>We aim to go out battery powered 5 watt on Field Day. I don't know about the
>availability of a 2m/440 rig.
>
>Is there any hope of working RS-12 for the satellite bonus points?
>Anybody try it? Succeed?
>
>Tnx Bob
>
Bob--I've done it every year for the past 3 years on FD. It's kind of a
zoo because there are many first time users. I would suggest you try RS-10
with the 2 meter uplink. A problem with using RS-12 is that many of the
people in the uplink passband on 15 meters don't know they are in the
satellite, so a lot of the "CQ Field Days" you hear on the satellite will
not be satellite QSOs--just regular old terrestrial skip.
I recall reading a few months ago that the Russians were about to launch
the next RS bird; RS-14?? Anyone know if it's up?
73--Jim, K6ZH
>From David Robbins (KY1H) 413-494-6955(w) 413-655-2714(h)
><robbins@guid2.dnet.ge.com> Tue May 10 16:55:54 1994
From: David Robbins (KY1H) 413-494-6955(w) 413-655-2714(h)
<robbins@guid2.dnet.ge.com> (David Robbins 413-494-6955 413-655-2714 (KY1H w h))
Subject: remote spotting stations with ct
Message-ID: <9405101547.AA17053@thomas.ge.com>
i'm sorry, but my dumb mail program on this vax doesn't let me copy all the
other message texts into mine automatically, so you will just have to imagine
that I am responding to a bunch of them.
I would think that using networked CT over packet to remote spotting
stations would be the equivalent of getting spots over the PacketCluster.
As long as the remote station(s) don't actually make the QSO there shouldn't
be any difference. Obviously with this interpretation the distance to the
spotting station(s) wouldn't matter.
I had written in remote query capability in my old MM logging package that let
a remote spotter send 'private' dx spots and query the log to see if stations
were needed for QSOs or mults on each band. It worked rather nicely and we
miss it a bit in CT. It would be nicer to have a real networked spotter since
they could have instant access to the whole log so we may look into that for
the future.
73, dave ky1h robbins@guid2.dnet.ge.com
>From ballen@morgan.com (Brooke Allen) Tue May 10 18:58:36 1994
From: ballen@morgan.com (Brooke Allen) (Brooke Allen)
Subject: low rhombic as rcv ant
Message-ID: <9405101358.ZM4924@is.morgan.com>
Has anyone tried, or have thoughts on, using a terminated rhombic
a few feet off the ground as a receiving antenna?
|