I have an RPi with an RTL-SDR that is freshly updated and have my config all sorted with no problem. I had to set 3 or 4 new items (to use the soapy interface and set the bandwidth but those were all google’able).
We have a separate system to operate the antenna and switches that are working spot on:
Similarly here with OPSSAT sometimes hundreds of packets at a pass but recently nothing and thought it was because I’ve only got a self-built UHF eggbeater II and an airspy mini attached to an RPi 4.
As an aside are you related to a Dr Robert Bridges used to teach Maths in Birmingham?
OK, looking this from a RF perspective, that ISS pass is not ‘good’ at all. The ISS should be incredibly strong with your kind of setup. Instead you can just barely see the packets, and only a few have decoded.
Looking at the observation metadata, your gain is set to ‘null’. I’m not sure what a ‘null’ gain results in with the more recent updates, but I suspect its nothing good.
Hi @pierros, @vk5qi! Yes, the ISS should be super loud. It’s usually something silly like 20-30 dB above the noise floor. I didn’t see that gain was null - that must’ve been an artefact from the last update.
Also, I couldn’t ‘fail’ my recent OPSSAT observations. Where’d that button go?
Will report back on Tuesday when I’m at the station. And also post my Advanced >> Support (from the satnogs-config I assume?). 73s Chris
ISS is at a lower altitude than most of the cubesats and MUCH higher transmitter power so should be easily received. The CAS-4A and 4B satellites CW beacons are very good VHF targets and not as strong as the ISS. Waterfall passband is wide enough you should also see the lower part of the transponder passband. On UHF, try SO-50 and AO-27 (operating schedule is at ao27.net, basically 4-5 min on timed for N Hemisphere mid-latitudes).
RESOLVED: It was that “null” default setting on the client upgrade. Will calibrate when I’ve a chance (COVID, uni teaching). Good pass using “20” dB gain:
There is an active discussion currently between developers for the future of the vetting and there will be a public proposal soon. This will take into consideration the ability of station owners to mark their station as non-functional for a period in the past which will affect the status of observations performed during that period.