Moderator : Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Please refrain from generalized statements about professions that one does not like. They can be construed as personal attacks. Andy K3UK On Jan 6, 2008 1:57 AM, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, Demetre, you got something against lawyers? We lawyers LOVE digital radio. Down with anti-lawyer bigotry. He he Roger, Some people don't like pactor and some don't like lawyers!! de Roger W6VZV 73 de Demetre SV1UY -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Skip, you don't really mean that! Any witches to burn.. thieves to cut the hands off.. I'll go now and monitor the bands.. woe betide I find a NBEMS signal that interferes another signal.. Andy, DF4WC Original-Nachricht Datum: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 12:50:52 -0500 Von: kh6ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] An: Jim Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Greg Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED], Albert Schramm [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M Sent this email this morning: Good morning Charles, It is 12:26 PM on Sunday January 6, and you transmitted, calling to connect with WG3G on 10.138 in Pactor 1, over top of an ongoing test of the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System that had been going on for half an hour. What we want to know is your boat's position at 12:20 PM on Sunday, January 6, or if you were in Patchogue NY, so we can figure out why you may not have seen any activity on the frequency before transmitting for WG3G. Your website says you do not have a cruising boat yet, so we don't know where you might have been. You were a solid S7 here in South Carolina. One of the stations also on the air is not too far away, in Fredonia, NY. We understand that accidents happen, but with six stations sharing the frequency, it is unlikely that you could not have copied any of them, especially since I copied you perfectly. Attached is a screen capture of the incident. Your signal is centered on the diamond and if you look hard you can see the PSK63 signal you covered up. We will be testing the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System around this frequency in the coming days, so the frequency will often be occupied. You write on your web page that the hamming bug has bitten you. Since you already work Pactor, maybe you would like to participate in the test of the NBEMS. If so to to http://www.w1khj/NBEMS for information and a link to download the software. We are looking forward to your helping us understand how this collision happened. 73, Skip KH6TY -- Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger?did=10
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Andy, It is an honest attempt to work together to resolve a continuing problem. WG3G has been off the air for months, I believe, so the question is why is his transmitter automatically trying to connect with WG3G. I'll bet he doesn't even know it. Wouldn't you like to know? WG3G is in Trinidad according to ZS5S. No thanks for the sarcasm. Maybe you can help if you are so inclined...Would you like to? Skip - Original Message - From: Andreas Rehberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 1:05 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M Skip, you don't really mean that! Any witches to burn.. thieves to cut the hands off.. I'll go now and monitor the bands.. woe betide I find a NBEMS signal that interferes another signal.. Andy, DF4WC Original-Nachricht Datum: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 12:50:52 -0500 Von: kh6ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] An: Jim Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Greg Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED], Albert Schramm [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M Sent this email this morning: Good morning Charles, It is 12:26 PM on Sunday January 6, and you transmitted, calling to connect with WG3G on 10.138 in Pactor 1, over top of an ongoing test of the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System that had been going on for half an hour. What we want to know is your boat's position at 12:20 PM on Sunday, January 6, or if you were in Patchogue NY, so we can figure out why you may not have seen any activity on the frequency before transmitting for WG3G. Your website says you do not have a cruising boat yet, so we don't know where you might have been. You were a solid S7 here in South Carolina. One of the stations also on the air is not too far away, in Fredonia, NY. We understand that accidents happen, but with six stations sharing the frequency, it is unlikely that you could not have copied any of them, especially since I copied you perfectly. Attached is a screen capture of the incident. Your signal is centered on the diamond and if you look hard you can see the PSK63 signal you covered up. We will be testing the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System around this frequency in the coming days, so the frequency will often be occupied. You write on your web page that the hamming bug has bitten you. Since you already work Pactor, maybe you would like to participate in the test of the NBEMS. If so to to http://www.w1khj/NBEMS for information and a link to download the software. We are looking forward to your helping us understand how this collision happened. 73, Skip KH6TY -- Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger?did=10 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
It is getting a bit crazy on 30m. I have been seeing a lot of Winlink QRM lately. If anyone doubts this, put your receiver on 10.140 USB and watch the PSK31 QSOs for a while. You can guarantee you won't have to wait very long before some Pactor station Winlink server switch to Pactor-3 and cover everyone up. I find it hard to believe that the initiating station couldn't hear at least one of the PSK31 signals. 73 Sholto KE7HPV. - Original Message - From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem. Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400 around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our frequency. It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time before that happened. 73, Rick, KV9U kh6ty wrote: Andy, It is an honest attempt to work together to resolve a continuing problem. WG3G has been off the air for months, I believe, so the question is why is his transmitter automatically trying to connect with WG3G. I'll bet he doesn't even know it. Wouldn't you like to know? WG3G is in Trinidad according to ZS5S. No thanks for the sarcasm. Maybe you can help if you are so inclined...Would you like to? Skip
