Date   

Re: COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

Colin Ranson
 

Oh, forgot to mention, the M+P 13mm is relatively like lead piping to bend compared to M+P hyperflex, at least the example I’ve seem, but jolly good for straight runs.

 

Colin de G8LBS.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Colin Ranson
Sent: 10 May 2021 17:36
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

 

Thanks for that info Clive,   a swift look did not reveal carriage for say - 12m,

 

Any idea ? Our club antennas could do with some decent stuff.

 

Regards

 

Colin de G8LBS

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Clive, G3GJA
Sent: 10 May 2021 17:26
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

 

You can buy LLA400UF in 1m increments here: LLA400UF® ULTRA FLEX Coaxial Cable - 1M INCREMENTS (ccsukltd.co.uk) That is what I shall be using for my rotator loops.

 

The LLA400 clone has a much tougher jacket than some of the other clones, such as HDF400, and the measured performance of four 25m lengths used on a local repeater site matched the published LMR400 performance at 23cms. More than can be said for a new 100m drum of  Westflex 103 which was awful.

 

Clive G3GJA

 

From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> On Behalf Of Martin
Sent: 10 May 2021 17:04
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

 

Many thanks to everyone for such a response, I certainly have much information now, but possibly a little confused? I really appreciate all the comments from you all who have been here and done it all before.  
I have checked the losses at 1296 MHz and whilst I realise there is more to this than meets the eye in terms of quality, flexibility and expected lifespan; my conclusion is that LMR 400 is about 1 dB  better than the M and P Ultraflex 10 and that the M and P 13 mm one is 3 .7 dBs better than LMR 400, which is a useful bonus if accurate specification.  All compared to LDF4-50A at 8.9 dBs per 100 metres around 6 dB's better than the LMR400. Its getting around the rotator that's the 'problem' as has always been difficult but more so, when considering 23 cms. The LMR cable flexible can only be purchased in 300 m coils I think and is rather expensive! Using an LNA/PA (S G Labs) suppose the losses give or take a dB will not be too critical? So its a case of balancing the budget against performance required/expected. 73 Martin GW3XJQ     
  

 

HESH Typographic Logo

HESH Computer Services

hesh.co.uk
01482 324936

8 Louis Pearlman Centre, Goulton Street, Hull, HU3 4DL

 

Registered in England No. 3003479. The information contained in this email may be legally privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, use of this information (including disclosure, copying or distribution) or any action taken, or omitted to be taken, in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful; therefore please inform the sender and delete the message immediately. The views expressed in this email are those of the originator and not necessarily those held by HESH Computer Services Ltd, who do not accept liability for any action taken in reliance on the contents of this message or for the consequences of any computer viruses which may have been transmitted by this email.

 

 


Re: COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

Colin Ranson
 

Thanks for that info Clive,   a swift look did not reveal carriage for say - 12m,

 

Any idea ? Our club antennas could do with some decent stuff.

 

Regards

 

Colin de G8LBS

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Clive, G3GJA
Sent: 10 May 2021 17:26
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

 

You can buy LLA400UF in 1m increments here: LLA400UF® ULTRA FLEX Coaxial Cable - 1M INCREMENTS (ccsukltd.co.uk) That is what I shall be using for my rotator loops.

 

The LLA400 clone has a much tougher jacket than some of the other clones, such as HDF400, and the measured performance of four 25m lengths used on a local repeater site matched the published LMR400 performance at 23cms. More than can be said for a new 100m drum of  Westflex 103 which was awful.

 

Clive G3GJA

 

From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> On Behalf Of Martin
Sent: 10 May 2021 17:04
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

 

Many thanks to everyone for such a response, I certainly have much information now, but possibly a little confused? I really appreciate all the comments from you all who have been here and done it all before.  
I have checked the losses at 1296 MHz and whilst I realise there is more to this than meets the eye in terms of quality, flexibility and expected lifespan; my conclusion is that LMR 400 is about 1 dB  better than the M and P Ultraflex 10 and that the M and P 13 mm one is 3 .7 dBs better than LMR 400, which is a useful bonus if accurate specification.  All compared to LDF4-50A at 8.9 dBs per 100 metres around 6 dB's better than the LMR400. Its getting around the rotator that's the 'problem' as has always been difficult but more so, when considering 23 cms. The LMR cable flexible can only be purchased in 300 m coils I think and is rather expensive! Using an LNA/PA (S G Labs) suppose the losses give or take a dB will not be too critical? So its a case of balancing the budget against performance required/expected. 73 Martin GW3XJQ     
  

 

HESH Typographic Logo

HESH Computer Services

hesh.co.uk
01482 324936

8 Louis Pearlman Centre, Goulton Street, Hull, HU3 4DL

 

Registered in England No. 3003479. The information contained in this email may be legally privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, use of this information (including disclosure, copying or distribution) or any action taken, or omitted to be taken, in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful; therefore please inform the sender and delete the message immediately. The views expressed in this email are those of the originator and not necessarily those held by HESH Computer Services Ltd, who do not accept liability for any action taken in reliance on the contents of this message or for the consequences of any computer viruses which may have been transmitted by this email.

 


Re: COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

Clive, G3GJA
 

You can buy LLA400UF in 1m increments here: LLA400UF® ULTRA FLEX Coaxial Cable - 1M INCREMENTS (ccsukltd.co.uk) That is what I shall be using for my rotator loops.

 

The LLA400 clone has a much tougher jacket than some of the other clones, such as HDF400, and the measured performance of four 25m lengths used on a local repeater site matched the published LMR400 performance at 23cms. More than can be said for a new 100m drum of  Westflex 103 which was awful.

 

Clive G3GJA

 

From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> On Behalf Of Martin
Sent: 10 May 2021 17:04
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

 

Many thanks to everyone for such a response, I certainly have much information now, but possibly a little confused? I really appreciate all the comments from you all who have been here and done it all before.  
I have checked the losses at 1296 MHz and whilst I realise there is more to this than meets the eye in terms of quality, flexibility and expected lifespan; my conclusion is that LMR 400 is about 1 dB  better than the M and P Ultraflex 10 and that the M and P 13 mm one is 3 .7 dBs better than LMR 400, which is a useful bonus if accurate specification.  All compared to LDF4-50A at 8.9 dBs per 100 metres around 6 dB's better than the LMR400. Its getting around the rotator that's the 'problem' as has always been difficult but more so, when considering 23 cms. The LMR cable flexible can only be purchased in 300 m coils I think and is rather expensive! Using an LNA/PA (S G Labs) suppose the losses give or take a dB will not be too critical? So its a case of balancing the budget against performance required/expected. 73 Martin GW3XJQ     
  



HESH Typographic Logo

HESH Computer Services

hesh.co.uk
01482 324936

8 Louis Pearlman Centre, Goulton Street, Hull, HU3 4DL

Registered in England No. 3003479. The information contained in this email may be legally privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, use of this information (including disclosure, copying or distribution) or any action taken, or omitted to be taken, in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful; therefore please inform the sender and delete the message immediately. The views expressed in this email are those of the originator and not necessarily those held by HESH Computer Services Ltd, who do not accept liability for any action taken in reliance on the contents of this message or for the consequences of any computer viruses which may have been transmitted by this email.


Re: COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

Martin
 

Many thanks to everyone for such a response, I certainly have much information now, but possibly a little confused? I really appreciate all the comments from you all who have been here and done it all before.  
I have checked the losses at 1296 MHz and whilst I realise there is more to this than meets the eye in terms of quality, flexibility and expected lifespan; my conclusion is that LMR 400 is about 1 dB  better than the M and P Ultraflex 10 and that the M and P 13 mm one is 3 .7 dBs better than LMR 400, which is a useful bonus if accurate specification.  All compared to LDF4-50A at 8.9 dBs per 100 metres around 6 dB's better than the LMR400. Its getting around the rotator that's the 'problem' as has always been difficult but more so, when considering 23 cms. The LMR cable flexible can only be purchased in 300 m coils I think and is rather expensive! Using an LNA/PA (S G Labs) suppose the losses give or take a dB will not be too critical? So its a case of balancing the budget against performance required/expected. 73 Martin GW3XJQ     
  


Re: 6cm tests

KENT BRITAIN
 

On this side of the pond Mouser is showing 20 week lead time.

Sure seems to have the same specs as the Mini-Circuits GVA-83.

MiniCircuits doesn't have a simiconductor foundry, so a good chance both houses are using the same die and just using their own part numbers.     Sam, G4DDK and I both have boards for these parts.  Same boards as the PGA-103's.  And we are more than 10 dB cheaper!! hihi 

On Monday, May 10, 2021, 08:42:52 AM CDT, Gareth G4XAT via groups.io <g4xat@...> wrote:


873-SKY65017-70LF £2.29 + VAT at Mouser UK.


