Re: [digitalradio] Re: lowercase to UPPERCASE translator with slashed zero
From: Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] The option to display in upper case is better than nothing, but readability is best optimized by letting the user choose - the font and its associated metrics (size, bold, italic) - the font color - the background color Which is what I do :-) Simon Brown, HB9DRV
Re: [digitalradio] CW software?
Robert, fldigi on linux does CW and in my tests received as well as cwget. It allows for AFSK and hardline keying via the key input on your radio. There was a bug with hardline keying in the older alpha versions so it is best to run the latest code from w1hkj.com. Of course, full source code is available, and there is an active user and support base. It seems to receive best with machine generated code at 10wpm. Like most programs it seems to lose sync with slower or farnsworth code - I think it would be a lot of fun with digital ops at each end at 20 wpm or so running QRO hardline keying. 73 de Brett VK2TMG
Re: [digitalradio] 110 Baud Packet and 20M test
thanks for the comments, Jose. i know I had lots of fun getting my AEA232 to work well on packet. hopefully band conditions will improve a bit so that we can try this on the air. 73's and Merry Christmas to all from western Canada (temp -10C and about 25CM of snow right now) John VE5MU - Original Message - From: Jose A. Amador To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 6:07 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 110 Baud Packet and 20M test John Bradley wrote: Couple of observations; *Had to change the Dwait values and TXdelay values to 80 , (found under options)increasing the delay slightly seemed to work better, although some of that could be due to desensing the rigs a bit, being so close. It also could be that the decoder on the packet engine that needs more time to synchronize. With Kantronics TNC's on 2 m and Bell 202 tones, I used to play with TXDelay in KISS mode under Linux (it can adjust KISS params on the fly and while sending pings (TCPIP)) until I just could get 100% of ping packets copied and set it a bit longer for reliability. It helped thruput to cut flags to the minimum. Well, as good as it might seem, I had to lengthen it a bit more because many users with software packet drivers (Baycom, Flexnet, AGWPE) could not synchoronize their engines with such short flags and sent repeat rates sky high... The KPC2 minimum was 50 ms txdelay for reliable copy, but many needed at least 100 ms. Also, using open or closed squelch made a big difference, because the speed in opening the squelch also matters. I could not convince all users to use open squelch and software carrier detect 73 de Jose, CO2JA
Re: [digitalradio] new multi mode program from HRD developers
Simon Brown wrote: From: Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:aa6yq%40ambersoft.com The option to display in upper case is better than nothing, but readability is best optimized by letting the user choose - the font and its associated metrics (size, bold, italic) - the font color - the background color Which is what I do :-) Simon Brown, HB9DRV Indeed it is. Just adjusted these things in PSKDeluxe. Hey, Simon, what is the status of your new multi-mode data program? I understand that it will integrate with your excellent HRD program and essentially supercede PSKDeluxe? Reply only if you have time. :-) de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
I have used Olivia, Throb, PSK63, Hell, MFSK all successfully on the low end just below the normal PSK freqs on 20 meters. It would seem to me the best place on all bands, using the low end of normal PSK frqs, where people would notice you. Early on, in each of those modes, that is about the only place I heard anyone, or saw any spots. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Andrew J. O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 6:38 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies Just to clarify my original point... I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE). My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to call CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software. This would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for potential signals. My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the amount of simultaneous QSOs in the aforementioned modes rarely exceeds 3-5 . When it is at the 5 level, it is often 2-3 Olivia stations, maybe 1 MFSK16 and one Hell. I will argue that MOST of the time it is less than three simultaneous QSOs . Sometimes NO signals at all. Thus, the amount of interest in the exotic digital modes is at such a level that we would benefit from clustering, and our use of a calling/beacon frequency would not likely clutter up the portion of the band. If we established 4 beacon frequencies (80,40,30, and 20M) you could easily monitor the bands via scan features in the radio . Again, the idea would be just to meet on the calling frequency and move further up/down the band for extended conversation. I am NOT suggesting a different calling frequency for each mode. 20 M seems like the easies band to establish a data frequency that allows worldwide participation. The others are more complex due to varying regional bandplans. I will read the feedback I have received so far and suggest some frequencies to try this weekend. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date: 12/20/2006 3:54 PM
