[digitalradio] Re: Report on RFSM2400 vs. OFDM
Unluckily i have to say that this comparison is quite flawed... using easypal which needs minimum 6db SNR in the lowest setting in conditions of less than 4db snr (1/6 throghput you say) is not a good idea. Comparing that to a mode which can adapt to lower snr's is BS at best. Your invited to repeat the test after having learned how to use easypal, and use it in suitable conditions. There are lots of experienced d-sstvers to get help from.
[digitalradio] Re: Setting up FDMDV
Both soundcards should also be qite precise at 48k sampling rate. If one or both cards are not able to precisely do 48k samples you will get bad audio quality, periodic interruptions, or bad SNR values. For vista users it's important to set the default audio rate to 48k, not 44100. I do not recommend vista at all, i have tested it and changed back to xp after a month.
[digitalradio] RFSM frequencies?
What are the common frequencies that RFSM users are using for mail transfers ? Can the casual monitor decode any RFSM or is it restricted to just the two stations that are linked ? I see there is a beacon mode so I guess that I should be able to decode some beacons. -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Report on RFSM2400 vs. OFDM
I'm not sure what Les wrote about the cost of the product, but my understanding was that there was a temporary $60 price associated with RFSM8000 from the normal price. The question is: who will buy it at any price? If you have seen what has happened to other developers who tried to charge for their products, some of them having excellent value, they simply failed to find a market. In fact, I would be hard pressed to come up with any new ham software products in recent time that have taken off and been purchased by many hams. Consider programs such as the paperchaser log which was a niche logging program. After a few years the author discontinued the product because he only had a few buyers. I sure would not want to have been one of those buyers. But I nearly was as it looked like a very good program! Imagine someone buying such a program that t is now free, but worse, it is no longer been developed or supported. I suspect the same thing happened with the emergency group that thought they were going to be able to charge $50 per seat for their emergency program. I don't think it succeeded. But others have gone on to develop similar programs at no charge. But even those programs are not heavily used either. There is a limited amount of mindshare with all this technology and many of us are on overload as it is. (Not only for ham programs, but the hundreds of competing programs and even operating systems which are open source or at least free as in beer). I am now using an astronomy program that is completely free and that is as good as what you used to have to pay $50 to $100 for just a few years ago. The Open Office Suite has made it possible to avoid buying the MS Office Suite saving at least $500. I do not consider this a bad thing at all. It makes more software available to more people and equalizes the power to everyone and not just those with a lot of money. Where the RFSM8000 type of product seems to have the greatest value is in the commercial market. Assuming that it can compete with multi thousand dollar STANAG modems, it should be an excellent buy for those who use this technology. I know that I probably speak for a majority of hams who wish them well. As I have said many times, what I am looking for is a program that provides ARQ chat that can operate under the worst possible conditions and can also scale if conditions warrant so that I can send any data that I am interested in sending and is legal to use in my country. The technology has been invented to do slow, medium, and fast speeds (1000 wpm text data) depending upon the conditions, but no one has been able to put this together in a simple to use package that will appeal to the mainstream digital ham. I believe the best approach, and I see some are talking about this lately, are programs that are modular and you can bolt on various parts and not have to reinvent the wheel over and over with each new mode. 73, Rick, KV9U dmitry_d2d wrote: Hi Les, Rick and all. About prices of RFSM-8000. I'm sorry, but Les was wrote incorrect information. In January, we offer special low prices. Price of FULL Featured (with Mail-Server) version is 60 USD (only for HAMs). Mail-Client version is unavailable. And, we think, this action (special low prices for HAMs) will be continued - in February and more. Please, see our web-page for last correct information: http://rfsm2400.radioscanner.ru 73, Dmitry (RFSM-IDE Group). Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked DRCC contest info : http://www.obriensweb.com/drcc.htm Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Additional webcam on 10132
I created a link , http://www.obriensweb.com/sstv/sstv.htm , that supplements Joe's 30M SSTV page. It also monitors 10132 USB and will display the 12 most recent SSTV signals decoded. Location is FN02hk, just a 40M Inverted V at the moment, so receive capability is not that great. -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
[digitalradio] SSTV on 10132
Been listening for a while now. At 17:12:25Z there was 3 transmitting at the same time.
