An ALE network and WinLink are both useful. My comments to the FCC were:
RM-11392 attempts to address problems of interference between narrow
and wide bandwidth text and data communition modes on amateur
bands, but the proposed rule changes will create more problems than
they solve. Historicly,
I would almost agree except for the 8 kHz wideband mode. That can easily
be 6 kHz and accommodate AM as used in HF communications. A wider
bandwidth just opens the door to more problems. I will file my comments
based on yours except I will suggest a maximum of 6 kilohertz.
John B. Stephensen
I used 8 kHz because the FCC will specify the maximum bandwidth at -23 dB.
Users want 6 kHz minimum bandwidth with minimal attenuation. Maufacturers of
ham radio equipment usually specify the bandwidth of a 6 kHz crystal filter at
the -3 dB points and the tolerance is often -0% / +25%. AM and
I updated my comments to the FCC to change the second to last paragraph:
RM-11392 attempts to address problems of interference between narrow
and wide bandwidth text and data communition modes on amateur
bands, but the proposed rule changes will create more problems than
they solve. Historicly,
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Hmm OK,
I hope this anti SCS thing is not going to end to being an
anti-European thing Roger. I get that feeling somehow, since SCS is
not an American company.
My dear fellow, I once owned an SCS PTC-II. Very few American hams ever
bought one--they never sold
Calling on 14.236 in FDMDV now
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My dear fellow, I once owned an SCS PTC-II. Very few American hams
ever
bought one--they never sold well here.
Quite the contrary, many american hams own a PTC-II modem, also there
are more PACTOR PMBOs in
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Quite the contrary, many american hams own a PTC-II modem, also there
are more PACTOR PMBOs in USA than the rest of the World right now my
friend.
To paraphrase Bill Clinton, it depends on one's use of the word many.
In fact, a vanishingly small percentage of either
I didn't suggest anti-Pactor missiles, Demetre, I humorously suggested that
anti-PMBO missiles were on the Christmas lists of many hams this season. You
claimed that this constituted an admission on my part that I have QRM'd
PMBOs -- which is complete nonsense, but unfortunately typical of your
At 09:13 PM 29/12/2007, Rodger wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Quite the contrary, many american hams own a PTC-II modem, also there
are more PACTOR PMBOs in USA than the rest of the World right now my
friend.
To paraphrase Bill Clinton, it depends on one's use of the word many.
In fact, a
At 11:28 AM 12/28/2007, you wrote:
Hi Mark,
How would this kill various digital modes with a bandwidth of 1500 hertz
or less? I operate Oliva mostly at 500 hertz wide and sometimes and
1000 hertz wide.
73, tom n4zpt
If a mode's bandwidth is 1500 Hz or less, then there would be no
change in
I cannot believe the holder of a valid ham radio
license would ever come out and say this
FROM .
--- John B. Stephensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the rule changes are to extend beyond 29 MHz,
narrow-band segments on the VHF and UHF bands should
allow a maximum bandwidth of 8 kHz.
I'm sorry to inform you that I USED the carrier detect feature when I
ran my packet station and had very little problem with the jamming
you are describing.
On the other hand, nothing I was sending was time sensitive therefore
setting up the connect schedules to keep trying throughout a 24 hour
One problem with your scenario is that the petition uses necessary
bandwidth for data emissions, you are describing occupied bandwidth
for phone/image emissions. From a practical standpoint there is a BIG
difference in determining the two.
Data emissions are nice because their parameters are
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To paraphrase Bill Clinton, it depends on one's use of the word
many.
In fact, a vanishingly small percentage of either American or European
digital operators ever bought SCS modems, due to their high cost.
Hi Jack,
There will always be varying viewpoints on various technical issues. The
difference today is that we have vehicles to actually allow the average
person to discuss them worldwide such as through the democratizing
process on groups like digitlradio.
There are those who do not really
Do you really know if Pactor was licensed to others? If SCS actually
fully licensed the mode, it would seem to me that they would insure that
the memory ARQ would have been included. Only the SCS modems seemed to
have this feature. That is why they worked better between SCS modems
than between
GM Rick,
From my KAM Plus manual, under Pactor Operation:
The KAM Plus uses memory ARQ in this mode to improve reception.