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Rick wrote: I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem. Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400 around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our frequency. It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time before that happened. I was working an MFSK QSO Saturday, and a Pactor station fired up right on our frequency. He obviously couldn't have cared less at the initiating end that we were there. And of course at the other end there was no human being to curb this illegal activity. The QRM was intense, but I QROed to 200 watts and eventually it went away. Plain and simple illegal behavior by the Pactor station. de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
At 04:57 AM 1/7/2008, Rick wrote: I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem. Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400 around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our frequency. It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time before that happened. 73, Rick, KV9U I bet that guy did not have a clue, he has a hardware box that can only use Amtor/Pactor. probably PSK31 and a couple of other modes.most of which he can't, or has never used. He has probably never been on any Internet forums or newsgroups, so he has not a clue what is going on in the digital world of Ham Radio, nor does he probably care. I would cite a lack of knowledge of modes and bandwidths etc on his part, maybe he thinks the various digital modes all have retrys and error correction..so it will just sort itself out and all modes will simply share frequencies! Yesterday, I was on 20m and I heard a stack of signals which were not Pactor (I had a Pactor sked setup) I switched to PSK31 on my hardware boxno go. I fired up HRD on my SLUSB, still no go :-( I was not sure what signals they were, to be able to try and resolve them, being just interested in what they were. Being a little tone deaf and not having an intimate knowledge of all the modes and what they sound like, did not help me. Were they MT63? PSK250? I don't know If you run Digipan, you have no hope! With the increasing number of new modes being developed, the problem will get worse :-( Add the coming of improved propagation and this will become a spectrum quagmire in which no one will be able to operate easily. We have all helped create the mess we have. A gazillion software programs, all doing their own thing some with many modes and expanding more modes, nearly daily, others that don't have so many modes. No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle will get worse. IF people can identify a signal, with callsigns, they will be less inclined to interfere with it, if a operator can't resolve a signal.they probably care a lot less about any interference to it. Sadly, only soundcard software solutions can be given this signal decoder ability, hardware boxes are a different deal. You need operator digital modes knowledge too, many people do not know what all the modes sound like, I know I don't, even though I have a recording of mode sounds that someone on the group was good enough to post! Now, this is not bagging all the good people, who do software development for the benefit of Hams, for little or no cost BUT.. Someone bright enough to do it...is going to have to write that signal decoder program very soon.otherwise this whole problem will get worse. Fixing the WinLink problem is another deal altogether. 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Hello Jack,
In MultiPSK, the RS ID provides this function...automatically
changes mode and frequency also, when implemented. Not sure of any
other software that uses this function but it works very well and can
decode mode and center frequency fairly deep into the noise.
73,
Bill
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jack Chomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
{snip}
No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify
signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something
like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle
will get worse.
{end of snip}
[digitalradio] Mode identification
Yes, but the RS ID signal has to be transmitted.
I believe that Jack refers to some thing like a function PK-232's had to
analyze and identify the mode.
Something could be done using MultiPSK Analysis function.
But for an example, today I attempted to decode a signal tha APPARENTLY
was PSK250 on 10138, and could not reach a conclusive copy or ID.
It is not that simple, after all, at least, so far.
73,
Jose, CO2JA
---
Bill McLaughlin wrote:
Hello Jack,
In MultiPSK, the RS ID provides this function...automatically
changes mode and frequency also, when implemented. Not sure of any
other software that uses this function but it works very well and can
decode mode and center frequency fairly deep into the noise.
73,
Bill
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jack Chomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
{snip}
No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify
signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something
like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle
will get worse.
{end of snip}
__
Participe en Universidad 2008.
11 al 15 de febrero del 2008.
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.universidad2008.cu
[digitalradio] Re: Mode identification
Understood; RS ID tells the other station the mode and frequency. I
think you are correct in that analysis of a signal is difficult. Some
modes are very easy to recognize by ear (Throb, for example), others
are much more difficult. One I had trouble with the other day, was
Clover, but had not heard it in so long I had forgotten what it
sounded like.
73.
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose A. Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but the RS ID signal has to be transmitted.
I believe that Jack refers to some thing like a function PK-232's
had to
analyze and identify the mode.
Something could be done using MultiPSK Analysis function.
But for an example, today I attempted to decode a signal tha APPARENTLY
was PSK250 on 10138, and could not reach a conclusive copy or ID.
It is not that simple, after all, at least, so far.
73,
Jose, CO2JA
---
Bill McLaughlin wrote:
Hello Jack,
In MultiPSK, the RS ID provides this function...automatically
changes mode and frequency also, when implemented. Not sure of any
other software that uses this function but it works very well and can
decode mode and center frequency fairly deep into the noise.
73,
Bill
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jack Chomley engineering@
wrote:
{snip}
No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify
signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something
like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle
will get worse.
{end of snip}
__
Participe en Universidad 2008.
11 al 15 de febrero del 2008.
