[sarex] Re: further late reply regarding ISS simplex

Stan Vandiver w4sv at arrl.net
Sat Aug 12 04:22:24 PDT 2006 

Now a days?  It has always been like that, even when the "S" in SAREX 
meant "Shuttle".  I've been skunked many times from shuttle crews 
too, due either to low interest, or heavy workloads.  There are few 
"hams" like Owen Garriott, Tony England, Valery Korzun, or Bill 
McArthur... but many others have still done a fine job (no, not their 
"job" obviously) of getting on the air and making random QSO's.  We 
realize they have "real work" to do onboard, and if they have more 
interest in looking out the window, or shooting photos, or phoning 
home to their family... they're entitled to spend their free time as 
they wish.  But we very much do enjoy when they take the time to make 
random contacts with us earthbound hams.  It raises our spirits, as 
we hope it raises theirs, to make this special radio connection.

A very good example of bad split-frequency operation (that is, 
inexperienced hams) was the crew of Expedition-4 (Bursch and Walz). 
On Christmas Eve 2001, I copied one of them calling CQ for a whole 
pass, with absolutely no contacts.  I tried every uplink known to me 
(all pre-programmed in my rig) and they just were not hearing anyone, 
it seemed.  I seriously don't think they couldn't "sort out the QRM" 
but rather that they had their radio left on one of the secret splits 
used for school (or other private) contacts, and therefore they just 
got dead silence, as if no one cared to call them and talk to them, 
and maybe wish them a Merry Christmas.  They never got on the air 
again either, except for school contacts.  That was a shame.

One last comment, back to the Shuttle Amateur Radio EXperiment: they 
used FIVE voice uplinks, and you had to "win the luck of the draw" to 
jump between them to try to get them to respond to you.  Talk about a 
QRM generator!!!   Things were simplexer, er... simpler, with Mir.

Best regards,
Stan/W4SV


On 11 Aug 2006 at 20:03, Kenneth, N5VHO wrote:

> So one frequency up and down for SSTV, Packet, Voice,
> PSK-31 and two for the crossband repeater. 
> 
> I think you need to go back to my posting regarding
> the reason "theres been very little phone activity
> from the ISS for many years"(regardless of the up/down
> frequency scheme). They have other things to play
> with. Only interested crew members get on now a days
> and the rest are a horse lead to water issue.
> 
> Kenneth - N5VHO
> 
> --- McGrane <tmcgrane at suffolk.lib.ny.us> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Sorry kenneth but you totally missed the original
> > point----- theres been
> > very little phone activity from the ISS for many
> > years and split seperate
> > frequencies are an unneccesary incumberance to
> > operation.
> > 
> > What good is split operation if the astronauts dont
> > use it????
> > 
> > With simplex, maybe theyll leave the radio on for
> > callers.
> > That states my point simply.
> > 
> > pat
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Kenneth, N5VHO wrote:
> > 
> > > Split operations allows everyone can hear the
> > > astronauts talking back all the time.
> > > 
> > > Kenneth - N5VHO
> > > 
> > > --- McGrane <tmcgrane at suffolk.lib.ny.us> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 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
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around 
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> ----
> Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> To unsubscribe, visit http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/sarex
>

More information about the SAREX mailing list