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

Re: Re: Satellite Idea



Joe,

You have made a good argument.  If we give in to encroachment of our
frequencies, where will it end?

My previous comments were motivated toward protecting the satellite uplink,
and not considering the ramifications for our allocations.  I can offer no
solution [short of war...just kidding].  It really is out of our
legislature's hands as this is international in nature, so it falls into
relations between gov't state dept's [yeh, don't hold your breath].

But is doggedly using frequencies that are so impacted to render the
satellite unusable going to be the best approach?  This is the crux of my
question.  

My opinion is that it is "day-late" to protect 2m.  Utilize the microwave
bands now before they are likewise taken.  As you have heard it often
stated, the microwave bands are a natural place for satellite operations.
I am in favor of doing everything to promote their use [and for AO-40 it
has defaulted to what is available].  So maybe we can use mode-VX on a
trial basis to see the degree of the problem, and if very bad then I
suggest moving on to US and LS entirely.

As I read my trade magazines filled with 2.4 Ghz spread-spectrum data/ISM
articles and equipment ads, I wonder if that, too, may be too late?  At
least by using 1268 and 2401 on AO-40 we are staking a claim for the future.

Ed 
PS: It may fall to hams in the countries with the pirates to wage the main
battle.  The Int'l ham community can support as well as possible! 

>From: Joseph Murray <k0vty@juno.com>
>
>Hi Ed
>
>I hope,  that fully recognizing Yoshi's 2 meter problem will bring to the
>mind of every Ham on this BB, the crucial fact that Ham folks have lost
>or are loosing radio spectrum .   The lost is mainly done as 40 meters
>was done .  Move into the band and take it away or make it so unusable
>that Ham's don't try to use it any longer.
>We as Ham's can allow this to happen over and over until there is no Ham
>radio .    Oh maybe someone will have an IR thingy in his/her back yard. 
>    Right now 2 meters is being moved in on to the south.    What is
>being done?    How bad will that become if nothing is done?    Could
>Japan do something now , probably not.    How long have we been trying to
>cure the 40 meter problem?      What is the answer?    Nothing seems to
>protect Ham's spectrum      How long is it going to take for Congress to
>pass legislation to stop this loss to Ham radio?       Does not using
>AO-40 on the 2 meter uplink help or hinder Ham radio spectrum security.  
>   Was the 11 meter band used by ham's enough?    How did the 11 meter
>band loss turn out?    Are there any intrusions into ten meters because
>of 11 meters?     I am just as concerned about Yoshi's predictament and
>do not wish him grief.   Not using the 2 meter up link to AO-40 does not
>IMHO seem to be the correct way to help Yoshi.    How many of us are not
>members of ARRL .  That's something we can do .
>
>Anybody have answers?
>
>Sorry Ed you turned me on , a little bit
>
>73's  
>
>Joe  K0VTY
>=========================================
>On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 06:30:05 -0900 "Edward R. Cole" <al7eb@ptialaska.net>
>writes:
>> Thanks for your comments, Yoshi.
>> 
>> I hope the members of the bb have noted the problems of using the 
>> V-uplink
>> over Asia-Oceana.  I believe these to exist in Europe as well.  Now 
>> I hear
>> that pirate stations in Central America may be impacting the 
>> western
>> hemisphere.  This reaffirms my statement a few weeks ago when 
>> discussing
>> AO-40 modes, and why I felt mode VS was unlikely [or modes-VX, VK].  
>> Too
>> bad the V-xmtr died.
>> 
>> With interest in Japan in mode-LS we can expect some equipment to 
>> be
>> marketed.  That's a good development.
>> 
>> Ed
>> 
>> >Hi This is Yoshi.
>> >
>> >At 2001/03/29 05:32:22 BOWEN, SCOTT M. (JSC-CC) wrote:
>> >> What are the chances of building a satellite the has a straight 2 
>> meter
>> >> uplink and downlink?
>> >
>> >  Due to the limited time capability and large footprint, we have
>> >to watch the downlink even during we making uplink. So 2m inband
>> >mode have no advantage both of satellite and ground station. It
>> >requires both us and sat some sort of Hi-Q duplexer. But Crossband
>> >mode do not. It is much more easy to use.
>> >  Or, if we want to use FM bird with only a 2m FM rig, parrot mode
>> >may be the only one answer I think.
>> >
>> >> Almost everyone starts on a 2 meter FM rig, It would seem that if 
>> getting
>> >> people interested into sat. ops, a 2 meter repeater in the sky 
>> would do
>> >> it...
>> >
>> >  Maybe it is true almost around the world ... except Japan :-(
>> >Here in Japan, we have much population of legal and illegal ops
>> >on 2m at the urban area, so the most popular band is not 2m but
>> >70cm.
>> >  But even in the 70cm it had already crowded enough to give up!
>> >Maybe most of Japanese FM birds user want to get the next bird
>> >with Mode-LS HiHi.
>> >
>> >
>> >Yoshihiro Imaishi JF6BCC/KH2GR
>> >GL:PM53JV, ex KC6IY(T88IY),V63BP
>> >mailto:jf6bcc@jarl.com or jf6bcc@jamsat.or.jp
>> a16.mbn.or.jp/~palau/> Sorry, Japanese only now.
>> >----
>> >Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>> >To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
>> > 
>> 
>> ----
>> Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
>> 
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
> 


----
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