Re: 6cm tests

militaryoperator
 

Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] 6cm tests

Why not replace the SPF5189 with one of these, which does seem to be spec-ed for 6GHz..https://www.mouser.co.uk/datasheet/2/472/SKY65017_70LF_200528I-1524673.pdf
Should be a straight swap??
Gareth

Looking closer at specs, they seem biased towards 2Ghz. 6Ghz seems to be real limit so 5.7Ghz looks poor.

Guess one needs devices speced to 10Ghz then it should be fine at 6.

Ben.
 


Re: wtKST not talking to Airscout Problem solved

Brian Howie GM4DIJ
 

On 10/05/2021 15:04, Pete - GM4BYF via groups.io wrote:
I found that moving the AirScout Folder onto the Desktop solved the problem
73
Pete GM4BYF
I've got mine on "E" drive .

Brian GM4DIJ


--
Brian


Re: wtKST not talking to Airscout Problem solved

Pete - GM4BYF
 

I found that moving the AirScout Folder onto the Desktop solved the problem

73
Pete GM4BYF

On 09/05/21 17:01, Pete - GM4BYF via groups.io wrote:
Thanks Brian  - but it is not that. Doing some more investigation.

73
Pete GM4BYF

On 09/05/21 15:47, Brian Howie GM4DIJ wrote:
On 09/05/2021 14:18, Pete - GM4BYF via groups.io wrote:
Trying to set up on another P.C. When left clicking on the correct box for a callsign on wtKST to get the correct map up on Airscout, nothing happens. On my current laptop this is working well.

Any help gratefully received please.
Options Airplane Scatter , remember to tick Activate. Fools me when I have to refresh or re-install. The other problem I sometimes have is where the "tiles" are stored, but if airscout works "standalone" it's not that.

Brian GM4DIJ
--
vry 73
Pete GM4BYF


Re: 6cm tests

Steve G4HTZ
 

Here’s a cheap pre amp design using a Franco board 
scroll down to pre amp 

https://wiki.batc.org.uk/5.6_GHz#Receive_Pre-amplifiers

--
Steve G4HTZ 
JO01JN60
Great Wakering, Essex 
24ghz 1.8w 80cm dish 

also known to be active occasionally on 70cms DATV 


Re: 6cm tests

Gareth G4XAT
 

873-SKY65017-70LF £2.29 + VAT at Mouser UK.


Re: 6cm tests

Andy G4JNT
 

£80 for the PCB sounds reasonable - when it's not a Chinese rip-off

*PAYING* £80 for the board does not.
A scalpel and soldering iron can give you a quite usable PCB



On Mon, 10 May 2021 at 14:24, militaryoperator via groups.io <Military1944=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] 6cm tests
Why not replace the SPF5189 with one of these, which does seem to be spec-ed for 6GHz..https://www.mouser.co.uk/datasheet/2/472/SKY65017_70LF_200528I-1524673.pdf
Should be a straight swap??
Gareth



Re: 6cm tests

militaryoperator
 

Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] 6cm tests
Why not replace the SPF5189 with one of these, which does seem to be spec-ed for 6GHz..https://www.mouser.co.uk/datasheet/2/472/SKY65017_70LF_200528I-1524673.pdf
Should be a straight swap??
Gareth


_._,_._,_
£2.29 Sounds ok for the device, £80 for the board seems high!!

Might be worth a mess?

Ben


Re: 6cm tests

Gareth G4XAT
 

Why not replace the SPF5189 with one of these, which does seem to be spec-ed for 6GHz..https://www.mouser.co.uk/datasheet/2/472/SKY65017_70LF_200528I-1524673.pdf

Should be a straight swap??

Gareth


Re: COAXIAL CABLE LMR400

Conrad, PA5Y
 

Over here there is lots of RFS cable and hardly any Commscope. LMR cables are far too expensive.  I have loops of SCF12-50J and also run it up the tower, so far so good. Including VAT both LCF12-50 and SCF12-50 is 3.70 EUR per meter and Spinner N types are 11.70 EUR each, 7/16 about the same. This is genuine cable and high quality. I no longer use any amateur cables as it is 2-3 times more expensive and about 1/4 as good. As I have 360 deg of good take off I rotate my antennas a lot and I am quite active. Therefore I believe that these cables are up to the task.

Regards

Conrad PA5Y


From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> on behalf of John Lemay via groups.io <john@...>
Sent: 09 May 2021 09:56
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] COAXIAL CABLE LMR400
 
Martin

LMR-400 is not very flexible and whilst it will be fine for running up
the tower, it is less suitable for a rotator loop - unless you form it
in a helix of a couple of turns. FWIW I run LDF4-50 up the tower to the
head unit and then use flexible cables at the rotator.

