[digitalradio] Re: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Interference
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just who are these Luddites you're so fond of attacking, Howard? Finally, an chance to use the information from those seemingly useless history classes I endured while frowning up in the UK. Andy K3UK From http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/luddite.html Luddism and the Neo-Luddite Reaction Cultural change necessarily involves resistance to change. The term Luddite has been resurrected from a previous era to describe one who distrusts or fears the inevitable changes brought about by new technology. The original Luddite revolt occurred in 1811, an action against the English Textile factories that displaced craftsmen in favor of machines. Today's Luddites continue to raise moral and ethical arguments against the excesses of modern technology to the extent that our inventions and our technical systems have evolved to control us rather than to serve us and to the extent that such leviathans can threaten our essential humanity. and from http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRluddites.htm In the early months of 1811 the first threatening letters from General Ned Ludd and the Army of Redressers, were sent to employers in Nottingham. Workers, upset by wage reductions and the use of unapprenticed workmen, began to break into factories at night to destroy the new machines that the employers were using. In a three- week period over two hundred stocking frames were destroyed. In March, 1811, several attacks were taking place every night and the Nottingham authorities had to enroll four hundred special constables to protect the factories. To help catch the culprits, the Prince Regent offered £50 to anyone giving information on any person or persons wickedly breaking the frames. Luddism gradually spread to Yorkshire, Lancashire, Leicestershire and Derbyshire. In Yorkshire, croppers, a small and highly skilled group of cloth finishers, turned their anger on the new shearing frame that they feared would put them out of work. In February and March, 1812, factories were attacked by Luddites in Huddersfield, Halifax, Wakefield and Leeds. In February 1812 the government of Spencer Perceval proposed that machine-breaking should become a capital offence. Despite a passionate speech by Lord Byron in the House of Lords, Parliament passed the Frame Breaking Act that enabled people convicted of machine-breaking to be sentenced to death. As a further precaution, the government ordered 12,000 troops into the areas where the Luddites were active. On of the most serious Luddite attacks took place at Rawfolds Mill near Brighouse in Yorkshire. William Cartwright, the owner of Rawfolds Mill, had been using cloth-finishing machinery since 1811. Local croppers began losing their jobs and after a meeting at Saint Crispin public house, they decided to try and destroy the cloth- finishing machinery at Rawfolds Mill. Cartwright was suspecting trouble and arranged for the mill to be protected by armed guards. Led by George Mellor, a young cropper from Huddersfield, the attack on Rawfolds Mill took place on 11th April, 1812. The Luddites failed in gain entry and by the time they left, two of the croppers had been mortally wounded. Seven days later the Luddites killed William Horsfall, another large mill-owner in the area. The authorities rounded up over a hundred suspects. Of these, sixty-four were indicted. Three men were executed for the murder of Horsfall and another fourteen were hung for the attack on Rawfolds Mill. Throughout 1812 there were attacks on Lancashire cotton mills. Local handloom weavers objected to the introduction of power looms. On 20th March, 1812 the warehouse of William Radcliffe, one of the first manufacturers to use the power-loom, was attacked in Stockport. Wheat prices soared in 1812. Unable to feed their families, workers became desperate. There were food riots in Manchester, Oldham, Ashton, Rochdale, Stockport and Macclesfield. On 20th April several thousand men attacked Burton's Mill at Middleton near Manchester. Emanuel Burton, who knew that his policy of buying power-looms had upset local handloom weavers, had recruited armed guards and three members of the crowd were killed by musket-fire. The following day the men returned and after failing to break-in to the mill, they burnt down Emanuel Burton's house. The military arrived and another seven men were killed. Three days later, Wray Duncroff's Mill at Westhoughton, near Manchester, was set on fire. William Hulton, the High Sheriff of Lancashire, arrested twelve men suspected of taking part in the attack. Four of the accused, Abraham Charlston, Job Fletcher, Thomas Kerfoot, and James Smith, were executed. The Charlston's family claimed Abraham was only twelve years old but he was not reprieved. It was reported that Abraham cried for his mother on the scaffold. A local part-time
Re: [digitalradio] Re: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Interference
