Re: [digitalradio] Multi Hop NVIS Propagation Delay Interference Re: PSK Modes

[Brett Owen Rees VK2TMG]

Hi David,

I did some experiments with VK2ZEN in Newcastle - 194km distance by GPS. We
tried machine reception of CW, RTTY, PSK31 and MFSK16. There was a lot of
QRN. MFSK16 provided 100% copy down to about 10 watts, with RTTY and PSK31
requiring about 30 watts for 100% copy. CW was woeful - about 30% machine
copy (I think we were running it too slow to get good sync). This was on 80m
at about 2300 local.

I would think from my experiments that running MFSK16 at reasonable power
(say 50W for a 100W rig) would provide for quite reliable communications
using NVIS.

73,
Brett VK2TMG

[digitalradio] Re: What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[expeditionradio]

"Analog SSTV" 
7034 close to the normal SSTV frequency in Japan and parts of Asia.  
At that time of day 0100z, maybe you were hearing a European or
Russian station on SSTV, working a JA or other Asia station who you
could not hear. Or maybe you were hearing the JA station over the pole
... there are some JA "big guns" on 40m SSTV.

Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew O'Brien"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What is this mode ?
> 
> http://www.obriensweb.com.unid.mp3
> 
> It  was on 7034 this evening around 0100 UTC.  It sounds familar but
> can't remember what it is .
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andy K3UK
> Skype Me :  callto://andyobrien73
> www.obriensweb.com
>

Re: [digitalradio] What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[Leigh L Klotz, Jr.]

Actually, through a quirk in DNS, the trailing dot is allowed in the 
host name.   You an use this to your advantage when puncuating 
sentences, for example http://wa5znu.org or http://wa5znu.org.

73,
Leigh/WA5ZNU
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 5:49 pm, John Becker wrote:
> need a slash after the dot com Andy
>> http://www.obriensweb.com./unid.mp3

Re: [digitalradio] BUXCOMM Rascal for the Icom IC-746 - anyone with experience?

[Dave Corio]

   Joe, thanks for the info! What puzzles me is that I sent an email to 
Buxcomm asking specifically for an interface that would let me run FSK 
on my 746, and all they suggested was a simple cable.


   Is that Rascal all I need, or is there something I'm missing? It 
sounds as though I can just plug one end into my PC, and the other into 
the ACC1 jack of the 746, and that will give me FSK keying. Is it really 
that inexpensive and easy? I don't really care about CW, as I have an 
interface already that does that. Do you know if the Rascal also picks 
up the audio output from the ACC1 to send to the PC?


   Thanks loads for your reply and information!
73
Dave
KB3MOW


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


As far as I can determine the BUXCOMM GLX Rascal is
the same for the 746 and 756 series.

You should go to:

http://www.commparts.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=8&products_id=130236 



and get this one, plug it in and be working FSK in
less than 10 minutes.

I am using the BUXCOMM GLX Rascal on our clubs
IC-775DSP, IC-756PRO2 and IC-756. At home I am using
one on my IC-706MK2G and IC-756PRO3. All worked the
first time and all with FSK for RTTY and AFSK for
PSK31 and voice keyer. It is a no brainer. Using
MMTTY for rtty is far better than any of the terminal
unit like the PK-232.

AS far as CW is concern. The Buxcom GLX Rascal does
not do CW. Computer send CW uses pin 4(9 pin) or pin
20(25 pin connector). It is easier to just build up a
one transistor interface for CW keying. You can find
the circuit in many places or on my website at:
http://www.qsl.net/k0bx  and look under cw 
keying.


I hope this helps.

Joe K0BX




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.4/643 - Release Date: 1/21/2007 5:12 
PM
  

[digitalradio] Re: What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[Andrew O'Brien]

-In the CW/data  portion ?

-- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> slow scan TV
> 
> 
> 
> At 07:29 PM 1/22/2007, you wrote:
> >What is this mode ?
> >
> >http://www.obriensweb.com.unid.mp3
> >
> >It  was on 7034 this evening around 0100 UTC.  It sounds familar but
> >can't remember what it is .
>

Re: [digitalradio] What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[John Becker]

slow scan TV



At 07:29 PM 1/22/2007, you wrote:
>What is this mode ?
>
>http://www.obriensweb.com.unid.mp3
>
>It  was on 7034 this evening around 0100 UTC.  It sounds familar but
>can't remember what it is .

Re: [digitalradio] What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[John Becker]

need a slash after the dot com Andy



>http://www.obriensweb.com./unid.mp3

Re: [digitalradio] Re: What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[Danny Douglas]

Sounds like slow scan tv to me.

Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.

moderator  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message - 
From: "Andrew O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 8:37 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: What is this mode ? (soundbite)


> Should be
> http://www.obriensweb.com/unid.mp3
>
>
>
>
>
> Announce your digital  presence via our DX Cluster
telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>
> Our other groups:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.4/644 - Release Date: 1/22/2007
7:30 AM
>
>

[digitalradio] YWØ, AVES ISLAND

[John Becker]

This is information from another list.
May be useful for members here.
---



Dear friends

YWØDX Aves Island is an DXpedition sponsored by the 4M5DX group, which 
Im member, and in this occasion we want to privilege the digimodes 
(RTTY and PSK 31), for that reason we invite you to contact the 
Dxpedition and we also appreciate your collaboration in forwarding this 
information to your own local organizations. In the same way, we like to 
inform that for the first time in history we will participate in the CQ 
Worldwide RTTY WPX Contest, February 10 ­ 11, 2007.
We invite you to visit our URL: www.yw0dx.4m5dx.org for gather all the 
information regarding this activity and also to publish which bands you 
required to work, the log will be available on-line.

Thanks for your collaboration and we look forward to contact you.

Best regards.

Pasquale Casale,
YV5KAJ - 4M5RY - YW5RY
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PHONE:58-416-6245502
QSL VIA EA5KB or WWW.eQSL.cc
P.O. Box 50240 Caracas 1050-A Venezuela

[digitalradio] Re: What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[Andrew O'Brien]

Should be
http://www.obriensweb.com/unid.mp3

[digitalradio] What is this mode ? (soundbite)

[Andrew O'Brien]

What is this mode ?

http://www.obriensweb.com.unid.mp3

It  was on 7034 this evening around 0100 UTC.  It sounds familar but
can't remember what it is .



-- 
Andy K3UK
Skype Me :  callto://andyobrien73
www.obriensweb.com

Re: [digitalradio] PSK and Yeasu ft-101

[ve3fwf]

Have a look at 

http://www.geocities.com/n2uhc/interface.html

This is the opto-isolated circuit I initially built for my HW-100 and it works 
just fine with the ICOM radios.