Reliable names to look out for are Times Microwave and Commscope. As
others have said, you may or may not get good performance from the many
clones that are available. DX Shop is one UK source.

Yes, you will need connectors which are specific to LMR-400.

Regards

John G4ZTR

On 2021-05-08 21:26, Martin wrote:
> Could I ask for some information on LMR 400 coaxial cable from anyone
> who has used it and how it turns out in practise.
> I gather from what I have read, that its good quality and fairly low
> loss when compared with the other 10 mm approx. diameter cables. I am
> looking for something for use on 23 cms and will be using half inch
> LDF4-50A for the main run from shack to tower base and something more
> flexible from there on, around say another 45 feet. I will be running
> an LNA at the top and close to the Yagi.
> I cannot see that it is available from the main amateur radio dealers
> and there is one commercial supplier who will only provide it in 100 m
> drums.  I am happy to invest a in this quantity, (for other purposes
> and bands) but not until I know more about the cable itself. Does it
> require special N series plugs and how flexible is it etc? Its
> available on eBay I think but again, reading seems to suggest there is
> some dubious quality cable being sold which is fake?
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://groups.io/g/UKMicrowaves/message/62381
> [2] https://groups.io/mt/82686040/239367
> [3] https://groups.io/g/UKMicrowaves/post
> [4] https://groups.io/g/UKMicrowaves/editsub/239367
> [5]
> https://groups.io/g/UKMicrowaves/leave/3272144/239367/1480192407/xyzzy






Re: Microwave dish size and shape versus frequency question

KENT BRITAIN
 

Glad it helped.   Kent WA5VJB/2E0VAA/G8EMY

Yes, I know, a G8, but it is a full license.   Really wanted that G Call! hihi

American hams have no idea what the 8 means.



On Sunday, May 9, 2021, 11:35:23 AM CDT, Chris Wilson <chris@...> wrote:


Hello Kent,

Friday, May 7, 2021

Thanks for the reply Kent, appreciated and helpful.


Best regards,
Chris    2E0ILY      mailto:chris@...


KB> Interesting way to think about it,  But the focal points for the
KB> 2.4 GHz and 10 GHz waves are slightly different
KB> since 2.4 GHz waves cannot become an infinitesimal point.    Of
KB> course 10 GHz wave cannot either.
KB> And 2.4 GHz feeds and 10 GHz feeds will have different phase centers.


KB> In the practical world the points are pretty close and just make
KB> your feed support adjustable and move it
KB> in and out a bit for best signal levels.  I have tested hundreds
KB> of dishes on the antenna range and the feed
KB> usually ends up a bit closer to the dish than the calculated focal point.


KB> Frequency limits on the size of the dish.


KB> The dish needs to be a least 5 wavelengths across to bring the waves to a focus.


KB>                  For 23 cm this would be about a 1 Meter dish.    10 wavelengths is preferred.


KB> Upper frequency is determined by the surface accuracy of the dish surface.


KB>                  Most commercial dishes are good to 24+ GHz


KB> The offset dish can be more difficult to work with since the feed point is not as obvious and
KB> pointing can be more difficult.  But it gets the feed structure out of the beam.


KB> Good luck with your project, Kent





KB>   
KB> 
KB>   
KB>                      On Friday, May 7, 2021, 08:28:18 AM CDT,
KB> Chris Wilson <chris@...> wrote:   

KB> 

KB> 




KB>  07/05/2021 14:20



KB> Absolute newbie question coming...



KB> I saw a big microwave dish advertised on Ebay and then by
KB> coincidence saw this advert mentioned on a UK Satellites forum. I
KB> am getting started in amateur radio satellite communications,
KB> initially via a 1.8 meter PF dish and the QO-100 satellite using
KB> SSB and hopefully later, ATV signals.



KB> The up link is on 2.4 GHz and someone extolling the magnificence
KB> of the Ebay dish was shot down by someone saying it may well be no
KB> use at all for 2.4 GHz uplink., for example, and was probably made for a specific purpose.



KB> This surprised me, I naively thought a dish was a dish, with
KB> prime or offset focus, but now thinking deeper I recall seeing
KB> very small, but seemingly deep versus diameter 10GHz dishes on tripods.



KB> So may I ask, how is the size / shape of a microwave dish related
KB> to its intended frequency usage please? Thanks.