[digitalradio] Re: lowercase to UPPERCASE translator with slashed zero
As do I. Aren't there some upper-case-only fonts around? 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] The option to display in upper case is better than nothing, but readability is best optimized by letting the user choose - the font and its associated metrics (size, bold, italic) - the font color - the background color Which is what I do :-) Simon Brown, HB9DRV
Re: [digitalradio] new multi mode program from HRD developers
Hi Roger, Coming along really well. I will very probably never use PSK31 Deluxe again. My immediate plans are to get the SuperBrowser integrated (better said - rewritten), then we'll add another wave of testers. I'll announce progress here if you want. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Indeed it is. Just adjusted these things in PSKDeluxe. Hey, Simon, what is the status of your new multi-mode data program? I understand that it will integrate with your excellent HRD program and essentially supercede PSKDeluxe? Reply only if you have time. :-) de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
Danny Douglas wrote: I have used Olivia, Throb, PSK63, Hell, MFSK all successfully on the low end just below the normal PSK freqs on 20 meters. It would seem to me the best place on all bands, using the low end of normal PSK frqs, where people would notice you. Early on, in each of those modes, that is about the only place I heard anyone, or saw any spots. Excepting Throb (which I have never used) I seem to find most of the activity on the above modes just ABOVE the PSK freqs, around 14073.5 or so. And of course 14076 is a popular HELL calling freq. de Roger W6VZV
[digitalradio] Re: Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excepting Throb (which I have never used) I seem to find most of the A funny story: I was showing all the digital modes to a ham new to the territory, showing him what they sound like. So I switched to Throb, telling him that this is Throb but you'll never hear anybody using it, and punched the CQ button. Another Throb station came right back to me.
RE: [digitalradio] 110 Baud Packet and 20M test
When I was working HF packet (at 110 baud) back in the early 1980's, I found that I did generally make my PACLEN to 40 and MAXFRAME to 1 and my ID was k5yfw-3775 or what ever I was using. If conditions were really good, I set the PACLEN to 76 (72-76 characters is what is recommended for standard message text) and a MAXFRAME of 2. I wish I would have had the ability to automatically vary the PACLEN and MAXFRAME when signals varied. 73, Walt/K5YFW -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Patrick Lindecker Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 4:09 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 110 Baud Packet and 20M test Hello John, RR for all about you experimentation. I recommend the following: to do 110 bauds Packet, set the options PACLEN to 40 and MAXFRAME to 1. For calls, it is advised to put the RS ID on duty to allow the other Hams to identify the mode and the exact frequency. PACLEN to 40 so as to limit the duration of the frames and the probability of bit error. Surely 20 or 30 would be perhaps better. MAXFRAME to 1 because is useless to send more than one frame as in HF the probability to have a failure is high. And because if you send several frames, as there is no selective REJECT in AX25, you are going to send again all your frames good or not... Note: this apply to connected 110 bauds Packet. In APRS, you have no choice: you send only one frame with all the position and weather information, included the message. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: John Bradley To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Cc: Terry White Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 7:52 PM Subject: [digitalradio] 110 Baud Packet and 20M test Terry, VE5TLW and I were using (fooling with?) 110 baud packet this AM on 20M. Should be noted that we are about 1km apart, although I switched over to my dummy load and reduced power so he was hearing me at S3, or just above his noise. Couple of observations; *Had to change the Dwait values and TXdelay values to 80 , (found under options)increasing the delay slightly seemed to work better, although some of that could be due to desensing the rigs a bit, being so close. * After a connect, when sending a test text file, 110 baud sent the entire file in one long packet. worked Ok * After listing each other in the repeater list ie VE5MU-0, then the other station would repeat the beacon message when in APRS beacon mode. Would not repeat connect attempts. repeater needs a fairly good signal to work. Interesting mode, and very interested in how it will work under poor conditions. So , as of 1830Z, have my rig on 14077USB, and sitting on 1000hz. Beacon every 3 minutes, and the responder on , and a test message stored in message 1. Will leave it on for the next couple of hours and see what happens. Later will try setting it up as a repeater, where you would list VE5MU-0 as a repeater then TX your beacon message and see if you can hear it coming back will try 3590 this evening, too John VE5MU
Re: [digitalradio] new multi mode program from HRD developers
Simon Brown wrote: Hi Roger, Coming along really well. I will very probably never use PSK31 Deluxe again. My immediate plans are to get the SuperBrowser integrated (better said - rewritten), then we'll add another wave of testers. I'll announce progress here if you want. Simon Brown, HB9DRV That would be great by me. Certainly is topical. Right now there is very little competition among multi-digital mode programs. Hope your release is soon; haven't used a new program in a long time, grin. de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] new multi mode program from HRD developers
I don't really see DM780 as competition, rather a Windows alternative with the detector / modulator code packaged in a DLL so that other programmers can see how it works and hopefully make it better. This will be my Q1/Q2 2007 project, then I have HRD work to do, then I may look at writing my own Windows-based SDR console. I would like to make use of DirectX and 3D. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] That would be great by me. Certainly is topical. Right now there is very little competition among multi-digital mode programs. Hope your release is soon; haven't used a new program in a long time, grin.
[digitalradio] New rfsm2400 MIL-STD-188-110A modem
Download 0.481 from http://rfsm2400.narod.ru/ or my side http://rfsm2400.aanesland.com/ 73 de LA5VNA Steinar
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
I have worked Olivia on 14105-14110...also MT63, not very often, indeed. Never checked below 14070 for digitalmaybe it could be interesting. On 40, I have found 2 watering holes: 7070-7075 and 7035-7038 I have used Olivia and Hell on 7073. I have worked quite a few exotic DX on 7035, and would like to keep it that way, keeping the chatter on 7070...yesterday night there were two south african stations, making it a more interesting place to look around. Jose, CO2JA -- Original Message -- From: Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:59:21 -0500 I have used Olivia, Throb, PSK63, Hell, MFSK all successfully on the low end just below the normal PSK freqs on 20 meters. It would seem to me the best place on all bands, using the low end of normal PSK frqs, where people would notice you. Early on, in each of those modes, that is about the only place I heard anyone, or saw any spots. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Andrew J. O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 6:38 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies Just to clarify my original point... I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE). My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to call CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software. This would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for potential signals. My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the amount of simultaneous QSOs in the aforementioned modes rarely exceeds 3-5 . When it is at the 5 level, it is often 2-3 Olivia stations, maybe 1 MFSK16 and one Hell. I will argue that MOST of the time it is less than three simultaneous QSOs . Sometimes NO signals at all. Thus, the amount of interest in the exotic digital modes is at such a level that we would benefit from clustering, and our use of a calling/beacon frequency would not likely clutter up the portion of the band. If we established 4 beacon frequencies (80,40,30, and 20M) you could easily monitor the bands via scan features in the radio . Again, the idea would be just to meet on the calling frequency and move further up/down the band for extended conversation. I am NOT suggesting a different calling frequency for each mode. 20 M seems like the easies band to establish a data frequency that allows worldwide participation. The others are more complex due to varying regional bandplans. I will read the feedback I have received so far and suggest some frequencies to try this weekend. __ __ __ __ Correo enviado por ElectroMAIL. Facultad El�ctrica. CUJAE Dominio: electrica.cujae.edu.cu
