[digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: I think there are valid reasons for the FCC only allowing spread spectrum above 222 Mhz (where there is plenty of room!). A single spread spectrum signal on HF may go unnoticed by most stations, but what happens if 100 (in range) are on at the same time? The statistical chances that where will be QRM on your frequency are much higher, the more stations that are on. You are talking about real, 20kHz or more wide spread spectrum though, aren't you? If it's only as wide as a voice signal, it's causing no more harm than a voice signal (and it probably isn't spread spectrum according to at least some learned opinions.) Julian, G4ILO
[digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, k...@... wrote: Quite frankly, RTTY could easily be replaced with PSK63 as the prime digital contest mode. However, many PSK operators are so clueless and often downright rude when it comes to contests that its an extremely uphill battle. We could fit a lot more PSK63 signals on the band than RTTY... It would be interesting to see what happened if a semi-major RTTY contest was moved to PSK63 only. Agreed, though the IMD might be a problem, especially as many RTTY contesters use class C amps. Of course, you could also argue that they wouldn't need to use as much power... As a not completely unrelated aside, a few of us have been helping to test G4HYG's APRS Messenger software which at the moment is an experiment to find an alternative publicly documented mode to FSK300 packet that gives better performance on the HF bands. We had been using PSK63 but very recently have been trying the GMSK modes (63, 125 and 250) which are implemented in the MMVARI free software. I don't know (and don't at the moment have time to find out) what exactly the technical differences are between PSK and GMSK but the performance seems to be even better, and apparently it doesn't have the amplitude variations that cause IMD products when using PSK. Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to use it, though, and I guess both RTTY and PSK31 are so established now that you'll never persuade people to give them up. Julian, G4ILO
[digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: Just use common sense.. Garrett / AA0OI Common sense says follow the regulations, because they were made for the benefit of everyone, and not just for what a few who would like to do what they wish without regard for others that want to use the bands. Regulations are not guide lines - they are LAW for the benefit of all. Band plans are guide lines, not regulations. What may seen nit picking to you may seem necessary to others. The regulations are a great balancing act to both protect and enable as many users to be treated as fairly as possible. 73, Skip KH6TY We also have a saying over here, the law is an ass. Whilst I'm not advocating anarchy, I guess most people in this discussion have broken the law at one time or another by, for example, exceeding the speed limit in their car, something that could arguably have more serious consequences than using a transmission mode that some regulation appears to ban even though no harm would be caused by using it. I think a sense of proportion is needed. Julian, G4ILO
[digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: actually, this could be a good development because I still have a funny feeling that they would balk at the idea of calling it illegal. I don't use the mode because I am chicken, but there are still many in the USA that do. Andy K3UK On the other hand it might just make the powers that be think that hams are a lot of trouble and expense. If they are really concerned about this they will find out for themselves. Surely, at a time of economic stringency, there are better uses for your tax dollars than revisiting ham radio regulations in detail? Julian, G4ILO
AW: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
The inventor is an idiot . not cause he invented the mode nor cause he said it is spread spectrum Bur because he still hold on the software that does send the false autogenerated spots
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
Julian, This regulation was made years ago and just covers all spread spectrum. In the FCC's opinion, ROS is spread spectrum, both by description by the author and lab analysis. So, they had no choice but to uphold the current ruling. If someone wants to redefine spread spectrum on HF as having a limited spreading factor (no more than SSB phone, for example), this must be done via a petition to the FCC. The procedure is straightforward. I have done it myself on other matters. Those with an opinion that ROS is NOT really spread spectrum and wants to use it in the US only need to file a petition stating why it is not harmful and what limits should be imposed. ROS will have to be given a definition designator and the FCC will then decide where a mode with that emission can be used without harm. For example, why is NBFM not allowed to be used below 10 meters? Perhaps it also should be, but until the regulations are changed to permit it, it may not be done. 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/20/2010 4:19 AM, g4ilo wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: I think there are valid reasons for the FCC only allowing spread spectrum above 222 Mhz (where there is plenty of room!). A single spread spectrum signal on HF may go unnoticed by most stations, but what happens if 100 (in range) are on at the same time? The statistical chances that where will be QRM on your frequency are much higher, the more stations that are on. You are talking about real, 20kHz or more wide spread spectrum though, aren't you? If it's only as wide as a voice signal, it's causing no more harm than a voice signal (and it probably isn't spread spectrum according to at least some learned opinions.) Julian, G4ILO
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
Who is to decide what is harmful to the general population or not - the individual looking out for himself, or the public looking out for everyone (in the form of a republic) including that individual? 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/20/2010 4:34 AM, g4ilo wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: Just use common sense.. Garrett / AA0OI Common sense says follow the regulations, because they were made for the benefit of everyone, and not just for what a few who would like to do what they wish without regard for others that want to use the bands. Regulations are not guide lines - they are LAW for the benefit of all. Band plans are guide lines, not regulations. What may seen nit picking to you may seem necessary to others. The regulations are a great balancing act to both protect and enable as many users to be treated as fairly as possible. 73, Skip KH6TY We also have a saying over here, the law is an ass. Whilst I'm not advocating anarchy, I guess most people in this discussion have broken the law at one time or another by, for example, exceeding the speed limit in their car, something that could arguably have more serious consequences than using a transmission mode that some regulation appears to ban even though no harm would be caused by using it. I think a sense of proportion is needed. Julian, G4ILO
[digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Sounds like a LID response. Channel 19 is 27.185 Mhz, I am sure the will welcome you back. Kurt K8YZK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, AA0OI aa...@... wrote: Spoken like a good Nazi Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@... To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:18:24 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA If I print any ham in the U.S. transmitting via the ROS mode I'm going to call Laura Smith of the FCC and give her the callsign of the offender. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@... PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
Julian, For example, five years ago, Winlink attempted to get the FCC to allow then to use Pactor-III ALL OVER the phone bands, with the argument that the bandwidth was no greater than a phone signal. Do you think that should have been allowed for the benefit of that 1% of the US ham population and therefore wrecking the phone bands for over 50% of hams worldwide? Perhaps you have never had a QSO destroyed by a Pactor-III or Pactor-II mailbox... Regulations in this country protect as well as hinder sometimes. 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/20/2010 7:23 AM, KH6TY wrote: Who is to decide what is harmful to the general population or not - the individual looking out for himself, or the public looking out for everyone (in the form of a republic) including that individual? 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/20/2010 4:34 AM, g4ilo wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: Just use common sense.. Garrett / AA0OI Common sense says follow the regulations, because they were made for the benefit of everyone, and not just for what a few who would like to do what they wish without regard for others that want to use the bands. Regulations are not guide lines - they are LAW for the benefit of all. Band plans are guide lines, not regulations. What may seen nit picking to you may seem necessary to others. The regulations are a great balancing act to both protect and enable as many users to be treated as fairly as possible. 73, Skip KH6TY We also have a saying over here, the law is an ass. Whilst I'm not advocating anarchy, I guess most people in this discussion have broken the law at one time or another by, for example, exceeding the speed limit in their car, something that could arguably have more serious consequences than using a transmission mode that some regulation appears to ban even though no harm would be caused by using it. I think a sense of proportion is needed. Julian, G4ILO
Re: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
BINGO!!! I invoke Godwin's Law!!! See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law Dave NK7Z On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 18:56:58 -0700 (PDT) AA0OI aa...@yahoo.com thus spake: Spoken like a good Nazi Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@tampabay.rr.com To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:18:24 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA If I print any ham in the U.S. transmitting via the ROS mode I'm going to call Laura Smith of the FCC and give her the callsign of the offender. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay.rr.com PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
SO ! that whats in my swimming pool.. I'll have to add more chlorine.. Garrett / AA0OI From: Dave AA6YQ aa...@ambersoft.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 9:58:44 PM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! Enough of this juvenile garbage. Amateur radio in the US is governed by regulations to which we agree to abide when we are granted a license. These regulations are particularly important in amateur radio because we all share one set of frequencies. These regulations are not perfect; in particular, the regulation constraining Spread Spectrum usage is insufficiently precise, and as a result precludes the use of techniques on HF that the FCC would likely approve given a competent exposition. In this situation, an amateur radio operator interested in using these techniques on HF should hold off until the regulation has been changed to permit their use, contributing to or leading the effort to change the regulation if capable. There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking the FCC for their view of whether a particular mode or technique is legal under the current regulations. The knowledge that many amateurs are confused about what constitutes Spread Spectrum should if anything make the FCC more receptive to a proposal to clarify the regulation. The claim that asking the FCC a question can kill amateur radio is amazingly ridiculous; asking the FCC a question is more likely to teleport the Loch Ness Monster into your swimming pool than kill amateur radio. Unlike broadcast television stations, amateur radio operators don't individually negotiate their licenses with the FCC. Thus the comments below regarding regulations being trumped by station permits negotiated by attorneys is completely irrelevant. The nasty name-calling that appears below and in previous posts today is flat-out unacceptable. Were I moderator of this group, the offending parties would be long gone. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:digitalradi o...@yahoogroups. com]On Behalf Of W2XJ Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 10:10 PM To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! Skip if you call this a regulation, I agree with Garret. It is a misguided one and a victim of unintended consequences. The whole discussion is stupid and you, Skip, are too anal retentive. I work in broadcast and there are many un-updated FCC regulations that the commission subsequently licenses in a manner contrary to their own rules. Look at the FCC definition of translator and then tell me how under the letter of the law how AM and HD-2 and HD-3 stations can legally use that service. Regardless stations get legal permits every day. Washington is a town of double and denial speak, the rules mean next to nothing in many cases. What your communications attorney can wring out of them is all that counts. It is whiners like you that damage the system. Ham radio is supposed to be self regulating which means please do not disturb the FCC. I guess you still do not get it. People like you will kill this hobby. On 7/19/10 8:56 PM, KH6TY kh...@comcast. net wrote: Just use common sense.. Garrett / AA0OI Common sense says follow the regulations, because they were made for the benefit of everyone, and not just for what a few who would like to do what they wish without regard for others that want to use the bands. Regulations are not guide lines - they are LAW for the benefit of all. Band plans are guide lines, not regulations. What may seen nit picking to you may seem necessary to others. The regulations are a great balancing act to both protect and enable as many users to be treated as fairly as possible. 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/19/2010 8:42 PM, AA0OI wrote: The rules and regulations are a guide line they were never meant to be written on 2 stone tablets and prayed to on the seventh day.. if everyone followed every little nit picking rule and regulation the world would come to a stand still.. (the government told Wilbur and Orville that they were forbidden to fly) I'm sure everyone drives the speed limit too.. Just use common sense.. Garrett / AA0OI From:John Becker, WØJAB w0...@big-river. net To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 6:03:07 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! The hell with the rules and law, right Garrett? John, W0JAB At 05:48 PM 7/19/2010, you wrote: What is absurd is that its a fight in the first place.. do you ever just back up and look at what is being said?? Your all acting like this is life or death..ITS NOT..I have been using it all along... NO FCC at my door,, NO FBI,, NO KGB.. You are all fighting for something that no one cares