KB> This is the link to the dish in question:



KB> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/164502970358?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649









Re: Microwave dish size and shape versus frequency question

Chris Wilson
 

Hello Kent,

Friday, May 7, 2021

Thanks for the reply Kent, appreciated and helpful.


Best regards,
Chris 2E0ILY mailto:chris@chriswilson.tv


KB> Interesting way to think about it, But the focal points for the
KB> 2.4 GHz and 10 GHz waves are slightly different
KB> since 2.4 GHz waves cannot become an infinitesimal point. Of
KB> course 10 GHz wave cannot either.
KB> And 2.4 GHz feeds and 10 GHz feeds will have different phase centers.


KB> In the practical world the points are pretty close and just make
KB> your feed support adjustable and move it
KB> in and out a bit for best signal levels. I have tested hundreds
KB> of dishes on the antenna range and the feed
KB> usually ends up a bit closer to the dish than the calculated focal point.


KB> Frequency limits on the size of the dish.


KB> The dish needs to be a least 5 wavelengths across to bring the waves to a focus.


KB> For 23 cm this would be about a 1 Meter dish. 10 wavelengths is preferred.


KB> Upper frequency is determined by the surface accuracy of the dish surface.


KB> Most commercial dishes are good to 24+ GHz


KB> The offset dish can be more difficult to work with since the feed point is not as obvious and
KB> pointing can be more difficult. But it gets the feed structure out of the beam.


KB> Good luck with your project, Kent





KB>
KB>
KB>
KB> On Friday, May 7, 2021, 08:28:18 AM CDT,
KB> Chris Wilson <chris@chriswilson.tv> wrote:

KB>

KB>




KB> 07/05/2021 14:20



KB> Absolute newbie question coming...



KB> I saw a big microwave dish advertised on Ebay and then by
KB> coincidence saw this advert mentioned on a UK Satellites forum. I
KB> am getting started in amateur radio satellite communications,
KB> initially via a 1.8 meter PF dish and the QO-100 satellite using
KB> SSB and hopefully later, ATV signals.



KB> The up link is on 2.4 GHz and someone extolling the magnificence
KB> of the Ebay dish was shot down by someone saying it may well be no
KB> use at all for 2.4 GHz uplink., for example, and was probably made for a specific purpose.



KB> This surprised me, I naively thought a dish was a dish, with
KB> prime or offset focus, but now thinking deeper I recall seeing
KB> very small, but seemingly deep versus diameter 10GHz dishes on tripods.



KB> So may I ask, how is the size / shape of a microwave dish related
KB> to its intended frequency usage please? Thanks.



KB> This is the link to the dish in question:



KB> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/164502970358?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649


Re: Microwave dish size and shape versus frequency question

Chris Wilson
 

Hello Neil,

Friday, May 7, 2021

Thanks very much to all who replied, here and directly. A special thanks to Neil for the very detailed yet easy to follow explanation, I appreciate your time doing that :)

Just for completeness, if someone bought the dish in the Ebay advert at

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/164502970358?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

Is there a risk it might not work at all effectively on 2.4GHz TX or for 10.5GHz RX? That is what was stated on the Sats UK forum, and no one seemed to query the statement. All the best and thanks again 2E0ILY (Chris in Shropshire).


Best regards,
Chris 2E0ILY mailto:chris@chriswilson.tv


NSG> Hi Chris, so long as a dish is large enough relative to a
NSG> wavelength to avoid diffraction loss at the frequency chosen, and
NSG> the surface irregularities are small enough relative to a
NSG> wavelength to prevent loss from phase errors, *and you can
NSG> illuminate it fully without much spillover*, then the depth
NSG> of the dish does not matter much.

