[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: TRAKBOX tracking verses WISP




Please ignore. I seem to send messages before trying 'everything'.
I found that first I had to use the -80.650 for longitude. However, I
tried this once before and it didn't work. Next I decided to edit all the
the NASA 2-line data to exclude the ascii text, and this combination
worked. Apparently by leaving in the beginning text, it confuses the
TRAKBOX for the data entry.

Having edited out all the unnecessary ascii text and changing the
longitude back to -80.65 (as I thought the very first time) all appears
to be fine.

Thanks for everyone's patience. I guess I'm getting old enough for
that to be called 'a senior' moment, hi.





At 09:31 PM 01/22/2001 -0500, Reid Bristor, Sr. Consultant wrote:
>
>I have just recently finished (finally) my TAPR TrakBox unit and have been
>checking its accuracy against WISP for satellite positioning data. The unit
>has the newer 3.50b version of the firmware installed. However, when
>inputting the data for the satellites (the ascii file download), it seems
>that the tracking information provided for UO-22 (as an example) is
>considerably during the realtime display is considerably different than WISP.
>
>I noticed when loading in the keps via ascii file, all the data for UO-22
>seems to be correct. I am not sure about the year. It stores the year as
>10 (YO). Then default value was 98. The time is in UTC and matches
>that of the time displayed in WISP.
>
>Also, my assumption is that my latitude and longitude values for my
>QTH (Melbourne, Florida) are both positive values (lat: +28.125 and
>long: +80.650). THe calculation problem appears among all the
>satellites in the TRAKBOX.
>
>Those of you that are using the TRAKBOX, has anyone else run into
>this problem, and if so what did you do to rectify? The purpose of the
>firmware version 3.50b was to accomodate the Y2K and it should
>recognize 2001. However, maybe the 2001 is a problem. What should
>the YO be? I have tried 01, 10, and 11, but none have brought the
>calculations close to the values in WISP. The value when loading in
>the ascii NASA format file gives a value of 10 for YO (Epoch year).
>
>Before you ask, the values in WISP are correct and accurate since I
>am using it for the SATGATE operations here, and the AOS and LOS
>are within a few seconds of the predicted value. The values in
>in the TRAKBOX are incorrect and I can't seem to get them within
>the range indicated by the WISP display.
>
>Any ideas?
>
>
>Reid Bristor,  WA4UPD
>S.E. Area SATGATE
>
>----
>Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
>
Reid Bristor,  WA4UPD
S.E. Area SATGATE

----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home