you have my vote 100% agreement KB2SSE
Ken On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 14:56 -0500, n9wys wrote: > Gentle people, > > I've been sitting quietly on the sidelines, watching this thread > progress. > And I think that maybe it's time for me to jump in with my own > opinions on > digital vs. analog. (Whether it be P-25 or D-Star) > > Although I'm usually very open to newer technology, this digital (or > better > said, "digitized") voice thing has me very concerned. As a public > safety > worker, I shudder to think that maybe some day I might need assistance > and > call for back-up, only to have my meaning misunderstood because a few > syllables were dropped because of the CODEC. For example: how many > people > have told someone else on their cell phone that "you sounded like you > just > went under water?" (Especially with Nextel?????) Or suddenly had your > call > discontinued - with no prior warning/indication? > > As ham radio operators, one of our missions is to pass critical > traffic... > we cannot fulfill that mission if the traffic cannot be properly > received in > the first place, whether it is because we cannot ourselves discern the > message or it is obscured because of "artificial" means. My question > is: > why make it more difficult on ourselves to accomplish this mission by > adding > another layer of fallibility into the picture? > > Now in regard to the testing/repairing these D-Star systems... I > didn't > become a ham until later in life, although I've always had an interest > in > radio. But since I have, I continue to strive to be more than just an > "appliance operator"... I need to be able to understand how it works, > and > if within my means, troubleshoot and/or repair it. Based on the > earlier > statement that the only way to test/repair these stations is to "box > and > ship" it back to the manufacturer, I feel we as Amateurs are taking a > huge > step backward, both for ourselves and for our hobby. > > I also feel we are doing the Amateur Radio Service itself a huge > disservice, > since one of the basic tenets of the Service itself is to "Expan(d) > the > existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained > operators, > technicians, and electronics experts." [Part 97.1(d)] > > OK, flame-proof suit on... You may fire when ready, Gridley! > > 73 de Mark - N9WYS > > -----Original Message----- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Steve S. Bosshard > (NU5D) > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 1:53 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room - testing DSTAR > > I take care of a pretty large EDACS system. There is a simulator > built > into my COM120B just for EDACS and LTR - even decodes pocsag paging. > > This is never used in setting up the base station/repeaters. The > procedure uses simple deviation and receiver tests. Same with > subscriber units - most (but certainly not all) problems can be > caught > in conventional mode. > > On the repeater receiver a sniff point on the discriminator output > allows basic receiver testing. This does not simulate DSTAR but gets > to > a go/no go point. Kind of like the first DPL - I had to buy an > aftermarket board and wire it to my CE50 service monitor - would > encode > and if the light went out on receive - would decode as well. > > I doubt any manufacturer will make a test set for a low volume > product > because there are not enough folks wanting to pay for a DSTAR tester. > > Next problem - if the thing is broke - I am not gonna go probing > around > surface mount chips with my simpson and weller - better to box and > ship. > > Anyhow that another 2 cents - might make payroll if this keeps up... > > 73, Steve NU5D > > Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote: > > > > And one more point - and it's a major one.... > > > > You can get P25 test equipment. > > > > Show me one piece of test equipment - an IFR, an HP, a General > Dynamics > > (the folks that made some of Motorolas R-series of service > monitors) > > or any > > other test equipment manufacturer that makes a dstar tester. Not > even > > the manufacturer has one. > > > > So haw do you verify that a dstar system is actually working right? > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > >