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.universidad2008.cu
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Jack Chomley wrote: At 04:57 AM 1/7/2008, Rick wrote: I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem. Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400 around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our frequency. It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time before that happened. 73, Rick, KV9U I bet that guy did not have a clue, he has a hardware box that can only use Amtor/Pactor. probably PSK31 and a couple of other modes.most of which he can't, or has never used. He has probably never been on any Internet forums or newsgroups, so he has not a clue what is going on in the digital world of Ham Radio, nor does he probably care. I would cite a lack of knowledge of modes and bandwidths etc on his part, maybe he thinks the various digital modes all have retrys and error correction..so it will just sort itself out and all modes will simply share frequencies! Yesterday, I was on 20m and I heard a stack of signals which were not Pactor (I had a Pactor sked setup) I switched to PSK31 on my hardware boxno go. I fired up HRD on my SLUSB, still no go :-( I was not sure what signals they were, to be able to try and resolve them, being just interested in what they were. Being a little tone deaf and not having an intimate knowledge of all the modes and what they sound like, did not help me. Were they MT63? PSK250? I don't know If you run Digipan, you have no hope! With the increasing number of new modes being developed, the problem will get worse :-( Add the coming of improved propagation and this will become a spectrum quagmire in which no one will be able to operate easily. We have all helped create the mess we have. A gazillion software programs, all doing their own thing some with many modes and expanding more modes, nearly daily, others that don't have so many modes. No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle will get worse. IF people can identify a signal, with callsigns, they will be less inclined to interfere with it, if a operator can't resolve a signal.they probably care a lot less about any interference to it. Sadly, only soundcard software solutions can be given this signal decoder ability, hardware boxes are a different deal. You need operator digital modes knowledge too, many people do not know what all the modes sound like, I know I don't, even though I have a recording of mode sounds that someone on the group was good enough to post! Now, this is not bagging all the good people, who do software development for the benefit of Hams, for little or no cost BUT.. Someone bright enough to do it...is going to have to write that signal decoder program very soon.otherwise this whole problem will get worse. Fixing the WinLink problem is another deal altogether. 73s Jack VK4JRC Hi Jack.you didnt mention the 20m frequency that you were on and heard the digital signal that you could not recognise or decodei have been a digital op since 2000 and even i get problems with some digital modes..im usually on 14076 most evenings using JT65A..this looks like a carrier on the left side and tone dotes out to the right.it is part of the WSJT suite of modes.every night i get what are obviously Winlink PMBO's at around 14075.2 and 14075.6they come on even when there are strong signals on the freq so they must be auto and unattended..i believe these PMBO's use Pactor 3 which is a commercial program of SCS in Germany.i also believe that Winlink is a commercial program by the same company. there was a RTTY contest on this week end.14076 was unusable as many RTTY stations just used what freq they liked...some of us qsy'd to 18102 to see if we could get any VK to EU propagation..i put out a JT65A CQ and was immediatly clobbered by a very strong RTTY station.deliberate interference...by the look of his signal he was not calling CQ and there is no contests allowed on WARC bands any way.i continued to call CQ and he went away after about 5 minutes.. i agree Jack it looks like a mess and we ops have made it sothere has been some attempt to get areas for each one but once again there are ops who who dont know or wont comply with gentlemens agreements.. for those ops using Windows the program Multipsk has the most digital modes in it BUT not all of them as new ones are being made all the time 73 David VK4BDJ
[digitalradio] Updated NBEMS files avialble
http://w1hkj.com/NBEMS/
[digitalradio] DXKeeper APP_DXKEEPER_SUBMODE field
Hello Dave, Patrick, the newest version of DXKeeper provides a sub-mode field; it'd be nice if MultiPSK would log things like the Olivia tone constellation there: APP_DXKEEPER_SUBMODE. Perhaps Simon and I can convince the ADIF development community to make this a standard field. Yes it would be nice to add some more information (speed and shift in RTTY, for example, as you can do standard RTTY but also RTTY with 23 Hz of shift (even if RTTY MSK is not very used...), or as you propose number of tones and bandwidth in Olivia or Contestia, or type of SSTV standard...). Is there some rule about this new field? I will see directly with you for more details. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Dave Bernstein To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 4:58 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Comments on the JT65A and Olivia contests 15 QSOs in about 2 hours of operating, just under half with European stations, all on 20m. There was an MFSK-16 station QRV that threatened my sanity; it wasn't the QRM, it was listening to 2 hours of that moronic music that made me feel like Red Buttons in the Longest Day. MFSK-16 definitely deserves its own band segment, preferably with padded soundproof walls. Too bad Pactor III doesn't sound like that; Winlink would have had their own private band segment years ago. Patrick, the newest version of DXKeeper provides a sub-mode field; it'd be nice if MultiPSK would log things like the Olivia tone constellation there: APP_DXKEEPER_SUBMODE. Perhaps Simon and I can convince the ADIF development community to make this a standard field. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of the 15 or so logs received so far, the comments appear to be. The bands (40 and 20M) were in very poor conditions Both Olivia and JT65A contests were considered tough. Activity was , according to early reports, higher in the JT65A mode . Several JT65A WSJT users had difficulty handing a pile-up (There are some advanced features within WSJT where you can decode several signals at once, but perhaps people do not know this). Some folks mistook their local time for UTC time. Several ZL's, VKs, and JA's on the JT65A contest As for the comments that the contest was tough, that was expected. The experimental contests take a lot of patience. JT65A as implemented in WSJT is not at all designed for conventional contesting. Today's results are helpful for analyzing how contests with JT65A could be conducted in the future (if at all!). Olivia should have been easier, I did see 4 QSO's taking place in Olivia 500/8 at the same time on 40M, some die-hards stuck with 500/4 ! Andy K3UK
RE: [digitalradio] DXKeeper APP_DXKEEPER_SUBMODE field
There's no rule proposed, Patrick; I think of it as a mode-specific comment. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Patrick Lindecker Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 4:54 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] DXKeeper APP_DXKEEPER_SUBMODE field Hello Dave, Patrick, the newest version of DXKeeper provides a sub-mode field; it'd be nice if MultiPSK would log things like the Olivia tone constellation there: APP_DXKEEPER_SUBMODE. Perhaps Simon and I can convince the ADIF development community to make this a standard field. Yes it would be nice to add some more information (speed and shift in RTTY, for example, as you can do standard RTTY but also RTTY with 23 Hz of shift (even if RTTY MSK is not very used...), or as you propose number of tones and bandwidth in Olivia or Contestia, or type of SSTV standard...). Is there some rule about this new field? I will see directly with you for more details. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Dave Bernstein To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 4:58 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Comments on the JT65A and Olivia contests 15 QSOs in about 2 hours of operating, just under half with European stations, all on 20m. There was an MFSK-16 station QRV that threatened my sanity; it wasn't the QRM, it was listening to 2 hours of that moronic music that made me feel like Red Buttons in the Longest Day. MFSK-16 definitely deserves its own band segment, preferably with padded soundproof walls. Too bad Pactor III doesn't sound like that; Winlink would have had their own private band segment years ago. Patrick, the newest version of DXKeeper provides a sub-mode field; it'd be nice if MultiPSK would log things like the Olivia tone constellation there: APP_DXKEEPER_SUBMODE. Perhaps Simon and I can convince the ADIF development community to make this a standard field. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of the 15 or so logs received so far, the comments appear to be. The bands (40 and 20M) were in very poor conditions Both Olivia and JT65A contests were considered tough. Activity was , according to early reports, higher in the JT65A mode . Several JT65A WSJT users had difficulty handing a pile-up (There are some advanced features within WSJT where you can decode several signals at once, but perhaps people do not know this). Some folks mistook their local time for UTC time. Several ZL's, VKs, and JA's on the JT65A contest As for the comments that the contest was tough, that was expected. The experimental contests take a lot of patience. JT65A as implemented in WSJT is not at all designed for conventional contesting. Today's results are helpful for analyzing how contests with JT65A could be conducted in the future (if at all!). Olivia should have been easier, I did see 4 QSO's taking place in Olivia 500/8 at the same time on 40M, some die-hards stuck with 500/4 ! Andy K3UK
[digitalradio] Re: Mode identification
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One I had trouble with the other day, was Clover, but had not heard it in so long I had forgotten what it sounded like. You heard a Clover signal?! What kind of time machine do you have there? Heard any spark lately?