[digitalradio] New Beta release of NBEMS, version 1.2.0
We are pleased to announce a new beta release of NBEMS, version 1.2.0, with the addition of Plain Talk, a semi-duplex mode built into the Flarq/VBdigi combination. You can use Plain Talk for chat-like QSO's that are more like normal conversation than typical simplex operation. This latest beta release has also been fine tuned for faster throughput on message transfers. Our testing continues to suggest that PSK63 is the most practical speed to use on HF in the presence of the usual QRN and QSB. PSK125, or even PSK250, seems to be practical for faster transfers on the more consistent 2m VHF paths, but falling back to PSK63 if the path does not support the higher speeds. NBEMS on HF is intended to be used with NVIS antennas on both ends of the communication, within a range of 300 miles, as that is more than sufficient for emcomm use. True NVIS antennas have a very high takeoff angle (90 degrees in ideal cases), so QRN, usually arriving at low angles, is discriminated against by the true NVIS antenna. NBEMS on HF, using existing, relatively high, HF antennas will still be subject to both varying skywave propagation and low angle reception of QRN, and tests under those conditions may not be representative of performance obtainable when true NVIS antennas are used on both ends. NVIS antennas are often dipoles mounted only 8' to 12' off the ground, and sometimes include a reflector wire under the dipole to direct the signal straight up and illuminate the ionosphere above the antenna. It is worth giving it a try! Go to http://www.w1hkj.com/NBEMS and look for the installation download link. If you are upgrading from a previous NBEMS installation, it is recommended that you first remove NBEMS by going to Control Panel, Add or Remove Programs (Programs and Features under VISTA), find NBEMS, and remove it. Then run the latest setup.exe installation program. The NBEMS Development Team Skip, KH6TY Dave, W1HKJ
Re: [digitalradio] New Beta release of NBEMS, version 1.2.0
At 04:44 PM 1/27/2008, you wrote: It is worth giving it a try! Go to http://www.w1hkj.com/NBEMS and look for the installation download link. This has been one of my pet peeves for a long long time. Rather that having to search a site why not just a DIRECT link such as http://www.your-site.com/nbms/download Really it's like saying you can see my tax return for 2006 at http://www.irs.gov spending your next lifetime searching for it. John, W0JAB
Re: [digitalradio] New Beta release of NBEMS, version 1.2.0
But, we want you to *read* about it first, John! :-) An announcement is not the appropriate place to post all the information about the product. The announcement is probably too long as it is! After being presented with screenshot, so you can decide if it is something that might interest you, the very *first* item you come to is the download link, so that is not too hard to find, is it... 73, Skip KH6TY From: John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.your-site.com/nbms/download Really it's like saying you can see my tax return for 2006 at http://www.irs.gov spending your next lifetime searching for it.
Re: [digitalradio] New Beta release of NBEMS, version 1.2.0
Installed and working well here, Thanks Skip and Dave, Andy K3UK On Jan 27, 2008 6:38 PM, kh6ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But, we want you to *read* about it first, John! :-) An announcement is not the appropriate place to post all the information about the product. The announcement is probably too long as it is! After being presented with screenshot, so you can decide if it is something that might interest you, the very *first* item you come to is the download link, so that is not too hard to find, is it... 73, Skip KH6TY From: John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.your-site.com/nbms/download Really it's like saying you can see my tax return for 2006 at http://www.irs.gov spending your next lifetime searching for it. -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] RFSM frequencies?
Hi Andrew Here in VK those that are testing use 14109.5 khz USB - 7183 and 3637.5 khz both LSB not that I expect it will do you much good under the present conditions If you display the Packets monitor window you will get all the link information and any chat between stations - main screen will show any BEACON packets received Les VK2DSG From: Andrew O'Brien Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:36 PM To: DIGITALRADIO Subject: [digitalradio] RFSM frequencies? What are the common frequencies that RFSM users are using for mail transfers ? Can the casual monitor decode any RFSM or is it restricted to just the two stations that are linked ? I see there is a beacon mode so I guess that I should be able to decode some beacons. -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Report on RFSM2400 vs. OFDM
Rick Doesnt only apply to software - I have already been down that same path with the P38 modem - got one going cheap if anyone wants it Les VK2DSG From: Rick Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 1:52 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Report on RFSM2400 vs. OFDM I'm not sure what Les wrote about the cost of the product, but my understanding was that there was a temporary $60 price associated with RFSM8000 from the normal price. The question is: who will buy it at any price? If you have seen what has happened to other developers who tried to charge for their products, some of them having excellent value, they simply failed to find a market. In fact, I would be hard pressed to come up with any new ham software products in recent time that have taken off and been purchased by many hams. Consider programs such as the paperchaser log which was a niche logging program. After a few years the author discontinued the product because he only had a few buyers. I sure would not want to have been one of those buyers. But I nearly was as it looked like a very good program! Imagine someone buying such a program that t is now free, but worse, it is no longer been developed or supported. I suspect the same thing happened with the emergency group that thought they were going to be able to charge $50 per seat for their emergency program. I don't think it succeeded. But others have gone on to develop similar programs at no charge. But even those programs are not heavily used either. There is a limited amount of