[amsat-bb] QIKcom-1: SatNOGS and Listening

[Robert Bruninga]

Listening for QIKCOM-1:  Just to be sure.  If the antennas were not
released by the host, then no one will be able to decode it but we are
HOPING that someone can hear it responding by EAR.  That is, put your
receiver in SSB mode and listen carefully by ear.  Then ping it with as
much AX.25 FM power as you can.  No more often than every 12 seconds, since
it has a DUPE filter of 10 seconds.



Then see if you can hear a correlation 1 second avfter each uplink for a
possible digipeat…



Bob



*From:* Scott [mailto:scott23192 at gmail.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 10, 2018 10:08 AM
*To:* Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>; Malcolm Beckett <
macbeck22 at gmail.com>
*Cc:* Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>
*Subject:* Re: QIKcom-1: SatNOGS



Greetings Bob, it’s been a while since we spoke.  Perhaps “Outernet” was
the subject previously.



Yes, Malcolm was kind enough to refer me to recordings from a number of
diverse receiver sources last night and I only found one with actual
packets – which decoded to be digipeats through PSAT.



Additionally, I had a nice overhead pass of QIKcom-1 last night and as I’ve
done many times before, tried to exchange APRS packets with it at up to 50w
thru a RHCP yagi gain antenna (X-Quad).  No replies were heard,
unfortunately.



73!



-Scott,  K4KDR




------------------------------
------------------------------



*From:* Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>

*Sent:* Wednesday, January 10, 2018 9:53 AM

*To:* Malcolm Beckett <macbeck22 at gmail.com> ; Scott <scott23192 at gmail.com>

*Cc:* Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>

*Subject:* RE: QIKcom-1: SatNOGS



Thanks!

Data number 59348 makes sense.  At first I was totally confused by the
continuous tone traks aAND the fact that they followed Doppler.  Meaning
they must be coming from the spacecraft.



Then I realized that maybe the receiver is Doppler trakcing and so any
fixed tone in the passband would then appear to follow Doppler when in fact
it was constant.  So, now that I ignore those, I can see the packets.



Bob





*From:* Malcolm Beckett [mailto:macbeck22 at gmail.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 10, 2018 9:39 AM
*To:* Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>; Scott <scott23192 at gmail.com>
*Subject:* Re: QIKcom-1: SatNOGS



Bob,



For reference, here's some NO-84 passes:
https://network.satnogs.org/observations/?norad=40654



However, the visual appearance will vary based on gain and station
configuration.  The SatNOGS team responded this morning and eliminated all
of the observations I'd found.  The weak signals appear to be NO-84 off the
back of directional antennas.  A few decodes from NO-84 and one terrestrial
station.



I've copied Scott Chapman, K4KDR, as he tried last night with negative
results.  My station is portable but relatively robust.  As time and
weather permit, I may find some acceptable passes and try to warm it up a
little!



Have a great day,



Malcolm







On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> wrote:

Yes, that is going to be a problem.  They are both on the same frequency
along with PCSAT NO44, and so one has to ignor any passes when both are in
view.

I still think the best test is to be pinging it once every 12 seconds and
see if there are any responses.  That will be proof.



I have not looked at waterfalls before of a good packet, so I don’t know
what to expect.  Maybe you could capture a waterfall on a strong pass of
NO84 and lets nail down an example of a good pass.



Bob

WB4APR