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
IDing in CW has the benefits that its universally understood, requires no decoding software, and is trivial to implement. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jack Chomley Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 3:28 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M At 04:57 AM 1/7/2008, Rick wrote: I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem. Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400 around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our frequency. It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time before that happened. 73, Rick, KV9U I bet that guy did not have a clue, he has a hardware box that can only use Amtor/Pactor. probably PSK31 and a couple of other modes.most of which he can't, or has never used. He has probably never been on any Internet forums or newsgroups, so he has not a clue what is going on in the digital world of Ham Radio, nor does he probably care. I would cite a lack of knowledge of modes and bandwidths etc on his part, maybe he thinks the various digital modes all have retrys and error correction..so it will just sort itself out and all modes will simply share frequencies! Yesterday, I was on 20m and I heard a stack of signals which were not Pactor (I had a Pactor sked setup) I switched to PSK31 on my hardware boxno go. I fired up HRD on my SLUSB, still no go :-( I was not sure what signals they were, to be able to try and resolve them, being just interested in what they were. Being a little tone deaf and not having an intimate knowledge of all the modes and what they sound like, did not help me. Were they MT63? PSK250? I don't know If you run Digipan, you have no hope! With the increasing number of new modes being developed, the problem will get worse :-( Add the coming of improved propagation and this will become a spectrum quagmire in which no one will be able to operate easily. We have all helped create the mess we have. A gazillion software programs, all doing their own thing some with many modes and expanding more modes, nearly daily, others that don't have so many modes. No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle will get worse. IF people can identify a signal, with callsigns, they will be less inclined to interfere with it, if a operator can't resolve a signal.they probably care a lot less about any interference to it. Sadly, only soundcard software solutions can be given this signal decoder ability, hardware boxes are a different deal. You need operator digital modes knowledge too, many people do not know what all the modes sound like, I know I don't, even though I have a recording of mode sounds that someone on the group was good enough to post! Now, this is not bagging all the good people, who do software development for the benefit of Hams, for little or no cost BUT.. Someone bright enough to do it...is going to have to write that signal decoder program very soon.otherwise this whole problem will get worse. Fixing the WinLink problem is another deal altogether. 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Dave AA6YQ wrote: IDing in CW has the benefits that its universally understood, requires no decoding software, and is trivial to implement. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- *From:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of *Jack Chomley *Sent:* Sunday, January 06, 2008 3:28 PM *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M At 04:57 AM 1/7/2008, Rick wrote: I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem. Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400 around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our frequency. It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time before that happened. 73, Rick, KV9U I bet that guy did not have a clue, he has a hardware box that can only use Amtor/Pactor. probably PSK31 and a couple of other modes.most of which he can't, or has never used. He has probably never been on any Internet forums or newsgroups, so he has not a clue what is going on in the digital world of Ham Radio, nor does he probably care. I would cite a lack of knowledge of modes and bandwidths etc on his part, maybe he thinks the various digital modes all have retrys and error correction..so it will just sort itself out and all modes will simply share frequencies! Yesterday, I was on 20m and I heard a stack of signals which were not Pactor (I had a Pactor sked setup) I switched to PSK31 on my hardware boxno go. I fired up HRD on my SLUSB, still no go :-( I was not sure what signals they were, to be able to try and resolve them, being just interested in what they were. Being a little tone deaf and not having an intimate knowledge of all the modes and what they sound like, did not help me. Were they MT63? PSK250? I don't know If you run Digipan, you have no hope! With the increasing number of new modes being developed, the problem will get worse :-( Add the coming of improved propagation and this will become a spectrum quagmire in which no one will be able to operate easily. We have all helped create the mess we have. A gazillion software programs, all doing their own thing some with many modes and expanding more modes, nearly daily, others that don't have so many modes. No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle will get worse. IF people can identify a signal, with callsigns, they will be less inclined to interfere with it, if a operator can't resolve a signal.they probably care a lot less about any interference to it. Sadly, only soundcard software solutions can be given this signal decoder ability, hardware boxes are a different deal. You need operator digital modes knowledge too, many people do not know what all the modes sound like, I know I don't, even though I have a recording of mode sounds that someone on the group was good enough to post! Now, this is not bagging all the good people, who do software development for the benefit of Hams, for little or no cost BUT.. Someone bright enough to do it...is going to have to write that signal decoder program very soon.otherwise this whole problem will get worse. Fixing the WinLink problem is another deal altogether. 73s Jack VK4JRC Hi Dave CW id is not universally understood..i for one have a hearing problem and CW is very difficult for me to hear let alone decode...also what about those who are deaf...we do have a number of them around the world... most are now using digital modesi have worked a deaf op on PSK31 and i wouldnt have known he was deaf until he told me... today there are also many new hams who havent had to learn CW as it is no longer a requirement for a HF licence in most countries... 73 David VK4BDJ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