Thanks for the historical perspective.. I am fortunate enough to have studied English History many years ago where I learned the term... Luddites are those who distrusts or fears the inevitable changes brought about by new technology and in the end the Luddite Movement ceased to be active While I obviously would prefer a voluntary bandplan with FCC regulation of only Bandwidth... I can live with temporary regulation of non qualified automatic modes as I realize that in the long run that even those unnecessary regulations will have to die a natural death. Again.. I have seen voluntary bandplans with Bandwith only regulation work in many countries already...they work well... they free up the ham population to innovate.. while the Luddites in the USA want to keep us in Technology jail with their fears of the future. __ Howard S. White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 AE6SM No Good Deed Goes Unpunished Awfully Extremely Six Sado Masochist - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 8:33 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Interference --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just who are these Luddites you're so fond of attacking, Howard? Finally, an chance to use the information from those seemingly useless history classes I endured while frowning up in the UK. Andy K3UK From http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/luddite.html Luddism and the Neo-Luddite Reaction Cultural change necessarily involves resistance to change. The term Luddite has been resurrected from a previous era to describe one who distrusts or fears the inevitable changes brought about by new technology. The original Luddite revolt occurred in 1811, an action against the English Textile factories that displaced craftsmen in favor of machines. Today's Luddites continue to raise moral and ethical arguments against the excesses of modern technology to the extent that our inventions and our technical systems have evolved to control us rather than to serve us and to the extent that such leviathans can threaten our essential humanity. and from http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRluddites.htm In the early months of 1811 the first threatening letters from General Ned Ludd and the Army of Redressers, were sent to employers in Nottingham. Workers, upset by wage reductions and the use of unapprenticed workmen, began to break into factories at night to destroy the new machines that the employers were using. In a three- week period over two hundred stocking frames were destroyed. In March, 1811, several attacks were taking place every night and the Nottingham authorities had to enroll four hundred special constables to protect the factories. To help catch the culprits, the Prince Regent offered £50 to anyone giving information on any person or persons wickedly breaking the frames. Luddism gradually spread to Yorkshire, Lancashire, Leicestershire and Derbyshire. In Yorkshire, croppers, a small and highly skilled group of cloth finishers, turned their anger on the new shearing frame that they feared would put them out of work. In February and March, 1812, factories were attacked by Luddites in Huddersfield, Halifax, Wakefield and Leeds. In February 1812 the government of Spencer Perceval proposed that machine-breaking should become a capital offence. Despite a passionate speech by Lord Byron in the House of Lords, Parliament passed the Frame Breaking Act that enabled people convicted of machine-breaking to be sentenced to death. As a further precaution, the government ordered 12,000 troops into the areas where the Luddites were active. On of the most serious Luddite attacks took place at Rawfolds Mill near Brighouse in Yorkshire. William Cartwright, the owner of Rawfolds Mill, had been using cloth-finishing machinery since 1811. Local croppers began losing their jobs and after a meeting at Saint Crispin public house, they decided to try and destroy the cloth- finishing machinery at Rawfolds Mill. Cartwright was suspecting trouble and arranged for the mill to be protected by armed guards. Led by George Mellor, a young cropper from Huddersfield, the attack on Rawfolds Mill took place on 11th April, 1812. The Luddites failed in gain entry and by the time they left, two of the croppers had been mortally wounded. Seven days later the Luddites killed William Horsfall, another large mill-owner in the area. The authorities rounded up over a hundred suspects. Of these, sixty-four were indicted. Three men were executed for the murder of Horsfall and another fourteen were hung for the attack on Rawfolds Mill. Throughout 1812 there were attacks on
[digitalradio] Differing ham interests -- not luddites
