date: 07/07/09 05:53:00 ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Re: FT-736R won't send CW
Hi Allen, Presumably my earlier suggestions to the 736 forum all checked out, unsuccessfully. One other thing to check: If you have a volt meter, measure the potential across the key. Mine is a tad over 7 volts. If you get zero, it's possible that there is indeed something wrong inside the rig. I've checked both of the rig's owners manuals, as you probably already have, and the diagrams for plugging in a key or paddles are identical. Good luck, Greg KO6TH > Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 10:20:18 -0700 > From: suen...@yahoo.com > To: amsat-bb@amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FT-736R won't send CW > > > I know it's a simple anwser but make sure the CW plug is wired the same. > It might be a stereo plug and wired differently for the 736R and the 767. > > 73's > RoD > > --- On Tue, 7/7/09, Allen Vinegar wrote: > > > From: Allen Vinegar > > Subject: [amsat-bb] FT-736R won't send CW > > To: amsat-bb@amsat.org > > Date: Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 10:26 AM > > I posted this to the 736R forum but > > have not received any good answers. I know I must be missing > > something obvious but I can't get my FT-736R to work in CW > > mode. I plug in the same key I use with my FT-767GX, press > > the CW button, turn on the VOX, press down the key and > > nothing happens. Rig works fine on SSB and FM. Before I open > > up the case and dig in, what am I missing?? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Al W8KHP > > ___ > > Sent via amsat...@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...@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 _ Windows Live™ SkyDrive™: Get 25 GB of free online storage. http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_SD_25GB_062009 ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] 2009 AMSAT Annual Meeting and Space Symposium - Call for papers
This is the second call for papers for the 2009 AMSAT Annual Meeting and Space Symposium to be held October 9 - 11 at the Four Points Sheraton Hotel at the Baltimore Washington Airport. Proposals for papers, symposium presentations and poster presentations are invited on any topic of interest to the amateur satellite community. We request a tentative title of your presentation as soon as possible, with final copy submitted by September 1, 2009 for inclusion in the printed proceedings. Abstracts and papers should be sent to Dan Schultz, N8FGV, at n8...@amsat.org. ___ Sent via amsat...@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
[amsat-bb] Book your flight to the Amsat Symposium today, airline fare sale for next 24 hours
Southwest Airlines is having a fare sale today only for fall travel, sale fares are valid every day except Fridays & Sundays. Must purchase tickets online by July 8, 11:59 pm Pacific Time (about 24 hours from now). Other airlines may be matching these fares. Now might be a good time to book your flight to the Amsat Symposium at the Baltimore (BWI) airport, October 9 to 11. (Even if you decide to return home on Sunday, you can still save a bit on the outbound flight if you come on Thursday.) Dan Schultz N8FGV ___ Sent via amsat...@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