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
Just because the Government has written it down on paper, does not make it right.. And not to start another argument, but incase you haven't noticed we've lost control of our Government and that includes the FCC Garrett / AA0OI From: James Hall hall.jam...@gmail.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 10:17:08 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! Apparently it's perfectly fine to break the rules because what the big bad government doesn't know won't hurt them. At least according to some people. I wonder if anyone making that flim-flam argument frequents the W6NUT repeater. Wouldn't surprise me in the least. On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 9:15 PM, J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com wrote: I agree that traditional SS spread across a very large portion of the band would be bad here in the US if a lot of stations were using it at once. ROS, though we know it's not as good as several other modes, is not that kind of SS. It has limited bandwidth, not much different from a number of other modes, and the ban against it doesn't make sense. So I don't agree with the FCC approach to their regulations, where they ban how the intelligence is transmitted rather than the bandwidth the signal occupies. At the same time, I just can't believe some of my fellow countrymen who think it's ok to pick and choose which rules you'll follow. If you don't like the rules against petty theft, do you just steal? The right way is to campaign to get the rules you don't like changed, and until you do, follow them. Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: KH6TY To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 5:38 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! I think there are valid reasons for the FCC only allowing spread spectrum above 222 Mhz (where there is plenty of room!). A single spread spectrum signal on HF may go unnoticed by most stations, but what happens if 100 (in range) are on at the same time? The statistical chances that where will be QRM on your frequency are much higher, the more stations that are on. Our bands have very limited spectrum, and therefore it is up to all of us to cooperate in using the least bandwidth that will do the job. Perhaps it has been forgotten that five years ago, it was the practice for a single wideband Pactor-II mailbox to obliterate the entire PSK31 segment of the 20m band, displacing as many as 30 PSK31 stations. It was only after much discussion that the Pactor mailboxes agreed to move elsewhere. However there remains a Canadian Pactor-III automatic (not listening first) mailbox station just below 14.070 that makes that area unusable by anyone else. The FCC regulations in the US do not allow US Pactor-III mailboxes to operate there, but, without consideration to others, the Canadian Pactor-III station (just across the border) just dominates that frequency at will when it could just as well operate in the automatic subbands with all the other Pactor-III mailboxes. This is a good example of not getting along with your neighbors! The FCC rules may seem unfair, and I am sure SOME are unfair, but there is a process of amendment that insures fair access by all parties, as best can be done. So, if you do not agree with the FCC rules (that PROTECT as well as hinder), take the step of filing a petition to amend the rules and make your case, but do not disregard the current rules because you think they are unfair, because others may not think the same, and they may be harmed by your breaking the rules. We all have to try to get along, and the best way to do that is to observe the local regulations, which have been made for the benefit of the many and not just for the benefit of the select few. If the regulations really deserve to be changed, make your case and let the process of public comment by ALL concerned parties determine what should be done. The FCC makes regulations only for the public benefit, and only after giving everyone a chance to comment. 73, Skip KH6TY
AW: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
And not to start another argument, but incase you haven't noticed we've lost control of our Government and that includes the FCC Snip.. Is there ANY country in the world where the people have control over their government??? Where can I get a flight ticket to there?? Just kidding
[digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Garrett /AA0OI said Spoken like a good Nazi NZ4O says it's all about obeying the law. The Nazi's did not obey the law and it was their downfall. Garrett /AA0OI said What happened to the real Americans ??? NZ4O says real American's used to obey the law. As a society we are no longer doing that and it's one of the reasons that America is in total societal collapse. NZ4O says my post was tongue in cheek but I forgot to add the smiley face. :)) 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay.rr.com PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
Subject says operating ros in usa .. And the discussion was long enough So godwin is right hi hi Can we now come back to the topic?? I found it very bad that you come from digital radio to historical politics but maybe godwin IS RIGHT with his law Greetz Sigi
Re: AW: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
No eveyone is Leonardo DaVinchi, or me ! Garrett / AA0OI From: Siegfried Jackstien siegfried.jackst...@freenet.de To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 5:45:34 AM Subject: AW: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! The inventor is an idiot … not cause he invented the mode nor cause he said it is spread spectrum Bur because he still hold on the software that does send the false autogenerated spots
AW: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Garrett /AA0OI said What happened to the real Americans ??? NZ4O says real American's used to obey the law. As a society we are no longer doing that and it's one of the reasons that America is in total societal collapse. Snip... Real americans??? Had red skin and were killed by white men
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
That right they would.. I hold a Exta Class ham license I hold Commercial Pilots License, single engine land , multi engine land , Insturment rated, CFI, CFII, Multi Engine Instructor. with over 20,000 hrs I hold a Captians Liscense for over 600,000 tons I Owned my own company teaching backpacking and wilderness survival. in Colorado I'm a marksman with a pistol at 100 ft and rifle to 1000 yards.. What you done with your life? Garrett / AA0OI From: k8yzk k8...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 6:30:59 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Sounds like a LID response. Channel 19 is 27.185 Mhz, I am sure the will welcome you back. Kurt K8YZK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, AA0OI aa...@... wrote: Spoken like a good Nazi Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@... To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:18:24 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA If I print any ham in the U.S. transmitting via the ROS mode I'm going to call Laura Smith of the FCC and give her the callsign of the offender. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@... PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
Dave: Very good,, I could have done worse and call him O'Bama ! Garrett / AA0OI From: Dave Cole d...@nk7z.net To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 7:43:51 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA BINGO!!! I invoke Godwin's Law!!! See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law Dave NK7Z On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 18:56:58 -0700 (PDT) AA0OI aa...@yahoo.com thus spake: Spoken like a good Nazi Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@tampabay.rr.com To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:18:24 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA If I print any ham in the U.S. transmitting via the ROS mode I'm going to call Laura Smith of the FCC and give her the callsign of the offender. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay.rr.com PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
HiSigi: The thing is it would take some Washington Idiot a total of 5 min to sit down an say,, Yes you can use it, or No you can not But nothing in Washington takes 5 min.. Garrett / AA0OI From: Siegfried Jackstien siegfried.jackst...@freenet.de To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:40:37 AM Subject: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA Subject says operating ros in usa …. And the discussion was long enough So godwin is right hi hi Can we now come back to the topic?? I found it very bad that you come from digital radio to historical politics but maybe godwin IS RIGHT with his law Greetz Sigi
Re: AW: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
I wasn't alway this way,, and someday we'll have to take it back !! Garrett / AA0OI From: Siegfried Jackstien siegfried.jackst...@freenet.de To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:43:53 AM Subject: AW: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! And not to start another argument, but incase you haven't noticed we've lost control of our Government and that includes the FCC Snip…… Is there ANY country in the world where the people have control over their government?? ? Where can I get a flight ticket to there?? Just kidding
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Andy asked me not to call you a Nazi,, that it was personal,, so I retract it,,, You O'bama You. Thomas Jefferson said, that at some time our government would become so out of hand that we the people would have to take back control of it.. (The second amendment ain't about hunting) Sit back and make yourself comfortable,, just keep following the rules, right or wrong.. We the People will try to correct the problems. When you follow the laws blindly, your no long a citizen of the country, your a citizen of the government,, which are you??. Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@tampabay.rr.com To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:47:43 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Garrett /AA0OI said Spoken like a good Nazi NZ4O says it's all about obeying the law. The Nazi's did not obey the law and it was their downfall. Garrett /AA0OI said What happened to the real Americans ??? NZ4O says real American's used to obey the law. As a society we are no longer doing that and it's one of the reasons that America is in total societal collapse. NZ4O says my post was tongue in cheek but I forgot to add the smiley face. :)) 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay.rr.com PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Re: DominoEX On VHF FM
