Posts by HB9SKA

    It is always the operator if something goes wrong with the signal quality, sometimes the equipment is another obstacle.

    Agreed, its always the operator - and his equipment.

    The really bad operators are turning the vfo knob while transmitting, to find the actual TX frequency. This is as bad as an offset, that the most not GPS controlled stations have with their QSO partner.

    That's bad and wrong operating, this has nothing to do with new or old hardware. I'm only turns the RIT. Runs it out of 9.9 kHz because my LNB, then I tune in the PSK-beacon again and calculate the RX-frequency new with my self written Software.

    But this all is not an issue of the new IC-705 if the right old man is sitting behind it.

    Thank you, I'm 62 now. ;)

    Have also a nice weekend and I hope we hear us again on the transponder.


    Hello Mike DK1ML

    it is annoying to listen to the own voice with a latency of 200-300ms.

    No, its not annoying for a satellite operator, its fun and just a habituation. I can understand you, for many shortwave operator who sprung on the QO-100-train satellite operation is a new field. In a 20m-contest I would make no QSO.

    The worse signals on the satellite are resulting in worse operators, or old equipment, not in a missing duplex mode :-)

    That's definitely wrong, also with a :). I'm QRV with my old Kenwood TS-711E/811E duo with a Datong R.F. Clipper and have a clean signal on the transponder. The worse signals are from the operators who can not configure there Pluto's correctly. If you have your whole rig under control, Software with SDR and Hardware, you can have a nice signal with every rig.


    I received the Mode-S beacon from UO-11 with a 1.2m TV prime focus Dish and a Kenpro KR-5400A. The elevation rotor suffered damage as a result. Anyway, we have no information, why it should be a 4-m Dish.

    Hmmm.... with a 4m Dish to hunt LEO-sats is like to shot with a big gun to little birds.

    "Mit Kanonen auf Spatzen schiessen". I have never heard such a nonsense in my long "career" as OSCAR operator, Sorry.

    Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-92

    It's been in Facebook and on Twitter. Maybe I said something here a few
    days ago. In any case, its battery is having trouble keeping it running
    through eclipses. It then goes into auto-safe mode. There is apparently a
    bug in the software that I wrote for the Foxes so that under some
    circumstances it "forgets" that it went into safe automatically and stays
    in safe mode even when the voltage comes back up after it enters the sun.
    In that case we have to wait for a command station to re-enable it. This
    is not too tenable over the long run, so I'm not sure what the ops people
    plan to do. It would be nice if the batteries failed open so it worked
    reliably in sun like AO-7. Unfortunately, that did NOT happen with AO-85.
    We'll see with 92.

    73, Burns WB1FJ
    AMSAT Flight Software

    Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-92

    I've mostly been posting about it on Twitter.

    AO-92 has a cell that's failing, and towards the end of many eclipses it
    goes into auto-safe mode at 3.6v. If the battery drops low enough the IHU
    resets, and it comes back up in normal safe mode. Mark and I have been
    commanding to repeater mode on the first available pass after the resets,
    but it's not a long term sustainable answer. Last night Mark commanded the
    transmitter completely off while we consider a plan of action.

    Leaving autosafe on and the tx off, we may be able to turn the repeater on
    ad-hoc for weekends or such, completely dependent on command station
    availability. Turning autosafe and the IHU off like we did with AO-85 will
    kill the satellite pretty quickly, so that's not a good response either. So,
    we'll look at resets and battery states before this weekend and see where we

    73, Drew KO4MA
    AMSAT VP Operations

    OSCAR - Status KW 36 im PDF-Format
    Rückkopplung / Feedback

    Infos und Empfangsberichte sind immer gerne willkommen, auch in diesem Forum!
    Information and reception reports are always welcome, also in this forum!