The above circuit should work on your FT-101.   The important thing is that the 
rig should not drift. While a jump of 50 Hz is OK on SSB, it will cause loss of 
signal on digital. You will be able to spot a drifting problem by watching the 
signals on the waterfall. I can send you a 4N35 if you can't source one 
locally; I'm fairly certain I have some spares.  Radio Shack used to have 1:1 
600 ohm transformers but I don't know if they still carry these anymore.

Good luck and join the fun on digital.

73, Bernie

  - Original Message - 
  From: Bob 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:18 AM
  Subject: [digitalradio] PSK and Yeasu ft-101



  Hi Gang!
  I am fairly new here to this group and have been reading some of the posts.  
I would like to know if anyone here is using a older rig like mine, a Yaesu 
FT-101 Z and running PSK31 mode, and what kind of interface they are using. I 
have seen several schematics for homemade interfaces and am unsure which would 
be the best to use, I have a 1.8 GHZ computer and a sound card in it.

  Thanks
  Bob
  KC9GMN

   

[digitalradio] PK-232MBX

[K0BX]

Hi Bob thanks for the thanks.

I used my PK-232MBX for many years before going to the mmtty soundcard 
route.

There was just so much information on the PK-232 that I had gathered I 
didn't want it to get away.  Most of it came from the old RTTY Journal.

No I am not a technical writer.  I am a system analyst/programmer for 
the Boeing Aircraft Company here in St. Louis.  We get stuck doing the 
user manuals for the software we develop.  It is such a waste for a high 
skill/high payed programmer to do a clerk job!!  But that's the way it 
is. hi hi.

Hope you can use some of the information Bob.

Joe K0BX


AD5VJ Bob wrote:

> Thanks Joe:
> 
> This is great information. 
> Very well written, are you a technical writer? 
> 
> 
>>-Original Message-
>>From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of K0BX
>>Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:00 PM
>>To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>>Subject: [digitalradio] PK-232MBX
>>
>>I have a limited amount of articles on the PK-232 on my 
>>website.  It has to do with adjusting the filters for 170HZ 
>>and making the shift to 170 from the old packet 200HZ.  There 
>>is an article on hooking it up to my TS-850S using FSK.
>>
>>Just maybe you want to take a look.
>>
>>Joe K0BX
>>
>>http://www.qsl.net/k0bx
>>
>>
>>
>>Announce your digital  presence via our DX Cluster 
>>telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>>
>>Our other groups:
>>
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 
>>
>> 
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Announce your digital  presence via our DX Cluster 
> telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
> 
> Our other groups:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Stop the insanity!
Please do not add me to any distribution lists (Joke, Stories or Junk) 
without my permission.

RE: [digitalradio] Re: PK-232MBX

[AD5VJ Bob]

Thanks just joined awaiting approval 

> -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Becker
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 6:01 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: PK-232MBX
> 
> Bob
> you may like to try the PK-232 yahoo list for help also.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PK232/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Announce your digital  presence via our DX Cluster 
> telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
> 
> Our other groups:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [digitalradio] PK-232MBX

[AD5VJ Bob]

Thanks Joe:

This is great information. 
Very well written, are you a technical writer? 

> -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of K0BX
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:00 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [digitalradio] PK-232MBX
> 
> I have a limited amount of articles on the PK-232 on my 
> website.  It has to do with adjusting the filters for 170HZ 
> and making the shift to 170 from the old packet 200HZ.  There 
> is an article on hooking it up to my TS-850S using FSK.
> 
> Just maybe you want to take a look.
> 
> Joe K0BX
> 
> http://www.qsl.net/k0bx
> 
> 
> 
> Announce your digital  presence via our DX Cluster 
> telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
> 
> Our other groups:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

[digitalradio] PK-232MBX

[K0BX]

I have a limited amount of articles on the PK-232 on my website.  It has 
to do with adjusting the filters for 170HZ and making the shift to 170 
from the old packet 200HZ.  There is an article on hooking it up to my 
TS-850S using FSK.

Just maybe you want to take a look.

Joe K0BX

http://www.qsl.net/k0bx

[digitalradio] PSK and Yeasu ft-101

[Bob]

Hi Gang!
I am fairly new here to this group and have been reading some of the posts.  I 
would like to know if anyone here is using a older rig like mine, a Yaesu 
FT-101 Z and running PSK31 mode, and what kind of interface they are using. I 
have seen several schematics for homemade interfaces and am unsure which would 
be the best to use, I have a 1.8 GHZ computer and a sound card in it.

Thanks
Bob
KC9GMN

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Digitalradio: A New Look !

[Andrew O'Brien]

Thanks, I'll look in to alternative colours for the background.

Andy.


On 1/22/07, jhaynesatalumni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


  Something I don't like is that it now comes up with a lavender
background. Makes it hard to read the blue and gray buttons for
"next" and "messages" and "older"







--
Andy K3UK
Skype Me :  callto://andyobrien73
www.obriensweb.com

RE: [digitalradio] Re: PK-232MBX

[John Becker]

Bob
you may like to try the PK-232 yahoo list
for help also.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PK232/

RE: [digitalradio] Re: PK-232MBX

[AD5VJ Bob]

Is it the cable or is it the PK??

I am writing this because Timewave is closed, they send their people home at 
4:30 their time. I found out the other day when I had
them on the phone asking questions about this PK-232MBX concerning upgrades and 
cables.

If anyone here can help it would be most appreciated. 
Any constructive suggestions would be welcome.

I understood Timewave to tell me I needed a "modem" cable to connect the PK to 
the computer. They offered to sell me a set of cables
for 30.00 but I don't have the money to spend on anything but bills and sons 
right now.

So, I tried to make my own "MODEM" cable (like a good Ham) by cutting two 
cables which gave me a male db25 on one end and a female
db9 on the other.

I connected the cable to the computer com1 serial connector and to the db25 
connector on the PK-232MBX.

The MBX starts up does its self test and then goes into "wait mode" awaiting 
its next command, with the "BAUDOT" light lite, but the
application I am using "MODEMSWITCH" says it can not find the PK-232 on any of 
the com ports.

So I have now bought an AT compatible "modem" cable off of ebay with the proper 
connectors. I need to make sure it is not the cable
I made causing the problem.

Here was the procedure I used:

I looked up "serial modem cable wiring".

I made copious notes and drawings of the
wiring configuration and started to work.

9 PIN   25PIN
  1   8
  2   3
  3   2
  4  20
  5   7
  6   6
  7   4
  8   5
9 N/C


I found an old parallel printer cable with a db25 and one of those funny 
looking parallel printer connectors on it. 

I cut off the printer connector and left the db25 and stripped the rubber back 
and then separating out all of the wire in tact on
the db25.

I rang out the cable with the db25 on it until I had the wires going to the 
correct pin numbers for the modem wiring.

