[digitalradio] ALE-GPR Geo Position Reporting

2006-10-26 Thread expeditionradio
ALE-GPR (Geo Position Report) uses the ALE Instant Message feature called AMD. You can connect your GPS directly to the computer, and PCALE will auto-report your position to anyone who is part of the open GPR net. The first real-world use of ALE-GPR was during the Katrina disaster. ALE operators

[digitalradio] Re: ARRL Proposal: CW and Digital on 5MHz at 100W

2006-10-26 Thread jgorman01
I do have some concerns that would have been addressed by Bonnie's strictures. One, can everyone watching a waterfall display recognize a weak Federal SSB or digital signal trying to claim the frequency? Two, there are no restrictions on automatic stations. It looks to me like auto stations

Re: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL Proposal: CW and Digital on 5MHz at 100W

2006-10-26 Thread Danny Douglas
As an operator who ran government radio facilities for 30 years; there is no way a government station is going to know who else is on the freq, unless it is easily determined CW or FSK, and mostly they dont care. If I popped up looking for a clear freq, to send my other end to, and there was a

Re: [digitalradio] PAX2

2006-10-26 Thread KV9U
Tried connecting last night but no luck. I am assuming that your frequency is the actual frequency and that anyone connecting has to put their dial frequency below that point depending upon how many Hz they want to use on the waterfall. So if a station is USB 7.044, and I want to connect to

RE: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL Proposal: CW and Digital on 5MHz at 100W

2006-10-26 Thread DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
The 60M channels are between regular government fast boat channels. I doubt that they would used the chennels we are allowed on; but, if they are, they would be putting out between 100 and 500 watts PEP USB and perhaps encrypted and fed into good marine vertical antennas. Walt/K5YFW

Re: [digitalradio] PAX2 and 20M as of 1700Z

2006-10-26 Thread John Bradley
Nope, that is dial frequency, so if you are on 7075.5 USB indicated, the signal will appear centered on 1000hz oon your waterfall. i know, I know that in effect it is 7076.5 BUT..easier to go by dial frequency. As of 1700Z Oct 26, will be on 14076.5 dial frequency, USB, and TX

[digitalradio] OE3GBB 14236 now

2006-10-26 Thread Tony
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web,

Re: [digitalradio] PAX2 and 20M as of 1700Z

2006-10-26 Thread Danny Douglas
One of my real pet peeves is seeing a spot for a freq for PSK, clicking on it, and finding the station not there but somewhere up the band. Freqs given on spots should be that read off of the waterfall, because the software that QSYs a rig is going to take in consideration the rig freq +

Re: [digitalradio] PAX2 and 20M as of 1700Z

2006-10-26 Thread John Bradley
thank you for splitting hairs. Now, for those who are actually interested in trying a mode than arguing about it, I am at 14076.5 USB, dial frequency, centered on 1000hz, using PAX2, multiPSK ,as of 1845Z John VE5MU - Original Message - From: Danny Douglas To:

[digitalradio] Re: Don't ignore proposals/local HF net successes

2006-10-26 Thread jgorman01
Funny, you didn't have any problem critizing Ed Hare and by fiat, the ARRL on their position on BPL interference mitigation. Seems to me that what's good for the goose is good for the gander! Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

[digitalradio] Re: ARRL Proposal: CW and Digital on 5MHz at 100W

2006-10-26 Thread jgorman01
Still, I believe sooner or later there will be a conflict on a shared frequency. If there isn't going to be a problem, then why bother making it shared? When this occurs, if standard operating procedures were laid out in the rulles, it would minimize the chance of conflict. Jim WA0LYK --- In

Re: [digitalradio] PAX2 and 20M as of 1700Z

2006-10-26 Thread KV9U
John, There is no argument here. It is critical that you give the correct frequency. When I was unable to connect, I was not sure if it was propagation or possibly not aligning the frequencies. For this kind of operation you must be very close to the net frequency or it is simply not going

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Don't ignore proposals/local HF net successes

2006-10-26 Thread John Champa
Oh, that wasn't being critical of Ed Hare! He's an old friend. Nor of ARRL's work against BPL. That was more like a technological disagreement, in which he was probably correct in the end: We have no readily available answer...yet. Not to worry. If I start being really citical, one will feel

Re: [digitalradio] local HF net successes

2006-10-26 Thread John Champa
Antenna are important here, guys! Are you using NVIS antennas, e.g., a dipole NMT 1/4 wave high, etc. John - K8OCL From: Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] local HF net successes Date: Tue, 24 Oct