At 08:33 AM 1/7/2008, you wrote: Hi Dave CW id is not universally understood..i for one have a hearing problem and CW is very difficult for me to hear let alone decode...also what about those who are deaf...we do have a number of them around the world... most are now using digital modesi have worked a deaf op on PSK31 and i wouldnt have known he was deaf until he told me... today there are also many new hams who havent had to learn CW as it is no longer a requirement for a HF licence in most countries... 73 David VK4BDJ You are right David. Sorry, I forgot your aspect. 73s Jack VK4JRC
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
In my experience, most users of digital modes beyond RTTY and PSK-31 stay up-to-date with whatever software they are using because 1. they need the defect repairs 2. they want the new features and modes Using CW (or any other universal mode) for identification does not require registration or registration databases. It simply requires an option that when enabled automatically appends your callsign and mode in CW to the end of a transmission if you haven't ID'd in the past 10 minutes. Most hams want to do the right thing; if we got the ball rolling and set a good example, many would jump on the bandwagon. However many modes there are today, there will be lots more by this time next year (counting variants). 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jack Chomley Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 5:28 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M At 08:18 AM 1/7/2008, you wrote: IDing in CW has the benefits that its universally understood, requires no decoding software, and is trivial to implement. 73, Dave, AA6YQ OK, ask ALL software developers to bury that function in their program.so it can't be switched OFF and IDs at fixed agreed intervals. ID fixed at program reg time (cannot be edited) ALL programs registered, or they don't work. Developers to keep databases of registration. Won't fix a thingpeople would simply keep using old versions of software. No, it all comes with a mode awareness campaign and some dedicated software, to work as a decoder. So...how MANY modes are there? 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] 160M PSK activity?
Been trolling the low end of 160M for a while, is there any PSK users on 160M? Gary Mitchelson N3JPU Montgomery Co. MD FM19 http://www.mitchelson.org/
Re: [digitalradio] 160M PSK activity?
There was some last night on 1807-1810 On Jan 6, 2008 6:26 PM, Gary - N3JPU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Been trolling the low end of 160M for a while, is there any PSK users on 160M? Gary Mitchelson N3JPU Montgomery Co. MD FM19 http://www.mitchelson.org/ -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Try: http://www.w1khj.com/NBEMS CHUCK AA5J At 01:02 PM 1/6/2008, Nick wrote: Hello Haward, Happy New Year! Sorry, http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS is not a working link. Server not found Firefox can't find the server at www.w1khj.com 73! Sunday, January 06, 2008, 19:50:52, you wrote: k Sent this email this morning: k Good morning Charles, k It is 12:26 PM on Sunday January 6, and you transmitted, calling to connect k with WG3G on 10.138 in Pactor 1, over top of an ongoing test of the k NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System that had been going on for half an k hour. What we want to know is your boat's position at 12:20 PM on Sunday, k January 6, or if you were in Patchogue NY, so we can figure out why you may k not have seen any activity on the frequency before transmitting for WG3G. k Your website says you do not have a cruising boat yet, so we don't know k where you might have been. You were a solid S7 here in South Carolina. One k of the stations also on the air is not too far away, in Fredonia, NY. k We understand that accidents happen, but with six stations sharing the k frequency, it is unlikely that you could not have copied any of them, k especially since I copied you perfectly. k Attached is a screen capture of the incident. Your signal is centered on the k diamond and if you look hard you can see the PSK63 signal you covered up. k We will be testing the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System around this k frequency in the coming days, so the frequency will often be occupied. k You write on your web page that the hamming bug has bitten you. Since you k already work Pactor, maybe you would like to participate in the test of the k NBEMS. If so to to http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS for information and a link to k download the software. k We are looking forward to your helping us understand how this collision k happened. k 73, Skip KH6TY -- Best regards, Nick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Should be http://www.w1hkj.com/NBEMS. The k and h were transposed. Skip KH6TY - Original Message - From: Chuck Mayfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 6:38 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M Try: http://www.w1khj.com/NBEMS CHUCK AA5J At 01:02 PM 1/6/2008, Nick wrote: Hello Haward, Happy New Year! Sorry, http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS is not a working link. Server not found Firefox can't find the server at www.w1khj.com 73! Sunday, January 06, 2008, 19:50:52, you wrote: k Sent this email this morning: k Good morning Charles, k It is 12:26 PM on Sunday January 6, and you transmitted, calling to connect k with WG3G on 10.138 in Pactor 1, over top of an ongoing test of the k NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System that had been going on for half an k hour. What we want to know is your boat's position at 12:20 PM on Sunday, k January 6, or if you were in Patchogue NY, so we can figure out why you may k not have seen any activity on the frequency before transmitting for WG3G. k Your website says you do not have a cruising boat yet, so we don't know k where you might have been. You were a solid S7 here in South Carolina. One k of the stations also on the air is not too far away, in Fredonia, NY. k We understand that accidents happen, but with six stations sharing the k frequency, it is unlikely that you could not have copied any of them, k especially since I copied you perfectly. k Attached is a screen capture of the incident. Your signal is centered on the k diamond and if you look hard you can see the PSK63 signal you covered up. k We will be testing the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System around this k frequency in the coming days, so the frequency will often be occupied. k You write on your web page that the hamming bug has bitten you. Since you k already work Pactor, maybe you would like to participate in the test of the