I then cut the end off of a cable that had the two 9 pin connectors 
- one on each end of different genders.

I picked the gender that matched the db9 connector on the back of the computer 
and then rang that cable out pin to pin.

I then matched the wires and soldered them together according to my notes and 
drawings of what I found for serial modem cable on the
internet. I heat shrinked them to avoid shorting.

9 PIN   25PIN
  1   8
  2   3
  3   2
  4  20
  5   7
  6   6
  7   4
  8   5
9 N/C

For some reason it isn't working but it seems that the PAKRATT is because it 
goes through all of its diagnostics and all is well.

I have since rang out the cable again and corrected all errors but it still 
doesn't work, I have again rang out the cable and the
cable rings true this time (double/triple checked)

Any ideas how to test this system (Is it the cable or is it the PK??)



  73 fer nw es gud DX,
QSL VIA: BUR, LotW, e-QSL
Bob AD5VJ
Old calls: WY5L/KH3-KE5CTY-N5IET
http://www.ad5vj.com/

Member: CTDXCC, NTCC, STXDXCC
FISTS: # 12637, SKCC# 2369
10X# 37210, FP#-1141
SMIRK#-5177, RARS #-149

 



> -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of earicci
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 3:37 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: PK-232MBX
> 
> Dave:
> 
> They sell any cable you need, and will even build custom if you need.
> 
> Best 73 Eliot KE0N
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Announce your digital  presence via our DX Cluster 
> telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
> 
> Our other groups:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [digitalradio] PSK Modes

[Jose_Angel Amador Fundora]

-- Original Message --
From: KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date:  Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:47:12 -0600

>Some of us did try Chip modes when Nino first came out with them, but 
>they did not seem to perform as well as existing modes.

So we coincide...it is a pity...but using the ionosphere, you have to play by 
its rules.

>I really implore to our treasured programmers to see if they can come up 
>with some modes that can compete with Pactor modes. Especially some ARQ 
>modes that can work on MS OS.
>
>We know from Pactor 2, that a raised cosine shaped pulse is likely a 
>very good basic waveform. 

That is for saving bandwidth, mostly. It might allow better decoding, as well.

>Then for the most robust mode, a two tone 
>DBPSK modulation is used and as the conditions improve, the modulation 
>changes to DQPSK and then with further improvements to 8-DPSK and even 
>16-DPSK for maximum throughput when conditions are very good. This is 
>what enables Pactor 2 to send about 700 bits per second at the peak 
>speed and do it in only a 500 Hz wide span.

The steepest loss of performance in PSK constellations occurs from QPSK onwards
as the distances between the constellation points diminish. It is well treated
in "Communications Systems" by Carlson et al.

>We know this can be done at the higher speeds under good conditions with 
>sound card modes since SCAMP was even faster than P2, although a much 
>wider signal. The problem with SCAMP was that it had no fallback position.

So, fallback is important on HF.

>Pactor 3 is runs an occupied bandwidth of about 2.4 kHz, but raw speed 
>is over 2700 bps. Instead of 2 tones, P3 uses up to 18, separated by 120 
>Hz and modulated at 100 baud DBPSK or DQPSK.
>
>SCS has some fairly detailed data on Pactor 3 at:
>
>http://www.scs-ptc.com/download/PACTOR-III-Protocol.pdf
>
>I wish someone could explain why we can not have a sound card mode that 
>is roughly the same as Pactor 2 at least. Even if there was no ARQ at first.

I don't know if the least complex of it all is ARQ...most likely, the rest is 
harder to implement.

>And how different is Pactor 3, than what the SSTV hams are using 
>everyday? Aren't they using OFDM with QAM? If you recall what Tom Rink 
>said back in 1995 on the TAPR HF SIG:

That it is not adaptive as pactor is.

>"As mentioned in the introduction, PACTOR-II uses a two-tone DPSK modulation
>system. Due to the raised cosine pulse shaping, the maximum required 
>bandwidth is only around 450 Hz at minus 50 dB. ASK, which was also tested in 
>the 
>early stage, provided poorer results in weak conditions compared with a higher 
>DPSK modulation, as different amplitude levels are more difficult to 
>distinguish in noisy channels than more phase levels. 
>Additionally, ASK increases the Crest
>Factor of the signal. For these reasons, it is not used in the final 
>PACTOR-II protocol. Basic information on these items can also be found in the 
>first part of this series."
>
>Although not ASK, doesn't QAM employ amplitude changes as part of the 
>modulation scheme?

Yes. A key requirement is having the highest distance between constellation 
points to
have an edge against the noise (or QRM). That's why, in DRM, the FAC uses 4QAM, 
as it allows to send the reduced but very important info it conveys. But the 
MSC must use 64QAM, because the amount of data to be sent does not allow 
otherwise in the least bandwidth.  

>What happens if you use a multitone DPSK? It seems to a non-engineering 
>person like myself, that a lot of what P2 and P3 are made up of are 
>really a series of PSK100 or PSK200 tones (carriers).
>Isn't Q15X25 a similar modulation scheme? It even runs at 83.33 baud 
>rather than a minimum of 100 baud such as P2.
>
>Why did it not work as well as P modes?
>
>Or is it because it has no coding such as Reed-Solomon block coding or 
>Viterbi convolutional coding?

Certainly...all those tricks add up, and most likely, in a non proportional 
way...I cannot assure it by heart, but is very likely. One of the gains of the 
code used in pactor modes is 
using convolutional encoding with Viterbi decoding. The Viterbi decoder, 
knowing the history 
of what has been sent, as the convolutionally coded stream depends on what has 
been sent 
previously, makes a soft decode of what is the most likely symbol transmitted. 
RS coding, after deinterleaving, on the other side, may allow to recover erors 
WITHOUT retransmission, which may save more "bandwidth" than what is wasted on 
the FEC overhead.

Also, P2 and P3 avoid the edges of the channel to have the least amplitude and 
delay differences between carriers. That's why a "reduced" version of Q15X25 is 
being more succesful 
in holding the link. 

>73,
>
>Rick, KV9U

73, 

Jose, CO2JA

 

 
__ __ __ __
Correo enviado por ElectroMAIL. Facultad Eléctrica. CUJAE Dominio: 
electrica.cujae.edu.cu


 

Re: [digitalradio] PSK Modes

[KV9U]

Some of us did try Chip modes when Nino first came out with them, but 
they did not seem to perform as well as existing modes.

I really implore to our treasured programmers to see if they can come up 
with some modes that can compete with Pactor modes. Especially some ARQ 
modes that can work on MS OS.

