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

Re: Nova vs SatPC question?



I find that Nova's squint is correct when I compare it to LogSatPro and IT.

I agree, SatPC32 is a bear to work with compared to the others...having to
edit a text file to change squint is "low tech" if I ever saw it. Also, when
I make changes in those text files they don't "take" right away, sometimes
requiring a restart of the program. Changes in the view also sometimes take
several seconds.

On the same machine running Nova, everything happens rather quickly, even
with the hi-res maps loaded. Nova also is VERY good in terms of not using a
bunch of processor time.

Each program has it's pro's and con's: (not looking at rotor or doppler
stuff)

IT: Fast, runs on anything, great interface, DOS only.

LogSatPro: fast, great fast forward/pause/rewind, nice maps, but 16 bit
program, and requires inverting the data for alon/alat on ao-40. I don't
think the program is particularly well supported in terms of development.
Updates are rare.

Nova: fast, very nice maps, great feature set, not hard to figure out,
superb kepler update via the internet, a very powerful set of "extra"
features like scripting, but not exactly intuitive in the way it's set up.
To be fair, I'm not sure you can make the large number of complicated
features that are available completely simple. Support looks pretty good, in
terms of update history. Ordering/registering the program is a dream.

SatPC32: lots of features, not easy to work with or learn, a work in
progress. It needs a LOT of work, in my opinion. It really doesn't seem
ready for prime time in the USA...registration seems to be a bunch of hoop
jumping.

For linux, I love mtrack! 73

hasan schiers, N0AN

schiers@netins.net
or use amsat.org or arrl.net remailer
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob McElligott" <bmcellig@kornet.net>
To: <amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:05 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Nova vs SatPC question?


> Recently, I took the opportunity to download the demo version of
> SatPc32.  I compared it to Nova and found that there was a significant
> difference in squint angles readings between the two programs.  Sometime
as
> much as 50 degrees or more with SatPc32 always being the highest.
>
> For my little test, I used the same Keplerian elements for AO-40, squint
> angle information (ALON 298, Alat 0) and of course the same location
> data.  Since both programs are running on the same computer, time was
> identical.  The azimuth, elevation, range, MA, etc., were all identical,
> with the exception of the squint angles.  Nova might display 35 degrees,
> while SatPC32 was showing 82 degrees.  They didn't always stay
proportional
> to each other either.  I also attempted running the program individually,
> and on two different computers and still got the same results.
>
> Has anyone else noticed this?  Is there a reasonable explanation for
> it?  Which one is correct?
>
> Basic observations of the two program is that each of these programs has
> their good points, in which I liked the built in tuner capabilities of
> SatPC32, but to me Nova is much easier program to use.  Entering squint
> information into SatPC32 is a bear for some, as it requires editing the
> Squint.SQF file manually each time you want to change it.  Several friends
> of mine have had to call me asking how to edit and setup some of SatPC32's
> critical files, as they crashed the program while trying to modify the
> squint file.  The program is easily crashed by mis-editing the Squint
file.
>
> 73, Bob HL2/KK4UZ
>
>
>
> ----
> 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



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home