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
How about using PSK31 as the baseline and then transmit any other digital mode a kHz or so up from the highest PSK31 signal that is on at that time? That is pretty much what I do on 80, 40, and 20. I would very much like a spot frequency to operate on for 30 meters which seems grossly underutilized and is a superb digital band. I like 10.133 for a dial frequency. It clears a high power government digital station by a few kHz, that is frequently on in my reception area, and I like anything with repeating digits:) I wonder if hams do not tend to operate there because they do not have an antenna for that band? On 10 meters, I generally put the dial at 28.120 and on 6 meters at 50.290. I have not done much with other bands except a little bit with 160 around 1.808, but I guess I am a bit high and probably should try 1.805. But I love the number 1808 with my repeating my favorite number twice. As you can see my dial frequency selections are done with great scientific analysis:) My actual transmitting frequency is going to be nominally 1500 Hz above my dial frequency. This will vary for each user depending upon their particular equipment and operating preferences, but I suspect that most will be around 1000 to 1500 Hz higher than their dial frequency. Are there any hams who find that they prefer other center frequencies due to some reason or due to their rigs filtering requirements? 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew J. O'Brien wrote: Just to clarify my original point... I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE). My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to call CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software. This would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for potential signals. My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the amount of simultaneous QSOs in the aforementioned modes rarely exceeds 3-5 . When it is at the 5 level, it is often 2-3 Olivia stations, maybe 1 MFSK16 and one Hell. I will argue that MOST of the time it is less than three simultaneous QSOs . Sometimes NO signals at all. Thus, the amount of interest in the exotic digital modes is at such a level that we would benefit from clustering, and our use of a calling/beacon frequency would not likely clutter up the portion of the band. If we established 4 beacon frequencies (80,40,30, and 20M) you could easily monitor the bands via scan features in the radio . Again, the idea would be just to meet on the calling frequency and move further up/down the band for extended conversation. I am NOT suggesting a different calling frequency for each mode. 20 M seems like the easies band to establish a data frequency that allows worldwide participation. The others are more complex due to varying regional bandplans. I will read the feedback I have received so far and suggest some frequencies to try this weekend. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.25/593 - Release Date: 12/19/2006
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
Rick I think that you are pretty much looking at RTTY freqs, which usually are 2 or 3 KC above the PSK signals, and upward from there. This suggest calling freq for other digital modes, therefore should be a bit above or below the combination package of PSK/RTTY so as to get them out of each others way. As to giving your VFO (dial) freq, that is not the normal way PSK is spotted, nor any other mode dependant on a waterfall. As you say, everyone is a bit different as to where their waterfall pointer lies on a digital signal. It is much better to just spot the actual freq where the audio signal comes out on the waterfall. I.E. 14.0731. No matter who clicks on a spot like that, their trace comes out on the waterfall as that freq. We dont care where each others dial freq is - but the location of the signal. In your case its dial plus 1500 - In mine its dial plus 1000, other will have similar setting according to where their sound card best passes a signal (sweet spot), and there is no qestion where the transmitting signal is found. Double click a spot, and bang- your reciever/transmitter freqs are set properly, and no one has to look around to see where in the world the spotter found it. I am a bit perplexed about 160 meters. It is such a wide band, with so few signals per KHZ, I wonder why anyone wants to send SSB, for instance, down in the low part. We should have sub bands down there, even more than the other bands, but dont. Why anyone would want to send SSB on top of ongoing CW signals is beyond me, but they do it all the time there. Thus, I think your suggestion for PSK at 1.808 or even lower is much too low for that activity. How about bringing it up to 1.850 and have cw below that and SSB above it? If not - why not? Most all of us have antenna tuners these days, and we dont run much power on PSK anyway, so it hasnt much to do with where our antennas are cut. I could certainly understand the mix-mash mess on 160 back when radio location signals abounded on the band, and hams in specific areas of the states/world were forbidden to operated in portions near those signals. That is no longer the case and we can pretty much transmit wherever we want on that band. We just need some gentlemens agreement (I.E. subbands) to protect signals from inteference from different modes. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 5:24 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies How about using PSK31 as the baseline and then transmit any other digital mode a kHz or so up from the highest PSK31 signal that is on at that time? That is pretty much what I do on 80, 40, and 20. I would very much like a spot frequency to operate on for 30 meters which seems grossly underutilized and is a superb digital band. I like 10.133 for a dial frequency. It clears a high power government digital station by a few kHz, that is frequently on in my reception area, and I like anything with repeating digits:) I wonder if hams do not tend to operate there because they do not have an antenna for that band? On 10 meters, I generally put the dial at 28.120 and on 6 meters at 50.290. I have not done much with other bands except a little bit with 160 around 1.808, but I guess I am a bit high and probably should try 1.805. But I love the number 1808 with my repeating my favorite number twice. As you can see my dial frequency selections are done with great scientific analysis:) My actual transmitting frequency is going to be nominally 1500 Hz above my dial frequency. This will vary for each user depending upon their particular equipment and operating preferences, but I suspect that most will be around 1000 to 1500 Hz higher than their dial frequency. Are there any hams who find that they prefer other center frequencies due to some reason or due to their rigs filtering requirements? 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew J. O'Brien wrote: Just to clarify my original point... I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE). My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to call CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software. This would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for potential signals. My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the amount of simultaneous QSOs
[digitalradio] Re: Grumble
Hello Everyone, I've just been reading all the controversial comments about transmitting PSK in upper case or lower case, speed of delivery and losing text in conditions which are far from being good. If your daily newspaper was printed entirely in upper case letters, people would stop buying the newspaper and it would be out of business in a very short time. Mr Murdoch the great newspaper owner would sack immediatly any editor who even suggested the idea. There is a reason why we have capital letters and lower case, its easier on the eye and the brain. It is always stressed that amateur radio is about learning and self training. One has to learn something about the complexities of radio to obtain a radio license. Why should it not be accepted that if one chooses to transmit digital modes that one should also learn how to type in order to transmit messages which resemble a page from a book or a page in a newspaper and can be easily understood ? Could it be the same thinking which is that one never reads a tranceiver instruction manual until a week has been spent trying to understand why the darned thing isn't working properly.? Just a thought A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to All, Mel G0GQK
[digitalradio] 10 Khz signal
What is the signal that occupies 3990 to 4000?
Re: [digitalradio] 10 Khz signal
Is it heard at night? Then I am going to guess that it is digital radio mondial broadcast. Bob N4HY Chuck Mayfield - AA5J wrote: What is the signal that occupies 3990 to 4000? -- AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction. - Dietrich Bonhoffer
Re: [digitalradio] 10 Khz signal
Robert McGwier wrote: Is it heard at night? Then I am going to guess that it is digital radio mondial broadcast. Bob N4HY Chuck Mayfield - AA5J wrote: What is the signal that occupies 3990 to 4000? -- AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction. - Dietrich Bonhoffer No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date: 12/20/2006 3:54 PM Yes. it is ther now as we speak...
[digitalradio] Re: 10 Khz signal
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then it needs to be reported to the FCC and their own government as out of band. Danny Douglas N7DC What is the signal that occupies 3990 to 4000? It is a broadcast station. That part of the band is shared with other non-amateur services in most of the world. Bonnie BA7/KQ6XA .