We know from Pactor 2, that a raised cosine shaped pulse is likely a 
very good basic waveform. Then for the most robust mode, a two tone 
DBPSK modulation is used and as the conditions improve, the modulation 
changes to DQPSK and then with further improvements to 8-DPSK and even 
16-DPSK for maximum throughput when conditions are very good. This is 
what enables Pactor 2 to send about 700 bits per second at the peak 
speed and do it in only a 500 Hz wide span.

We know this can be done at the higher speeds under good conditions with 
sound card modes since SCAMP was even faster than P2, although a much 
wider signal. The problem with SCAMP was that it had no fallback position.

Pactor 3 is runs an occupied bandwidth of about 2.4 kHz, but raw speed 
is over 2700 bps. Instead of 2 tones, P3 uses up to 18, separated by 120 
Hz and modulated at 100 baud DBPSK or DQPSK.

SCS has some fairly detailed data on Pactor 3 at:

http://www.scs-ptc.com/download/PACTOR-III-Protocol.pdf

I wish someone could explain why we can not have a sound card mode that 
is roughly the same as Pactor 2 at least. Even if there was no ARQ at first.

And how different is Pactor 3, than what the SSTV hams are using 
everyday? Aren't they using OFDM with QAM? If you recall what Tom Rink 
said back in 1995 on the TAPR HF SIG:

"As mentioned in the introduction, PACTOR-II uses a two-tone DPSK modulation
system. Due to the raised cosine pulse shaping, the maximum required 
bandwidth
is only around 450 Hz at minus 50 dB. ASK, which was also tested in the 
early
stage, provided poorer results in weak conditions compared with a higher 
DPSK
modulation, as different amplitude levels are more difficult to 
distinguish in
noisy channels than more phase levels. Additionally, ASK increases the Crest
Factor of the signal. For these reasons, it is not used in the final 
PACTOR-II
protocol. Basic information on these items can also be found in the 
first part
of this series."

Although not ASK, doesn't QAM employ amplitude changes as part of the 
modulation scheme?

What happens if you use a multitone DPSK? It seems to a non-engineering 
person like myself, that a lot of what P2 and P3 are made up of are 
really a series of PSK100 or PSK200 tones (carriers).
Isn't Q15X25 a similar modulation scheme? It even runs at 83.33 baud 
rather than a minimum of 100 baud such as P2.

Why did it not work as well as P modes?

Or is it because it has no coding such as Reed-Solomon block coding or 
Viterbi convolutional coding?

73,

Rick, KV9U


Jose_Angel Amador Fundora wrote:

>Nino:
>
>I have not had luck with Chip...not a single QSO so far.
>
>On 40 meters local NVIS test it did not work.
>
>Maybe the 300 baud chip rate was too fast for it to work.
>
>Would it be prefarable to use it on a "close to the MUF, single ray link"?? I 
>would like to try it on the air.
>
>How has been the actual experience with Chip modes?
>
>73 de Jose, CO2JA
>
>
>
>-- Original Message --
>From: "Nino Porcino \(IZ8BLY\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>Date:  Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:18:07 +0100
>
>  
>
>>Walt/K5YFW wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>if you may be receiving 1, 2 and 3 hop signals.  How does this affect BPSK
>>>and QPSK signals from for example PSK31/63/125?
>>>  
>>>
>>the 3 different signals will sum at the receiver, but, having each one a
>>different phase, the sum is destructive with the result that they tend to
>>cancel. If the paths are stable you notice a drop in the signal strength but
>>if paths are unstable (as it is often the case) one signal may win over the
>>others and the phase of the PSK decoder will wander back and forth. The
>>clock recovery is also problematic because of the unstability of the
>>reference.
>>
>>Among the possible solutions to multipath there is the spread spectrum
>>modulation (as in Chip64) where the symbols at the receiver aren't expected
>>at a precise timing, but are decoded in a "clockless" manner. In Chip64
>>signal scope you can actually see the signal trace wandering left and rigth
>>due to path hopping or see the ghosted trace of the secondary path.
>>
>>Nino/IZ8BLY
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
>
> 
>__ __ __ __
>Correo enviado por ElectroMAIL. Facultad Eléctrica. CUJAE Dominio: 
>electrica.cujae.edu.cu
>
>
> 
>   
>
>
>
>  
>

[digitalradio] Re: Digitalradio: A New Look !

[jhaynesatalumni]

Something I don't like is that it now comes up with a lavender
background.  Makes it hard to read the blue and gray buttons for
"next" and "messages" and "older"

Re: [digitalradio] PSK Modes

[Jose_Angel Amador Fundora]

Nino:

I have not had luck with Chip...not a single QSO so far.

On 40 meters local NVIS test it did not work.

Maybe the 300 baud chip rate was too fast for it to work.

Would it be prefarable to use it on a "close to the MUF, single ray link"?? I 
would like to try it on the air.

How has been the actual experience with Chip modes?

73 de Jose, CO2JA



-- Original Message --
From: "Nino Porcino \(IZ8BLY\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date:  Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:18:07 +0100

>Walt/K5YFW wrote:
>
>> if you may be receiving 1, 2 and 3 hop signals.  How does this affect BPSK
>> and QPSK signals from for example PSK31/63/125?
>
>the 3 different signals will sum at the receiver, but, having each one a
>different phase, the sum is destructive with the result that they tend to
>cancel. If the paths are stable you notice a drop in the signal strength but
>if paths are unstable (as it is often the case) one signal may win over the
>others and the phase of the PSK decoder will wander back and forth. The
>clock recovery is also problematic because of the unstability of the
>reference.
>
>Among the possible solutions to multipath there is the spread spectrum
>modulation (as in Chip64) where the symbols at the receiver aren't expected
>at a precise timing, but are decoded in a "clockless" manner. In Chip64
>signal scope you can actually see the signal trace wandering left and rigth
>due to path hopping or see the ghosted trace of the secondary path.
>
>Nino/IZ8BLY
>
>
>
 

 
__ __ __ __
Correo enviado por ElectroMAIL. Facultad Eléctrica. CUJAE Dominio: 
electrica.cujae.edu.cu


 
   

[digitalradio] WAS: Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23/NOW: upgrading

[Dan Harriman]

James et al;

Here is the way we do it at the VE sessions that I
help. If a person passes a test with flying colors,
such as maybe only missing a couple or 3 questions, we
ask him/her if they want to take the next higher test.
That way, they may take it without paying for another
test session. You never know, you might just pass it!

On the other hand, if the person just barely passes,
we don't suggest another test. 

So, in conclusion, if you pass with a pretty darn good
score, why not take the next one? What have you to
lose? You have everything to gain!

