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

Re: Fw: QRM on AO51



I'm able to access AO-51 at the same quality as SO-50 and AO-27 with
50 mw so my guess it's not a receiver sensitivity issue.  It might be
front end overload but in the US, I can't see that being different
than Europe.  I know that I need a little more power when satellites
are over the eastern 1/2 of the US vs the western.

73 de Pat --- KA9SCF.


On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:04:10 -0000, Mike Hooles
<Mikehooles@btinternet.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Hooles" <Mikehooles@BTInternet.com>
> To: "Patrick Green" <pagreen@gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 9:01 AM
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] QRM on AO51
> 
> > Hi Patrick,
> > I have never had problems accessing SO50, AO27, nor UO14 when it was
> > working.
> > I was coming to the conclusion that there was something different about
> > the AO51 receiver, but there could be very high levels of qrm swamping the
> > receiver.
> > Does it only happen over Europe, or is it over all continents? If the
> > latter we are either on an unfortunate frequency, or there is something
> > different about the receiver.
> > If it does not occur on low power days on the same frequency, then it is
> > probably us overloading the front end. If it is clear on a different
> > uplink frequency, then maybe it is the frequency that we have chosen. It
> > could also be that the ctcss passband is too tight,
> >
> > Regards
> > Mike G3LGR
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Patrick Green" <pagreen@gmail.com>
> > To: "Mike Hooles" <Mikehooles@btinternet.com>
> > Cc: "AMSAT" <amsat-bb@amsat.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:40 AM
> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] QRM on AO51
> >
> >
> >> Do you guys have these same problems on AO-27/SO-50?  is 145.92 the
> >> problem?
> >>
> >> 73 de Pat --- KA9SCF.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:02:28 -0000, Mike Hooles
> >> <Mikehooles@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >>> I too find it difficult to get into AO51. I wondered whether my level of
> >>> CTCSS was too low, but I understand now that it was unwanted QRM.
> >>> The difference between SO50 and AO51 regarding access for me is very
> >>> pronounced.
> >>> If it is just QRM, then mayebe on future FM birds we should stick to the
> >>> AO27/SO50 uplink frequency for 2metre access,
> >>> Regards
> >>> Mike G3LGR
> >>> ----
> >>> 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
----
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