Could we not use highly inflammatory comments such as calling other hams Luddites? There are NO luddite hams that I have found. There can be differing viewpoints on what types of operation have value to a given individual. Remember that the luddite term referred to people who were employed in an industry that they (rightly) could see was going to be destroyed by new technologies and they (wrongly) destroyed the property of others and caused some deaths. That is what caused their downfall. There is no parallel to ham radio. There are new technologies coming along, most of them will likely not become popular, most will not be all that useful, but once in a while there will be some new things that at least a few will find interesting. And maybe someday we will have a sea change due to some amazing breakthroughs. But that has not happened in the last 40+ years since I was first licensed. Looking ahead, we will still have CW, and analog phone as the primary areas of interest. I expect an increase in digital if it proves to work well for certain applications as we have seen with the main digital mode of very narrow and weak signal PSK31 for keyboarding. The ability to send e-mails through the internet is something that gives amateur radio an edge for the moment although if it ever got to be excessive, it could be prohibited on HF at some future time due to our limited bandwidth. A lot of this depends upon how we influence the views of our elected ARRL representatives since they are the ones who make the final determination of how we (as a group) lobby the FCC. Rick, KV9U -Original Message- From: Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 3:20 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Interference --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dr. Howard S. White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howard Why don't you start a poll and see just how many on this group (under FCC regulations) would be in favor of what you suport. By the way, are you active on the various modes that this reflector encourages. MFSK PSK31 and others? I for one, am on tha air daily and see the result of semi automatic operations. I do see value in your point of view, but find no use for services that allow for personal Email or messages from the internet to be broadcast on Amatuer Radio. I also have no use for the constant contest operation that spreads out to the exclusion of other modes. Some rules are always needed. I am having a hard time getting the connection between rich factory owners and a government that would allow its populace to starve by its actions and ham operators who have a point of view that is different than yours. Ed Again.. I have seen voluntary bandplans with Bandwith only regulation work in many countries already...they work well... they free up the ham population to innovate.. while the Luddites in the USA want to keep us in Technology jail with their fears of the future. The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Interference
That's two messages in a row inveighing against modern-day Luddites holding back bandwidth-based allocation without citation of anyone actually taking this position. Perhaps this is another example of If you hold a weak position, attack an imaginary enemy. The true obstacle to bandwidth-based allocation is its linkage to unlimited semi-automatic operation. If we are jailed, to use your florid analogy, this is the key. As for voluntary band plans making regulation of semi-automatic operation unnecessary, you need look no further than the Winlink web site to find many examples of semi-automatic stations using frequencies proscribed by current IARU band plans. For whatever reason, voluntary band plans are demonstrably ineffective at establishing semi-automatic sub-bands. All that said, I appreciate your acknowledging the need to constrain unqualified semi-automatic operation, Howard. While we may diagree on the longevity of the regulations required to implement this, we at least agree that such regulations are initially required. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dr. Howard S. White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the historical perspective.. I am fortunate enough to have studied English History many years ago where I learned the term... Luddites are those who distrusts or fears the inevitable changes brought about by new technology and in the end the Luddite Movement ceased to be active While I obviously would prefer a voluntary bandplan with FCC regulation of only Bandwidth... I can live with temporary regulation of non qualified automatic modes as I realize that in the long run that even those unnecessary regulations will have to die a natural death. Again.. I have seen voluntary bandplans with Bandwith only regulation work in many countries already...they work well... they free up the ham population to innovate.. while the Luddites in the USA want to keep us in Technology jail with their fears of the future. __ Howard S. White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 AE6SM No Good Deed Goes Unpunished Awfully Extremely Six Sado Masochist - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 8:33 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Interference --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just who are these Luddites you're so fond of attacking, Howard? Finally, an chance to use the information from those seemingly useless history classes I endured while frowning up in the UK. Andy K3UK From http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/luddite.html Luddism and the Neo-Luddite Reaction Cultural change necessarily involves resistance to change. The term Luddite has been