FOX-1A freq suggestion


#1

Regarding Observation 730395
https://network.satnogs.org/observations/730477/
and basically all the latest Fox-1A obs.

The sat seems to have drifted roughly -3khz from the freq we have in the DB.

I am making a suggestion to fix this. And posting this here to use a citation.


#2

Yikes, poor AO-85 - it’s not looking so good.


#3

Yea. And its IHU won’t turn on so no DUV data. (I have been following the information on twitter. Which is why I scheduled them)


#4

Somebody might want to contact user “@blueskies” as that account seems to be vetting a lot of AO-85 observations as “good” and there isn’t even the slightest spec of signal in the waterfall…


#5

Yea. I think I am going to go thru them an fix any that are mis-vetted.


#6

https://network.satnogs.org/observations/730802/

Very Wobbly.


#7

All re mis vetting
I look at the waterfall and listen to the audio for any signal. I code as good if i hear any signals during the pass is this not correct? Looking at the enclosed example 730802 the waterfall is very visible i often hear audio on very much poorer plots. I will re vett all these passes and check tonight.
Re duv mode i didnt know about this option and another user contacted me yesterday re this he agreed its a learn as you go, as the documentation is lacking.
Will try and do better


#8

Not looking very healthy here https://network.satnogs.org/observations/730269/ :frowning:


#9

Have re vetted as suggested I will work through the other observations as able, i would welcome any additional clarification on “for now even a faint sign on the waterfall is enough to make it valid.” and * Bad no satellite detected in this observation. verses *Failed too much noise, also any information or default modes for best capture


#10

I went ahead and pushed this through… should AO-85 return to its proper state please submit a reversal.


#11

@blueskies, 730802 is indeed a “good” vet. However yesterday there were 20 to 30 AO-85 observations that you vetted as “good” that appeared to have no evidence of AO-85 at all.

For example:
https://network.satnogs.org/observations/725166/

I cannot see any evidence of AO-85 here (but I will admit that sometimes I can’t see stuff on the LCD monitors… so I could be wrong - but it seems there are lots of observations like this).

–Roy
K3RLD


#12

Seems we are still a bit off on freq. looks like I might have hit 3 instead of 5 on my keyboard. So I will put a new suggestion in again. As it is now slightly higher then the signal.