k NBEMS. If so to to http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS for information and a link to k download the software. k We are looking forward to your helping us understand how this collision k happened. k 73, Skip KH6TY -- Best regards, Nick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Yes, Skip. My bad. You are correct except for the . at the end of the link vbg Sorry for the qrm... that is little QRM, like psk31 is 73 Chuck AA5J At 01:02 PM 1/6/2008, Nick wrote: Hello Haward, Happy New Year! Sorry, http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS is not a working link. Server not found Firefox can't find the server at www.w1khj.com 73! Sunday, January 06, 2008, 19:50:52, you wrote: k Sent this email this morning: k Good morning Charles, k It is 12:26 PM on Sunday January 6, and you transmitted, calling to connect k with WG3G on 10.138 in Pactor 1, over top of an ongoing test of the k NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System that had been going on for half an k hour. What we want to know is your boat's position at 12:20 PM on Sunday, k January 6, or if you were in Patchogue NY, so we can figure out why you may k not have seen any activity on the frequency before transmitting for WG3G. k Your website says you do not have a cruising boat yet, so we don't know k where you might have been. You were a solid S7 here in South Carolina. One k of the stations also on the air is not too far away, in Fredonia, NY. k We understand that accidents happen, but with six stations sharing the k frequency, it is unlikely that you could not have copied any of them, k especially since I copied you perfectly. k Attached is a screen capture of the incident. Your signal is centered on the k diamond and if you look hard you can see the PSK63 signal you covered up. k We will be testing the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System around this k frequency in the coming days, so the frequency will often be occupied. k You write on your web page that the hamming bug has bitten you. Since you k already work Pactor, maybe you would like to participate in the test of the k NBEMS. If so to to http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS for information and a link to k download the software. k We are looking forward to your helping us understand how this collision k happened. k 73, Skip KH6TY -- Best regards, Nick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
[digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
My attempt at installation failed with NOTE: Now spawning the main Setup program 'Setup1.exe' *** ERROR: Cannot start main setup program! (CreateProcess() returned error code 0x0005H) Did you customize Setup1? Suggestions? 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kh6ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Should be http://www.w1hkj.com/NBEMS. The k and h were transposed. Skip KH6TY - Original Message - From: Chuck Mayfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 6:38 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M Try: http://www.w1khj.com/NBEMS CHUCK AA5J At 01:02 PM 1/6/2008, Nick wrote: Hello Haward, Happy New Year! Sorry, http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS is not a working link. Server not found Firefox can't find the server at www.w1khj.com 73! Sunday, January 06, 2008, 19:50:52, you wrote: k Sent this email this morning: k Good morning Charles, k It is 12:26 PM on Sunday January 6, and you transmitted, calling to connect k with WG3G on 10.138 in Pactor 1, over top of an ongoing test of the k NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System that had been going on for half an k hour. What we want to know is your boat's position at 12:20 PM on Sunday, k January 6, or if you were in Patchogue NY, so we can figure out why you may k not have seen any activity on the frequency before transmitting for WG3G. k Your website says you do not have a cruising boat yet, so we don't know k where you might have been. You were a solid S7 here in South Carolina. One k of the stations also on the air is not too far away, in Fredonia, NY. k We understand that accidents happen, but with six stations sharing the k frequency, it is unlikely that you could not have copied any of them, k especially since I copied you perfectly. k Attached is a screen capture of the incident. Your signal is centered on the k diamond and if you look hard you can see the PSK63 signal you covered up. k We will be testing the NarrowBand Emergency Messaging System around this k frequency in the coming days, so the frequency will often be occupied. k You write on your web page that the hamming bug has bitten you. Since you k already work Pactor, maybe you would like to participate in the test of the k NBEMS. If so to to http://www.w1khj/NBEMShttp://www.w1khj/NBEMS for information and a link to k download the software. k We are looking forward to your helping us understand how this collision k happened. k 73, Skip KH6TY -- Best regards, Nick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
[digitalradio] Clarification on Winlink
Winlink was a system that used MBOs (Mail Box Operations) around the world that you could connect to with Pactor and Clover II, to send mail to other hams. It was also tied in to the VHF packet structure at one time. The owners then developed an internet based system called Winlink 2000, which is a VERY different paradigm, and which keeps most of the traffic off the HF bands and on the internet. It works through HF using Pactor, mostly P2 and P3 with a daily time limit, and also has many VHF connections using packet. This systems is not associated in any way with SCS and it is not a commercial operation since all usage is free to radio amateurs. In some respects the old Winlink network lives on as the NTS/D (ARRL National Traffic System - Digital), but the Winlink 2000 Administrator has been very unhappy that it has continued to operate and has publicly stated that he wished they had installed time bombs in the software so it would have become inoperative. Needless to say, some of us do not support that kind of viewpoint. 73, Rick, KV9U David wrote: .i believe these PMBO's use Pactor 3 which is a commercial program of SCS in Germany.i also believe that Winlink is a commercial program by the same company.
[digitalradio] Re: Mode identification
Yes. A radio. No re sparkI even hear CW from time to time! 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jhaynesatalumni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin bmc@ wrote: One I had trouble with the other day, was Clover, but had not heard it in so long I had forgotten what it sounded like. You heard a Clover signal?! What kind of time machine do you have there? Heard any spark lately?
