Posts by DL5RDI

    dl6dca


    Naja, so viel Diversivität gibt es ja bezüglich der Spiegel eigentlich nicht.

    Es gibt Offsetspiegel. Bei diesen benötigt man vor einem Hohlleiter zur optimalen "Ausleuchtung" eine dielektrische Linse.

    Die 2. Variante sind die echten, rotationssymmetrischen Parabolspiegel, hier wird vor einem Hohlleiter keine Linse benötigt - ein handelsübliches LNB, welches für Offsetspiegel ausgelegt ist (sind nahezu alle LNBs) bringt hier nicht die volle Leistung.


    Da nahezu alle TV-Offsetspiegel sehr ähnliche "Proportionen" haben gibt es m.E. schon eine für (nahezu alle) Offsetspiegel "optimale" Linse. Welche das ist und wie sie aussehen muss, das werden wir sicher noch heraus finden - die Linsen von Rocket-LNBs (z.B. Venton) sind schon nahe dran ;-)


    73 de Johannes, DL5RDI

    HB9RYZ


    Hello Wolfgang,


    obviously you did not read the instruction manual ;-)


    In the options menue you can activate different things - one of the features are special fields for Sat-use: e.g. Sat-name, Sat mode.....


    I feel comfortable with this (in my opinion) very good freeware program.


    73 de Johannes

    DD4YR


    Hello Robert,


    I have to disagree. The most important thing in a HF-pileup is the 2nd receiver (see all the top HF-radio models !). The monitoring of the pileup is essential for success in a pileup. If you have an experienced DX-OP it is not adversely when you can monitor all the pileup (neither for the DX nor for the caller). You have to observe the habits of the DX-OP and than you have to call on the "right" frequency. (As it should be in HAM radio 99% listening and 1% calling).


    As VE4SW already said full duplex (monitoring your own signal) and split is not a contradiction !


    For QO-100 I use an analogue receiver to listen to the DX and in addition a SDR to watch all the pileup and to listen (and constantly monitor) my own transmission.


    Thus I still can not see "two rules fighting" or any reason why working split via QO-100 (in certain cases) should be omitted.


    But lets look forward for an offical statement from AMSAT.


    73 de Johannes DL5RDI / AC2TR

    Hello,


    did you listen to the simplex pileup ? Could you copy the DX-Station in the crowd of calling HAMs ?


    No - you couldn't copy the DX. Thus the DX has to wait until everybody calms down and then can reply to one station.

    In split mode the DX has its "own" QRG and will be heard and can answer to a call sign, even when many stations are calling. Thus the QSO rate is much, much higher (higher efficiency).


    Thus in my opinion split mode for rare DX with huge pileup is also useful via QO-100.


    73 de Johannes

    hb9iiu


    if you are looking for a remote conrol solution, you could take a raspery and connect it via serial with the Upconverter and via WLAN with your home network. Than you can (e.g. via TeamViewer) remote controll the raspery and with a terminal program you can communicate with your upconverter and switch between TX and RX (and also on/off, forward and refleted power, IF readout and IF change....)..


    73 de Johannes

    Hello,


    I used something like this (not exactly this antenna, but with the same technical data) during my hollidays this year in I5 (Toscana). With about 10W I had a very good readable SSB signal via QO-100 (about 3db below the CW beacon).


    73 de Johannes

    pe1hzg


    If it is a kit to assemble your self it is no problem with customs - Kits are also excluded from the CE - marking.


    Thus if there has to be soldered something or two parts just connceted together or the PCB has to be mounted in the housing it is a kit (Bausatz) and is not affected by a missing CE-sign.


    (I think it is a parallel to the FCC-rules in the US where you have so called kits where you have to put just one transistor in a socket to complete a rig - than this device has not to be FCC-certifed).

    The lesson, be first to market, do not dither about trying to get everything optimal and get global agreement on standards.


    ...like it was with VCRs in the 80s: VHS (better marketing) vs VIDEO 2000 (the better system) :-) ...