NSG> Usual vague rule of thumb is that the dish diameter needs to be
NSG> at least 10 times the wavelength and surface errors need to be
NSG> about a tenth of the wavelength across the entire surface. As a
NSG> dish gets deeper, it gets harder to illuminate the surface unless
NSG> you use a subreflector, so most PF dishes have a focal length
NSG> about 0.3 to 0.5 of their diameter. Offset dishes tend to be
NSG> shallower, perhaps 0.5 to 0.7 f/d ratio.
NSG>
NSG>
NSG> Subreflectors need to be a minimum of 8-10 wavelengths, so a
NSG> very deep dish 2m wide at 13cm would need a subreflector
NSG> over a metre in diameter, and that would block the dish
NSG> very seriously, so deep dishes under f/d 0.3 are generally
NSG> only used where the diameter is 40 or more times the
NSG> wavelength. With an f/d 0.25 dish, the focus is in the
NSG> same plane as the edges of the dish, so the feed has to be
NSG> able to illuminate the edge at 90 degrees to the axis, which is
NSG> challenging. Worse, you usually set the illumination so it is
NSG> about 10-12 dB down at the edge of the dish to get best
NSG> efficiency with least spillover, but in an f/d 0.25 dish,
NSG> the edge is twice as far from the focus as the centre, to
NSG> there is an additional 6dB of taper added (space
NSG> attenuation) and the feed needs to be only 4-6 dB down at 90 degrees.
NSG>
NSG>
NSG> Those 1.8 dishes are probably OK at C-band, and might even work
NSG> at 12 GHz. Definitely OK for 2.4 but very very sharp and
NSG> potentially too gainy at 10 GHz if the surface is accurate. If
NSG> it isn't very accurate, the beam will be less sharp and more useable.
NSG>
NSG>
NSG> For narrowband use on QO100, 800 mW to a 95 cm dish gets me to
NSG> the reference beacon level, so you would probably only need 125
NSG> mW to get to the reference level on narrowband to the 1.8m
NSG> dish. For TV use, obviously you need to be running more
NSG> power, but that giant dish will mean you can under-run a
NSG> big PA to get minimum spectral regrowth and a super clean signal.
NSG>
NSG> I reckon a 1.0 to 1.2m offset dish is about the sweet spot for
NSG> QO100 unless you have loads of space and something very solid to bolt a 1.8m pf dish down to.
NSG>
NSG> Neil G4DBN
NSG>
NSG>

NSG>
NSG>
NSG> On 07/05/2021 14:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
NSG>
NSG>


NSG> 07/05/2021 14:20

NSG> Absolute newbie question coming...

NSG> I saw a big microwave dish advertised on Ebay and then by
NSG> coincidence saw this advert mentioned on a UK Satellites forum. I
NSG> am getting started in amateur radio satellite communications,
NSG> initially via a 1.8 meter PF dish and the QO-100 satellite using
NSG> SSB and hopefully later, ATV signals.

NSG> The up link is on 2.4 GHz and someone extolling the magnificence
NSG> of the Ebay dish was shot down by someone saying it may well be
NSG> no use at all for 2.4 GHz uplink., for example, and was probably made for a specific purpose.

NSG> This surprised me, I naively thought a dish was a dish, with
NSG> prime or offset focus, but now thinking deeper I recall seeing
NSG> very small, but seemingly deep versus diameter 10GHz dishes on tripods.

NSG> So may I ask, how is the size / shape of a microwave dish
NSG> related to its intended frequency usage please? Thanks.

NSG> This is the link to the dish in question:

NSG> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/164502970358?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649


NSG>
NSG>


Re: wtKST not talking to Airscout

Pete - GM4BYF
 

Thanks Brian  - but it is not that. Doing some more investigation.

73
Pete GM4BYF

On 09/05/21 15:47, Brian Howie GM4DIJ wrote:
On 09/05/2021 14:18, Pete - GM4BYF via groups.io wrote:
Trying to set up on another P.C. When left clicking on the correct box for a callsign on wtKST to get the correct map up on Airscout, nothing happens. On my current laptop this is working well.

Any help gratefully received please.
Options Airplane Scatter , remember to tick Activate. Fools me when I have to refresh or re-install. The other problem I sometimes have is where the "tiles" are stored, but if airscout works "standalone" it's not that.

Brian GM4DIJ
--
vry 73
Pete GM4BYF


Re: wtKST not talking to Airscout

Brian Howie GM4DIJ
 

On 09/05/2021 14:18, Pete - GM4BYF via groups.io wrote:
Trying to set up on another P.C. When left clicking on the correct box for a callsign on wtKST to get the correct map up on Airscout, nothing happens. On my current laptop this is working well.
Any help gratefully received please.
Options Airplane Scatter , remember to tick Activate. Fools me when I have to refresh or re-install. The other problem I sometimes have is where the "tiles" are stored, but if airscout works "standalone" it's not that.

Brian GM4DIJ

--
Brian


wtKST not talking to Airscout

Pete - GM4BYF
 

Trying to set up on another P.C. When left clicking on the correct box for a callsign on wtKST to get the correct map up on Airscout, nothing happens. On my current laptop this is working well.

Any help gratefully received please.

--
73
Pete GM4BYF



--
vry 73
Pete GM4BYF

2081 - 2100 of 64329