[digitalradio] ANNOUNCE: PocketDigi 1.0.11 released
Hi gang. I released PocketDigi 1.0.11 at http://pocketdigi.sourceforge.net. There are following new features implemented: RSID, PSK63F, PSK125, sampling rate conversion, tx delay/tx tail/ats3 preamble/postamble settings, keyboard accelerators, Handheld PC 2000 improvements, Waterfall FFT optimization and basic Smartphone support. RSID is the famous Reed Solomon ID of Patrick Lindecker F6CTE. Patrick added this feature into his MultiPSK software year ago. Until now only MultiPSK (and since last week also Cesco's FDMDV?) implemented this feature. Instead of CW ID or Image ID, a sequence of 15 MFSK tones is sent at the beginning of every TX to identify mode and center of frequency of the following data stream. RSID has very high redundancy, so if the RSID is decoded with zero or one error, there is extremely low probability of false detection. The feature is very handy to automatically detect mode and submode of rare modes and therefore encourages experimentation. Also it is easy to tune MFSK16 mode as no tuning is needed at all. I found RSID very useful with ATS-3b transceiver, at it has only narrow not very flat CW filter. Even if the whole digital signal does not fit into the filter, if the mode has high enough redundancy and is strong enough, it will be still decoded if tuned properly. But without seeing the whole spectrum of the signal on waterfall, it is very difficult to tune it. With RSID receive on, one only needs to get the RSID signal into receiver passband to make sure the signal will be tuned correctly. PSK63F is a nice mode invented by Nino Porcino IZ8BLY. It is a crossbreed between MFSK16 and PSK63. It uses convolution code and varicode of MFSK16, but for hardware layer it uses binary phase shifting at 63.125Bd. PSK63F tries to fight ionospheric flutter by faster phase modulation and forward error correction. It is well known that BPSK31 does not survive polar flutter. BPSK63 is better, but one loses 3dB. For DX work, PSK63F could gain back that 3dB and still show lower sensitivity for polar flutter. PSK125 is nothing more than 2x faster, 2x wider and 3dB less sensitive BPSK than PSK63. I finally added sample rate conversion. It took me a bit longer, because it is done in fixed point arithmetic again to make it computationally feasible on Windows CE devices. I have good experience with my iPaq 3630 and Jornada 720, they show very little clock error. But my new laptop shows as high as 4% error on TX and 2% on RX. Even PSK31 did not work at that level of clock error. With the release of ATS-3b kit by Steve KD1JV, I received reports about having trouble to get the communication interface working. ATS-3b is controlled by Manchester modulation generated by sound card, which is translated to digital levels by a simple slicer. Some sound cards generate ugly transient response at the start and end of sound. I added four new parameters to control the shape of transient response: TX delay, TX tail, ATS3 preamble and ATS3 postamble. The first two are silence intervals. The next two are intervals of Manchester idle tone. The idle tone is shaped by raised cosine function now to minimize clicks, if it is longer than 50msec. Also Jornada 720 generates some ugly click about 200msec after sound output opening. I was not able to find out the cause, but setting TX delay to 250ms either avoids the click or at least shifts the modulation after the click. I added keyboard accelerators for accessing menu from keyboard. According to Microsoft GUI guidelines for Pocket PC platform, one shall not use keyboard accelerators. They work on my device though, so I leave them there. Menu pops up at Alt-T for tools, Alt-M for Modem, Alt-A for mAcros etc. F1-F12 execute macros on desktop. Until now, I relied on testing of Handheld PC 2000 build by Helge Tefts. Last month I bought Jornada 720 on e-bay for whooping $40+shipping. I did some user interface improvements on that platform, made some missing features available like context menus on RX/TX windows etc. Jornada 720 has a two LiIon cell accu. I bet ATS-3b may be powered from the handheld's accu. I replaced complex FFT by a real FFT for waterfall calculation, which lowers current consumption. Now all the DSP calculation uses less current than user interface updates + FEC and certainly less than backlight on my iPaq 3630. This is quite interesting. It shows that for HAM radio digital modems and PDA sized display, DSP CPU will be probably counter-productive as DSP is usually clumsy for general purpose computing. To improve current consumption even more, I would probably need to replace some stock user interface components from Microsoft like RX window by a custom one or get back to a custom design with very small monochrome display and simple user interface. Ondra OK1CDJ bought himself a Smartphone HTC S710. The device does not have a touch screen and did not show menu in PocketDigi-1.0.10. Smartphone only
[digitalradio] NBEMS experience today
Several of us were around the 10137 frequency earlier today and tried various combinations of modes, including NBEMS. We had at least KH6TY, K3UK, VE5MU, KC7GNM, and WD4KPD. Some attempts at making transfers was done. I sent Skip one of my standard messages which is the Gettysburgh Address. It took about 6 minutes or so to send with its 1419 character length.using the PSK63 speed. I unfortunately did not record this exactly. Not really fast, but we had quite a few repeats due to conditions being marginal. Again, this mode is intended more for VHF, but it does work on HF, even with fairly modest signals. The main thing is that the message was completely accurate at the receiving station, something nearly impossible to do with most of the sound card modes. What we probably should have done is try the same message with FAE 400 mode and compare the throughput under similar conditions. Eventually it sounds like NBEMS may have a chat mode, which I think would be a good thing, but you can easily switch back and forth between the flarq ARQ add-on and the basic VBdigi program. I wonder if it might be possible to eventually add the FAE 400 mode? In fact, later on I was tuning around and VE5MU was down the band calling on FAE 400 and I just sort of set my cursor on the waterfall and I was connected. We had a lengthy chat and if you have used this mode, you know that it is hard to keep up with the throughput with less than 40 wpm keyboard speed:) And that is when conditions are not the best. I am wondering if it might be possible to have this mode eventually available on VBdigi as it clearly is the superior ARQ HF sound card mode at this time. You can use wide FAE for more speed, but it is no where near as sensitive as the 400 Hz narrower mode. And for those of us who really do not want to operate with moderate width modes (under 500 Hz), the 400 Hz wide mode is ideal. The 10130 to 10140 sub bands under the new Region 2 Band Plan recommends no more than 500 Hz bandwidth. Questions about NBEMS: 1. I think I asked something like this before, but bear with me. It seems to be sending several blocks of data because you see the inserted characters that must be a checksum and if the receiving station decodes all correctly it knows that. Is this a CRC kind of check or something similar? 