Good morning all... This has been interesting me since I read about it in QST last year. I, too, have been looking to do some experimenting with this mode. Last year, I briefly tested this by heading to my Churchabout 3.5 miles away. I brought along my TINY Sony Vaio and my IC-2AT...and then set my FT-817 in receive with DominoEX-8. With 100 mW, I had nearly solid print from the old 2AT and a rubber-duckie antenna. With better antennas, one would think that significantly better distances could be accomplished. Too bad more don't experiment like this. 73, John KB2HSH --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, JonP jpere...@... wrote: I have the need to set up some reliable local digital communications (say 10 mile radius from the base station) for data transfer, and to do so in a short period of time. I would normally first think of VHF FM packet, but a lot of people are running into troubles with things like Vista and Windows 7 (please, spare me the Linux or Apple and D*Star messages, they're not realistic in this situation). I've seen some references to running DominoEX and MFSK-16 on VHF FM. A number of my prospective operators are running digital modes such as DominoEX, MFSK, etc. on their computers now (under XP, Vista, Win7) without problems. Would one of those modes be realistic to run on 25 watt (or higher) mobiles on 2 meter FM using vertically polarized antennas? I realize that the vertical polarization would be an issue if we want to get out of the local area, but right now the need is within a local area and everyone would be running with a typical VHF vertical. If feasible, what sub-band would we use? I would assume the FM simplex sub-bands. Is that correct? Anything else we should consider? Any special issues/problems? I would think that we would not have to reduce power since these radios are already running FM, but if not the case please correct me. Thanks. Jon KB1QBZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Can we PLEASE dispense with the dick waving contests, and the political rhetoric. Believe it or not, the rest of the world cares little for your politics. Can we please get back to ham radio? VE3BDR From: AA0OI Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 10:12 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Andy asked me not to call you a Nazi,, that it was personal,, so I retract it,,, You O'bama You. Thomas Jefferson said, that at some time our government would become so out of hand that we the people would have to take back control of it.. (The second amendment ain't about hunting) Sit back and make yourself comfortable,, just keep following the rules, right or wrong.. We the People will try to correct the problems. When you follow the laws blindly, your no long a citizen of the country, your a citizen of the government,, which are you??. Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@tampabay.rr.com To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:47:43 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Garrett /AA0OI said Spoken like a good Nazi NZ4O says it's all about obeying the law. The Nazi's did not obey the law and it was their downfall. Garrett /AA0OI said What happened to the real Americans ??? NZ4O says real American's used to obey the law. As a society we are no longer doing that and it's one of the reasons that America is in total societal collapse. NZ4O says my post was tongue in cheek but I forgot to add the smiley face. :)) 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay.rr.com PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: DominoEX On VHF FM
That sounds like fun, and useful too. ve3bdr in kanuckistan From: kb2hsh Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 10:16 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: DominoEX On VHF FM Good morning all... This has been interesting me since I read about it in QST last year. I, too, have been looking to do some experimenting with this mode. Last year, I briefly tested this by heading to my Churchabout 3.5 miles away. I brought along my TINY Sony Vaio and my IC-2AT...and then set my FT-817 in receive with DominoEX-8. With 100 mW, I had nearly solid print from the old 2AT and a rubber-duckie antenna. With better antennas, one would think that significantly better distances could be accomplished. Too bad more don't experiment like this. 73, John KB2HSH --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, JonP jpere...@... wrote: I have the need to set up some reliable local digital communications (say 10 mile radius from the base station) for data transfer, and to do so in a short period of time. I would normally first think of VHF FM packet, but a lot of people are running into troubles with things like Vista and Windows 7 (please, spare me the Linux or Apple and D*Star messages, they're not realistic in this situation). I've seen some references to running DominoEX and MFSK-16 on VHF FM. A number of my prospective operators are running digital modes such as DominoEX, MFSK, etc. on their computers now (under XP, Vista, Win7) without problems. Would one of those modes be realistic to run on 25 watt (or higher) mobiles on 2 meter FM using vertically polarized antennas? I realize that the vertical polarization would be an issue if we want to get out of the local area, but right now the need is within a local area and everyone would be running with a typical VHF vertical. If feasible, what sub-band would we use? I would assume the FM simplex sub-bands. Is that correct? Anything else we should consider? Any special issues/problems? I would think that we would not have to reduce power since these radios are already running FM, but if not the case please correct me. Thanks. Jon KB1QBZ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Actually, the Nazi's did obey the law. (That is not a defense of their actions.) They just changed the law to make whatever they wanted to do legal, or did it outside of Germany where the law did not apply. - 73 - Rud Merriam K5RUD http://mysticlakesoftware.com/ -Original Message- From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O [mailto:n...@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:48 AM To: digital radio eGroup Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Garrett /AA0OI said Spoken like a good Nazi NZ4O says it's all about obeying the law. The Nazi's did not obey the law and it was their downfall. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay.rr.com
[digitalradio] Re: DominoEX On VHF FM
How will RMS Express running WINMOR in either SSB mode or FM mode fit in between this comparisons? Can even be adjusted to run through repeaters. Can run Peer to Peer or to a WInlink RMS WINMOR. I am looking forward to learning about pros an cons. 73 de la7um Finn --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: Dave, I forgot to point out that we use Contestia 64/1000 on SSB, not FM, for that 200 mile path. When using FM, DominoEx works just as well, but of course, the overall range is less on FM. Essentially, if you can work a VHF or UHF station on SSB phone, you can work the same station on FM using DominoEx 4 (the most sensitive DominoEx variation). This was the subject of my presentation to the Southeastern VHF Society in April of last year, and we have since proven that over and over again. The difference is that the data rate of DominoEx 4 compared to SSB phone is much slower (assuming an average speaking speed of 200 wpm). However, on tropospheric scatter UHF paths, DominoEx does not survive at all and only Contestia or Olivia (half the speed of Contestia) get through, when even moderately strong SSB phone signals are so distorted by Doppler spreading that they are not understandable. This is true on probably 80% of our morning schedules on 432 MHz over 200 mile paths when there is no propagation enhancement. 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/19/2010 8:35 PM, KB3FXI wrote: Interesting suggestions, Skip. We're hoping to be installing UHF and VHF vertical yagi's at the Skyview Radio Society before winter sets in. I'll be sure to do some weak signal work with the DominoEx 8 as you suggest. -Dave, KB3FXI --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh6ty@ wrote: The reason to use DominoEx is only for FM DX communications. It is slower than MT63, but much more sensitive, so you still get good copy way below limiting and quieting. For that reason, on our local FM digital net, we use DominoEx 8 and with horizontally polarized antennas, include everyone in a range of 35 miles. I suggest trying MT63-2000, and if some stations cannot copy, drop down in speed to MT63-1000, and if necessary, drop down to MT63-500. Then if you still have problems with some stations not copying, go to DominoEx 8. If any station is below limiting, which is quite possible at 25 miles using low verticals, MT63 may not work. On UHF, where Doppler shift and Doppler spreading is a major problem with SSB voice, we use Contestia 64-1000, which works very well on 200 miles paths. 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/19/2010 7:58 PM, KB3FXI wrote: Jon, Here in WPA we've adopted MT63 2k long (64 bit) interleave as our standard. The mode is very wide (2000hz) but fits very nicely inside the typical FM transceiver and repeater audio passbands. Here's some of the big advantages of MT63 2k long on FM: -Massive amount of FEC (forward error correction) and interleaving provides perfect copy, even under horrendous simplex conditions and weak signals into repeaters (it even barrels through short drop-outs and heavy noise with weak stations into our local UHF repeater) -There's no need to have to tune on the waterfall as all MT63 submodes in FLDIGI are fixed at a bottom waterfall frequency of 500hz (2k long goes from 500 - 2500 on the waterfall) -WPM rate is about 200wpm -Works fine using only a hand mic on the computer speaker and the computer mic somewhere in the vicinity of the received audio from the transceiver We run over UHF/VHF traditional voice repeaters and simplex frequencies with great success on our net every week... even with first time users. Please give it a shot and let us know how you make out. Also, make sure your ops do a proper sound card calibration. You only have to do this once, unless you change your sound card or switch to a USB mic. Here's a video I made on that subject of calibration using CheckSR.exe and FLDIGI: http://www.utipu.com/app/tip/id/9382/ -Dave, KB3FXI www.wpaNBEMS.org --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, JonP jperelst@ wrote: I have the need to set up some reliable local digital communications (say 10 mile radius from the base station) for data transfer, and to do so in a short period of time. I would normally first think of VHF FM packet, but a lot of people are running into troubles with things like Vista and Windows 7 (please, spare me the Linux or Apple and D*Star messages, they're not realistic in this situation). I've seen some references to running DominoEX and MFSK-16 on VHF FM. A number of my prospective operators are running digital modes
AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
They would say . you know the rules and you have to follow the rules The thing is . who has to make the technical decision if ros is spread spectrum so forbidden in us (answer: the user) Next thing is . is ros really ss??? What I know about ss is sender and receiver are spreading the data very wide Factor 10 is minimum to say it is ss but normally far more is used In ros the spreading factor is very small . and so it looks more like mfsk on the air For me as I am no professional in data transmissions it looks like it is afsk (like many other soundcard modes) Does the ham need to have the knowledge how the tones are calculated??? If the tones are spread spectrum or not?? What about digital sstv modes?? How can a user know if the used bandwith is (much) more as needed?? Any fec mode uses more bw or more time as needed for a non fec transmission Why not just modify the rules a bit Frequency hopping or wide spread spectrum only above 220 And the narrowband ss modes like ros and all other modes (incl. chip, Olivia and similar) can be used on shortwave if the bw is lower as 3kc (like her in dl)...surely with sdr wider ss modes could be used . but not allowed Synced frequency hopping with sdr would also be possible . but not allowed Just say . any mode bw 3kc ..(exceptions possible like 0.5kc on 30m or historical am transmissions) That would be easy All modes should be free available to anybody (so fcc cia mi6 etc can download the soft and use it too) Modes where you need special hardware are only allowed if the developer also gives a free software solution (for receive only) (hello d-star, hello scs) ..for monitoring Think about changing your rules is easier as trying to tel ros is not ss .. Cause next new mode will come soon . and story returns . so change your laws in us 73 Sigi Ps: I am glad that I live not in the land of freedom hi hi :-)
Re: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
The FCC has actually analyzed the mode (to my surprise!) and says it is SS, and we are obliged to accept their determination. To use it, someone just must file a petition to change the regulations. 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/20/2010 11:03 AM, Siegfried Jackstien wrote: They would say ... you know the rules and you have to follow the rules The thing is ... who has to make the technical decision if ros is spread spectrum so forbidden in us (answer: the user) Next thing is ... is ros really ss??? What I know about ss is sender and receiver are spreading the data very wide Factor 10 is minimum to say it is ss but normally far more is used In ros the spreading factor is very small ... and so it looks more like mfsk on the air For me as I am no professional in data transmissions it looks like it is afsk (like many other soundcard modes) Does the ham need to have the knowledge how the tones are calculated??? If the tones are spread spectrum or not?? What about digital sstv modes?? How can a user know if the used bandwith is (much) more as needed?? Any fec mode uses more bw or more time as needed for a non fec transmission Why not just modify the rules a bit Frequency hopping or wide spread spectrum only above 220 And the narrowband ss modes like ros and all other modes (incl. chip, Olivia and similar) can be used on shortwave if the bw is lower as 3kc (like her in dl).surely with sdr wider ss modes could be used ... but not allowed Synced frequency hopping with sdr would also be possible ... but not allowed Just say ... any mode bw 3kc (exceptions possible like 0.5kc on 30m or historical am transmissions) That would be easy All modes should be free available to anybody (so fcc cia mi6 etc can download the soft and use it too) Modes where you need special hardware are only allowed if the developer also gives a free software solution (for receive only) (hello d-star, hello scs) for monitoring Think about changing your rules is easier as trying to tel ros is not ss Cause next new mode will come soon ... and story returns ... so change your laws in us 73 Sigi Ps: I am glad that I live not in the land of freedom hi hi J
[digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690
Does anyone use the FT 690 for 50Mhz digital? Especially with the Signalink. If so I'd like to know the equipment number of the connecting serial cable which attaches both these units. Jon G4FUT
Re: [digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690
Part Numbers Options: SignaLink USB Part Numbers (please specify when ordering): a.. SLUSB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLUSB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLUSBRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLUSBRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLUSB5PD - For 5-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLUSB8PD - For 8-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLUSB13I - For ICOM 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLUSB13K - For Kenwood 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLUSB6PM - For 6-pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLUSBK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLUSBNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Extra Radio Cables: a.. SLCAB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLCAB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLCABRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLCABRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLCAB5PD - For 5-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLCAB8PD - For 8-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLCAB13I - For ICOM 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLCAB13K - For Kenwood 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLCAB6PM - For 6-Pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLCABK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLCABNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Accessories: a.. Plug Play Jumper Modules - Click here for part numbers and radios supported b.. SLHEAD - SignaLink Programming Header for wiring your own jumper module The instructions will include details on the jumpers. You will need a cable to go from the Signalink USB to the headphone jack also. I own 2 Signalink USB s and am very happy with them. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 12:44 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690 Does anyone use the FT 690 for 50Mhz digital? Especially with the Signalink. If so I'd like to know the equipment number of the connecting serial cable which attaches both these units. Jon G4FUT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
Re: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
--- On Tue, 20/7/10, KH6TY kh...@comcast.net wrote: The FCC has actually analyzed the mode (to my surprise!) Hi Skip, I know we've been round this loop before but I'd still like to see the report the FCC are alleged to have produced. If it does exist I'd have though a US citizen would be able to get it via a Freedom of Information Act request. http://www.fcc.gov/foia/ I know ARRL's Dan Henderson N1ND asked a couple of Amateurs about the mode and they thought it was SS but we don't know on what basis. Do you know if any US amateurs are raising a Petition for Rulemaking to move to regulation by bandwidth instead of mode ? Irrespective of what you think of the merits of one particular mode the current FCC regs are archaic with respect to digital modes and can only impede development. 73 Trevor M5AKA
[digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690
Thanks Rudy, Yes, I am very happy with Signalink, I use one with my ICOM 718 for data so wish to move onto 6 metres now Regards Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Benner ben...@... wrote: Part Numbers Options: SignaLink USB Part Numbers (please specify when ordering): a.. SLUSB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLUSB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLUSBRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLUSBRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLUSB5PD - For 5-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLUSB8PD - For 8-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLUSB13I - For ICOM 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLUSB13K - For Kenwood 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLUSB6PM - For 6-pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLUSBK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLUSBNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Extra Radio Cables: a.. SLCAB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLCAB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLCABRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLCABRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLCAB5PD - For 5-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLCAB8PD - For 8-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLCAB13I - For ICOM 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLCAB13K - For Kenwood 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLCAB6PM - For 6-Pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLCABK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLCABNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Accessories: a.. Plug Play Jumper Modules - Click here for part numbers and radios supported b.. SLHEAD - SignaLink Programming Header for wiring your own jumper module The instructions will include details on the jumpers. You will need a cable to go from the Signalink USB to the headphone jack also. I own 2 Signalink USB s and am very happy with them. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 12:44 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690 Does anyone use the FT 690 for 50Mhz digital? Especially with the Signalink. If so I'd like to know the equipment number of the connecting serial cable which attaches both these units. Jon G4FUT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
[digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690
Rudy, I pressed the SEND button too soonfrom the list you kindly posted will this cable SLCAB8R ...be the correct one for the connection from the Signalink to the Yaesus 8 pin mike socket? Regards again Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jon_g4fut jon_g4...@... wrote: Thanks Rudy, Yes, I am very happy with Signalink, I use one with my ICOM 718 for data so wish to move onto 6 metres now Regards Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Benner benner@ wrote: Part Numbers Options: SignaLink USB Part Numbers (please specify when ordering): a.. SLUSB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLUSB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLUSBRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLUSBRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLUSB5PD - For 5-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLUSB8PD - For 8-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLUSB13I - For ICOM 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLUSB13K - For Kenwood 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLUSB6PM - For 6-pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLUSBK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLUSBNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Extra Radio Cables: a.. SLCAB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLCAB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLCABRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLCABRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLCAB5PD - For 5-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLCAB8PD - For 8-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLCAB13I - For ICOM 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLCAB13K - For Kenwood 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLCAB6PM - For 6-Pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLCABK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLCABNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Accessories: a.. Plug Play Jumper Modules - Click here for part numbers and radios supported b.. SLHEAD - SignaLink Programming Header for wiring your own jumper module The instructions will include details on the jumpers. You will need a cable to go from the Signalink USB to the headphone jack also. I own 2 Signalink USB s and am very happy with them. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 12:44 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690 Does anyone use the FT 690 for 50Mhz digital? Especially with the Signalink. If so I'd like to know the equipment number of the connecting serial cable which attaches both these units. Jon G4FUT \ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
Re: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
Hi Trevor, I have already previously stated that a FCC engineer with the FCC group analyzing ROS told me what was done, and what was concluded, and I wa asked not to divulge his name. Whether or not there was a report issued, I do not know. I don't know of any US amateurs raising any petition to move to regulation by bandwidth instead of by mode. This has already been denied by the FCC once, so I doubt if it will be revisited soon, but nothing prevents anyone from entering their own petition. However, it will not be me, because I understand why spread spectrum of any kind on HF would not be good for the ham community in the US in general, and that regulation by bandwidth had its own serious problems. Remember that the US ham population is very large, and what we are allowed to do here can affect many hams worldwide, due to the worldwide nature of propagation. You need to count your blessings that the FCC regulations keep automatic mailboxes confined to the FCC-designated subbands for unattended stations (when other countries do not), because without those, a hoard of US amateurs could flood the bands with mailboxes, interfering with DX and ragchew QSO's all over the world. You have to be careful what you wish for! Hi! As you say, we have been around this loop before, and, especially since Tony's tests show no weak signal advantage to the ROS wide spread spectrum variants over the narrowband variants, I think it is time to stop beating this horse to death and move on to something more constructive. I think that Andy previously set a cutoff date for ROS discussions on this reflector, and it is probably time for him to do that again, since arguments are getting to be circular and sometimes degenerate into personal attacks or insults. The ROSmodem Yahoo group is always available for continued discussions for users of the mode and has not been killed as was threatened. I always try to answer comments or criticisms directed to me, but I really have a lot to do to keep up with kit orders for my interface in the July QST and cannot keep on answering emails about ROS over and over. I have said all I can say, so I want to leave this discussion right now! I hope you understand... Thanks! 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/20/2010 1:19 PM, Trevor . wrote: --- On Tue, 20/7/10, KH6TY kh...@comcast.net mailto:kh6ty%40comcast.net wrote: The FCC has actually analyzed the mode (to my surprise!) Hi Skip, I know we've been round this loop before but I'd still like to see the report the FCC are alleged to have produced. If it does exist I'd have though a US citizen would be able to get it via a Freedom of Information Act request. http://www.fcc.gov/foia/ I know ARRL's Dan Henderson N1ND asked a couple of Amateurs about the mode and they thought it was SS but we don't know on what basis. Do you know if any US amateurs are raising a Petition for Rulemaking to move to regulation by bandwidth instead of mode ? Irrespective of what you think of the merits of one particular mode the current FCC regs are archaic with respect to digital modes and can only impede development. 73 Trevor M5AKA
Re: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
At 12:19 PM 7/20/2010, you wrote: Do you know if any US amateurs are raising a Petition for Rulemaking to move to regulation by bandwidth instead of mode ? Trevor, We in the USA have been down this path before. And every time the FCC has said the same thing. I really don't know just where you are trying to go but it seems that it is again an anti wide rant. If it is you can save the rest of us from it. John, W0JAB
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
You'd better care about our politics,, if we go under, so does the rest of the world ! Garrett / AA0OI From: Rudy Benner ben...@vianet.ca To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 9:24:46 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Can we PLEASE dispense with the dick waving contests, and the political rhetoric. Believe it or not, the rest of the world cares little for your politics. Can we please get back to ham radio? VE3BDR From: AA0OI Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 10:12 AM To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Andy asked me not to call you a Nazi,, that it was personal,, so I retract it,,, You O'bama You. Thomas Jefferson said, that at some time our government would become so out of hand that we the people would have to take back control of it.. (The second amendment ain't about hunting) Sit back and make yourself comfortable, , just keep following the rules, right or wrong.. We the People will try to correct the problems. When you follow the laws blindly, your no long a citizen of the country, your a citizen of the government,, which are you??. Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@tampabay. rr.com To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:47:43 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Garrett /AA0OI said Spoken like a good Nazi NZ4O says it's all about obeying the law. The Nazi's did not obey the law and it was their downfall. Garrett /AA0OI said What happened to the real Americans ??? NZ4O says real American's used to obey the law. As a society we are no longer doing that and it's one of the reasons that America is in total societal collapse. NZ4O says my post was tongue in cheek but I forgot to add the smiley face. :)) 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay. rr.com PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o. org - - -- http://www.obriensw eb.com/digispott er.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook .com/pages/ digitalradio/ 123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
Re: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
Hi Sigi: It once was a nice place,, but is falling apart quickly ! Garrett / AA0OI From: Siegfried Jackstien siegfried.jackst...@freenet.de To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 10:03:06 AM Subject: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA They would say … you know the rules and you have to follow the rules The thing is … who has to make the technical decision if ros is spread spectrum so forbidden in us (answer: the user) Next thing is … is ros really ss??? What I know about ss is sender and receiver are spreading the data very wide Factor 10 is minimum to say it is ss but normally far more is used In ros the spreading factor is very small … and so it looks more like mfsk on the air For me as I am no professional in data transmissions it looks like it is afsk (like many other soundcard modes) Does the ham need to have the knowledge how the tones are calculated?? ? If the tones are spread spectrum or not?? What about digital sstv modes?? How can a user know if the used bandwith is (much) more as needed?? Any fec mode uses more bw or more time as needed for a non fec transmission Why not just modify the rules a bit Frequency hopping or wide spread spectrum only above 220 And the narrowband ss modes like ros and all other modes (incl. chip, Olivia and similar) can be used on shortwave if the bw is lower as 3kc (like her in dl)…..surely with sdr wider ss modes could be used … but not allowed Synced frequency hopping with sdr would also be possible … but not allowed Just say … any mode bw 3kc ….(exceptions possible like 0.5kc on 30m or historical am transmissions) That would be easy All modes should be free available to anybody (so fcc cia mi6 etc can download the soft and use it too) Modes where you need special hardware are only allowed if the developer also gives a free software solution (for receive only) (hello d-star, hello scs) ….for monitoring Think about changing your rules is easier as trying to tel ros is not ss …. Cause next new mode will come soon … and story returns … so change your laws in us 73 Sigi Ps: I am glad that I live not in the land of freedom hi hi J
[digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Well with everything you hold and a $1 you can buy a cup of coffee at Mac's. I hold a Extra Class and been licensed since 1966 when you did not have to memorize the test, and had to know Morse Code. I am retired army, I have shot everything from 45 cal up to a 109MM. I am qualified with pistols also, big deal.. I don't fly so you got me there. So run ros and see where it goes. Oh one thing is I don't have to brag about what I can do, if you don't agree with the FCC why not petition for them to change it, Kurt SSG US Army (Retired) K8YZK (Ex WN8VBX,WA8VBX,HL9JB,XW8GW,DA1UE,DA2VC) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, AA0OI aa...@... wrote: That right they would.. I hold a Exta Class ham license I hold Commercial Pilots License, single engine land , multi engine land , Insturment rated, CFI, CFII, Multi Engine Instructor. with over 20,000 hrs I hold a Captians Liscense for over 600,000 tons I Owned my own company teaching backpacking and wilderness survival. in Colorado I'm a marksman with a pistol at 100 ft and rifle to 1000 yards.. What you done with your life? Garrett / AA0OI From: k8yzk k8...@... To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 6:30:59 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA  Sounds like a LID response. Channel 19 is 27.185 Mhz, I am sure the will welcome you back. Kurt K8YZK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, AA0OI aa0oi@ wrote: Spoken like a good Nazi  Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O nz4o@ To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:18:24 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA If I print any ham in the U.S. transmitting via the ROS mode I'm going to call Laura Smith of the FCC and give her the callsign of the offender. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA nz4o@ PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
Well the pen is mightier than the sword ..as demonstrated by the clurk who drafted the barn door catch 220 clause .. which of the wide modes is going to be banned next , olivia may be?, that seems to work nicely and originated out side the union ? G . --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, AA0OI aa...@... wrote: I wasn't alway this way,, and someday we'll have to take it back !!  Garrett / AA0OI From: Siegfried Jackstien siegfried.jackst...@... To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:43:53 AM Subject: AW: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !  And not to start another argument, but incase you haven't noticed we've lost control of our Government and that includes the FCC  Snipâ¦â¦  Is there ANY country in the world where the people have control over their government?? ? Where can I get a flight ticket to there?? Just kidding  Â
Re: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
And every time the FCC has said the same thing. Q .. Did it get passed the 'Cross-road' ? some one needs to take the By-pass :) Bandwidth enhanced , who drafted the clause , Tim Leary ? --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB w0...@... wrote: At 12:19 PM 7/20/2010, you wrote: Do you know if any US amateurs are raising a Petition for Rulemaking to move to regulation by bandwidth instead of mode ? Trevor, We in the USA have been down this path before. And every time the FCC has said the same thing. I really don't know just where you are trying to go but it seems that it is again an anti wide rant. If it is you can save the rest of us from it. John, W0JAB
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
This is interesting, but I am curious, are you bragging or complaining? Bob, W5XR From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of AA0OI Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 7:58 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA That right they would.. I hold a Exta Class ham license I hold Commercial Pilots License, single engine land , multi engine land , Insturment rated, CFI, CFII, Multi Engine Instructor. with over 20,000 hrs I hold a Captians Liscense for over 600,000 tons I Owned my own company teaching backpacking and wilderness survival. in Colorado I'm a marksman with a pistol at 100 ft and rifle to 1000 yards.. What you done with your life? Garrett / AA0OI http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/47.gif _ From: k8yzk k8...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 6:30:59 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Sounds like a LID response. Channel 19 is 27.185 Mhz, I am sure the will welcome you back. Kurt K8YZK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com , AA0OI aa...@... wrote: Spoken like a good Nazi Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@... To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:18:24 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA If I print any ham in the U.S. transmitting via the ROS mode I'm going to call Laura Smith of the FCC and give her the callsign of the offender. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@... PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
right, I still can't copy over 63 wpm code and that I learned in 1971.. Garrett / AA0OI From: k8yzk k8...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 1:47:02 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Well with everything you hold and a $1 you can buy a cup of coffee at Mac's. I hold a Extra Class and been licensed since 1966 when you did not have to memorize the test, and had to know Morse Code. I am retired army, I have shot everything from 45 cal up to a 109MM. I am qualified with pistols also, big deal.. I don't fly so you got me there. So run ros and see where it goes. Oh one thing is I don't have to brag about what I can do, if you don't agree with the FCC why not petition for them to change it, Kurt SSG US Army (Retired) K8YZK (Ex WN8VBX,WA8VBX,HL9JB,XW8GW,DA1UE,DA2VC) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, AA0OI aa...@... wrote: That right they would.. I hold a Exta Class ham license I hold Commercial Pilots License, single engine land , multi engine land , Insturment rated, CFI, CFII, Multi Engine Instructor. with over 20,000 hrs I hold a Captians Liscense for over 600,000 tons I Owned my own company teaching backpacking and wilderness survival. in Colorado I'm a marksman with a pistol at 100 ft and rifle to 1000 yards.. What you done with your life? Garrett / AA0OI From: k8yzk k8...@... To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 6:30:59 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA  Sounds like a LID response. Channel 19 is 27.185 Mhz, I am sure the will welcome you back. Kurt K8YZK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, AA0OI aa0oi@ wrote: Spoken like a good Nazi  Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O nz4o@ To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:18:24 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA If I print any ham in the U.S. transmitting via the ROS mode I'm going to call Laura Smith of the FCC and give her the callsign of the offender. 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA nz4o@ PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o.org http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
WOMEN ?! Garrett / AA0OI From: Ted Bear w7...@juno.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 2:21:45 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! Holy Moly.. When you guys going to drop the ROS subject and get back to interesting DIGITAL RADIO that this reflector's name indicates..? ? I am wearing out my delete key on the daily mess of crap about ROS...?? There HAS to be something more interesting to talk about then ROS on a daily basis..? de Ted -- W7RHB _ _ _ _ _ ___ Get Free Email with Video Mail Video Chat!
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690
Well, I think that is correct, but I seem to be getting my butt kicked all day, so I decided to send you enough data to figure it out and come out smelling rosy for a change. I think I get the Bonehead Award today. Don't forget that you will need a cable for the receive, that part is easy. If you are going to kick me, please take a number and line up. No pushing. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 1:45 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690 Rudy, I pressed the SEND button too soonfrom the list you kindly posted will this cable SLCAB8R ...be the correct one for the connection from the Signalink to the Yaesus 8 pin mike socket? Regards again Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jon_g4fut jon_g4...@... wrote: Thanks Rudy, Yes, I am very happy with Signalink, I use one with my ICOM 718 for data so wish to move onto 6 metres now Regards Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Benner benner@ wrote: Part Numbers Options: SignaLink USB Part Numbers (please specify when ordering): a.. SLUSB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLUSB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLUSBRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLUSBRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLUSB5PD - For 5-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLUSB8PD - For 8-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLUSB13I - For ICOM 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLUSB13K - For Kenwood 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLUSB6PM - For 6-pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLUSBK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLUSBNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Extra Radio Cables: a.. SLCAB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLCAB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLCABRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLCABRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLCAB5PD - For 5-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLCAB8PD - For 8-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLCAB13I - For ICOM 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLCAB13K - For Kenwood 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLCAB6PM - For 6-Pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLCABK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLCABNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Accessories: a.. Plug Play Jumper Modules - Click here for part numbers and radios supported b.. SLHEAD - SignaLink Programming Header for wiring your own jumper module The instructions will include details on the jumpers. You will need a cable to go from the Signalink USB to the headphone jack also. I own 2 Signalink USB s and am very happy with them. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 12:44 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690 Does anyone use the FT 690 for 50Mhz digital? Especially with the Signalink. If so I'd like to know the equipment number of the connecting serial cable which attaches both these units. Jon G4FUT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA
Whatever. From: AA0OI Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 2:26 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA You'd better care about our politics,, if we go under, so does the rest of the world ! Garrett / AA0OI From: Rudy Benner ben...@vianet.ca To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 9:24:46 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Can we PLEASE dispense with the dick waving contests, and the political rhetoric. Believe it or not, the rest of the world cares little for your politics. Can we please get back to ham radio? VE3BDR From: AA0OI Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 10:12 AM To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Andy asked me not to call you a Nazi,, that it was personal,, so I retract it,,, You O'bama You. Thomas Jefferson said, that at some time our government would become so out of hand that we the people would have to take back control of it.. (The second amendment ain't about hunting) Sit back and make yourself comfortable, , just keep following the rules, right or wrong.. We the People will try to correct the problems. When you follow the laws blindly, your no long a citizen of the country, your a citizen of the government,, which are you??. Garrett / AA0OI From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O n...@tampabay. rr.com To: digital radio eGroup digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:47:43 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Operating ROS In USA Garrett /AA0OI said Spoken like a good Nazi NZ4O says it's all about obeying the law. The Nazi's did not obey the law and it was their downfall. Garrett /AA0OI said What happened to the real Americans ??? NZ4O says real American's used to obey the law. As a society we are no longer doing that and it's one of the reasons that America is in total societal collapse. NZ4O says my post was tongue in cheek but I forgot to add the smiley face. :)) 73 GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O Lakeland, FL, USA n...@tampabay. rr.com PODXS 070 Club #349 Feld Hell Club #141 30 Meter Digital Group #691 Digital Modes Club #1243 WARC Bands Century Club #20 NZ4O Amateur SWL Autobiography: http://www.nz4o. org - - -- http://www.obriensw eb.com/digispott er.html Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit) Facebook= http://www.facebook .com/pages/ digitalradio/ 123270301037522 Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
Re: [digitalradio] ROS HF Path Simulations wide vs. narrow
Tony, Our on-air tests show that ROS 16 baud, 2200 Hz wide spread spectrum was very poor on UHF under Doppler spreading. Can you confirm this with flutter tests like Jaak has done on http://contestia.blogspot.com/p/pathsim_09.html ? 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/19/2010 9:42 PM, Tony wrote: All, With all the attention ROS has been getting lately, I thought it would be interesting to see how the narrow mode compared to the wide version under the controlled environment of the HF path simulator. After a few hours of testing, it seems there's little difference between the two. The simulator indicated that they both had the same sensitivity (-15db) and essentially the same poor channel performance characteristics (see throughput samples below). In no case did one mode outperform the other to the point where it would make any real difference; both have the essentially the same wpm rate as well. These tests are not conclusive, but they do suggest that there may not be any real advantage in using the wide mode vs narrow under most circumstances. Of course, the simulator can only emulate the basic characteristics of the real HF channel so it would be interesting to hear from those who have compared the two on-air. Tony -K2MO CCIR-520-2 POOR CHANNEL SIMULATIONS: -11DB SNR ROS 2250 / 16 baud the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazlµog Lghe quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quccirown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog Âe quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fealoeumps ovahe lazEh/i ROS 500 / 16 baud the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick breFn fox juo3s over tes lazy dog the quæe t ´uls r?umps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown f Á jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dogQo
[digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690
Rudi, No kicking from me...instead I'll defend you for the excellent information you sent... :-) Cheers Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Benner ben...@... wrote: Well, I think that is correct, but I seem to be getting my butt kicked all day, so I decided to send you enough data to figure it out and come out smelling rosy for a change. I think I get the Bonehead Award today. Don't forget that you will need a cable for the receive, that part is easy. If you are going to kick me, please take a number and line up. No pushing. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 1:45 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690 Rudy, I pressed the SEND button too soonfrom the list you kindly posted will this cable SLCAB8R ...be the correct one for the connection from the Signalink to the Yaesus 8 pin mike socket? Regards again Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jon_g4fut jon_g4fut@ wrote: Thanks Rudy, Yes, I am very happy with Signalink, I use one with my ICOM 718 for data so wish to move onto 6 metres now Regards Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Benner benner@ wrote: Part Numbers Options: SignaLink USB Part Numbers (please specify when ordering): a.. SLUSB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLUSB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLUSBRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLUSBRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLUSB5PD - For 5-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLUSB8PD - For 8-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLUSB13I - For ICOM 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLUSB13K - For Kenwood 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLUSB6PM - For 6-pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLUSBK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLUSBNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Extra Radio Cables: a.. SLCAB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLCAB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLCABRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLCABRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLCAB5PD - For 5-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLCAB8PD - For 8-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLCAB13I - For ICOM 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLCAB13K - For Kenwood 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLCAB6PM - For 6-Pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLCABK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLCABNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Accessories: a.. Plug Play Jumper Modules - Click here for part numbers and radios supported b.. SLHEAD - SignaLink Programming Header for wiring your own jumper module The instructions will include details on the jumpers. You will need a cable to go from the Signalink USB to the headphone jack also. I own 2 Signalink USB s and am very happy with them. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 12:44 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690 Does anyone use the FT 690 for 50Mhz digital? Especially with the Signalink. If so I'd like to know the equipment number of the connecting serial cable which attaches both these units. Jon G4FUT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00
[digitalradio] Parting with RTTY equipment
After thinking about a for a while - I'm going to part with all my RTTY equipment. It's all going. John, W0JAB
RE: [digitalradio] Parting with RTTY equipment
Post a notification to the Greenkeys mailing list. __ GreenKeys mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/greenkeys Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:greenk...@mailman.qth.net Mark T. Regan, K8MTR, CTO1 USNR-Retired (1969-1991) -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Becker, WØJAB Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 17:00 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Parting with RTTY equipment After thinking about a for a while - I'm going to part with all my RTTY equipment. It's all going. John, W0JAB
QRE: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA
The ARRL withdrew its regulation by bandwidth instead of mode proposal before the FCC responded. This proposal generated a lot of commentary from the US amateur community, all of which remains available online. If you review these, you will find that most comments opposing the proposal cited the QRM caused by unattended digital stations, whose permitted range would have been dramatically increased had the proposal been adopted. Opposition to this proposal was anti-QRM, not anti-wide. An unattended station running a narrow mode without an effective busy frequency detector is as offensive as an unattended station running a wide mode without an effective busy frequency detector; neither belongs on the amateur bands. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on Behalf Of John Becker, WOJAB Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 2:10 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: AW: AW: [digitalradio] Operating ROS In USA At 12:19 PM 7/20/2010, you wrote: Do you know if any US amateurs are raising a Petition for Rulemaking to move to regulation by bandwidth instead of mode ? Trevor, We in the USA have been down this path before. And every time the FCC has said the same thing. I really don't know just where you are trying to go but it seems that it is again an anti wide rant. If it is you can save the rest of us from it. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Moderator (again) Politics
Me again. In addition to a prohibition on personal attacks , this group should be free of politics . This does not preclude disagreement with Ofcomm, IARU, CRTC, FCC, or other national bodies when it relates to amateur radio. It does mean that we should avoid declarative statements about one country being better than another, or espousal of one political theory over another (right wing reactionaries versus left wing revolutionaries, etc). You are entitled to your own political views but they are not part of this group. The rules are posted below, they have been unchanged for many years but I have added the following While expressions of national pride are understandable at times , please avoid political statements that are not relevant to communications/amateur radio policy. Rules. This group is uncensored. Members are free to engage in the posting of information, solicit answers to questions, and engage in lively discussion. Expressions of diverse opinions are encouraged. However, expressions of opinion should be non-judgmental and devoid of personal insult. For example : You can say I really disagree, and I think your view is totally wrong but should not say You are a jerk,and obviously have the I.Q of a mole. Racist remarks, or remarks intolerant of the diverse cultures found within the amateur radio community, are not allowed. While expressions of national pride are understandable at times , please avoid political statements that are not relevant to communications/amateur radio policy The expression of fraternal greetings associated with varying holidays celebrated around the world ARE allowed The use of swear words is discouraged. Please try to avoid endless debate of a topic. Make your opinions known by all means, respond to counterpoints a couple of times if you want. However, after a while, debates often turn in to endless circular arguments. When this happens the moderators will occasionally end the debate by giving a 72 hour notice. This means after 72 hours notice, posting on the topic should end. Occasionally, a cooling off period is enacted whereby the list is placed on fully moderated status to allow the debate to cool of. Andy K3UK Owner.
[digitalradio] (unknown)
Andy, I am sick and tired of reading the political comments and name calling about ROS. The discussion has devolved from a discussion (too long, IMHO) about the technical aspects of ROS to personal attacks and political discussions about which laws we in the USA should obey, neither of which have anything to do with digital radio. Can we please call a halt? I get the digest form of the discussion group, and have to wade through all these diatribes to find the one or two useful messages in each one. It didn't used to be this way. Thanks and 73 Pete K5GM Pete Jordahl, K5GM k...@amsat.org
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
I sure am glad I grew up! MAN! Get a life! From: Ted Bear w7...@juno.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 3:21:45 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better ! Holy Moly.. When you guys going to drop the ROS subject and get back to interesting DIGITAL RADIO that this reflector's name indicates..?? I am wearing out my delete key on the daily mess of crap about ROS...?? There HAS to be something more interesting to talk about then ROS on a daily basis..? de Ted -- W7RHB Get Free Email with Video Mail Video Chat!