resurrected from a previous era to describe one who distrusts or fears the inevitable changes brought about by new technology. The original Luddite revolt occurred in 1811, an action against the English Textile factories that displaced craftsmen in favor of machines. Today's Luddites continue to raise moral and ethical arguments against the excesses of modern technology to the extent that our inventions and our technical systems have evolved to control us rather than to serve us and to the extent that such leviathans can threaten our essential humanity. and from http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRluddites.htm In the early months of 1811 the first threatening letters from General Ned Ludd and the Army of Redressers, were sent to employers in Nottingham. Workers, upset by wage reductions and the use of unapprenticed workmen, began to break into factories at night to destroy the new machines that the employers were using. In a three- week period over two hundred stocking frames were destroyed. In March, 1811, several attacks were taking place every night and the Nottingham authorities had to enroll four hundred special constables to protect the factories. To help catch the culprits, the Prince Regent offered £50 to anyone giving information on any person or persons wickedly breaking the frames. Luddism gradually spread to Yorkshire, Lancashire, Leicestershire and Derbyshire. In Yorkshire, croppers, a small and highly skilled group of cloth finishers, turned their anger on the new shearing frame that they feared would put them out of work. In February and March, 1812, factories were attacked by Luddites in Huddersfield, Halifax, Wakefield and Leeds. In February 1812 the government of Spencer Perceval proposed that machine-breaking should become a capital offence. Despite a passionate speech by Lord Byron in the House of Lords, Parliament passed the Frame Breaking Act that enabled people convicted of
[digitalradio] Re:TNCs
I use my KAM frequently; WinWarbler lets me run MMTTY and the KAM simultaneously, providing diversity decoding of one signal, or the ability to copy both a DX station and his/her pileup. I also have a PK232 and an STSII-e; I use the latter for Pactor, and (rarely and somewhat perversely) PSK31. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I still have not one but two, neither of which is hooked up at the moment, and havent been for the past several years. Why bother with them, when we have perfectly good computer soundboards they do the job. Someday, I may get into a situation where I dont have internet capability, and will have to revert back to packet, but dont see the future of that. The question arises: Who still has a spark gap transmitter? I never had one, as by the time I came around (most everyone here I suspect) their time had come and gone.Some few of us still have a crystal (only) rig around too, and some of them even work and get exercised every year or so. Its fun the revert back and use the old stuff now and again, including the virbroplex and straight keys, but wouldnt turn things around for them being full time, for all the tea in China. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 2/18/2005 The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [digitalradio] Re: what's the difference ?
Dave, The ability of the software that you requested has arrived. SCAMP will DEFINITELY not TX if the channel is busy with anything! Sometimes it almost seems too protective:) Since it is a wide BW mode, a tiny and weak CW signal, which just happens to be about two KC above the dial freq, has been holding me back from sending a message for about that last 15 minutes on a predetermined frequency. While you can adjust a setting to make this feature more deaf they do recommend about a 20 db setting and that seems about right. Rick, KV9U Viroqua, WI SCAMP beta tester -Original Message- From: Dave Bernstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 4:36 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: what's the difference ? Qualified is a characteristic of the software application used to run a semi-automatic station. A qualified application can detect that a frequency is already in use by a QSO in any of several common amateur HF modes: CW, SSB, RTTY, PSK, MFSK, Olivia, Pactor, etc; if such an application receives an incoming request on an already-busy frequency, it will not initiate operation and thereby avoid QRMing an onging QSO. An unqualified application will respond to an incoming request whether or not the frequency is clear. As a result, ongoing QSOs may be QRMed. To my knowledge, all current semi-automatic station automation applications are unqualified. Howard says the developers of SCAMP will provide busy frequency detectors for most common amateur HF modes; if they succeed, then it will be possible to build qualified station automation applications around SCAMP. The characteristic Qualified is thus independent of the mode being used for semi-automatic operation. We're as concerned with unqualified semi-automatic PSK applications as we are with unqualified semi-automatic CW or Pactor applications. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the difference between a non qualified automatic modes and qualified automatic modes ? The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Interference
