[amsat-bb] US barriers to orbit (Re: Amateur communication satellites)

[Dave Mann]

Yes Mode K is very easy.  I worked many RS QSO's in CW with no problems at all.  Used two Kenwood TS-830's and a multi-band Fritzel Co. Wire antenna.  Only problem for me was that I had to report ever QSO with a "Soviet Bloc" country to the G2 office.  After a few weeks I just gave the spooks a copy of the logbook.

73
Dave
Ex-DA1BB


Sent from my iPad

> On Jun 29, 2016, at 15:50, Bryan KL7CN <bryan at kl7cn.net> wrote:
> 
> Mode K is awesome!
> 
> But, it seems more "old style ham radio-y" than using VHF/UHF gear -- big-ish gear, big antennas. I was thinking about how someone with a Raspberry Pi and a VHF/UHF module would use Mode K -- my HackerLab crowd.
> 
> Like I said: Yay. More satellites.
> 
> But I sure would like to see something more modern-feeling that would appeal to the Maker/DIY/Rasperry Pi crowd.
> 
> But, see #1. :)
> 
> -- bag
> 
> Bryan KL7CN/W6
> bryan at kl7cn.net
> 
> On Jun 29, 2016, at 13:00, Paul Stoetzer <n8hm at arrl.net> wrote:
> 
> Mode K was pretty popular back with RS-12/13! The Doppler shift is
> minimal enough at those frequencies that any normal HF transceiver in
> split mode will work fine.
> 
> The neat thing is the potential for subhorizon access to the satellite.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Paul, N8HM
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Bryan Green <bryan at kl7cn.net> wrote:
>> 1. Yay. More satellites.
>> 
>> 2. HF? Really? Huh.
>> 
>> 3. Net-net: see 1.
>> 
>> -- bag
>> 
>> Bryan KL7CN/W6
>> bryan at kl7cn.net
>> 
>> On Jun 29, 2016, at 12:28, Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> Within the US, when someone like Bob, WB4APR, tries to build amateur
>>>>> communication sats, he runs into needless obstacles from FCC and NTIA.
>>> 
>>>> Expand, please.
>>> 
>>> The FCC had held up our Advance Notice (API) filing on the Naval Academy's
>>> last 5 Amateur Satellites (2 in orbit!) in a disagreement over whether
>>> Amateur Satellites built by students at the Service Academies can be
>>> amateur or must operate under NTIA rules in Federal Bands.
>>> 
>>> Since the 5 satellites all had 2-way ham-user transponders on them on 2m
>>> and 70cm, the NTIA disagreed and said it was an FCC part 97 operation.
>>> FCC said it had to be Federal (and back and forth).  Note, we CANNOT get
>>> an "Experimental license" from the FCC, because it is true, that our
>>> institution is Federal.  But when  our students build an Amateur
>>> Satellite, it does not matter who built it, what matters is how it is
>>> OPERATED.
>>> 
>>> Finally, I think the paperwork was accepted by the FCC for OPERATION in
>>> support of users in the Amateur Satellite Service and we have our fingers
>>> crossed that they will forward the API Notices to the ITU.
>>> 
>>> To avoid any recurrence of this debate, our next student experimental
>>> satellite will be a bent-pipe HF linear transponder like the early AMSATS
>>> with uplink on 15m and downlink on 10m.
>>> 
>>> We walk a fine line...  In order for DOD to launch it, the experiment has
>>> to have some educational value to DOD.  In order for us to be able to
>>> build something useful and economical at the undergraduate level, it needs
>>> to be amateur.   So by proposing an HF transponder for our next project,
>>> we NAILED-IT!
>>> 
>>> The Feds have NO SATELLITE allocations in HF, but the Amateur Satellite
>>> Service does. Therefore if they want to let us learn anything about HF
>>> satellites, then they have to let us operate it in the Amateur Satellite
>>> Service where there will be plenty of "users" to exercise it.
>>> 
>>> So it will be a 100% amateur radio satellite for all hams worldwide and
>>> what we learn from it will have value to understaning HF satellites.
>>> 
>>> Again, fingers crossed.  This would be a 2018 satellite at the earliest.
>>> 
>>> LESSON LEARNED:  Don't let anyone but the Amateur Satellite Control
>>> operator get involved in the paper work.  He files the paperwork and he
>>> takes the responsibility for ON/OFF command as required by the FCC.
>>> 
>>> Bob, WB4APR
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb