[amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question

[Alan P. Biddle]

Greg,

A good compromise, and I certainly understand the desire to remain in the
loop.  It allows the other operator to take advantage of greater automation
or not, as suits them.

Alan
WA4SCA



-----Original Message-----
From: Greg D. [mailto:ko6th_greg at hotmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 11:37 PM
To: n3tl at bellsouth.net; apbiddle at mailaps.org; jbelstner at yahoo.com;
amsat-bb at amsat.org
Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question



> From: n3tl at bellsouth.net
> To: APBIDDLE at mailaps.org; jbelstner at yahoo.com; amsat-bb at amsat.org
> Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:42:09 -0400
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Doppler Tuning Convention Question
> 
 
> 
> Alan, I have no doubt that you're right about the necessity for Doppler
> control above Mode B satellites. Having always preferred the KISS approach
> whenever possible, I suppose that's why I haven't been able to get myself
> very excited for L- and S-band opportunities. I definitely enjoy the
> benefits of computer control for Doppler. I just don't much care for
having
> no choice in using it (or not) to effectively work a satellite.
> 
> 73 to all,
> 
> Tim - N3TL
> 
>  

Actually, I've been running 2.4 ghz manually since AO-40, and really haven't
had that much trouble.  Just keep spinning the dial.  Also, having an older
rig (736r), I don't bother with computer control when on the linear birds.
I do relax under full computer control for FM up through L-band, but there's
still something satisfying about manual tuning.

Greg  KO6TH




________________________________

Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox. See how.
<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:
WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2>