Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Chuck Mayfield]

I don't know that you have seen this link, so 
just in case you might be able to get an idea
http://www.winlink.org/Presentations/SCAMPspec.pdf
I KNOW that I could not develop anything based on 
it, but perhaps you or someone else on this reflector can.
Chuck AA5J

At 02:43 PM 3/9/2007, Rein Couperus wrote:
>What a terrible waste of intellectual resources!
>
>Sigh
>
>Rein EA/PA0R/P
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> > Gesendet: 09.03.07 18:28:28
> > An: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> > Betreff: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz  Freq Coordination Info
>
>
> >
> > The only known implementation was on Windows, Rein, and it was closed
> > source.
> >
> >73,
> >
> > Dave, AA6YQ
> >
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rein Couperus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
> > >
> > > Rein EA/PA0R/P
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>--
>http://pa0r.blogspirit.com
>
>
>
>
>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: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 
>- Release Date: 3/8/2007 10:58 AM

Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Dave Bernstein]

As is often the case in engineering, Jose, perfect is the enemy of 
good. What Rick KN6KB discovered while developing SCAMP's busy 
detector was that he could detect CW, PSK, Pactor, and SSB at an ~80% 
confidence level without enormous difficulty. SCAMP beta testers were 
amazed by the effectiveness of this first iteration.

Pushing the confidence level from 80% to 100%, however, would take 
years -- if its even possible. But a busy detector that works 80% of 
the time would cut QRM from unattended automated stations (like 
WinLink PMBOs) by a factor of 5! 

Your comment that "many think it is simpler than it really is to do 
it WELL" is frankly moot; Rick demonstrated two years ago that useful 
busy frequency detection was implementable on a PC and soundcard.

73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Then, we need a codesmith that does away with those inaccurate 
assertions.
> 
> The bona fide attempts of Rick with SCAMP has opened a can of 
worms...
> I don't even think he foresaw this, as many think it is simpler 
than it 
> really is to do it WELL. It is no kids play.
> 
> Let's wait for the magic code.
> 
> Jose, CO2JA
> 
> Dave Bernstein wrote:
>  AA6YQ comments below
> > 
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador"  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > Seems I did not make my point. A large portion of Winlinks popping
> > "out of nowhere" is because some  H I D D E N   (in the skip zone)
> > user has  triggered it.
> > 
>  That's exactly right, Jose. But if WinLink properly included a
>  
> > busy frequency detector, then it would refrain from responding to 
> > that H I D D E N user -- as would a human operator under the same 
> > circumstances. But since WinLink doesn't include a busy frequecy 
> > detector, and since WinLink doesn't respond to an operator sending
> > "QRL, please QSY", it blasts away, QRMing the pre-existing QSO.
> > 
> > Andy, wasn't there another list to discuss this "I hate Winlink" 
> > stuff?
> > 
>  There is indeed another list for discussing policy. Addressing
>  
> > inaccurate technical assertions seems in-scope for this list.
> > 
> > 73,
> > 
> > Dave, AA6YQ
> 
> __
> 
> V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía 
y Educación Energética.
> 22 al 25 de mayo de 2007
> Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
> http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier
>

[digitalradio] SCAMP resources

[Dave Bernstein]

SCAMP's protocol specification is available in

http://www.winlink.org/Presentations/SCAMPspec.pdf

There is also an article on SCAMP by its author, Rick KN6KB, in the 
proceedings of the 23rd ARRL and TAPR Digital Communications 
Conference. Here's the abstract:

Digital modes enjoy increasing popularity and performance thanks to a 
better understanding of Digital Signal Processing (DSP) and continual 
improvement in the performance of modern computers, sound cards, and 
operating systems.  SCAMP is a new experimental "wide-band" (2 KHz) 
digital sound card message protocol suitable for HF. SCAMP leverages 
the work by Barry Sanderson, KB9VAK and employs an ARQ "wrapper" 
around Barry's Redundant Digital File Transfer (RDFT) scheme to 
provide the error-free automatic operation necessary for today's 
modern digital message systems. This paper documents work in process 
developing and testing a new sound card mode that promises Pactor-
like performance for HF channel transmission.  Key words: RDFT, 
HDSSTV, Pactor, MT63, PSK-31, Winlink, DIGTRX, Sound Card Modes, 
Pipelining.

These proceedings can be purchased via

http://tapr.org/pub_dcc23.html

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Jose A. Amador]

Then, we need a codesmith that does away with those inaccurate assertions.

The bona fide attempts of Rick with SCAMP has opened a can of worms...
I don't even think he foresaw this, as many think it is simpler than it 
really is to do it WELL. It is no kids play.

