[sarex] Re: further late reply regarding ISS simplex

[Robert Bruninga]

> Hello again- the astronauts will hear everyone calling 
> whether its split or simplex operation so why not make it
simplex!

Because many of us live near inconsiderate operators that step
all
Over the downlink by transmitting on the uplink.  Simplex is
just not a good idea.
The downlink should be separate from the uplink so that everyone
can hear the downlink without interfererence from uplink
stations.

Bob 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sarex-bounces at AMSAT.Org 
> [mailto:sarex-bounces at AMSAT.Org] On Behalf Of McGrane
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:43 PM
> To: Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] Ransom; bruninga at usna.edu
> Cc: Manned space BBS
> Subject: [sarex] Re: further late reply regarding ISS simplex
> 
> 
> Hello again- the astronauts will hear everyone calling 
> whether its split or simplex operation so why not make it
simplex!
> 
> pat
> 
> 
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
> 
> > It sounds like your issue is not that split frequencies are
bad but 
> > that multiple uplinks makes it difficult for the crew to 
> listen to one 
> > uplink. ITU region regulations for ground station 
> operations are the 
> > culprit. Space has no borders but Earth does so have of the 
> problem is 
> > getting everyone to agree on a single uplink. Not everyone
in the 
> > world has the same frequency allocations nor do they use 
> the available 
> > spectrum in their region the same way.
> > 
> > The issue is not the 20-30 miles but the number of callers 
> in the 2000 
> > km wide footprint. The station has to listen to all of 
> them. Since you 
> > can't hear all of them, it becomes difficult to know when 
> someone is 
> > talking or not without guidance from the station operator.
> > 
> > In the MIR days, the crew did not have the luxury of near
full time 
> > satellite communication that provides voice, email 
> communication and 
> > an IP phone that lets them make phone calls. If the MIR 
> crew wanted to 
> > talk to someone, they needed to use the ham radio or the 
> Russian VHF 
> > space to ground system. The ISS crew has plenty of options 
> to choose 
> > from when they want to communicate and it depends on the 
> personality 
> > of the crew as to which ones get utilized.
> > 
> > Kenneth - N5VHO
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sarex-bounces at AMSAT.Org
[mailto:sarex-bounces at AMSAT.Org] On 
> > Behalf Of McGrane
> > Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 6:43 PM
> > To: Manned space BBS
> > Subject: [sarex] further late reply regarding ISS simplex
> > 
> > 
> > Greetings from patrick N2OEQ
> > 
> > Despite support of the present frequency scheme for the ISS
I still 
> > wish to disagree with the policy of split operation with
different 
> > phone uplinks.
> > 
> > Back when the MIR was up, the russians operated simplex and 
> left the 
> > radio on to listen for callers.
> > On several occasions, I called the MIR according to my
tracking 
> > program and was rewarded several times with a response.
> > 
> > With two different uplink frequencies, the astronauts are
less 
> > inclined to leave the radio on to listen for callers.
> > 
> > When there were several callers here on simplex responding
to a CQ 
> > call from the MIR, we acted civilized and took turns and 
> everyone made 
> > contacts so I dont buy the absolute need for split
operation.
> > Besides, how many callers could there be within 20 or 30 
> miles up to 
> > the horizon.
> > 
> > We've had years of robot like amateur radio on the ISS. How
about 
> > loosening the ties!
> > 
> > Thanks for the soapbox..... pat
> > 
> > 
> > ----
> > Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of
AMSAT-NA.
> > To unsubscribe, visit
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/sarex
> > 
> 
> ----
> Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> To unsubscribe, visit http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/sarex
>