[amsat-bb] Re: S-band on Eagle
Edward R. Cole
al7eb at acsalaska.net
Fri Sep 8 21:39:35 PDT 2006
Quite so, Dom.
Pre-launch predictions were way-off on AO-40 ground station requirements.
We were told all one needed was a 16-turn helix and a downconvertor such as
the "Drake". I found that the 24-inch BBQ with bare Drake was deaf.
But when I used a 33-inch offset feed dish (solen from my ku-band sat-TV)
coupled with a good preamp before my unmodified Drake...I could copy the
beacon out to squints of 49-degrees. That tranlates as nearly 5 s-units
SNR for low squint angles (<10). I did spend a little more than the
average BBQ dish user (I purchased the MKU-232 from db6nt for ~ $245, but
made the system). I bought three Drakes in 1998 for $100 and modified one
to 435 MHz IF. The other I received at 123 MHz totally unmodified. I gave
the third as a door prize at a local hamfest.
My dish cost me $159 (for the 1-meter dish I had to buy for my TV system
since I stold the 33-inch for ham radio). I built my own 5-turn helix for
under $20. Everything else was left over from AO-10/13: FT-847, M2 UHF
yagi, 2m yagi.
For mode-L, I bought a 45-element loop-yagi ($125) and DEMI 144/1268 Tx
conv. ($450). There is the Yaesu B5400 and coax cables, etc. etc. ...but
not counting that. You should guess what my 2m-eme station cost? So I
have a lot of cash tied up in eme/sat ham radio (~ $10K), but not everyone
need duplicate what I do.
To summarize, my mode-US station came real close to performing like my
AO-10 mode-B station (in many ways it was superior).
Well I am glad that Amsat-DL chose to keep mode-L and S on P3E. You know
my opinion regarding Eagle...disappointment. But I will reserve judgement
till the day it is in orbit and operational...then ask me!
73's Ed - KL7UW
At 11:43 AM 9/8/2006 +0200, i8cvs wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jim Sanford" <wb4gcs at amsat.org>
>To: <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
>Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 3:40 AM
>Subject: [amsat-bb] S-band on Eagle
>> Ladies and gentlemen:
>> As one of you commented this evening, AO-40 wasn't exactly a rock
>> crusher on S-band. It worked, and adequately, at least on CW, but was
>> not great.
>Hi James, WB4GCS
>Not true !
>If one of us commented that AO40 was not great and only was usable at least
>on CW it means that his own station was not adeguate for it and not the
>satellite was responsible and one non able to fly swallow does not make a
>By the experience of users majority the S-band downlink of AO40 was great
>and the best ever made by AMSAT
>>As I reflect on my personal AO-40 experiences, I now
>> understand that there are 2 reasons for my disappointment. Local noise
>> was one, and transponder distortion was another --
>If local noise was a problem for you it was not a problem for the world wide
>majority of S-downlink users
>Distorsion is not completely true !
>Warbling and not distorsion was only present when RUDAK was operating
>so another swallow that not make a summer.
>> Thanks again and very 73,
>> James A. Sanford, PE
>> Eagle Project Manager
>> wb4gcs at amsat.org
>Best 73" de
>Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Ed - KL7UW
http://www.qsl.net/al7eb - BP40iq
144-EME: FT-847, mgf-1801/1402, 4xM2-xpol-20, 170w
432-EME: FT-847, mgf-1402, 1x21-ele (18.6 dBi), 60w
More information about the AMSAT-BB