    Tnx 4 report :(
    Tnx 4 likes :)

    73 von Thomas -

    Hello Lucio and forum

    I agree with you, its a longtime headache generating story. In my sight there are 3 types of satellites:

    1) HAM-satellites built by AMSAT-Organisations:)

    2) "Experimental" satellites built by universities and institutes =O

    3) Commercially satellites X(

    And there are many satellites with missions between 2) and 3), experimental missions with participation of amateur radio operators, also like SatNOGS, which goes later commercial. It means, the results are evaluated commercially. Therefore should 2) use the "frequency ranges 150.05_174 MHz and 400.15_420 MHz". But nothing happened in this direction. AMSAT-Organisations and -groups should stronger participates with 2), then the frequency coordination would be easier.

    For 3) there is the IARU Monitoring System. I hope SatNOGS will report this commercial CubeSat.

    OSCAR - Status KW 35 im PDF-Format
    Rückkopplung / Feedback

    Infos und Empfangsberichte sind immer gerne willkommen, auch in diesem Forum!
    Information and reception reports are always welcome, also in this forum!

    Tnx 4 report :(
    Tnx 4 likes :)

    73 von Thomas -

    I wrote an article about it, but I have to look for it in my archive.

    This was my article in German from 2015:

    WRC-15: Amateur-Bänder ungeeignet für Nicht-Amateur-Satelliten
    An der World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC), abgehalten im November 2015
    in Genf, entschied man sich für eine Agenda für die nächste WRC 2019 an den Rat
    der International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Einer der Tagesordnungspunkte
    ist von besonderem Interesse für die CubeSat-Community.

    Im Tagesordnungspunkt 1.7 für die WRC-19 steht: "to study the spectrum needs for
    telemetry, tracking and command in the space operation service for non-GSO
    satellites with short duration missions, to assess the suitability of existing
    allocations to the space operation service and, if necessary, to consider new
    allocations, in accordance with Resolution COM6/19 (WRC-15)."

    Die Resolution COM6/19, die eventuell eine neue Nummer erhält, spezifiziert die
    Frequenzbereiche 150.05 bis 174 MHz und 400.15 bis 420 MHz, welche als mögliche
    neue Frequenzzuweisungen in Betracht kommen.

    Einer der Faktoren für diese Entscheidung an der Konferenz war, dass einige
    Nicht-Amateurfunk-Satelliten Frequenzen für Telemetrie, Tracking und Kommandos
    in den Frequenzbereichen 144 MHz bis 146 MHz und 435 MHz bis 438 MHz benutzen
    und benutzt haben. Eine solche Nutzung steht nicht im Einklang mit "Nos. 1.56
    und 1.57". Diese zwei Bestimmungen der ITU Radio-Verordnungen definieren den
    Amateurfunk- und Amateur-Satellitenfunk-Dienst.

    IARU-Präsident Timothy S. Ellam, VE6SH/G4HUA, bemerkte: "This is an excellent
    result for the amateur services and clearly shows that non-amateur satellite
    constructors need to consider spectrum other than the very limited and congested
    segments that are available for amateur satellites at 144 MHz and 435 MHz."

    Eigene Anmerkung: Es bleibt zu hoffen, dass jene russischen Satellitenbauer,
    die die Amateurfunkfrequenzen als billige Alternative für sich entdeckt haben,
    sich zukünftig auch an die ITU-Verordnungen halten werden.

    I googled for "ITU Resolution COM6/19", there doesn't seem to be a solution yet. This is a long-lasting process, I hope you understand my pessimism now. And my note was a little bit naive at this time.

    This is a very old story since the launch of the first CubeSats. If they have no amateur radio license they have an national/experimental license. Its a waste of time to identify such intruders, just ignore it. But there are new ITU-regulations with new frequency-ranges within the 2m (130 MHz) and 70cm (450 MHz) bands for such experimental satellites also without any fees. But if nobody knows it...

    I wrote an article about it, but I have to look for it in my archive.

    The problem is the following: When a not coordinated satellite is identified then you also can collect telemetry from it. If this telemetry is in the SatNOGS DB then a "not coordination" makes no sense and the whole coordination work from IARU goes ad absurdum. My suggestion is to ignore such a satellite completely like an intruder.