[digitalradio] Navigator interface
Is anyone using one? If so your comments would be appreciated. Best Kim W4OSS
Re: [digitalradio] Navigator interface
I have one here - I think it's excellent. Currently driving a TS-2000, also use it with the K3. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - From: wb4lzq [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is anyone using one? If so your comments would be appreciated.
[digitalradio] Re: RAC Announces Newly Revised Canadian HF Band Plan
Digital modes on 160m don't seem to be important for the RAC ... otherwise they would have recognised that - like on 40 m where it has been considered - Region I has a different assignment for digital modes which is exactly in the RAC CW DX window. Frequencies below 1810 khz, by the way, are not allowed for amateur radio use in Region I. So let's continue to train our expertise in split operation. At least a foot note (and there are many in the bandplan already) would have been appropriate to inform the user that it's not unlikely that the weak DX signals between 1838 and 1840 will be in competition with strong local digital signals ... 73 Juergen, DL8LE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Mark Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: RAC announces a newly revised HF Band Plan The HF band plan presently in use in Canada was adopted in 1996. Since then, many changes have happened in the Amateur radio world and other band plans have been revised and modified. Let us only mention the changes announced by the FCC in 2007 affecting the US band plan and the revised one adopted by the IARU Region 2 countries at the Brasilia conference in September 2007. Just under two years ago, Radio Amateurs of Canada had asked Bob Nash, VE3KZ, a former First Vice President of RAC, to re-activate the HFBPC (HF Band Planning Committee) with a goal to review and modernize the Canadian HF Band Plan. Bob's committee has since worked very hard in studying and consulting all across Canada to eventually come up with a band plan proposed to the Board of Directors of Radio Amateurs of Canada. The RAC Board has adopted this plan at its July 2008 meeting and the new band plan is now on the RAC Web page at: http://www.rac.ca/service/bandplans/hfband_e.php RAC wants to thank the HFBPC members for their hard work and wishes the Canadian Amateur community much pleasure in using the new band plans. Please spread the news. 73, Daniel A. Lamoureux, VE2KA Vice President International Affairs, Radio Amateurs of Canada. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [digitalradio] Navigator interface
You ought to contact George Burns, W2SFD, ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) from Schenectady. He recently purchased one and the whole purchase procedure was a disaster! From the time he ordered it to the time he finally gave up on this unit was probably 2 months or better. The best I know is that he requested to return it for a FULL REFUND. I personally have a Navigator an I have not had an issue to date. But, after what I heard George went through I cannot honestly recommend it any longer. The screw ups were just to crazy. 73 de NY2U Bill In a message dated 8/25/2008 10:31:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is anyone using one? If so your comments would be appreciated. Best Kim W4OSS **It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here. (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv000547)
[digitalradio] s/n and acoustic coupling
In field I use PocketDigi and PDA with acoustic coupling (PDA-mic). How the acoustic coupling change the capability to decode signals below the noise floor? 73 de Jaak es1hj/qrp
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Path Simulations for PAX / HF Packet
Hello Tony, Glad you did measures for Pax. My figures are the following: Lowest S/N : - 10 dB for PAX and - 7 dB for PAX2 It corresponds to a Gaussian noise without any ionospheric distortion (your first case). In my figures, I accept an error rate of 2 % (2 characters false for 98 characters good). However with frames it is a bit more difficult to appreciate. Conditions of measure: the sampling speed of the sound card has been perfectly determined (Sampling freq button) and the sound level (as displayed in the Level box) is about 20 to 60 % (not critical). Normally there is a 3 dB difference between these 2 modes as there are strictly the same except that Pax2 is twice quicker than Pax. Note: Pax and Pax2 modulations are clones of Olivia, let's say very close on modulation to Contestia. For Pax and Packet there is no ARQ memory (contrary to ARQ FAE), so the minimum S/N in connected mode would be the same as in Unproto. Note: it could be theoritically possible to implement ARQ memory in Pax and Packet (which would give a sort of FEC (repetition) coding to these modes), but it would need time... 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 11:05 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Path Simulations for PAX / HF Packet Greetings Patrick, Hello Tony, TKS for the interesting tests. Did you test PAX or PAX2? with Unproto frames? 73 Patrick I used PAX2 with Unproto frames during the test. Haven't figured out how to test in the 'connect' mode yet. I just finished testing PAX 1 so please see below. PAX has a definite advantage in sensitivity over PAX-2 as well as the ability to print better when conditions are disturbed. There's a 3db advantage in sensitivity over PAX-2 when the criteria is based on 100% decode. But partial decodes at -6 and -10db vs. 0db and -2db would seem to indicated that PAX would do much better than PAX-2 in the ARQ connect mode. Would appreciate your thoughts on this Patrick... Tony, K2MO PAX: Sensitivity threshold for 100% decode: -11db (no ionospheric distortion) Ionospheric Simulations: High-Latitude Moderate.Complete decdoe @ -4db SNR. Partial decode -10db SNR High-Latitude DisturbedNO DECODE Mid-latitude Disturbed.Complete decode @ -4db SNR. Partial Decode @ -10db SNR Low-Latitude Disturbed.Complete decode @ 0db SNR. Partial decode @ -6db SNR PAX2: Sensitivity threshold for 100% decode: -2db (no ionospheric distortion) Ionospheric Simulations: High-Latitude Moderate.Complete decdoe @ +2db SNR. Partial decode 0db SNR High-Latitude DisturbedNO DECODE Mid-latitude Disturbed.Complete decode @ +1db SNR. Partial Decode @ -2db SNR Low-Latitude Disturbed.NO DECODE HFPAcket (300baud): Sensitivity threshold for 100% decode: +1db SNR (no ionospheric distortion) Ionospheric Simulations. NO DECODE* * Susceptible to slight multi-path timing delays and Doppler Spread; 1 Hz / 1msec Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Check our other Yahoo Groups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Re: Navigator interface