Perhaps earlier implementations by Kantronics did not... this one did. If I
watch and listen closely, I can observe packets being completed even when no
single packet
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you really know if Pactor was licensed to others? If SCS actually
fully licensed the mode, it would seem to me that they would insure
that
the memory ARQ would have been included. Only the SCS modems seemed to
have this
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Hi Rick,
Well my old KAM Controller with it's addon PCB for supporting PACTOR
1 definatelly has Memory ARQ. Memory ARQ is a must for PACTOR
protocol. There is no PACTOR without memory ARQ.
Actually, this is untrue. The PK232 did not have memory arq, and unless
I am
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Hi Rick,
Well my old KAM Controller with it's addon PCB for supporting PACTOR
1 definatelly has Memory ARQ. Memory ARQ is a must for PACTOR
protocol. There is no PACTOR without
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Well,
I have a KAM controller with PACTOR 1. I bet you have not even seen
one.
You know, Demetre, I am getting tired of remarks like that from you. I
have attempted to reply to your posts with courtesy, but you seem bent
upon returning courtesy with bad manners.
The team of PZ5YV is happy to anounce that we will be active during the
contest :
2008 ARRL RTTY Round-Up
So hope to log all of you form there, Happy New Year
Alex www.pz5yv.4m5dx.info http://www.pz5yv.4m5dx.info/
- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Roger J. Buffington
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 12:08 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Licensing of Pactor modes
AEA, Kantronics, and HAL all
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Well,
I have a KAM controller with PACTOR 1. I bet you have not even seen
one.
You know, Demetre, I am getting tired of remarks like that from you. I
have attempted to reply
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Sorry if I made you upset Roger, but you insist on something you do
not know very well and always try to prove that the other guy is
wrong. If I was a bit harsh with you it was for that reason and I did
not mean to offend you.
No worry, Demetre. You did not upset
OK, , I am pleased by the overwhelming response and the volume of
requests for DRCC numbers that will be part of the JT65A Crawl and the
Olivia contest , both held at varying times on UTC 1/1/08.
Unfortunately, I was not able to issue DRCC numbers below 100 to all
that requested one , sorry.
A very happy new year to all of digitalradio lovers.
Good luck and good DX in 2008
73
Özhan TA3BQ
Demetre,
It might help to visualize the interference problem caused by unattended
PMBO stations like this analogy:
A Winlink client, triggering a WinlinkPMBO to transmit, is like remotely
triggering a bomb blast without any way to guarantee that the area around
the bomb is clear.
Winlink
I probably should not get involved but here's a classic example of why
feelings against Pactor 3 run so high.
The frequency is 10.140, the mode is PSK31, it is 19:39 UTC today (29th Dec)
and VE1CDD is in QSO with PJ2MI, N0MNO and KJ7A are on frequency and I am
calling CQ. A Pactor-1 call up can
Demetre,
It is possible that SCS did license Pactor at a later time. It seems to
me that other companies tried to implement the memory ARQ function with
limited success. This feature is not necessary for Pactor to operate,
but it does help greatly with weak signals. However, if a company
Hi Rick,
Well, I had a go at Pactor and could not make it work, between the
SCS PTC-IIex and the SCS PTC-Pro I have here. The radios were the
problem, they would kerchunk away here and go nowhere, so I gave up
on it. I guess the radios were not suited to the switching times
required for
In part 97 the FCC specifies bandwidths of 20 and 100 kHz on VHF and UHF bands
and this is defined as 26dB below the mean power level. That hasn't prevented
hams from designing and building their own gear for 6 m through 70 cm. I'm
assming the FCC will want similar standards as they are more
Were you able to get an ID from the P3 station?
Leigh/WA5ZNU
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 11:53 am, Sholto KE7HPV wrote:
us. But then the transmission changes straight to Pactor-3 and wipes
everyone out for at least 5 minutes.
Hello Sholto
Sad to say , but I have had the same experience many times.
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
Sholto Fisher skrev:
I probably should not get involved but here's a classic example of why
feelings against Pactor 3 run so high.
