[sarex] Re: Simplex and space

[Vince Fiscus, KB7ADL]

>greetings- in response to an extremely condesending post, I must say your
>reading comprehension is poor for a writer unless you didnt read all the
>exchanges. To the contrary, I believe I can do something. that is why I
>try. pat
>
>
>On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, William M. Pasternak wrote:
>
> > As I recall from my days of film making with the late Roy Neal, K6DUE, 
> (who
> > was the person who literally began the manned ham radio in space 
> operations
> > through his connections with NASA) the reason the frequencies are -- as
> > they are -- is the result of three years of exhaustive research by the
> > folks who are responsible for any ham radio being ion the ISS.  The choice
> > was made so that ARISS operations interfere with no-body -- and hopefully
> > -- nobody on the ground interferes with ARISS.
> >
> > Changing hats:  Since the 1960's I have been researching and writing about
> > bandplanning -- repeaters -- remote bases -- etc.  The first 26 years for
> > the now defunct 73 Magazine (Looking west) and the past several years for
> > Worldradio.  As such, I have an ongoing information flow that few if 
> any of
> > you have.
> >
> > And it boils down to this:  Not all the world having the same bandplans as
> > the USA and North America.  And the "world" is not going to change to
> > satisfy a small group of folks who -- now and then -- want to talk to an
> > astronaut or cosmonaut.
> >
> > Rather, those  interested in such an activity can only perform it because
> > the rest of the world'a ham radio community permits it to happen.  And the
> > rest of the world of ham radio has -- in a defacto sense -- has 
> dictated to
> > manned space enthusiasts where they can operate.
> >
> > The bottom line:  Be happy that you can have the opportunity to make these
> > contacts at all and stop moaning because you may have to twiddle a dial
> > once in a while.  Just consider it as being the way it is -- and the way
> > its going to remain -- because it is not within any of your power to 
> change.
> >
> > de
> > Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 04:55 PM 8/12/2006, McGrane wrote:
> >
> > >Greetings after a busy day and to continue, the choice of a simplex
> > >frequency is easy;  145.800
> > >
> > >pat
> > >
> > >
> > >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
> > >
> > > > Does a (1) non interfering  (2) two meter (3) satellite (4) simplex
> > > frequency for worldwide use exist?
> > > >
> > > > I guess one would need to start with the approved world wide satellite
> > > frequencies - 144-146 MHz.
> > > > Then overlay regional usage band plans and see what was left.
> > > >
> > > > The ARRL band plan
> > > (http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html#2m)  for the
> > > USA has satellite operations from 144.30-144.50 and 145.80-146.00. That
> > > limits it down in a hurry so that criteria #1 is met.
> > > >
> > > > What do other regional band plans have in that range that meet the
> > > first criteria?
> > > >
> > > > Kenneth - N5VHO
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----
> > > > Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> > > > To unsubscribe, visit http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/sarex





Don't ya just love easy-sats.

Hee Heee Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Sorry.