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 10 Khz signal
But- not in this part of the world - and if it is in the Carribean, that IS this region. Also, by law, broadcast statiions are NOT to direct transmission to this region, in order to not intefere with licensed stations here. Now- I know MOST of them have - including our dear own Voice of America, and they all claim their English language broadcasts for for the other two regions. As a SWL, back in the 50-60s they were not against mailing me QSLs when I reported how well their transmission arrived in the states. They have gotten away with a lot - but some have actually been pressed to cease such transmission - but only after enough people complained.Dont complain - dont expect them to obey the regulations! Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 9:12 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: 10 Khz signal --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then it needs to be reported to the FCC and their own government as out of band. Danny Douglas N7DC What is the signal that occupies 3990 to 4000? It is a broadcast station. That part of the band is shared with other non-amateur services in most of the world. Bonnie BA7/KQ6XA . Connect to telnet://cluster.dynalias.org a single node spotting/alert system dedicated to digital and CW QSOs. Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date: 12/20/2006 3:54 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
It seems to me that the IARU Region 2 bandplan should at least be consulted as part of the subject process.. See http://www.iaru-regionii.org/Region_2_HF_Band_Plan.html. 73 de AA5J Danny Douglas wrote: As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about operating digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan. Bandplans are arbitary and there is NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary. Now - subbands ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks changes in separating modes. The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur Bands shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key, says of 160: CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE The only note of distinction in this whole band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no protection from radiolocation operators Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the first 10 kc. I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart the ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same thing. That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else. As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs. Give a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which is really irritating to a CW op. Most all of the PSK I have worked (128 countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the 14.069-14.073 bandwidth. The other digital modes have all been around 14.065 - 14.070. This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of PSK rather than just above it. I havent called CQ on the other modes, above the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below it. Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals at all on 20. I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so dont know how those separate out. Also have not been digitally active on 80 or 40 all that much either. Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford me new ones very often. The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but so far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops. I just dont think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital modes. Your last comment: Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if we operated voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between voice transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band? would appear to be exactly what we should be doing. It would keep the voice part out of the lower piece of the band and place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally legal according to the charts. I was hoping that would be what we would see on the other bands as well, but guess that is still not to be. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:digital_modes%40yahoogroups.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date: 12/20/2006 3:54 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
You would think so, but look at the band plan, and then at who is the lead for IARU within region 2 (ARRL). They say 1800-18930 CW, yet do not say that on their own US Amateur Bands chart, or at least recommend it. Phone doesnt show up on there, until 1840-1850 DX window. One hand doesnt know what the next is doing. We need INTERNATIONAL band plans. Get all three regions together in a room and make them stay there until they get a bandplan agreement - with teeth. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Chuck Mayfield - AA5J [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 9:33 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies It seems to me that the IARU Region 2 bandplan should at least be consulted as part of the subject process.. See http://www.iaru-regionii.org/Region_2_HF_Band_Plan.html. 73 de AA5J Danny Douglas wrote: As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about operating digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan. Bandplans are arbitary and there is NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary. Now - subbands ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks changes in separating modes. The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur Bands shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key, says of 160: CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE The only note of distinction in this whole band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no protection from radiolocation operators Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the first 10 kc. I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart the ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same thing. That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else. As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs. Give a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which is really irritating to a CW op. Most all of the PSK I have worked (128 countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the 14.069-14.073 bandwidth. The other digital modes have all been around 14.065 - 14.070. This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of PSK rather than just above it. I havent called CQ on the other modes, above the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below it. Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals at all on 20. I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so dont know how those separate out. Also have not been digitally active on 80 or 40 all that much either. Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford me new ones very often. The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but so far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops. I just dont think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital modes. Your last comment: Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if we operated voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between voice transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band? would appear to be exactly what we should be doing. It would keep the voice part out of the lower piece of the band and place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally legal according to the charts. I was hoping that would be what we would see on the other bands as well, but guess that is still not to be. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:digital_modes%40yahoogroups.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date: 12/20/2006 3:54 PM Connect to telnet://cluster.dynalias.org a single node spotting/alert system dedicated to digital and CW QSOs. Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