mindshare with all this technology and many of us are on overload as it is. (Not only for ham programs, but the hundreds of competing programs and even operating systems which are open source or at least free as in beer). I am now using an astronomy program that is completely free and that is as good as what you used to have to pay $50 to $100 for just a few years ago. The Open Office Suite has made it possible to avoid buying the MS Office Suite saving at least $500. I do not consider this a bad thing at all. It makes more software available to more people and equalizes the power to everyone and not just those with a lot of money. Where the RFSM8000 type of product seems to have the greatest value is in the commercial market. Assuming that it can compete with multi thousand dollar STANAG modems, it should be an excellent buy for those who use this technology. I know that I probably speak for a majority of hams who wish them well. As I have said many times, what I am looking for is a program that provides ARQ chat that can operate under the worst possible conditions and can also scale if conditions warrant so that I can send any data that I am interested in sending and is legal to use in my country. The technology has been invented to do slow, medium, and fast speeds (1000 wpm text data) depending upon the conditions, but no one has been able to put this together in a simple to use package that will appeal to the mainstream digital ham. I believe the best approach, and I see some are talking about this lately, are programs that are modular and you can bolt on various parts and not have to reinvent the wheel over and over with each new mode. 73, Rick, KV9U dmitry_d2d wrote: Hi Les, Rick and all. About prices of RFSM-8000. I'm sorry, but Les was wrote incorrect information. In January, we offer special low prices. Price of FULL Featured (with Mail-Server) version is 60 USD (only for HAMs). Mail-Client version is unavailable. And, we think, this action (special low prices for HAMs) will be continued - in February and more. Please, see our web-page for last correct information: http://rfsm2400.radioscanner.ru 73, Dmitry (RFSM-IDE Group). Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked DRCC contest info : http://www.obriensweb.com/drcc.htm Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] New Beta release of NBEMS, version 1.2.0
At 05:38 PM 1/27/2008, you wrote: But, we want you to *read* about it first, John! :-) Oh I see, you have no one of them READ-ME-FIRST files.
[digitalradio] Re: New Beta release of NBEMS, version 1.2.0
Doesn't work in 64-bit Vista. 8( Frank, K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] RFSM frequencies?
Thanks Les, I may monitor those freqs, will see if I decode any packets. Andy K3UK On Jan 27, 2008 8:05 PM, Leskep [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Andrew Here in VK those that are testing use 14109.5 khz USB - 7183 and 3637.5 khz both LSB not that I expect it will do you much good under the present conditions If you display the Packets monitor window you will get all the link information and any chat between stations - main screen will show any BEACON packets received Les VK2DSG From: Andrew O'Brien Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:36 PM To: DIGITALRADIO Subject: [digitalradio] RFSM frequencies? What are the common frequencies that RFSM users are using for mail transfers ? Can the casual monitor decode any RFSM or is it restricted to just the two stations that are linked ? I see there is a beacon mode so I guess that I should be able to decode some beacons. -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ) -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Report on RFSM2400 vs. OFDM
It is ironic you should mention the P38, Les. Quite some years ago I was one of the early adopters of new technology. Not usually the bleeding edge, but close to it. Tried a number of boxes, including the Kantronics UTU, plug in card for Pactor for the C-64 computer, AEA CP-1 with BMK Multi (early non Pactor version for around $100 for DOS). Then I had to make the big decision on which modes were going to be the future winners, particularly Clover II or Pactor. The AEA PK2232 and similar costly modems became available. Pactor and Clover II had the support from the Winlink BBS system and the RTTY Digital Journal group. Specialized software such as Peter Schulze TY1PS's clever Windows based Clover II Express software became available that did something that was a first ... it would automatically send a thumbnail picture to other stations equipped with this software. However, the legal aspect remained questionable for us in the U.S. (Perhaps it was only because of Mark Millers past petition that the FCC finally corrected this in very recent time). Today it would be close to impossible for Peter to sell this kind of software. Peter also sent perhaps the first digitized ham message that included a recorded song. Another interesting issue since some comments at the time seemed to suggest this might be legal here in the U.S. but I suspect further review made it not so. I bought the P38 for my (at the time) fairly advanced 286 IBM computer (ISA architecture bus and VGA graphics) and it never worked properly on Pactor. Even after claims by HAL that it would be corrected. They just could not get the programming right. It would connect with a Pactor station and then drop the link. Completely useless product for Pactor. Even when having Clover II QSO's with Ray Petit, W7GHM, the inventor of several early digital modes (Coherent CW, Clover, and then Clover II) we had a difficult time maintaining much data throughput between our locations with our mediocre antennas. Eventually, I returned the pathetic modem to HAL but had to pay a restocking fee. I made the decision at that point to abandon hardware modems and I am very fortunate that I did. It was not until the sound card modes became popular that I returned to digital modes again. And what a refreshing change it has been. And it is constantly getting better with 2007 as the big year of change with ARQ sound card modes becoming available. I would expect a number of other OT group members have had similar experiences. 73, Rick, KV9U Leskep wrote: Rick Doesnt only apply to software - I have already been down that same path with the P38 modem - got one going cheap if anyone wants it Les VK2DSG
[digitalradio] Anyone worked VK2QQ on 30M yet ?