2. Am I correct that it only requests the parts that it can not decode properly? And it does this even though in between blocks are OK and so don't need ARQ? So you can send maybe three or more blocks with the check and if only one is bad it only resends that one? 3. If it needs to repeat one or more blocks, the transmitting station does the repeat, but then continues to send new data as well? Probably to fill a maximum number of bytes per transmission? 4. If you see someone sending the flarq beacon in VBdigit, and their callsign, is that just a general call to anyone? Or is there some way to differentiate who is to get the message? 5. And then when their callsign appears automatically in the flarq program, does that mean they are trying to connect specifically to your callsign, or is your flarq program just responding to any flarq beacon? 6. If it is a general call, how do we know when you receive a message or who it is supposed to go to? 73, Rick, KV9U
Re: [digitalradio] A weekend of NBEMS: Some questions.
1. Did anyone use it on VHF or UHF this weekend ? It seems that it would be perfect for these quiet frequency ranges, file transfers at PSK250 should really be very useful It is designed primarily for VHF in the choice of modes, narrow bandwidth and not handling much QSB so no need for wider multitone modes that work further into the noise. 2. Did anyone try MFSK16 ARQ Does not work well, because the latency of MFSK16 means the first ARQ control code to start a sequence has passed before the decoder can decode it. Same problem with DominoEx. This was a desired choice also for VHF - wider, but less critical tuning, but the latency prevented it from working. 3. Has anyone established a protocol for who goes first when a few stations beacon and hear each other ? Not that I know of. We are going to disable having more than one station or two connected stations sending a message at the same time. Too confusing! 4. Is there any practical use for the email feature. It works well , but is it not easier to send via the Internet unless in an emcomm situation ? NBEMS is intended to be used primarily for personal emcomm messaging or point-to-point communications backup when all else fails. When the Internet is accessible, of course it is more desirable. 5. Where should we hang out if we are looking for email? Please don't hang out looking for email! If you are a served agency that assigns someone to monitor the band for traffic, or meet a sked, when normal communications are available, NBEMS is useful, but why clutter up the airwaves with email or messaging? The ham bands are primarily for amateur radio hobbiests to talk to other amateur radio hobbiests, not as a slow replacement for the Internet or text messaging. 6. Anyone come up with some emcomm tasks for this software package? How do we test this for emergency communication drills/event ? First the system must be validated and bugs worked out. Then it can be deployed by emcomm groups. We have only released NBEMS for beta testing, not for deployment, and are still making changes. We do appreciate the members of this group for taking the time to give NBEMS a try. 7 Is ALE 400 better ? Possibly, for HF where there is QSB to contend with. For VHF, PSK250 on a non-fading path has a speed advantage, I think. 8. Is it just me, or does the passage of ARQ files between two stations invoke FLARQ reception on a third station that is on same frequency ? It is not you. I have experienced the same thing. Of course a third-party station cannot request fills. We are still refining flarq based on the experiences already gained on HF. Hope this answers some of the questions, at least from my viewpoint. Other's may feel differently. One undocumented feature is the ability of VBdigi to seek for a directional CQ, but still needs some work. The way this works is that a station with emergency traffic repetitively calls CQ EM for example, and VBdigi will scan the passband up and down until it stops on such a CQ. In a widescale disaster, there may be many stations trying to pass emergency messages, and VBdigi will be able to find them without the operator having to stop and decode each one manually. Still some work to do on this feature, but it can only work if a narrowband mode is used, so that there are many stations in the passband (in the same area of the band). 73, Skip KH6TY
[digitalradio] I'm a new guy
Well at least relatively new. I've been a general since last February, but was operating HF as an Army MARS operator for about 2 years before my upgrade. I signed up here because I've discovered I have a bunch I want to learn about digital modes. I hope this is the right place. My experience so far has been with MT63, BPSK31, a little bit of Olivia and this weekend an attempt to try RTTY during the Roundup. In about two 45 minute periods of casual working I managed to work 7 or 8 stations. A lot to learn there also. Mode ID is a place to start I guess. I use MixW which to my knowledge doesn't auto id modes. Is there anyplace with sound/pictures of what the assorted modes sound and look like on the waterfall? After my efforts last weekend to join the Olivia party I have several questions there also but have rambled long enough here for the time. Thanks for your patience, 73's, Curt Curt Givens KC8STE, AAR5VR Army MARS Earthdog and Special Programs Director GCDOC/GCAC Dayton, OH Registering lawful Americans who possess a gun to stop armed criminals, is like registering virgins to stop prostitution. ___ No viruses found in this outgoing message Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.1.4 http://www.iolo.com