Danny, The ARRL bandplan shows Digital Modes to be 1.800 - 1.810. They also have an Experimental modes area at the top of the band from 1.995 - 2.000 in the Beacon bandplan area: http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html I came across some information this week that really upset me in reference to bandplans.This is not something new, as the incident occured in 2001. I don't know of the outcome. If a large group such as the ARRL publishes a bandplan, the FCC can cite you for poor operating practices if you do not follow it and someone claims interference: Band plans are voluntary in nature, Hollingsworth acknowledged in each of the similarly worded letters. He said the FCC depends upon voluntary compliance because it minimizes the necessity for the Commission to be called in to resolve amateur problems. Where interference results from band plans not being followed, Hollingsworth continued, the Commission expects substantial justification to be shown by the operators ignoring the band plans. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/10/04/1/?nc=1 I definitely agree that very few operators use digital modes on 160, but in general the percentage of digital operating is much lower than even CW, much less phone. 73, Rick, KV9U Danny Douglas wrote: As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about operating digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan. Bandplans are arbitary and there is NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary. Now - subbands ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks changes in separating modes. The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur Bands shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key, says of 160: CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE The only note of distinction in this whole band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no protection from radiolocation operators Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the first 10 kc. I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart the ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same thing. That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else. As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs. Give a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which is really irritating to a CW op. Most all of the PSK I have worked (128 countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the 14.069-14.073 bandwidth. The other digital modes have all been around 14.065 - 14.070. This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of PSK rather than just above it. I havent called CQ on the other modes, above the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below it. Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals at all on 20. I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so dont know how those separate out. Also have not been digitally active on 80 or 40 all that much either. Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford me new ones very often. The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but so far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops. I just dont think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital modes. Your last comment: Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if we operated voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between voice transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band? would appear to be exactly what we should be doing. It would keep the voice part out of the lower piece of the band and place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally legal according to the charts. I was hoping that would be what we would see on the other bands as well, but guess that is still not to be.
Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies
The way I read this, it was not because they were on a band plan for CW, but that they were interfering with communications that was already in use. The band plan was just something that gave them the ability to gig them for one more thing. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 10:32 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies Danny, The ARRL bandplan shows Digital Modes to be 1.800 - 1.810. They also have an Experimental modes area at the top of the band from 1.995 - 2.000 in the Beacon bandplan area: http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html I came across some information this week that really upset me in reference to bandplans.This is not something new, as the incident occured in 2001. I don't know of the outcome. If a large group such as the ARRL publishes a bandplan, the FCC can cite you for poor operating practices if you do not follow it and someone claims interference: Band plans are voluntary in nature, Hollingsworth acknowledged in each of the similarly worded letters. He said the FCC depends upon voluntary compliance because it minimizes the necessity for the Commission to be called in to resolve amateur problems. Where interference results from band plans not being followed, Hollingsworth continued, the Commission expects substantial justification to be shown by the operators ignoring the band plans. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/10/04/1/?nc=1 I definitely agree that very few operators use digital modes on 160, but in general the percentage of digital operating is much lower than even CW, much less phone. 73, Rick, KV9U Danny Douglas wrote: As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about operating digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan. Bandplans are arbitary and there is NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary. Now - subbands ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks changes in separating modes. The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur Bands shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key, says of 160: CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE The only note of distinction in this whole band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no protection from radiolocation operators Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the first 10 kc. I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart the ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same thing. That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else. As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs. Give a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which is really irritating to a CW op. Most all of the PSK I have worked (128 countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the 14.069-14.073 bandwidth. The other digital modes have all been around 14.065 - 14.070. This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of PSK rather than just above it. I havent called CQ on the other modes, above the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below it. Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals at all on 20. I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so dont know how those separate out. Also have not been digitally active on 80 or 40 all that much either. Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford me new ones very often. The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but so far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops. I just dont think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital modes. Your last comment: Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if we operated voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between voice transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band? would appear to be exactly what we should be doing. It would keep the voice part out of the lower piece of the band and place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally legal according to the charts. I was hoping that would be what we would see on the other bands
