Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] EME vs. satellite comms

To: Catherine James <catherine.james@att.net>
Subject: Re: [Amps] EME vs. satellite comms
From: Michael Clarson <wv2zow@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:28:16 -0500
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Meaningful ragchew???  Had to chuckle -- don't hear many of those. I do
understand Cathy's point. With geostationary and high elliptical sats,
propagation is removed from the QSO, which may allow folks in different
parts of the world to actually converse, providing the award guys don't
have a DXCC SAT category. Awards like that are silly with Sats -- no
varying propagation and everyone is almost the same distance from the sat.
It's difficult to learn about other cultures with "59 5" and move on to the
next qso. --Mike, WV2ZOW.

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Catherine James <catherine.james@att.net>
wrote:

> Gerald,
>
>    Moonbounce is almost useless for serious communications.  When was the
> last time that had a meaningful rag chew via the Moon?  It's especially
> useless
> for ragchew if you are limited to running JT modes.
>
>    JT modes and EME have their place for experimentation, testing, proof of
> concept, etc. but they are not a substitute for having a geostationary
> artificial satellite that
> can actually get a real message through.
>
>   Yes, LEO sats tend to be very brief "thx for the contact, goodbye".
> Phase 4 won't be so constrained.
>
> 73,
> Cathy
> N5WVR
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Gerald Williamson <amps@contesting.com> wrote:
>
> > We already have a satellite up and working on 6m, 2m, 135cm, 70cm, 23cm,
> > 13cm, 9cm, 6cm and 3cm with daily activity. Even higher and  lower
> > frequencies are used on occasion by some stations.
>
> > The satellite is the moon of course. With current and free WSJT  software
> > there is no need for the gigantic antennas that have been
> > used in the  past.
>
> > Seems a bit wasteful of time and expense to implement any man made
> > satellite for amateur radio purposes considering the capability already
> in  place.
>
>  73,
>  Gerald K5GW
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>