Let's wait for the magic code.

Jose, CO2JA

Dave Bernstein wrote:
 AA6YQ comments below
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Seems I did not make my point. A large portion of Winlinks popping
> "out of nowhere" is because some  H I D D E N   (in the skip zone)
> user has  triggered it.
> 
 That's exactly right, Jose. But if WinLink properly included a
 
> busy frequency detector, then it would refrain from responding to 
> that H I D D E N user -- as would a human operator under the same 
> circumstances. But since WinLink doesn't include a busy frequecy 
> detector, and since WinLink doesn't respond to an operator sending
> "QRL, please QSY", it blasts away, QRMing the pre-existing QSO.
> 
> Andy, wasn't there another list to discuss this "I hate Winlink" 
> stuff?
> 
 There is indeed another list for discussing policy. Addressing
 
> inaccurate technical assertions seems in-scope for this list.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Dave, AA6YQ

__

V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía y Educación 
Energética.
22 al 25 de mayo de 2007
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier

Re: Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz FreqCoordination Info)

[John Bradley]

Amen Jose;


Seems all the stateside operators want to do is argue. 

Is the plan to go back to the fundementals of this group, or do we set up a new 
one
where policy arguments would be punted?

John
VE5MU

   
   


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 3/8/2007 
10:58 AM

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[kv9u]

If I understand the URL correctly, the source code of SCAMP should have 
been released and could have been demanded under the legal copyright of 
the GPL.

As it was, it was deliberately set up with timers to self destruct after 
a few weeks or months. So even though some of us had the .exe for a 
while, it was no longer operable.

Some of us have been waiting for several years but there has been no 
further work on this mode that I know of on the newsgroup we are on. I 
can 't say enough good things about SCAMP because it solved most of the 
problems that we had with providing an ARQ mode and high speed, and busy 
frequency detection. The only drawback was that it could only operate 
with good signals and had no fall back position.

If their programmer could have continued working on it, I am confident 
that a fallback mode would have been possible. Unfortunately, with such 
a closed system, they needed to work on the reconstruction of the inner 
workings of the Winlink 2000 system with the new CMS system and now the 
RMS's being developed and a sound card mode to replace Pactor 3 is just 
not a high priority item. And when you only have one person, even if 
they are a spectacular programmer, you only have so many hours in a day 
that they can give to the cause.

With the ARRL proposal, I would expect that any successful mode would be 
used for Winlink 2000, but more importantly, for other digital modes, 
both keyboarding and higher speed file transfer and for development of 
new e-mail systems that are more adaptable, locatable, and much less 
fragile than the Winlink 2000 system.

Tomorrow our county AR Club will be continuing its training on packet, 
digital, and specifically the Winlink 2000 system. Although Winlink 2000 
can be useful for casual use for traveling radio amateurs, it is not 
well suited for emergency communications. Even though we are primarily 
interested in emergency communications, I like to thing that it is 
helpful to understand the design of the system. Many of our local hams 
are newer and some have told me that they are not clear about the 
difference between the Winlink, NTS/D, and Winlink 2000 systems and how 
they  evolved.

73,

Rick, KV9U

Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote:
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowModNDA
>
> So the FSF says no.  As Dave points out, I don't know that this has been
> taken to court.  However, in this case among, it would be unlikely to go
> to court.  I was serious in suggesting that perhaps Bruce Perens (who is a
> ham and a Linux activist) would be interested.
>
> Leigh/WA5ZNU
>   
>> In other words, once you release an alpha or beta, do you have to
>> provide source source to everyone else? Or does it have to be a
>> finalized and released code?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Rick, KV9U
>>
>> 
>
>
>
>
> 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] Proposal: Non-Disaster Automatic Ops on 60M Only

[kd4e]

Proposal:  Non-Disaster Automatic Ops on 60M Only

Let's petition the FCC to restrict all automatic
mode ops to 60M except when specifically requested
on other Ham bands during a declared disaster.

This will eliminate conflicts with user-attended
modes, eliminate a source of hassle for the FCC,
and still permit development of the mode(s).

And 60M is already channelized.

-- 

Thanks! & 73, doc, KD4E
~~
Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com
Personal: http://bibleseven.com
~~

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[John Bradley]

 I am actually thinking of selling timeshares on this frequency fiefdom, 
several rules would apply,
IMD > -20db, and no pets.

John

  - Original Message - 
  From: kd4e 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:23 AM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info


  I think you have to start at 3587.7 since one of
  the many ARRL "SW" Broadcasts seizes control of
  3587.3 - 3587.7 at-will and without consideration
  of existing activity.