73 es gud luk de 
Dan Harriman
Orange, Texas
--- James Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I was in this same boat, but when I went to take the
> test I was prepared.  Had I waited another 5 weeks I
> would have to continue studying and wondering if I
> could pass the test.  
> 
> One possibility is that I could take the extra test
> when I upgrade to general.  The issue with this is I
> am not ready for the extra test and I doubt I will
> be ready in 4 weeks.  
> 
> k6wrj  
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: James M Punderson IV 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 8:55 AM
>   Subject: [digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb
> 23

[digitalradio] BBS Program

[DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA]

Back in 1988, I really hacked a BBS program written in BASIC by DICK ROUX, 
N1AED, to make it work with an AEA PK-87(?).  The computer was a Radio Shack 
Model 100 laptop.

I have lost my electronic version but remember forwarding it to a number of 
hams via E-Mail.

If by chance you have a copy of this program, I would greatly appreciate 
getting and electronic copy of it.

Thanks & 73,

Walt/K5YFW

Re: [digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23

[Les Warriner]

You are not alone in your thoughts.  Our Technician class is 9 weeks, 
2 hours every Monday afternoon, then testing.  When the individuals 
obtain their licenses they are fully qualified and knowledgeable Hams 
as well as fully qualified Emergency Communications citizens.  We 
start with 6, 7 and 8th graders with a few high schoolers and 
parent/teachers tossed in and learn, not memorize what has to be 
known to truly be Hams. Many have advanced to General and even Extra 
from these classes.


Even though they at this point only have their Tech license, they are 
fully qualified to operate all positions on our station, W7HMS.  In 
the event of an incident in the area, there will always be a higher 
class licensee there so they do and can operate the HF as well as the 
VHF/UHF rigs.  Our school is an evacuation center so we have walkie 
talkies for the kids to bird dog in the gyms and pass traffic 
upstairs to the station for HF transmission to the Red Cross and 
EOC.  During exercises they put some of the "older" operators to 
shame and the Fed monitoring teams always write glowing reports on 
their performances.


After more than 50 years in the "Hobby", my personal thought is that 
the people who run these memorization classes  are doing a 
dis-service to the students.  There is NO way that these licensees 
after 6 or 8 hours are going to know anything about Ham radio let 
alone all of the ancillary benefits that go with being a true Ham. 
Yes they know the answers to the questions but know nothing at all of 
any background to the question or why the question is included in the 
pool.  After serving in numerous emergency situations, I have seen 
where one wrong word in a message can cost lives.  Are these new 
licensees qualified, as the rules require, to be able to conduct 
emergency communications?


My soap box is creaking so I'll just continue as we are and have been 
doing.  I learned also long ago that you do not easily change minds.


73

Les


I am sure it will be similar to the pent up demand we had when the
Technician license became code free and many new entrants took the test.

Because VHF and up is less compelling than daily occurence of longer
distance communications with HF, it may be that we will see continuing
interest.

A nearby city where I used to live and give the classes for Technician
and held VE sessions quite regularly, now has the "Ham in a day"
program. Basically, they will take anyone and go over the test questions
in the morning and early afternoon and then test later in the day. They
have a very high pass rate. Apparently, some students have had minimal
exposure to radio are able to pass.

I would not personally we willing to run such a test session, because
anyone who is not willing to meet for a couple of hours for six weeks
and study the material, will likely never stay with amateur radio
anyway. There are many competing interests out there and everyone picks
the things that interest them the most. We include a lot of "show and
tell", demonstrations of equipment and simple antennas, and hands on
components.

One thing that I don't fully understand is why people are taking element
3 or higher now. They will have to pay the fee all over again at another
VE test to have the paperwork submitted for the new no code General or
Extra Class license.

My wife, who is studying for her General, although she has very little
interest in HF, thought that the reason might be that they were ready
for the test and did not want to take the chance of getting stale by the
time of the next VE test session. Like most things, she is probably
right about that:)

73,

Rick, KV9U

James M Punderson IV wrote:

>Hi Rick,
>
>I work as a VE for some clubs here in NJ. We just had a session last
>Thursday at which instead of the usual 2 or 3 test takers, we had
>eleven of which seven were Technicians taking the General written exam.
>
>So if that's any indication, there is a lot of interest in HF out
>there. I think from talking to those folks at the session that this
>will enhance the chances of them sticking with ham radio.
>
>Jamie Punderson, W2QO
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23

[James Wilson]

I was in this same boat, but when I went to take the test I was prepared.  Had 
I waited another 5 weeks I would have to continue studying and wondering if I 
could pass the test.  

One possibility is that I could take the extra test when I upgrade to general.  
The issue with this is I am not ready for the extra test and I doubt I will be 
ready in 4 weeks.  

k6wrj  
  - Original Message - 
  From: James M Punderson IV 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 8:55 AM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23


  Hi Rick,

  I carefully explained to each person taking the General test at our VE
  session that they would have to come back again and pay $14 again in a
  month or so for the actual license upgrade and they all nevertheless
  wanted to take the test immediately.

  I think they prepared when the news first came out and hadn't counted
  on the FCC regulation implmentation delay and as you suggested, they
  didn't want the studying to "leak out" by waiting another month.

  Jamie Punderson, W2QO

  -- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  >
  > I am sure it will be similar to the pent up demand we had when the 
  > Technician license became code free and many new entrants took the test.
  > 
  > Because VHF and up is less compelling than daily occurence of longer 
  > distance communications with HF, it may be that we will see continuing 
  > interest.
  > 
  > A nearby city where I used to live and give the classes for Technician 
  > and held VE sessions quite regularly, now has the "Ham in a day" 
  > program. Basically, they will take anyone and go over the test
  questions 
  > in the morning and early afternoon and then test later in the day. They 
  > have a very high pass rate. Apparently, some students have had minimal 
  > exposure to radio are able to pass.
  > 
  > I would not personally we willing to run such a test session, because 
  > anyone who is not willing to meet for a couple of hours for six weeks 
  > and study the material, will likely never stay with amateur radio 
  > anyway. There are many competing interests out there and everyone picks 
  > the things that interest them the most. We include a lot of "show and 
  > tell", demonstrations of equipment and simple antennas, and hands on 
  > components.
  > 
  > One thing that I don't fully understand is why people are taking
  element 
  > 3 or higher now. They will have to pay the fee all over again at
  another 
  > VE test to have the paperwork submitted for the new no code General or 
  > Extra Class license.
  > 
  > My wife, who is studying for her General, although she has very little 
  > interest in HF, thought that the reason might be that they were ready 
  > for the test and did not want to take the chance of getting stale by
  the 
  > time of the next VE test session. Like most things, she is probably 
  > right about that:)
  > 
  > 73,
  > 
  > Rick, KV9U
  > 
  > 
  > James M Punderson IV wrote:
  > 
  > >Hi Rick,
  > >
  > >I work as a VE for some clubs here in NJ. We just had a session last
  > >Thursday at which instead of the usual 2 or 3 test takers, we had
  > >eleven of which seven were Technicians taking the General written exam.
  > >
  > >So if that's any indication, there is a lot of interest in HF out
  > >there. I think from talking to those folks at the session that this
  > >will enhance the chances of them sticking with ham radio.
  > >
  > >Jamie Punderson, W2QO
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > > 
  > >
  >



   

Re: [digitalradio] PSK Modes

[Nino Porcino \(IZ8BLY\)]

Walt/K5YFW wrote:

> if you may be receiving 1, 2 and 3 hop signals.  How does this affect BPSK
> and QPSK signals from for example PSK31/63/125?

the 3 different signals will sum at the receiver, but, having each one a
different phase, the sum is destructive with the result that they tend to
cancel. If the paths are stable you notice a drop in the signal strength but
if paths are unstable (as it is often the case) one signal may win over the
others and the phase of the PSK decoder will wander back and forth. The
clock recovery is also problematic because of the unstability of the
reference.

