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

Re: Thoughts on S vs V, U, C, X, K from a newcomer



I would strongly recommend getting one of these antennas:

http://www.jrmiller.demon.co.uk/products/s_ant.html

and one of these down converters:

http://www.kuhne-electronic.de/english/oscar40.htm

Once you are up to speed on Telemetry capture then the world is your oyster!

73, Paul, VP9MU

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Kjorling" <michael@kjorling.com>
To: "AMSAT-BB" <amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 8:51 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Thoughts on S vs V, U, C, X, K from a newcomer


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I will confess. I am new to most of the stuff being discussed on this
list,
> and am not even really familiar with "Eagle" and "Echo". I know that Echo
is
> E, that's pretty much it when it comes to that. :) And pardon me if I get
the
> bands wrong once or twice - I am trying to learn, but sometimes it takes a
> little while.
>
> As it is right now, I am looking into assembling a satellite station that
> will get me AO-40 first and foremost, and of course other birds will be a
> nice addition. I am looking at mode U/S because of a few concerns:
usablity
> at poor squint angles (I hear that the L-band uplink is worse than U-band
in
> this regard, and I am at almost 60°N), available equipment (I already have
an
> all-mode transceiver that will go up to 70 cm, and used equipment for
> anything up to U-band is easy to come by), and the practicality of
high-gain
> antennas for both the uplink as well as the downlink.
>
> Since I am basically building from scratch, not just the station but also
my
> knowledge, it may very well be that someone more knowledgable in the field
> would do things differently. So be it - that's a major part of amateur
radio,
> the way I see it: experimenting, trying things out, failing and trying
again.
> I have, unfortunately, run into a few people who prefer to say "don't do
it,
> it'll never work" than discuss ways to make "it" work, really. (Remember
that
> it wasn't more than a hundred years ago the "experts" told us that any
> frequency above 1.5 MHz was useless.) Fortunately, those people are in
> minority - the vast majority of the hams I have talked to have been very
> helpful. Also, don't get this wrong: I don't consider myself to be very
> "technologically challenged", but also know where my shortcomings are.
> Before getting my amateur license I was mostly playing around with DC and
> low-frequency AC electronics, and that's about my real experience in the
> _electronics_ field. I definitely wouldn't venture very far into the
UHF/SHF
> range without having a very good elmer at my side.
>
> I am in a pretty unusual situation, I think. There are no CC&Rs or
anything
> like that which limit my ability to put up antennas, but still to please
the
> rest of the family they have to be "aestetically pleasing", and preferably
as
> small as possible. So, I somehow need to hide the satellite antennas from
the
> casual observer. As my primary objective, at least in the short term, is
to
> get on AO-40, which has a quite usable U/S setup, U/S seemed like a good
> start. A high-gain helical antenna for the U-band uplink, and a dish
(maybe
> even a wire mesh dish) for the S-band downlink.
>
> As I am building things from scratch as far as antennas go, I really
couldn't
> care much less if the uplink (or downlink) is U-band, S-band, C-band,
X-band,
> K-band, or whatever really. The higher frequencies would have the obvious
> advantage that I would get more gain with antennas of the same physical
size,
> but that isn't the only consideration unfortunately. But if I could choose
> freely, I would use the highest band that I could count on working from my
> QTH, and really couldn't care much less what frequency that is. U, S, C,
X,
> K, it's really all the same to me - I need to get some new bits and pieces
up
> in either case.
>
> While accomodating "newcomers" is indeed important, I think it is also
> important to not loose sight of what the considerations of those people
are.
> I am not claiming to be any authority on the subject, but one thing I have
> noticed is that very few beginning amateurs today (meaning newcomers who
are
> `limited' to VHF and up, at least here in SM) get gear that has sideband
> and/or CW capabilities. They usually settle for FM-only transceivers,
which
> means that they won't be able to read the QSOs on the satellite anyway,
even
> if it is transmitting on a band they can receive without any additional
> equipment or work.
>
> Are hams today getting lazy, or are they simply afraid to try new things?
One
> amateur I know is even too lazy to use the VFO on his base V/U
transceiver -
> a fairly new Icom. His setup is good at V-band, workable at U-band but
most
> likely terrible at L-band - and he has come to me several times to tell me
> that L-band "works so bad". I think it's rather his station - low power
> output, high feedline losses and inadequate antennas - but for reasons
well
> beyond the subject of this list, I won't tell him that.
>
> Working satellites, and especially HEO amsats, is not as easy as plugging
in
> an omnidirectional antenna and pressing the PTT. That might work for
> terrestrial, local FM repeaters, but it's not the way things work with
> satellites. It takes a certain amount of determination to get on the
birds -
> if you're not willing to devote the time and, unfortunately, some money it
> takes, there are other parts of amateur radio that might be more
appealing.
> Especially as it looks like the CW requirement for HF privileges will be
> dropped, meaning a lot of people who are currently on VHF and up only
> licenses (myself included) will most likely get access to the HF bands.
>
> Just my two cents on the issue.
>
>
> Michael Kjörling
>
> - -- 
> Michael Kjörling :: michael@kjorling.com :: SMØYBY JO89  ^..^
> PGP: 3723 9372 c245 d6a8 18a6  36ac 758f 8749 bde9 ada6   \/
> Also 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297  6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e (old)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76
>
> iD8DBQE+8kyJdY+HSb3praYRAgjKAJ40zhP6TrdYszrY7nAIitljBnSpYgCgnIEh
> 1nTp8dQ3cixt96+DZhrw3S0=
> =NZBV
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ----
> Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

----
Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home