Adjusting the RX frequency, independent of the TX frequency

[OK1TE]

For satellite operation, is there any benefit to step the Tx and Rx frequencies in opposite directions.

Yes, there's a benefit. But the oposite adjustment needs to be band proportional.
That means, tuning up Rx on 70cm having Tx on 2m needs tune down Tx by third of the Rx step, but tuning up Rx on 2m having Tx on 70cm needs to tune down Tx with three times the Rx step. If the operation is not cross-band, which also makes sense, the factor is 1 obviously.

The smaller step for satellite mode is a nice idea. But I guess for FM it's not worth going under 1 kHz on Rx (still worth to compensate the 333 Hz for Tx).

[VK3KYY]

I would just divide the current step sizes by 10.

So 10kHz step becomes 1kHz when "Small step" option is enabled

[VK3KYY]

BTW.

I'm not sure what this function should be called

I'm currently calling its "Tx Rx lock" but this sounds like it stops Tx and Rx being changed.

Perhaps "Tx Rx link"

But that makes it sound like its operating as a repeater

[OK1TE]

Tx follow Rx:[On,Off,Sat] fits the display size.
Or "Tx Rx bind"?

[OK1TE]

... but please don't leave the idea of oposite compensation so easily. It makes sense and for satellites with uplink on 70cm and downlink on 2m it's a must...
Just think it over again and then possibly leave it...

Edit:
Of course, you can have a special zone with 5 (or x) pre-adjusted channels for each satellite, so it always has a solution.

[VK3KYY]

... but please don't leave the idea of oposite compensation so easily. It makes sense and for satellites with uplink on 2m and downlink on 70cm it's a must...
Just think it over again and then possibly leave it...

I guess we could add this to the Tx Rx lock / bind mode, as an additional option of "Sat", which is moves the VHF frequency 1/3 of the fate of the UHF frequency. Or vice versa

[OK1TE]

Nice! Thank you.

[kt4lh]

I know it's a bit more messy in programming, but we have plenty of channels.... why not just create a zone per satellite and a few stepped AOS/Overhead/LOS channels like we've done for radios for years? Seems easier to flip through the channels than remembering a button combo that's only useful for a small handful of users.

[VK3KYY]

I know it's a bit more messy in programming, but we have plenty of channels.... why not just create a zone per satellite and a few stepped AOS/Overhead/LOS channels like we've done for radios for years? Seems easier to flip through the channels than remembering a button combo that's only useful for a small handful of users.

Yes. I've heard that's what people do on most radio.

[zs6jgp]

Good day,

These are some of the Satellites our club members from the Sandton Amateur Radio Club, South Africa, operate:
https://github.com/JGPorteous/Ham-Satellite-Frequencies

We find the 5kz step for RX is sufficient, how we currently tackle Sat work:

We program 5 channels per sat, each with 5Khz diff. (6 Channels if the Sat needs 'waking up')
Manually moving up or down the channels until we get best frequency.
Using 2.5khz means there would be 10 possible channels to move up and down - this might be a bit much, as you tend to bounce a round a little sometimes.

One of the issues we find, is while using say a baofeng, when changing channels, there is a moment of 'being offline' or RX is 'deaf' while it is changing channel.

What would be great is if we could program one channel for TX, and have the RX freq variable, and the changing of the RX had the lease amount of 'deaf' time.

[EDIT] - Found the below already implemented, can't wait to try it out
Another idea is to have an upper and lower RX freq programmed (or set the lower RX and the radio knows it will only be 20Khz diff to figure out the upper) and let the radio scan all of them and change to the strongest RX freq in that range. This might be a bit more of a technical change/challenge, but would be an amazing feature.

Lastly thing to consider is, if a feature like this is introduced, the operation needs to be simple.
Usually while working Sats, you have the antenna in one hand and the radio in another, if you must press a combination of buttons, it might not be viable.

J