Among the possible solutions to multipath there is the spread spectrum
modulation (as in Chip64) where the symbols at the receiver aren't expected
at a precise timing, but are decoded in a "clockless" manner. In Chip64
signal scope you can actually see the signal trace wandering left and rigth
due to path hopping or see the ghosted trace of the secondary path.

Nino/IZ8BLY

[digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23

[James M Punderson IV]

Hi Rick,

I carefully explained to each person taking the General test at our VE
session that they would have to come back again and pay $14 again in a
month or so for the actual license upgrade and they all nevertheless
wanted to take the test immediately.

I think they prepared when the news first came out and hadn't counted
on the FCC regulation implmentation delay and as you suggested, they
didn't want the studying to "leak out" by waiting another month.

Jamie Punderson, W2QO


-- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am sure it will be similar to the pent up demand we had when the 
> Technician license became code free and many new entrants took the test.
> 
> Because VHF and up is less compelling than daily occurence of longer 
> distance communications with HF, it may be that we will see continuing 
> interest.
> 
> A nearby city where I used to live and give the classes for Technician 
> and held VE sessions quite regularly, now has the "Ham in a day" 
> program. Basically, they will take anyone and go over the test
questions 
> in the morning and early afternoon and then test later in the day. They 
> have a very high pass rate. Apparently, some students have had minimal 
> exposure to radio are able to pass.
> 
> I would not personally we willing to run such a test session, because 
> anyone who is not willing to meet for a couple of hours for six weeks 
> and study the material, will likely never stay with amateur radio 
> anyway. There are many competing interests out there and everyone picks 
> the things that interest them the most. We include a lot of "show and 
> tell", demonstrations of equipment and simple antennas, and hands on 
> components.
> 
> One thing that I don't fully understand is why people are taking
element 
> 3 or higher now. They will have to pay the fee all over again at
another 
> VE test to have the paperwork submitted for the new no code General or 
> Extra Class license.
> 
> My wife, who is studying for her General, although she has very little 
> interest in HF, thought that the reason might be that they were ready 
> for the test and did not want to take the chance of getting stale by
the 
> time of the next VE test session. Like most things, she is probably 
> right about that:)
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
> 
> 
> James M Punderson IV wrote:
> 
> >Hi Rick,
> >
> >I work as a VE for some clubs here in NJ. We just had a session last
> >Thursday at which instead of the usual 2 or 3 test takers, we had
> >eleven of which seven were Technicians taking the General written exam.
> >
> >So if that's any indication, there is a lot of interest in HF out
> >there. I think from talking to those folks at the session that this
> >will enhance the chances of them sticking with ham radio.
> >
> >Jamie Punderson, W2QO
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
>

[digitalradio] BUXCOMM Rascal for the Icom IC-746 - anyone with experience?

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

As far as I can determine the BUXCOMM GLX Rascal is
the same for the 746 and 756 series.

You should go to:

http://www.commparts.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=8&products_id=130236

and get this one, plug it in and be working FSK in
less than 10 minutes.

I am using the BUXCOMM GLX Rascal on our clubs
IC-775DSP, IC-756PRO2 and IC-756.  At home I am using
one on my IC-706MK2G and IC-756PRO3.  All worked the
first time and all with FSK for RTTY and AFSK for
PSK31 and voice keyer.  It is a no brainer.  Using
MMTTY for rtty is far better than any of the terminal
unit like the PK-232.

AS far as CW is concern.  The Buxcom GLX Rascal does
not do CW.  Computer send CW uses pin 4(9 pin) or pin
20(25 pin connector).  It is easier to just build up a
one transistor interface for CW keying.  You can find
the circuit in many places or on my website at:
http://www.qsl.net/k0bx and look under cw keying.

I hope this helps.

Joe K0BX

RE: [digitalradio] Re: HF Packet BBS?

[DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA]

Bill and All,

In Texas it is not uncommon to find large areas, say up to 7500 square miles 
with no cell phone, POTS, or any king of Internet connectivity except via home 
satellite Internet connectivity.  Also these areas have NO TV except via 
satellite.

While PSKMail, as an example, could certainly get beyond that area during the 
day on 40, 30 or 20M...at night, these area generally have only 80M 
communications capability.  Thus there are times when relaying from sender to 
receiver requires a relay station outside of the area of concern.

During hurricanes on the Texas Gulf Coast, you will find that from Brownsville 
to Houston and inland to Del Rio on the Rio Grande River and over to San 
Antonio and then over to Houston that the only cities with Internet capability 
are San Antonio and Houston.  Also, this area extends down 120 miles or so 
along Mexico's Gulf Coast and inland to Del Rio.  From Del Rio to El Paso is 
the Big Bend area which in normal times doesn't have much Internet Connectivity 
so there is a huge chunk of country...basically a 500 mile X 500+ mile area 
that might not have Internet connectivity.

So in planning data communications for this area on a 24X7 basis, we generally 
plan for the worst case scenario...NO Internet.

73,

Walt/K5YFW

-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bill McLaughlin
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 7:38 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: HF Packet BBS?


Hi Walt,

Guess I was less than precise in describing my position on this. In 
an emergency... telephones, cell phones, any internet connectivity 
and sat-phones and the like may well be disabled. I was saying our 
internet link here is much more fragile than many in the USthe 
point is we need to assume all *will* fail or be disabled. Any that 
remain are icing on the cake but we cannot assume we get iced cake. 
Plan for the worse case scenario and one will be set for any better 
conditions beyond that..