Anyone in North America worked VK2QQ on 30M SSTV yet ? Anyone worked VK/ZL on 30M any digital mode lately ? -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Report on RFSM2400 vs. OFDM
I was in a similar boat Rick. Still have the P38 card sitting around somewhere, I found the instruction book as well the other day. B-) 73, John de VK2XGJ One of the reasons politicians try so hard to get themselves re-elected, because they couldn't live under the laws that they have passed! - Original Message - From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Report on RFSM2400 vs. OFDM It is ironic you should mention the P38, Les. Quite some years ago I was one of the early adopters of new technology. Not usually the bleeding edge, but close to it. Tried a number of boxes, including the Kantronics UTU, plug in card for Pactor for the C-64 computer, AEA CP-1 with BMK Multi (early non Pactor version for around $100 for DOS). Then I had to make the big decision on which modes were going to be the future winners, particularly Clover II or Pactor. The AEA PK2232 and similar costly modems became available. Pactor and Clover II had the support from the Winlink BBS system and the RTTY Digital Journal group. Specialized software such as Peter Schulze TY1PS's clever Windows based Clover II Express software became available that did something that was a first ... it would automatically send a thumbnail picture to other stations equipped with this software. However, the legal aspect remained questionable for us in the U.S. (Perhaps it was only because of Mark Millers past petition that the FCC finally corrected this in very recent time). Today it would be close to impossible for Peter to sell this kind of software. Peter also sent perhaps the first digitized ham message that included a recorded song. Another interesting issue since some comments at the time seemed to suggest this might be legal here in the U.S. but I suspect further review made it not so. I bought the P38 for my (at the time) fairly advanced 286 IBM computer (ISA architecture bus and VGA graphics) and it never worked properly on Pactor. Even after claims by HAL that it would be corrected. They just could not get the programming right. It would connect with a Pactor station and then drop the link. Completely useless product for Pactor. Even when having Clover II QSO's with Ray Petit, W7GHM, the inventor of several early digital modes (Coherent CW, Clover, and then Clover II) we had a difficult time maintaining much data throughput between our locations with our mediocre antennas. Eventually, I returned the pathetic modem to HAL but had to pay a restocking fee. I made the decision at that point to abandon hardware modems and I am very fortunate that I did. It was not until the sound card modes became popular that I returned to digital modes again. And what a refreshing change it has been. And it is constantly getting better with 2007 as the big year of change with ARQ sound card modes becoming available. I would expect a number of other OT group members have had similar experiences. 73, Rick, KV9U Leskep wrote: Rick Doesnt only apply to software - I have already been down that same path with the P38 modem - got one going cheap if anyone wants it Les VK2DSG Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked DRCC contest info : http://www.obriensweb.com/drcc.htm Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.13/1246 - Release Date: 1/27/2008 6:39 PM
[digitalradio] RFSM 8000
Couple of points about RFSM8000... . Have been using this up here in VE land, version .527, and our file transfer results are similar to what the VK's are running, around 3000 baud average. . we have a test station running 24/7 using either RFSM8000 or ALE400, VE5GPM on 14103.0 .try a connect. It is also a mail server with the email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] . If you are interested in testing or want to be involved in testing , contact me off list. . Have not had the opportunity to test this under average to poor band conditions yet but are trying to put together a testing group to do so. More difficult since rfsm8000 using mil std 188 modulation may or may not be legal in the US, so have not pushed including US hams in the testing process. Can move to whatever frequency works in the US. . Like MultiPSK , RFSM8000 is a work in progress. Both Patrick and Dmitry have put in long hours developing the software, and to suggest that this software should be open source is an insult to both of these fine gentlemen, in my humble opinion. . Dmity's price of $60 is not out of line to what the licensed versions of MixW, MultiPSK and others are. Why shouldn't they gain some reward, and they continue to supply a functional product that is freeware , just without all the bells and whistles? For emergency communications, the ideal program would have the simplicity and speed of RFSM8000, the bandwidth and robustness of ALE400, and an improved connection to the internet email over that presently offered with RFSM8000 . Both Patrick and Dmitry are pretty talented individuals. would be nice to see their directions converge into one super piece of software. John VE5MU
