--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Well,
Do we really need contests, ragchewing, voice qsos, voice nets, cw
qsos, cw nets, on HF? Realy it all depends on what each individual
wants to do! Your millage might vary!
Of Demetre SV1UY
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2007 10:21 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Well,
Do we really need
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave AA6YQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've been through this too many times, Demetre. I know you get
it, you
just won't admit it.
The core issue is not that WinLink conveys email or uses a digital mode
protocol that's wide or narrow -- its that its
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave AA6YQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've been through this too many times, Demetre. I know you get
it, you
just won't admit it.
The core issue is not that WinLink conveys email or uses a digital mode
protocol that's wide or narrow -- its that its
Dave AA6YQ wrote:
We've been through this too many times, Demetre. I know you get it,
you just won't admit it.
The core issue is not that WinLink conveys email or uses a digital
mode protocol that's wide or narrow -- its that its unattended
stations (PMBOs) transmit without first
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You must admit that the problem you have is not Winlink, but any form
of networking on HF.
Wrong. My problem is with unattended stations that transmit
without first listening to see that the
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
OK Roger,
Whether you like it or not all the
above DIGITAL MODES are here to stay!!! They are not going to go away
because you don't like them. If you don't like them don't use them!
Actually, I doubt very much whether Winlink or Pactor will be around a
few years from
- Original Message -
From: Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2007 4:50 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
OK Dave,
You must admit that the problem you have is not Winlink, but any form
: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of w6ids
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2007 6:39 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
- Original Message -
From: Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio
Dave I agree with you but how about a new twist to this.
Not too long ago I was having a real nice keyboard to
keyboard QSO with K2MO - Tony on dial freq 7,077.4
Pactor when a member of this list starting calling CQ
on another mode. I did get a call and email him asking if
he did hear the
You were having a Pactor QSO and someone called CQ nearby in another
mode. You were able to identify the CQing operator. From your after-
the-fact email conversation with this person, its clear that he heard
your signal. If he assumed that your Pactor signal was coming from
a robot and that it
Hi Walt,
I did try and operate on 6 meter AM back in the summer of 1964, but had
inadequately operating equipment and hardly anyone local who worked the
band. At that time local was mostly done on 2 meter AM so I bought a
Heath Lunchbox and later a Clegg 22er which I even operated mobile. Even
In my college days, lots of on-campus and off-campus hams work 6M with the
Benton Harbor lunch box, Lafayette rigs and some home brew rigs. I use a
Lafayette running I suppose a couple of watts output, then a home brew 6146
transmitter about 15-20 watts output and ARC-5 Command Set receiver
Quite a few emergency planners are counting on the internet staying
operational except in the immediate disaster area. As an example, our
ARRL Section leader wants members to move all digital to Winlink 2000
and is focusing most resources to developing an interlinked repeater
system for voice
-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 4:24 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
Quite a few emergency planners are counting on the internet staying
I dont think that anyone believes that you can completely kill off the Internet
in its entirity; however, certainly certain sections/rather large geographical
areas could loose connectivity for several hours even for perhaps a day.
The question is what do amateur radio operators do during that
Rud Merriam wrote:
[Stuff Deleted]
I also think more use of VHF for covering NVIS distances is possible. A
nearby digi can connect at times to a Winlink Telpac node in Austin. That is
a distance of 130 or more miles. Since local use of NVIS would be to reach
the state EOC in Austin it is a
Those are good and insightful questions. I would not depend on the
Internet working. While certain data centers are hardened the average
user will not have access to those benefits. We learned in the last NYC
black out that the telephone company is no longer maintaining generators
and they
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Walt DuBose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I dont think that anyone believes that you can completely kill off
the Internet
in its entirity; however, certainly certain sections/rather large
geographical
areas could loose connectivity for several hours even for
I tend toward having solutions to the more extreme situations, but I am
probably more of an exception. With our summer flood disaster, our
immediate area did not have a communications emergency, but it could
have happened. Across the Mississippi River in SE MN, they did have
worse conditions.
Ric,
You have discovered the lost band...6M. Well for that matter 10M and 6M FM.
Going back to my LMR (at the time just commercial 2-way radio) dispatch days,
motorola had a formula that said two stations running 30 watts at 30 ft could
operate 30 miles. 15 miles to a mobile and that was in
Roger J. Buffington wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Well,
Do we really need contests, ragchewing, voice qsos, voice nets, cw
qsos, cw nets, on HF? Realy it all depends on what each individual
wants to do! Your millage might vary! It's a hobby OM! Each guys
pleasure might be someone else's
I think anything that depends on interconnected infrastructure is
vulnerable in an emergency. In a real emergency SSB AM FM and CW are the
only viable modes that you know will work. Everyone likes to tout
emergencies and homeland security to support whatever position they wish
to champion.
Fisher
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 10:40 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
David,
If it was using Pactor 2 would Winlink accept the message/attachments? or is
the 50K limit applicable here also?
73 Sholto
KE7HVP
Could you set up an automatic archive of these PACTOR transmissions,
like the various ones that exist for SSTV?
Leigh/WA5ZNU
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
For instance I am monitoring a Pactor 2 transmission on 30m that has
been on
going for
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It can also clog up our bands.
For instance I am monitoring a Pactor 2 transmission on 30m that has
been on
going for around 25 minutes so far and the latest email to go
through is
titled:
FW: Please read til
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It can also clog up our bands.
For instance I am monitoring a Pactor 2 transmission on 30m that has
been on
going for around 25 minutes so far and the latest email to go
through is
titled:
FW: Please read til
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Leigh L Klotz, Jr.
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 5:42 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
Could you set up an automatic archive of these PACTOR transmissions,
like the various ones that exist
.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 2:55 PM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Well,
Do we really need contests, ragchewing, voice qsos, voice nets, cw
qsos, cw nets, on HF? Realy it all depends on what each individual
wants to do! Your millage might vary! It's a hobby OM! Each guys
pleasure might be someone else's discomfort, but when an
Correction: it was Pactor 1 ARQ I was monitoring and yes, it was Winlink.
73 Sholto
KE7HPV
- Original Message -
From: Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable
stinks here:)
David
KD4NUE
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Leigh L Klotz, Jr.
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 5:42 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sholto Fisher
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 8:05 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
Correction: it was Pactor 1 ARQ I
be in Snopes by now.
David
KD4NUE
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sholto Fisher
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 8:05 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
34 matches
Mail list logo