73 es be well

Bill N9DSJ


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> One thing that I have noticed is that among U.S. and many other 
hams around the world there is a misconception that we (the world) 
cannot lose the Internet.
> 
> Well, I have seen times when the Internet within the U.S. (48 
states) and I suspect most of Canada and Mexico have lost the entire 
Internet for 30 seconds to 3 minutes at a time.  Due to the 
resilience of the Internet, it came back quickly.  However, I have 
seen/know of certain parts of the Internet within the U.S. and Canada 
that have lost Internet connectivity for up to 3 hours.
> 
> There is nothing that can be done to keep a well planned physical 
and network attack from completely taking down 90% of the Internet in 
the U.S. and Canada for a period of up to 3 days before the Internet 
would start to recover and then take another 10-14 days to completely 
recover.
> 
> Europe is in a lot better shape in that they do not have all that 
many long open areas where access could be terminated and many times 
more network controlling nodes per square mile where physical 
rerouting can be taken.
> 
> Africa and Australia suffer from the worse position that the U.S.
> 
> Satellite inter-connectivity helps but if we rely on satellite 
until the land connections are reestablished, the system slows down 
to a crawl.
> 
> The solution is to physically secure as many controlling nodes and 
backbone hubs as possible and protect network systems from electronic 
attacks.
> 
> Thanks to the many networking folks across the globe we can recover 
from the worst Internet failure but it may be a lot slower than we 
expect.
> 
> In the meantime, amateur radio has the ability or rather should 
have the ability to fill in for strategic message/E-Mail requirements 
of our society.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Walt/K5YFW
> 





Announce your digital  presence via our DX Cluster telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Our other groups:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23

[KV9U]

I am sure it will be similar to the pent up demand we had when the 
Technician license became code free and many new entrants took the test.

Because VHF and up is less compelling than daily occurence of longer 
distance communications with HF, it may be that we will see continuing 
interest.

A nearby city where I used to live and give the classes for Technician 
and held VE sessions quite regularly, now has the "Ham in a day" 
program. Basically, they will take anyone and go over the test questions 
in the morning and early afternoon and then test later in the day. They 
have a very high pass rate. Apparently, some students have had minimal 
exposure to radio are able to pass.

I would not personally we willing to run such a test session, because 
anyone who is not willing to meet for a couple of hours for six weeks 
and study the material, will likely never stay with amateur radio 
anyway. There are many competing interests out there and everyone picks 
the things that interest them the most. We include a lot of "show and 
tell", demonstrations of equipment and simple antennas, and hands on 
components.

One thing that I don't fully understand is why people are taking element 
3 or higher now. They will have to pay the fee all over again at another 
VE test to have the paperwork submitted for the new no code General or 
Extra Class license.

My wife, who is studying for her General, although she has very little 
interest in HF, thought that the reason might be that they were ready 
for the test and did not want to take the chance of getting stale by the 
time of the next VE test session. Like most things, she is probably 
right about that:)

73,

Rick, KV9U


James M Punderson IV wrote:

>Hi Rick,
>
>I work as a VE for some clubs here in NJ. We just had a session last
>Thursday at which instead of the usual 2 or 3 test takers, we had
>eleven of which seven were Technicians taking the General written exam.
>
>So if that's any indication, there is a lot of interest in HF out
>there. I think from talking to those folks at the session that this
>will enhance the chances of them sticking with ham radio.
>
>Jamie Punderson, W2QO
>
>
>
>
>  
>

[digitalradio] Re: Virtual Null Modem Ports

[Alan Biddle]

Bob,

If you have a need to connect two ports together, whatever the usage, 
they will do so.  In my case, it has saved wasting 4 hardware ports and 
associated cables.

Alan
WA4SCA

Re: [digitalradio] One last try for FSK keying

[Dave Corio]

   I wish my budget was that high right now hi!

Tnx es 73
Dave
KB3MOW


David Struebel wrote:


You should be able to pick up a used Pk-232 or KAM on Ebay for less 
than $100.00


Dave wrote:


I've burned up a lot of bandwidth in my quest for a way to key my
IC-746 (non-Pro) with FSK instead of AFSK RTTY, so this will be my
last post on the subject.

I'm looking for a used interface, TNC, or what-have-you that will
allow me to use the RTTY mode of my 746 rather than USB/LSB.

Can't afford new, or it would be easy. If someone has a working TNC,
such as an older MFJ, AEA, KAM, or perhaps an interface of some type
they would be willing to part with for a good price, I'd be pleased to
give it a good home. I don't care if it has PACTOR or AMTOR, or any
other modes except RTTY. All my other digital modes are set up for my
sound card. As long as it will send FSK signaling to the ACC1 jack of
my 746, I'll be thrilled!

Please reply privately, or the moderator may make me start paying rent
on this forum!

Thanks in advance and 73
Dave
KB3MOW





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.4/643 - Release Date: 1/21/2007 5:12 
PM
  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23

[Alan NV8A]

On 01/21/07 05:53 pm Andrew O'Brien wrote:

>>> I have even heard now, in my country of canada, that you can pass
>> the exam 
>>> after a weekend course
>>> My question.. how can someone learn about electronics and ham radio
>> in one 

> A whole weekend?  Nah, one day.  One local club has a "Ham In A Day" 
> sessions, I think it is 8 hours and after than you take the test.

A club in the area where I used to live advertised a "Ham in a Day" 
class, and I inquired about it for my teenage son. They told me it was 
*not* intended for people starting from scratch but assumed that 
participants had gone through the material on their own first.

73

Alan NV8A

[digitalradio] Re: US Hams Codeless Feb 23

[James M Punderson IV]

Hi Rick,

I work as a VE for some clubs here in NJ. We just had a session last
Thursday at which instead of the usual 2 or 3 test takers, we had
eleven of which seven were Technicians taking the General written exam.

So if that's any indication, there is a lot of interest in HF out
there. I think from talking to those folks at the session that this
will enhance the chances of them sticking with ham radio.

Jamie Punderson, W2QO




--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The trade off that I see is that we either have a few (very few) new 
> entrants who are highly motivated and likely to continue with amateur 
> radio for a lifetime, or we have many new entrants, with a relatively 
> simple entrance requirement, but only a few will stay with it. But a
lot 
> more, than you would have had with just a few entrants.
> 
> Our public policy for many years,  has been to take the second
approach. 
> If we had stayed with FCC examining sites requiring the 150 mile travel 
> radius, the 5 wpm for Technician and 13 wpm CW tests for General, the 
> requirement for drawing diagrams of circuits, and having no question 
> pool but having to really know the material in order to pass the
test, I 
> honestly believe that at best we would have 10% as many new entrants as 
> we now have. This would not replace the number leaving amateur radio
due 
> to lack of interest, time contraints, and most likely becoming SK.
> 
> The reason that I believe this to be a reasonable estimate is that I am 
> very hard pressed to come up with more than a handful of hams that I 
> have known over the years who would have jumped through all the hoops 
> that we had up until about 1980. My wife and daughter certainly would 
> not have done it. Not even the slightest chance. Same thing for most 
> others.
> 
> So if we want amateur radio to continue, we really have no choice to
try 
> and attract enough people so that a few will stay with it for the long 
> term. If we did not do that, and continued to lose the many, many 
> technical folks that we have lost for years now, we would see a 
> precipitous decline in ham numbers (and political clout) now that the 
> first wave of the 10 year licenses has ended. As it is we are seeing a 
> decline right now. I don't see this turning around much, if any, but if 
> we can at least hold our own that would be helpful.
> 
> I am expecting a substantial number of hams moving toward getting their 
> General class license. Since they will rarely be using CW, they will 
> mostly be using voice. But when they discover how easy it is to work 
> weaker signals on PSK31, Olivia, MFSK16, etc., I am hopeful that we can 
> expect an increase in digital operators.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
> 
> 
> 
> larry allen wrote:
> 
> >Hi Danny..
> >The problem we are having is that most of our new hams don't seem
to get 
> >on the air...
> >We have more hams now than ever before yet our bands are quieter
than they 
> >have ever been, since the 60's at least
> >Larry ve3fxq
> >
> >  
> >
>

Re: [digitalradio] Virtual Null Modem Ports

[Simon Brown]

- Original Message - 
From: "AD5VJ Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> http://developer.berlios.de/projects/n8vbvcomdriver/
> 


N8VB's vCOM is excellent, used a lot by radio amateurs.

Simon Brown, HB9DRV
(GD4ELI March 2nd - 12th 2006)

[digitalradio] Multi Hop NVIS Propagation Delay Interference Re: PSK Modes

[Dave Ingram]

(crossposted to NVIS and Digital Radio)
The effect of the ionosphere on digital signals was discussed on a webpage
that I coincidentally read this morning while looking at soundcard modes.

Murray ZL1BPU has created 'DominoEx', with the details at
http://www.qsl.net/zl1bpu/DOMINO/Index.htm

NVIS is specifically mentioned, with the mode tolerant of multipath signals.
Murray writes on the page that the mode was intended for use with NVIS, so it
might be worth considering. It was announced to the world December 2005, so
there might be some people who have used it.

I'd be interested to hear of people's operating experiences with digital modes
and NVIS.


Cheers,
David.
-- 
David Ingram (VK4TDI, ZL3TDI)
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
http://www.ingramtech.com/
MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm

expeditionradio wrote:
> As I understand it...
> The path loss for the ground bounce at HF is likely to attenuate the
> delayed single-bounce signal, and especially the multi-bounce signal.
> This attenuation from the ground bounce signals usually results in a
> significantly exalted no-bounce skywave direct signal for NVIS. 
> 
> The question then becomes: How much immunity is there with PSK
> decoding to the time shifted interfering signal's amplitude? 
> 
> Digital decoding of PSK may not be much of a problem, because there is
> somewhat of a threshold effect with decoders, but still, phase shift
> symbol rate becomes the important factor here. What we need is a
> relative figure of merit for comparing PSK at various symbol rates and
> various other signal methods in these sort of channel conditions. The
> flavor of noise in the channel can often be a factor... especially
> impulse noise.
> 
> The RF reflectivity of the earth at the bounce point has a significant
> effect on the bounce's attenuation value. So, the attenuated bounce
> may be more of a problem on sea water (-3dB to -12dB?), than when the
> bounce is on land (-6dB to -30dB?). I'm guessing at these attenuation
> values, for the purpose of discussion, rather than looking up the real
> data :)
> 
> Also, when operating freq is far below FoF2, or in propagation
> conditions that have QSB, with a rapidly varying sharp D layer
> absorbtion cutoff frequency knee, the multi-bounce signal may become
> larger than the primary NVIS signal when the lower angle incident
> skywave signal is attenuated. But, most of the time, this isn't seen
> much though, since normally the D layer absorbtion is a rather smooth
> curve vs frequency and doesn't have a sharp cutoff at such high angles. 
> 
> The bounced multipath interference signals for NVIS can be much
> stronger at MF frequencies than at HF, due to sometimes sharper
> ionospheric high angle critical incidence at MF and the increased
> reflectivity of the ground at MF in some areas. This is a common
> problem for AM broadcast DXing where phase cancellations often distort
> the signal at night. 
> 
> This was a significant factor in LORAN, especially when flying over
> the ocean, and if you have ever watched the old LORAN scopes in
> aircraft, it can sometimes be rather tricky to discern which is the
> real signal to use at certain times of the day... fortunately, most
> experienced navigators were pretty good at it!
> 
> Well, enough rambling for now... I gotta get back to work.
> 
> 73 Bonnie BA7/KQ6XA

[digitalradio] Re: BUXCOMM Rascal for the Icom IC-746 - anyone with experience?

[James M Punderson IV]

Hi Dave,

I am currently using a Rascal GLX and I can definitively tell you that
when plugged into the ACC1 port of my Icom 756Pro3 that it does do FSK
not just AFSK. I use the same cable that a 746 would use if I recall
correctly.

I am pretty sure that the earlier Rascal model that I had a few years
ago did not do FSK because I think that was why I stopped using it.

I don't know about CW as I haven't tried to do that with the Rascal.

Jamie Punderson, W2QO




--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> That's just a cable, Dave; you need a Rascal GLX to go with it. I 
> couldn't tell from the web site whether a GLX does FSK generation; 
> downloading the user manual before purchasing anything is highly 
> recommended!
> 
> 73,
> 
> Dave, AA6YQ
> 
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave"  wrote:
> >
> > I'm considering the Buxcomm Rascal CBLIC8PD for my IC-746 (non-Pro)
> > but have a couple of questions if anyone can assist.
> > 
> > The price of $19.99 seems incredibly inexpensive. I would like to 
> run
> > it from the serial port of my PC to the ACC1 jack on the rear of the
> > 746. The main reason I want this is to be able to run FSK RTTY in 
> the
> > 746 RTTY mode instead of AFSK in USB/LSB mode.
> > 
> > Does this little unit actually eliminate the need for a TNC to drive
> > FSK keying? I plan to use WinWarbler as the software.
> > 
> > Will it also key CW for me? I currently have an interface to key CW,
> > but the Buxcomm would have to replace it in ACC1. WinWarbler would
> > also be my program of choice for CW.
> > 
> > Will this completely replace my RIGblaster, or will I need to keep 
> it
> > to run PSK31 and other digital modes?
> > 
> > Any input anyone can give me about this unit (or comparable Buxcomm
> > units) would be greatly appreciated!
> > 
> > Tnx es 73
> > Dave
> > KB3MOW
> >
>

[digitalradio] Virtual Null Modem Ports

[AD5VJ Bob]

Hey guys anyone know anything about whether theses work for ham radio usage.

I found the information on the MixW pages

http://www.mixw.net/related.htm#tncemu

http://developer.berlios.de/projects/n8vbvcomdriver/

Tnx bob ad5vj