Why not use the full list of suggested ALE400 frequencies, 1837.0, 3589.0, 7037.5, 10141.5, 14074.0, 14094.0, 18104.5, 21094.0, 24926.0, 28146.0, 50162.5, 144162.5 (AF at 1625 Hz), just like the ALE HFN frequencies? They are already published and set aside, just as the normal ALE HFN freqs are. If we start using them with ALE400 we have a good chance of holding on to them. If we don't, pactor and other modes will surely assimilate them. I suggest we do full sounding and scanning on ALE400, just as ALE HFN does now on the 141A frequencies.
I agree that ALE400 works very well. In fact, much better than normal ALE. I have had several random ALE400 keyboard contacts on 20m and the throughput was just fantastic. It is sincerely hoped that ALE400 be further developed and enhanced and utilized whenever possible. With the Swiss Army Knife of digital communication, MultiPSK, at our disposal, how can we go wrong? Even if the developers of PCALE and MARSALE refuse to support ALE400, we can still go very far with it in MultiPSK. Their loss if they choose not to support ALE400. Best regards, Gary E. Kohtala, K7EK --------------- --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Lindecker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello Andy, > > Hereafter is a non exhaustive list of the ALE400 frequencies (proposed by Bonnie): > 1837.0, 3589.0, 7037.5, 10141.5, 14074.0, 14094.0, 18104.5, 21094.0, 24926.0, 28146.0, 50162.5, 144162.5 (AF at 1625 Hz) > The complete list of frequencies is on "http://hflink.com/ale400";. > > So for 40, 30, and 20M, it would be 7037.5, 10141.5, 14074.0. > > These frequencies must be entered in the "Options" window, for an automatic scan. > > Note: the features are the same in ALE and ALE400 (which is strictly an ALE at 50 bauds with 50 Hz between carriers). > > About open source of ALE or ALE400 and ARQ/FAE: > There is no open source but the specifications are public. The only difficult point of ALE/ALE400 was the CRC calculation (DTM/DBM) which is very fuzzy in the specifications. I have supplied my code about this CRC calculation (HFLINK and Multipsk Yahoo group) so that the programmation of these modes is normally no so difficult (and it can be answered to questions in the HFLINK group) . > > 73 > Patrick > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Andrew O'Brien > To: DIGITALRADIO > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 3:27 AM > Subject: [digitalradio] Time to do something real with ALE400 ? > > > I think many people have had time to experiment with ALE 400 in ARQ > mode and the feedback about the throughput has been very good. Most > people have connected via arranged contacts and the use of the K3UK > sked page . Several people have suggested this mode is so effective > that it might be useful in emergency communication situations. So, I > think it is time to seriously test ALE400 under something more > elaborate than arranged contacts and keyboard chats. > > I have made not secret of the fact that I think the PC-ALE software > has the best capabilities of any other digital software when it comes > to locating other stations. The sounding , scan, pause, decode and > resume , ability of PC-ALE is amazing. For ALE400 to be useful it > must be able to do some of what standard ALE via PC-ALE can do. > Since Bonnie has suggested that ALE 400 should not share suggested > standard amateur ALE channels, is it not time for ALE 400 users to > develop a few suggested sounding and net channels? Perhaps just > three, 40, 30, and 20M and begin occasional scans. Should the ALE > 400 community also develop a NET CALL protocol and also establish a > weekly net? > > I think the initial experiments have been conducted very well, time to > move to the next level and see if ALE400 has any future beyond a geek > plaything :>) > > -- > Andy K3UK > www.obriensweb.com > (QSL via N2RJ) >