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
The IMD shouldnt be a significant problem unless something is overdriven. However, you see that with PSK31 and to a lesser extent RTTY fairly often on the bands, although most of what i see is 60 cycle hum and audio harmonics related to that, rather than just pure overdrive. AFSK, etc., is the way to go if you can keep it clean (vs FSK). PSK31 is too slow for contesting, so the first shift required is to PSK63. 73, Ty K3MM Jul 20, 2010 04:00:06 AM, digitalradio@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, k...@... wrote: Quite frankly, RTTY could easily be replaced with PSK63 as the prime digital contest mode. However, many PSK operators are so clueless and often downright rude when it comes to contests that its an extremely uphill battle. We could fit a lot more PSK63 signals on the band than RTTY... It would be interesting to see what happened if a semi-major RTTY contest was moved to PSK63 only. Agreed, though the IMD might be a problem, especially as many RTTY contesters use class C amps. Of course, you could also argue that they wouldn't need to use as much power... As a not completely unrelated aside, a few of us have been helping to test G4HYG's APRS Messenger software which at the moment is an experiment to find an alternative publicly documented mode to FSK300 packet that gives better performance on the HF bands. We had been using PSK63 but very recently have been trying the GMSK modes (63, 125 and 250) which are implemented in the MMVARI free software. I don't know (and don't at the moment have time to find out) what exactly the technical differences are between PSK and GMSK but the performance seems to be even better, and apparently it doesn't have the amplitude variations that cause IMD products when using PSK. Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to use it, though, and I guess both RTTY and PSK31 are so established now that you'll never persuade people to give them up. Julian, G4ILO
Re: [digitalradio] Moderator (again) Politics
Andy, it seems to be time for a poll. 1. I wish to continue reading discussions of ROS 2. Enough already, lets talk about something else! Care to guess what the vote would be? Bill On 7/20/2010 4:51 PM, Andy obrien wrote: Me again. In addition to a prohibition on personal attacks , this group should be free of politics . This does not preclude disagreement with Ofcomm, IARU, CRTC, FCC, or other national bodies when it relates to amateur radio. It does mean that we should avoid declarative statements about one country being better than another, or espousal of one political theory over another (right wing reactionaries versus left wing revolutionaries, etc). You are entitled to your own political views but they are not part of this group. The rules are posted below, they have been unchanged for many years but I have added the following While expressions of national pride are understandable at times , please avoid political statements that are not relevant to communications/amateur radio policy. Rules. This group is uncensored. Members are free to engage in the posting of information, solicit answers to questions, and engage in lively discussion. Expressions of diverse opinions are encouraged. However, expressions of opinion should be non-judgmental and devoid of personal insult. For example : You can say I really disagree, and I think your view is totally wrong but should not say You are a jerk,and obviously have the I.Q of a mole. Racist remarks, or remarks intolerant of the diverse cultures found within the amateur radio community, are not allowed. While expressions of national pride are understandable at times , please avoid political statements that are not relevant to communications/amateur radio policy The expression of fraternal greetings associated with varying holidays celebrated around the world ARE allowed The use of swear words is discouraged. Please try to avoid endless debate of a topic. Make your opinions known by all means, respond to counterpoints a couple of times if you want. However, after a while, debates often turn in to endless circular arguments. When this happens the moderators will occasionally end the debate by giving a 72 hour notice. This means after 72 hours notice, posting on the topic should end. Occasionally, a cooling off period is enacted whereby the list is placed on fully moderated status to allow the debate to cool of. Andy K3UK Owner.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
- Original Message From: g4ilo jul...@g4ilo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 4:29:15 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to use it, though, and I guess both RTTY and PSK31 are so established now that you'll never persuade people to give them up. Julian, G4ILO While rtty can be replaced by other modes, they will not run on the 50 plus old mechanical printers and the demodulators that go with them. Just as some like to run AM on the ham bands. Not that good of a use of bandwidth, but just something to play with that many enjoy. I doubt that many hams that run the digital modes can really type very fast and depend on the micros in the programs. For the ones doing it in real time, psk31 probably has enough speed.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690
Thank you. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:22 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690 Rudi, No kicking from me...instead I'll defend you for the excellent information you sent... :-) Cheers Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Benner ben...@... wrote: Well, I think that is correct, but I seem to be getting my butt kicked all day, so I decided to send you enough data to figure it out and come out smelling rosy for a change. I think I get the Bonehead Award today. Don't forget that you will need a cable for the receive, that part is easy. If you are going to kick me, please take a number and line up. No pushing. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 1:45 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Yaesu FT-690 Rudy, I pressed the SEND button too soonfrom the list you kindly posted will this cable SLCAB8R ...be the correct one for the connection from the Signalink to the Yaesus 8 pin mike socket? Regards again Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jon_g4fut jon_g4fut@ wrote: Thanks Rudy, Yes, I am very happy with Signalink, I use one with my ICOM 718 for data so wish to move onto 6 metres now Regards Jon --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Benner benner@ wrote: Part Numbers Options: SignaLink USB Part Numbers (please specify when ordering): a.. SLUSB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLUSB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLUSBRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLUSBRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLUSB5PD - For 5-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLUSB8PD - For 8-pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLUSB13I - For ICOM 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLUSB13K - For Kenwood 13-pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLUSB6PM - For 6-pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLUSBK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLUSBNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Extra Radio Cables: a.. SLCAB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector b.. SLCAB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector c.. SLCABRJ1 - For RJ-11 Mic Connector d.. SLCABRJ4 - For RJ-45 Mic Connector e.. SLCAB5PD - For 5-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector f.. SLCAB8PD - For 8-Pin DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector g.. SLCAB13I - For ICOM 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector h.. SLCAB13K - For Kenwood 13-Pin DIN Accessory Port Connector i.. SLCAB6PM - For 6-Pin mini DIN Data / Accessory Port Connector j.. SLCABK3 - For the Elecraft K3's rear panel Audio In/Out PTT jacks k.. SLCABNC - Un-terminated cable (bare wires on radio end) for building your own cable Accessories: a.. Plug Play Jumper Modules - Click here for part numbers and radios supported b.. SLHEAD - SignaLink Programming Header for wiring your own jumper module The instructions will include details on the jumpers. You will need a cable to go from the Signalink USB to the headphone jack also. I own 2 Signalink USB s and am very happy with them. From: jon_g4fut Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 12:44 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Yaesu FT-690 Does anyone use the FT 690 for 50Mhz digital? Especially with the Signalink. If so I'd like to know the equipment number of the connecting serial cable which attaches both these units. Jon G4FUT -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3017 - Release Date: 07/20/10 02:36:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3018 - Release Date: 07/20/10 14:36:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
PSK63 was developed as an intended RTTY contesting mode replacement, not for conversation. PSK31 is too slow for contesting and has a preamble and a postamble that slows turnovers down, so the idea was that 100 wpm PSK63 would, overall, including faster turnovers than PSK31, be as fast as RTTY for contest exchanges, and contesters would benefit from less power needed, panoramic reception, less crowding, and faster synchronization. In the contesting world, a rapid exchange and turnover is more important than a faster typing speed. Peter Martinez designed PSK31 for ragchewing and so selected 50 wpm as fast enough for conversation for most typists. Even though Don, AA5AU, a big-time winner of RTTY contests, said he was just blown away about the possibility of PSK63 for contesting when I showed it to him, I was unable to get it implemented into WriteLog, as the author took a chicken and egg approach in which he said he would not add PSK63 to WriteLog until it became popular for contesting! Since WriteLog is so popular with contest winners, and did not support PSK63, the mode never took off, except in Europe. What might help would be for someone to convince the contest managers to do something like adding a multiplier for PSK63 contacts, or perhaps some other acceptable incentive, to make it worthwhile to use PSK63 for contests. Everybody would win, because so many PSK63 signals can fit into the space of one RTTY signal, and with panoramic displays, you get a list of callsigns to select from all presented to you, and can even highlight zones or callsign areas you need for multipliers, etc.. 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/20/2010 7:03 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote: - Original Message From: g4ilo jul...@g4ilo.com mailto:julian%40g4ilo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 4:29:15 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to use it, though, and I guess both RTTY and PSK31 are so established now that you'll never persuade people to give them up. Julian, G4ILO While rtty can be replaced by other modes, they will not run on the 50 plus old mechanical printers and the demodulators that go with them. Just as some like to run AM on the ham bands. Not that good of a use of bandwidth, but just something to play with that many enjoy.I doubt that many hams that run the digital modes can really type very fast and depend on the micros in the programs. For the ones doing it in real time, psk31 probably has enough speed.
[digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input
I am developing a 'modem' to directly modulate computer generated modes to RF thus eliminating the requirement of using a transceiver audio input Welcome to the group, tell us more. Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
I completely understand the lure of the old mechanical teleprinters. But I have to say I was surprised at my reaction to the addition of RTTY to the firmware in my NUE-PSK modem. I typically use the NUE-PSK battery powered plugged into my 817 while doing QRP in the field. I don't need to lug along a laptop to do PSK31. Apparently it was easy for them to add RTTY support, and by golly, I found myself doing the occasionally RTTY QSO using this little device. And it was fun. I would not have guessed a modern little device like the NUE-PSK would ever support RTTY, and I would not have guessed I'd get a kick out of it. I mean, I still prefer other digital modes, but RTTY once in a while can be fun too, I've discovered. Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: Ralph Mowery To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:03 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency - Original Message From: g4ilo jul...@g4ilo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 4:29:15 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to use it, though, and I guess both RTTY and PSK31 are so established now that you'll never persuade people to give them up. Julian, G4ILO While rtty can be replaced by other modes, they will not run on the 50 plus old mechanical printers and the demodulators that go with them. Just as some like to run AM on the ham bands. Not that good of a use of bandwidth, but just something to play with that many enjoy.I doubt that many hams that run the digital modes can really type very fast and depend on the micros in the programs. For the ones doing it in real time, psk31 probably has enough speed.
Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input
Will be interesting to compare this effort to the NUE-PSK, which takes a different appoach. They have a modem that plugs directly into a transceiver's Data port eliminating the need for PCs and soundcards, but they are now working on a NUE-SDR transceiver that either will fit as a card inside the little modem, or attach underneath it (not sure what their final design will be). This would eliminate both the PC and a separate transceiver. http://www.nue-psk.com/ Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 5:20 PM Subject: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input I am developing a 'modem' to directly modulate computer generated modes to RF thus eliminating the requirement of using a transceiver audio input Welcome to the group, tell us more. Andy K3UK
[digitalradio] 70cm -2M-6M-10M fan dipole ?
I am planning another HF installation soon and may have a 33ft mast begging for some extra creative thing to hang off it . I do not do 70cm -2M-6M much and think I should , just to be able to get out when there are bands openings. Nothing with DX in mind, just something omni-directional would do (or ANY direction) I was thinking about a fan-type dipole , one feed line going to dipoles for 70cm - 2M - 6M and maybe 10M. Most likely not fully horizontal , more of a sloper. Any thoughts on something like this? Quite a wide range of frequencies. Andy K3UK
[digitalradio] QRV 28120 full time digi modes
With hopes of 10M slowly improving, I have activated a full time 10M station. Full time, meaning the 25 Watt rig is permanently on 28120 USB. This is dedicated to digital modes and CW, trip the squelch and if I am in the shack...I will try to work you. 28120 was chosen due to the likelihood of other activity on that frequency that will break squelch and alert me to openings. Solar-terrestrial indices for 20 July follow. Solar flux 87 and mid-latitude A-index 4. The mid-latitude K-index at UTC on 21 July was 1 (6 nT). No space weather storms were observed for the past 24 hours. No space weather storms are expected for the next 24 hours. (as of Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:06:02 PM) Andy K3UK FN02hk Fredonia, NY
Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input
NUE PSK is great for back packing and mobile operation so long as only PSK 31 or RTTY is of interest. Computers offer a richer display with more options and the ability to generate many different modes. The idea is to go directly from the computer via IP to a back box that is broadband and can be remotely located and is mode agnostic. Both approaches have their own advantages. From: J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:50:07 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input Will be interesting to compare this effort to the NUE-PSK, which takes a different appoach. They have a modem that plugs directly into a transceiver' s Data port eliminating the need for PCs and soundcards, but they are now working on a NUE-SDR transceiver that either will fit as a card inside the little modem, or attach underneath it (not sure what their final design will be). This would eliminate both the PC and a separate transceiver. http://www.nue-psk.com/ Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 5:20 PM Subject: [digitalradio] directly modulatecomputer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input I am developing a 'modem' to directly modulate computer generated modes to RF thus eliminating the requirement of using a transceiver audioinput Welcome to the group, tell us more. AndyK3UK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
From: J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:33:06 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency I completely understand the lure of the old mechanical teleprinters. But I have to say I was surprised at my reaction to the addition of RTTY to the firmware in my NUE-PSK modem. I typically use the NUE-PSK battery powered plugged into my 817 while doing QRP in the field. I don't need to lug along a laptop to do PSK31. Apparently it was easy for them to add RTTY support, and by golly, I found myself doing the occasionally RTTY QSO using this little device. And it was fun. I would not have guessed a modern little device like the NUE-PSK would ever support RTTY, and I would not have guessed I'd get a kick out of it. I mean, I still prefer other digital modes, but RTTY once in a while can be fun too, I've discovered. Jim - K6JM I have an old mechanical printer that dates back to around 1945. Still works fine. I let it run just to watch it work. Sometimes it is interisting to compair the print of the old 1970 something homebuilt modem and mechanical printer with the modern sound card programs. The NUE-PSK should not be hard to impliment rtty on. I wrote a program to run on an 8080 processor board that only had 1 K of ram and 2 K of rom in it about 30 years ago. I did have an external modem to convert the tones to pulses. Same one that worked the mechanical printer. While the NUE-PSK looks interisting, I have a small netbook computer that will run all the sound card programs. If you have to have a keyboard, the netbook is not much larger with its 10 inch screen. . A small interface box handles the audio interface.
Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input
Remote control. Very useful in some situations. Especially if you aren't allowed to have decent antennas where you live. The kick I get from battery-operated QRP operation is communicating without infrastructure. I am out there with a battery, a radio, a NUE-PSK modem and a portable antenna. No internet, no power company. (Full disclosure -- I don't yet have a portable solar facility to recharge my battery, so right now I'm still tied to power company infrastructure for re-charging. But architecturally, I don't have to be.) As you say, both approaches have value. This diversity is why Ham Radio is so interesting Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: Gary Edwards To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 6:25 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input NUE PSK is great for back packing and mobile operation so long as only PSK 31 or RTTY is of interest. Computers offer a richer display with more options and the ability to generate many different modes. The idea is to go directly from the computer via IP to a back box that is broadband and can be remotely located and is mode agnostic. Both approaches have their own advantages. -- From: J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:50:07 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input Will be interesting to compare this effort to the NUE-PSK, which takes a different appoach. They have a modem that plugs directly into a transceiver' s Data port eliminating the need for PCs and soundcards, but they are now working on a NUE-SDR transceiver that either will fit as a card inside the little modem, or attach underneath it (not sure what their final design will be). This would eliminate both the PC and a separate transceiver. http://www.nue-psk.com/ Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 5:20 PM Subject: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input I am developing a 'modem' to directly modulate computer generated modes to RF thus eliminating the requirement of using a transceiver audio input Welcome to the group, tell us more. Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input
It'd be pretty cool if that nue-psk device was a little more like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100 With the built in keyboard. Is it very cumbersome to have that, a keyboard and your radio going all at once? On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:20 PM, J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com wrote: Remote control. Very useful in some situations. Especially if you aren't allowed to have decent antennas where you live. The kick I get from battery-operated QRP operation is communicating without infrastructure. I am out there with a battery, a radio, a NUE-PSK modem and a portable antenna. No internet, no power company. (Full disclosure -- I don't yet have a portable solar facility to recharge my battery, so right now I'm still tied to power company infrastructure for re-charging. But architecturally, I don't have to be.) As you say, both approaches have value. This diversity is why Ham Radio is so interesting Jim - K6JM - Original Message - *From:* Gary Edwards gfe00...@yahoo.com *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 20, 2010 6:25 PM *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input NUE PSK is great for back packing and mobile operation so long as only PSK 31 or RTTY is of interest. Computers offer a richer display with more options and the ability to generate many different modes. The idea is to go directly from the computer via IP to a back box that is broadband and can be remotely located and is mode agnostic. Both approaches have their own advantages. -- *From:* J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tue, July 20, 2010 8:50:07 PM *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input Will be interesting to compare this effort to the NUE-PSK, which takes a different appoach. They have a modem that plugs directly into a transceiver' s Data port eliminating the need for PCs and soundcards, but they are now working on a NUE-SDR transceiver that either will fit as a card inside the little modem, or attach underneath it (not sure what their final design will be). This would eliminate both the PC and a separate transceiver. http://www.nue-psk.com/ Jim - K6JM - Original Message - *From:* obrienaj k3uka...@gmail.com *To:* digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 20, 2010 5:20 PM *Subject:* [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input I am developing a 'modem' to directly modulate computer generated modes to RF thus eliminating the requirement of using a transceiver audio input Welcome to the group, tell us more. Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input
HEY !! I had one of those. In fact, I had a Trash 80 Model 1 with 4 k of RAM and Level I rom. That cassette interface was a POS. I also had most of the other TRS models at one time or other. From: James Hall Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 11:04 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input It'd be pretty cool if that nue-psk device was a little more like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100 With the built in keyboard. Is it very cumbersome to have that, a keyboard and your radio going all at once? On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:20 PM, J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com wrote: Remote control. Very useful in some situations. Especially if you aren't allowed to have decent antennas where you live. The kick I get from battery-operated QRP operation is communicating without infrastructure. I am out there with a battery, a radio, a NUE-PSK modem and a portable antenna. No internet, no power company. (Full disclosure -- I don't yet have a portable solar facility to recharge my battery, so right now I'm still tied to power company infrastructure for re-charging. But architecturally, I don't have to be.) As you say, both approaches have value. This diversity is why Ham Radio is so interesting Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: Gary Edwards To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 6:25 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input NUE PSK is great for back packing and mobile operation so long as only PSK 31 or RTTY is of interest. Computers offer a richer display with more options and the ability to generate many different modes. The idea is to go directly from the computer via IP to a back box that is broadband and can be remotely located and is mode agnostic. Both approaches have their own advantages. From: J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:50:07 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input Will be interesting to compare this effort to the NUE-PSK, which takes a different appoach. They have a modem that plugs directly into a transceiver' s Data port eliminating the need for PCs and soundcards, but they are now working on a NUE-SDR transceiver that either will fit as a card inside the little modem, or attach underneath it (not sure what their final design will be). This would eliminate both the PC and a separate transceiver. http://www.nue-psk.com/ Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 5:20 PM Subject: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input I am developing a 'modem' to directly modulate computer generated modes to RF thus eliminating the requirement of using a transceiver audio input Welcome to the group, tell us more. Andy K3UK No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3018 - Release Date: 07/20/10 14:36:00
Re: [digitalradio] ROS HF Path Simulations wide vs. narrow
On 7/20/2010 3:54 PM, KH6TY wrote: Our on-air tests show that ROS 16 baud, 2200 Hz wide spread spectrum was very poor on UHF under Doppler spreading. Can you confirm this with flutter tests like Jaak has done. Skip, My path tests show that ROS is less tolerant to Doppler spread than Olivia or one of it's variants so I'd have to agree with your on-air evaluation. Throughput starts to fail as the Doppler spread is increased beyond 20Hz (two channels 2ms delay) and I suspect you could be experiencing frequency dispersions beyond that range. I haven't been able to find any propagation data that shows how much Doppler spread is likely take place on VHF/UHF. Wish I knew that answer to that. Tony -K2MO Tony, Our on-air tests show that ROS 16 baud, 2200 Hz wide spread spectrum was very poor on UHF under Doppler spreading. Can you confirm this with flutter tests like Jaak has done on http://contestia.blogspot.com/p/pathsim_09.html http://contestia.blogspot.com/p/pathsim_09.html ? 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/19/2010 9:42 PM, Tony wrote: All, With all the attention ROS has been getting lately, I thought it would be interesting to see how the narrow mode compared to the wide version under the controlled environment of the HF path simulator. After a few hours of testing, it seems there's little difference between the two. The simulator indicated that they both had the same sensitivity (-15db) and essentially the same poor channel performance characteristics (see throughput samples below). In no case did one mode outperform the other to the point where it would make any real difference; both have the essentially the same wpm rate as well. These tests are not conclusive, but they do suggest that there may not be any real advantage in using the wide mode vs narrow under most circumstances. Of course, the simulator can only emulate the basic characteristics of the real HF channel so it would be interesting to hear from those who have compared the two on-air. Tony -K2MO CCIR-520-2 POOR CHANNEL SIMULATIONS: -11DB SNR ROS 2250 / 16 baud the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazlµog Lghe quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quccirown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog Âe quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fealoeumps ovahe lazEh/i ROS 500 / 16 baud the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick breFn fox juo3s over tes lazy dog the quæe t ´uls r?umps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown f Á jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dogQo __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5293 (20100719) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input
Well, I set up a portable chair that has a small shelf on the side where I place my 817. Battery on the ground. The NUE-PSK and very small keyboard sit on my lap. Works very comfortably. With PSK, I don't need to tune the radio very often, typically. I also liked the Commodore back in those days. And my dad had a TI 99 (I think it was). When computers were real and printed line by line on the screen. None of this namby pamby GUI stuff. Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: James Hall To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:04 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input It'd be pretty cool if that nue-psk device was a little more like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100 With the built in keyboard. Is it very cumbersome to have that, a keyboard and your radio going all at once? On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:20 PM, J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com wrote: Remote control. Very useful in some situations. Especially if you aren't allowed to have decent antennas where you live. The kick I get from battery-operated QRP operation is communicating without infrastructure. I am out there with a battery, a radio, a NUE-PSK modem and a portable antenna. No internet, no power company. (Full disclosure -- I don't yet have a portable solar facility to recharge my battery, so right now I'm still tied to power company infrastructure for re-charging. But architecturally, I don't have to be.) As you say, both approaches have value. This diversity is why Ham Radio is so interesting Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: Gary Edwards To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 6:25 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input NUE PSK is great for back packing and mobile operation so long as only PSK 31 or RTTY is of interest. Computers offer a richer display with more options and the ability to generate many different modes. The idea is to go directly from the computer via IP to a back box that is broadband and can be remotely located and is mode agnostic. Both approaches have their own advantages. -- From: J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:50:07 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input Will be interesting to compare this effort to the NUE-PSK, which takes a different appoach. They have a modem that plugs directly into a transceiver' s Data port eliminating the need for PCs and soundcards, but they are now working on a NUE-SDR transceiver that either will fit as a card inside the little modem, or attach underneath it (not sure what their final design will be). This would eliminate both the PC and a separate transceiver. http://www.nue-psk.com/ Jim - K6JM - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 5:20 PM Subject: [digitalradio] directly modulate computer /thus eliminating transceiver audio input I am developing a 'modem' to directly modulate computer generated modes to RF thus eliminating the requirement of using a transceiver audio input Welcome to the group, tell us more. Andy K3UK