I already have my BPL buster up and running right now. It's called a 10-meter beacon! You will only need a Tech plus license at a minimum and no coronation requirements to put up a low power slow speed CW signal with a basic dipole antenna, a very cheap AM CB radio, and some way to key the PTT switch on and off corresponding to the beacon ID and location information. Here is a very good article on building one of these beacon stations. http://www.4sqrp.com/resource/10m_beacon/10m_beacon.htm In this project a Norcal Keyer Kit was used but I went exceedingly cheap and easy here. I used a very slow motor drive used to rotate a circuit board disk with traces removed to correspond to my beacons call and location. The rotating disk keys the old CB very nicely. It's also easy to make a new disk at any time. It has been found that only a 2-watt 10-meter CW signal into a vertical located within 100 feet of an unshielded power line will induce enough RF on the power line to prevent BPL from operating properly for several miles. You might not think that a few watts would do it but in reality it is more than enough. Part 15 devices are limited to fractions of a watt. After I installed my Beacon I drove around my neighborhood and found my signal to be very strong under the power lines several miles away. At 3 miles I could not pick up my signal due to trees and houses but stopping under a power line my beacon signal could be picked up clearly on my mobile 10-meter transceiver and a 1/4-wave mobile whip antenna proving that my 10-meter beacon and it's vertical dipole had coupled to the power line located 60 feet away. --- expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques Needed to Mitigate Harmful Interference to Amateur Radio Service Undoubtedly, BPL systems operating in the ham bands cause interference to most of the analog and digital modes we presently use for amateur radio communications. Our main modes: SSB, FM, CW, SSTV, RTTY, PSK31, Pactor, and AM are vulnerable to most of the types of BPL signal interference. Unfortunately, common receiver noise-blanking and DNR techniques are inadequate to cancel the ugly BPL pulsating and multi-carrier signals. The Amateur Radio Service is, in essence, being forced to adopt some form of BPL-mitigation technology. The development of new amateur modes, semi-automated and automated frequency agile systems, advanced ARQ, and various sorts of FEC digital techniques could be a possible avenue for amateurs to communicate through the interference caused by BPL. It may not be possible to entirely eliminate the harmful interference BPL creates, but we need to start planning for it. We need to research and characterize the various types of BPL signals so that we can design modulation and control techniques to compensate for them. Using radio engineering and digital signal processing, we may be able to develop BPL-Busting Modes. These new modes and systems could carry any combination of voice/image/text/data. Frequency hopping, spread spectrum, wideband OFDM, multi-PSK, ALE, and MFSK are mode/systems that we could implement immediately in new formats... but we need the freedom within the FCC rules to advance some of these. Freedom that we don't have yet in USA. Under FCC current Amateur Radio Service rules, we do not have the freedom we need to take advantage of some of the most useful technologies that could help us to communicate through BPL interference. We are locked in a technology prison. Hopefully, in the near future, we will have more freedom... with bandwidth-based spectrum management. Bonnie KQ6XA ,, __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re:TNCs
I have several TNC's and oh no, several terminal units as well. I also have a sound card setup in the mix of digital equipment. You can't do ARQ modes with a sound card except for HFTerm which required Linux and as it locks the OS from running any other programs you might as well run Terman93 (AN-93) from a dos boot disk and save the harassment of loading another OS on your hard drive. A TNC is cheap these days even on Ebay and you can hook it up right along side the sound card interface. If you're going to do RTTY contesting a good terminal unit is the only way to go. They have active filters for both mark and space tones and limiter circuits so you can turn off the AGC so a strong signal in the band pass of your transceiver wont make the weaker signal disappear that your trying to copy. I have my HAL ST-6000 hooked up to the external modem port of my PK-232MBX, which allows my new, USB only computer to work fine with Windows and Windows only contesting software. Oh! I even own a spark gap transmitter! It's a hoot to setup and operate at a Hamfest without an antenna hooked up to one of the ice picks that form the gap. It makes a nice 1/2-inch blue spark, pop, and smell! --- Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I still have not one but two, neither of which is hooked up at the moment, and havent been for the past several years. Why bother with them, when we have perfectly good computer soundboards they do the job. Someday, I may get into a situation where I dont have internet capability, and will have to revert back to packet, but dont see the future of that. The question arises: Who still has a spark gap transmitter? I never had one, as by the time I came around (most everyone here I suspect) their time had come and gone.Some few of us still have a crystal (only) rig around too, and some of them even work and get exercised every year or so. Its fun the revert back and use the old stuff now and again, including the virbroplex and straight keys, but wouldnt turn things around for them being full time, for all the tea in China. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 2/18/2005 __ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re:TNCs
When was the last time you used that sound card and had a ARQ Amtor or a Pactor ARQ QSO ? You can't do that with a sound card. I have been playing with a linux program but even it's only about 42% of the 100% of the TNC.. BOTTOM LINE: your sound card just can't cut it. And when using my ST-6 TU I can't only copy about 60% of the sound cards on RTTY. why? Because your tones are in the ballpark at best... Maybe one day some one will come up with an AQR PKS-31 program with * tight * filtering that I'll work any day of the week At 04:21 PM 2/20/05, you wrote: I still have not one but two, neither of which is hooked up at the moment, and havent been for the past several years. Why bother with them, when we have perfectly good computer soundboards they do the job. Someday, I may get into a situation where I dont have internet capability, and will have to revert back to packet, but dont see the future of that. The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Need cluster testers again
I have moved the cluster software to a faster, more reliable, PC on my network. That was no small accomplishment since the Cluster software was not friendly to a simple transfer. I need a few tests, I am not sure it is working correctly because I can't connect myself. While I am working on a few more things, I would appreciate some connection tests via telnet://208.15.25.196 Andy K3UK The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Need cluster testers again
Andy, Tried twice, just a blank screen here. Does not ask for my call or any input. Jerry K0HZI The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] BPL-Busters. How to Design Them. Not Kilowatt Vigilante Justice.
How to Design BPL-Buster Communications By careful analysis of interfering signals, a communications system can be designed to optimally operate in the presence of BPL interference. Yes... there are limitations, but with repetetive or multi-carrier signals such as some of the BPL signals we have heard, we can exploit the holes in the time domain or frequency domain to our benefit. Take for example, a PowerLine Communication device that has some characteristic of the signal synchronized with the power frequency... 60 Hz in USA. In the frequency domain, this shows up as spectral lines 60Hz or 120Hz apart, or some multiple of it. In the time domain, the peak power of such a signal may coincide with the crossover of the 60 Hz cycle or the ramp part of the cycle. Even though the peak power is S9+, the gap between the peaks may be big enough to drive the proverbial mack truck through. Take a look at this image, it is a waterfall display sampled from the ARRL video of Briarcliff Manor NY, BPL system: http://expeditioncave.com/bpl Different types of BPL emissions might require different flavors of countermeasure signals for us to communicate through the interference. For example, with a multi-carrier BPL interfering signal, we could use a multi-carrier communication countermeasure signal with its carriers interleaved with the interference. Or, if our throughput requirement is low (such as keyboarding), a single PSK carrier or two at exactly the right frequency between a couple interfering carriers might be sufficient. No Kilowatt Vigilante Justice I am not advocating that we counter BPL's harmful interference with hams dealing out their own vigilante justice interference by pummelling the power line with a kilowatt of AM or CW. What I am advocating is that we combine a little ham ingenuity with technology tools, to continue what we do best, communicate on the airwaves. FCC May Protect BPL Beyond Part 15 In a very significant recent FCC ruling, the national power grid, a.k.a. the electric power companies, who have Part 15 carrier current control systems on Low Frequencies, were able to win a sort of protected status during proceedings over proposed Low Frequency ham band(s). The FCC cited the essential nature of AC power to the public and national security concerns when they turned down the LF ham band allocations. We are dealing with almost exactly the same situation brewing with BPL being used by the power companies and municipalities for infrastructure control systems. By doing so, they are now jockeying to fit within the precedent of the previous FCC ruling, to add legal weight in their favor, for a protected status based upon national security or essential services to the public. Compromise is the Norm for the Legal Arena I wholeheartedly encourage those who are so inclined, to continue the legalistic challenges to BPL's pollution of the airwaves. However, this BPL interference problem exists in the present, and it is going to get worse before it gets better! In USA, the wheels of justice turn slowly. In most litigation, compromise is the norm; the ones who really win are the lawyers. BPL Busters Not A Total Solution BPL-Buster communication is not a panacea for the predicament we have found ourselves in with BPL interference. However, it can be a tool, a resource we could use to continue operating in the face of noise. Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Need cluster testers again
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jerry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy, Tried twice, just a blank screen here. Does not ask for my call or any input. Jerry K0HZI Thanks Jerry, give unti around 0200 UTC, I need to add a few more files The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] One of the interesting upgrades out, is for the HK-232 / PK-232 series of TNC's
One of the interesting upgrades out, is for the HK-232 / PK-232 series of TNC's. Not only does the HK / PK232 series of TNC have excellent passive hf filters, now they are further improved with cascaded DSP filters. The ability to take the load off of the CPU is a great reason to use a TNC. There are also several software programs out there that recognize the upgraded TNC's and switch them in and out of TNC / Sound Card Mode automatically. For example the Airmail program for Winlink uses the Pactor TX/RX and Dsp functions of the HK-232 in Pactor One mode. The interface to the Ham Rig here is a HK-232 (kit form of the PK-232) upgraded with Timewave ( http://www.timewave.com/ )MBX (mail box), DSP, Low Power Chips, and the PSK31 interface switch modules. In essence when the PSK31 interface module is switched to sound card mode for programs like Scamp, the Tnc is bypassed and transformer isolated adjustable audio amplifiers for input and output to the sound card and ham rig is switched in. This same circuit is used when in Tnc mode, but then the internal modes, filters and dsp are used rather than any computer sound card programs. Thus I use the HK-232 with PSK31 in Sound Card mode when using Scamp, but use it in Tnc mode when using Airmail for Pactor Mode One receive and transmit only using the Tnc and internal Dsp support. When ever possible, I always choose a TNC function when available for a mode over software. Heck, I can put the TNC into a mode that will leave me on the air with a radio for vhf packet email, and receive email with no computer running. When I fire up the computer there it is do that with software hi hi 73 from Bill - WD8ARZ The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re:TNCs
Even when I used the TNCs , I didnt used AMTOR or PACTOR. So, havent lost anything there. I seem to be able to copy many more signals now, than when I was using them too, mainly becuase there are many more signals there. The sound card programs have opened up the world of digital to most hams, they just have to take the bull by the horn and do it. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 2/18/2005 The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Fw: Your email requires verification verify#P0CAlPOrJU6AMVlqVropvLftpP2mLGqI
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, obrienaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --Not me... - In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone else getting the below, everyltime you try to send to the group? He needs to be removed, if that is the case. I changed his status to no mail That should solve the problem Andy K3UK The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] test cluster now please
At 09:27 PM 2/20/05, you wrote: OK, I have got myself connected, please give it a try. I had to change the forwarded ports on my DSL router. OK Andy it works The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Need cluster testers again
i COULDN'T LOGIN EARLIER. But is ok now. - Original Message - From: John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 01:14 Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Need cluster testers again get... can't open connection to 208.15.25.196 At 07:04 PM 2/20/05, you wrote: I have moved the cluster software to a faster, more reliable, PC on my network. That was no small accomplishment since the Cluster software was not friendly to a simple transfer. I need a few tests, I am not sure it is working correctly because I can't connect myself. While I am working on a few more things, I would appreciate some connection tests via telnet://208.15.25.196 Andy K3UK The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ a href=http://dxcluster.blogspot.com;img src=http://feeds.feedburner.com/DigitalSpotter.gif; height=67 width=200 style=border:0 alt=Digital Spotter//a Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
