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

Re: Re: First-Hand Information abt. MAROC-TUBSAT

While the choice of 144.1 was poor I can't see what Amateur
activity the 436 MHz Tx is causing interference to.

Seems to me we've got a bunch of Hams on the government
payroll in Morocco who are keen to put up satellites
and have access to government funding.
We ought to be able to turn this situation to our
advantage instead of constantly knocking them.

The fact is Hams have never used much of the 435-438 MHz
allocations for satellite comms. Frequencies have been
kept empty for decades so its not suprising others will
seek to make use of them. We need a lot more amateur
satellites up there to occupy the frequencies.

Trevor M5AKA

>From: Timothy Vermette <tvermette@sk.sympatico.ca>
>To: amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org
>Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: First-Hand Information abt. MAROC-TUBSAT
>Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 23:32:38 -0600
>Well if they spent the money on their satellite that NASA spends YEARLY on
>Hubble then you might have a point.  My guess is that Hubble burns
>(including its shuttle revisits, the TDRS constellation time that it takes
>etc etc) in about half a day what they spent on this entire thing.
>This does open a really good question about using the amateur frequencies 
>downlink things that have nothing to do with amateur radio...like the folks
>who want to send an "amateur" satellite to Mars and use amateur frequncies
>to downlink data.  What does that have to do with amateur radio?
>Apparantly they have taken the bird off the air on those frequencies.
>Why not drop it?
>Well I sure dont see a problem using Ham freqs for sats in orbit around
>MARS. Seeing that ham equipment is alot cheaper.. it can make sense to keep
>costs down.. and inturn gives you a neat weak signal to work on making
>sensitive receivers.. besides its like a honor to me that they would use 
>freqs. I dont forsee any interference coming from Mars anytime soon. BUT
>there is no excuse to using ham freqs where it will cause interference. All
>kinds of frequencies are used every day but people who are not license to
>use them.. Cable companies do it every day. Sure its a closed system but
>they still use all kinds of freqs. Never looked but I think ethernet is the
>same way. ADSL uses some freqs way down there.. 100KHz so its not like its
>not done every day.
>My point is that there are times where using someone elses freq is 
>fine.. Mars is one.. just so long as it cant interfer with others.. I think
>this is kinda what you are talking about.
>As for taking the sat off of the ham freqs.. If it has a vhf (144.1), uhf
>(436??? cant remember where the data was located) and the 2.2GHz PAL
>downlink.. at what point do they stop using ham freqs? Sure they can
>downlink the PAL all day long but the sat is useless without commanding and
>telemetry. Unless they can shift their command/telem to the 2.2GHz TX'er..
>then this sat will continue to be a problem for hams till its shutoff
>forever.. abandoned, deorbited, or in some way handed over to use by hams. 
>think that others might like this option but if the sat continues to be 
>for commerial use.. then say in a year its give over.. that would say to
>some that its ok to use our freqs for whatever you wish aslong as its 
>over to us when your done.. This might be a bad idea. So if it cant use
>other freqs to do its work it should be shut off.. or if it was truely a
>hamsat from the beginning.. then say so and open it up..
>My 2 pennies worth.. Tim VE5TNC
>Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 

Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org