The frequency is 10.140, the mode is PSK31, it is 19:39 UTC
Thank you for letting me post here to this group...just an FYI for
those that might be interested in this digital mode event..thanks.
de kb9umt Don
EU 30 Meter Digital Weekend Event
When: January 19th 2400 utc to January 20th 2400 utc
2 days of digital fun, ragchew and DX on 30 Meters,
Happy New Year to all!
Just before Christmas, Sholto and I were busy with ALE400 on 10136.0 , with
good results most days between the west coast and
Central Canada, as well as into the US mid-west. Haven't been listening on
20M much since the band has been very poor here, I think because of
I do have a valid extra class license. There are lots of hams who use CW and
SSB on the VHF bands and want protection from FM repeaters and other wide-band
signals. The bottom 300 kHz of each VHF band should be protected. I was a
member of WSWSS and the San Bernardino Microwave Society and
Here is a corrected version -- VHF came out HF in one spot:
I do have a valid extra class license. There are lots of hams who use CW and
SSB on the VHF bands and want protection from FM repeaters and other wide-band
signals. The bottom 300 kHz of each VHF band should be protected. I was a
Here are the rules, revised, for the Jan 1 2008 JT65A Crawl.
Remember this is a TWO band only contest (you use either 40M, 20M, or
both 20 and 40M. No other bands.
Due to several requests, an extra hour of operating time has been
added. The three hours you can operate are now -0100 ,
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Sorry if I made you upset Roger, but you insist on something you do
not know very well and always try to prove that the other guy is
wrong. If I was a bit harsh with you it was
You bring up a good point and this is a good time to bring it up. The
definition of the Amateur Service in the US (and I think the ITU's is
the same) indicates the service is for radiocommunications between
duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a
personal aim
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
...This is supposed to be a free world but in a free world _we should
always be a bit more tolerant_, don't you think?
73 de Demetre SV1UY
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
New era beginning...
HNY 2008 from DigiQRP community.
--
Jaak Hohensee
ES1HJ/QRP
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know of any PSKmail use in the U.S. There have been no comments
on this group of success with this mode here although I think there may
be at least one server? In order for it to gain any traction it would
have to
Hi John and group,
I have written these frequencies down on a card here in the shack so I
can easily refer to them. They are quite different from the ALE400
frequencies that Bonnie invented, but to me are just as valid as long as
we can agree on one spot frequency per band. One nice thing is
Demetre,
You really need to end this conjecture about Pactor unless you have some
new information that Pactor is proprietary like Pactor 2 and Pactor 3.
If you check on the internet, you will find that Pactor is an open
protocol, while P2 and P3 use proprietary technology controlled by one
I have discussed my misadventures with PSKmail enough. I wish that I
could get it to work with at least one of my computers, one of which
runs Kubuntu, but thus far no luck. Same with several others that I have
talked to. My attempts to use an emulator and also to use a Virtual
Machine
The spectrum between 50 and 450 MHz is useful because
path losses are low FOR SSB AND CW ..
THAT'S RIGHT FOR SSB, CW how many 200 kHz wide
stations can you fit on 220 or 440 ? how much more
path loss ? The 300 khz is a joke every time that has
been tried it has failed so nwhat you say for
There have been recent comments attesting to the demise of
PACTOR I. Is this true for all intent and purposes?
For curiosity, who's using PACTOR I for keyboard QSO's with an
outboard TNC such as the venerable PK-232 and others?
If there is such activity is is hit 'n miss or quasi-scheduled?
Howdy Folks:
Well, there still is just a little time left (until 31-December-2007) to
submit your TARA Melee Score for this year's contest. All of us from TARA ask
EVERYONE that has yet to submit a score to PLEASE do so now! If you look at the
results that we've posted so far you'll see
Hello Howard,
I use Pactor I every now and then for keyboard to keyboard. It is hit
and miss for me; more a novelty than an oft-used mode.
73
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, w6ids [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There have been recent comments attesting to the demise of
PACTOR I.
N0HR Software Resources
N0HR's ham radio website, http://www.n0hr.com has many free resources for ham
radio:
The Ham Radio Toolbar for Internet Explorer Firefox:
http://www.n0hr.com/Ham_Radio_Toolbar.htm
HamLinks is a free ham radio toolbar that extends your (Internet Explorer or
52 matches
Mail list logo
