Of course, I have a different perspective coming from the UK where amateur
radio
isn't regarded as primarily an emergency communications service. :)
Julian, G4ILO
Just wait till the military run short of radio operators .. for :) read
:( .. that was why morse was part of the
I agree with you. I don't see any merit in doing on the amateur bands what can
be done on commercial frequencies. Indeed, I don't really see that even D-Star
enhances the hobby in any way. Being able to call someone whereever they are by
keying their call into your radio is not what ham radio
D-Star repeaters provide much better coverage due to the codec (I base this
on one test made which was most impressive). As for technology - this is
part of the Education benefits in Amateur Radio, my interest in radio
resulted in a degree in electronics mathematics. I listen almost all day
while
that.
I don't get the same thrill using my cellphone or internet email.
Jim - K6JM
- Original Message -
From: Simon HB9DRV
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 12:54 AM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: 3rd Generation Digital radio
D-Star repeaters
I believe a substantial number of American radio amateurs regard using radio
tranceivers and their associated pieces of equipment in an entirely different
way to their counterparts in Europe. The two continents are entirely different
and consequently the people who live in the two continents
much to do, so much
to learn, so little time
Jim - K6JM
- Original Message -
From: raf3151019
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 2:34 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re : 3rd generation digital radio
I believe a substantial number of American
I think you missed a generation or two.
First generation - CW (binary states plus time)
Second generation - RTTY and FAX
Third generation - AX.25 packet
Fourth generation - what the OP called the first generation
etc...
73 de Dave, NF2G
A perhaps narrow outsider's opinion: There is potential here for both good and
for wreaking havoc with fellow users of VHF/UHF amateur bands given a paradigm
shift into a G3 digital era. Improving upon packet's abilities could be a very
good thing- particularly for those involved in EmComm. But
That was why someone suggested that 220 be looked at rather than 440. Both 2m
and 440 have heavy usage with analog repeaters plus SSB/CW (and satellite).
Thus 220, or 900 Mhz, would be far better for a third generation digital
(trunked) network. After all it is going to mean a new radio