Interesting commentary regarding problems with the Navigator. I have had a Navigator for about 18 months. I have used it with the 756P3 and now with the 7700 and no problems what so ever. I caution that RTFM is a must and the instructions are pretty straight forward. Interestingly I helped a fellow ham who was having all sorts of issiues with his Navigator and the 7700. Once I saw a screen shot of the display it seem quite obvious to me the program was being overdriven from the navigator. I sent him a screen shot of what I was seeing on the display (psk) and it was like night and day. He backed off the drive from the navigator and it appears he is happy with the results. There are a lot of things that come into play and perhaps the most important one is patience and sometimes common sense. Don - kx9q
[digitalradio] Navigator interface
Interesting commentary regarding problems with the Navigator. I have had a Navigator for about 18 months. I have used it with the 756P3 and now with the 7700 and no problems what so ever. I caution that RTFM is a must and the instructions are pretty straight forward. Interestingly I helped a fellow ham who was having all sorts of issiues with his Navigator and the 7700. Once I saw a screen shot of the display it seem quite obvious to me the program was being overdriven from the navigator. I sent him a screen shot of what I was seeing on the display (psk) and it was like night and day. He backed off the drive from the navigator and it appears he is happy with the results. There are a lot of things that come into play and perhaps the most important one is patience and sometimes common sense. Don - kx9q
[digitalradio] New postings on W1HKJ web site
Hi all From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 73 de LA5VNA Steinar - http://www.w1hkj.com/ - Fldigi, NBEMS, and fl_logbook have all be updated to newer versions on the web site. *fldigi/NBEMS* - fldigi version 3.02, now includes the entire hamlib rig control suite in the Windows executable. Improved serial comms for rigCAT on Windows. *fl_logbook* - version 2.7 - Corrected launch problem on Windows when a logbook data file is specified. Added support for common Fltk gui switches. Try executing fl_logbook with the launcher line set to include --help for a popup window describing the common gui switches. 73, Dave, W1HKJ for development team(s)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Path Simulations for PAX / HF Packet
Patrick, Hello Tony, Glad you did measures for Pax. My pleasure; thanks for adding the mode to Multipsk! My figures are the following: Lowest S/N : - 10 dB for PAX and - 7 dB for PAX2. It corresponds to a Gaussian noise without any ionospheric distortion (your first case. Just tested PAX and PAX2 again for the lowest S/N (Gaussian noise only) and came up with -11db for PAX and -7db for PAX2. Very close. Normally there is a 3 dB difference between these 2 modes as there are strictly the same except that Pax2 is twice quicker than Pax. Understand Patrick. Ionospheric distortion seems to widen the gap between the two with PAX coming out ahead by 5db or so. I used the 100% decode criteria so that may be the difference. The PAX2 mode did not print at all (regardless of SNR) with the two most disturbing ionospheric simulations. Note: Pax and Pax2 modulations are clones of Olivia, let's say very close on modulation to Contestia. No wonder why they work so well! For Pax and Packet there is no ARQ memory (contrary to ARQ FAE), so the minimum S/N in connected mode would be the same as in Unproto. Thanks for clarifying that. Note: it could be theoritically possible to implement ARQ memory in Pax and Packet (which would give a sort of FEC (repetition)coding to these modes), but it would need time... Interesting. Thanks Patrick. Let me know if I can help with any mode simulations you haven't tried yet. Tony, K2MO
[digitalradio] signalink sL+
WONDERING IF ANYBODY IS USING A SIGNALINK SL+ FOR HIGH SPEED ARQ SOFTWARE IE RFSM2400 OR ALIKE ? I'M CURIOUS OF PERFORMANCE BEFORE I CONSIDER PURCHASE MATTHEW A. GREGORY KC2PUA
Re: [digitalradio] signalink sL+
SORRY I MENT SL 1+ MATTHEW A. GREGORY KC2PUA AAR2AN 315-759-5107 HOME 315-759-1452 CELL [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNITED STATES ARMY MARS - Original Message From: matt gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 8:54:50 PM Subject: [digitalradio] signalink sL+ WONDERING IF ANYBODY IS USING A SIGNALINK SL+ FOR HIGH SPEED ARQ SOFTWARE IE RFSM2400 OR ALIKE ? I'M CURIOUS OF PERFORMANCE BEFORE I CONSIDER PURCHASE MATTHEW A. GREGORY KC2PUA
[digitalradio] Re: signalink sL+
Signalink is not capable of high speed ARQ. It uses vox, and doesn't have a real PTT with RTS. Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, matt gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WONDERING IF ANYBODY IS USING A SIGNALINK SL+ FOR HIGH SPEED ARQ SOFTWARE IE RFSM2400 OR ALIKE ? I'M CURIOUS OF PERFORMANCE BEFORE I CONSIDER PURCHASE MATTHEW A. GREGORY KC2PUA
Re: [digitalradio] Re: signalink sL+
Skip - Original Message - From: expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 10:19 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: signalink sL+ Signalink is not capable of high speed ARQ. It uses vox, and doesn't have a real PTT with RTS. Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, matt gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WONDERING IF ANYBODY IS USING A SIGNALINK SL+ FOR HIGH SPEED ARQ SOFTWARE IE RFSM2400 OR ALIKE ? I'M CURIOUS OF PERFORMANCE BEFORE I CONSIDER PURCHASE MATTHEW A. GREGORY KC2PUA Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.6/1626 - Release Date: 8/21/2008 6:54 PM