  Is *your* Broadcast planned for 24/7 or at-will or
  might you consider time-sharing your frequency
  fiefdom with others? ;-)

  Perhaps the FCC could begin selling Ham spectrum
  to time-sharing collaboratives, Hams and Ham-related
  organizations, and perhaps non-Ham investors and one
  could buy their way into a specific frequency
  collaborative?

  We could even have time-share frequency swapping!

  Ahh, the brave new world of Ham radio that frequency-
  squatting could open up.

  Sigh.

  > John Bradley wrote: See below. I just nailed down a frequency, so
  > don't mess with it !!! *3587.5 141A(3587.3-3590.0kHz) VE5MU ALE
  > Canada

  -- 

  Thanks! & 73, doc, KD4E
  ~~
  Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com
  Personal: http://bibleseven.com
  ~~


   


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.7/713 - Release Date: 3/7/2007 9:24 
AM

Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Kurt]

> 
> > > Unfortunatelly all this name calling and mode bashing (you know,
> > > the mode I support is better than yours etc) does not promote
> > > digital radio at all.
> > >
> > > 73 de Demetre SV1UY
> >

>
 Ok I hope I have not done any name calling and if so I apologize, it 
was not done on purpose. I hope I have not said to QRM any station on 
purpose either, or bashed any mode. 
I my opinion (and this will be my last entry on this subject), 
winlink is being shoved as the all to end all for emergency 
communication, and for those at sea etc. I see it as a QRM generator 
with no control operator. I believe that the saying if you hear them 
you can work them, means a winlink station can hear a qso in progress 
before it transmit if one can hear it. 

I will work within the reg's to have the FCC at least here in the 
states curb in the abuse that is going on with winlink/pactor2or3.

73
Kurt
K8YZK

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Leigh L Klotz, Jr.]

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowModNDA

So the FSF says no.  As Dave points out, I don't know that this has been
taken to court.  However, in this case among, it would be unlikely to go
to court.  I was serious in suggesting that perhaps Bruce Perens (who is a
ham and a Linux activist) would be interested.

Leigh/WA5ZNU
> In other words, once you release an alpha or beta, do you have to
> provide source source to everyone else? Or does it have to be a
> finalized and released code?
>
> 73,
>
> Rick, KV9U
>

[digitalradio] intentional QRM

[David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD]

for all intents and purposes, when "Winlink" transmits
into the blind on a shared channel, that is intentional QRM.  so by 
doing so, they are advocating QRMing others just as i suggested.

i agree that my language was a bit overboard, and apparently in poor 
spirit, but please don't point me out as the sole abuser.

i promise Andy, this will be my last on this issue.

david/wd4kpd

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Leigh L Klotz, Jr.]

It depends on how they use RDFT.  What you are describing is LGPL but 
RDFT is GPL.  Mere aggregation is one thing (shipping with a linux 
distribution for example) but if they link C code against a GPL library 
(not an LGPL license) then the case is fairly clear as far as I have 
been told by my lawyers.
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 2:37 pm, Dave Bernstein wrote:
> Its complicated, Rick. If RDFT is GPL'd, and changes were made to
> RDFT, then those changes would have to be released under GPL.
> However, if RDFT was not changed, but simply "used" in a larger
> application (e.g. SCAMP), then it depends on how it was used. At one
> time, static linking would supposedly send you down one path, while
> dynamic linking would send you down another. Short of talking to the
> FSF folks or getting to the point where a judge decides in court, the
> IP lawyers would say there are few certainies.
>
> As for timing, I believe that the requirement is independent of
> release; if you modify GPL'd code, you must release your
> modifications whether or not you ever release a product. Otherwise,
> one could elude GPL by simply keeping one's products in permanent
> beta.
>
> Personally, if there's any open source code in stuff I work on, then
> I make that stuff open source. At some point I'll be extending
> PSKCORE to deal with assymetric sound cards, for example; that work
> will all be open source.
>
>73,
>
>Dave, AA6YQ
>
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kv9u <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>  If a programmer is experimenting with a work that is derived in
> part
>>  from a program that has been GPL'd, I wonder if it has to be
> released?
>>
>>  In other words, once you release an alpha or beta, do you have to
>>  provide source source to everyone else? Or does it have to be a
>>  finalized and released code?
>>
>>  73,
>>
>>  Rick, KV9U
>>
>>
>>  Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote:
>>  > Now that NCI is no longer necessary, maybe we can get Bruce
> Perens
>>  > interested in this topic and he can pursue the release of SCAMP
> source
>>  > code through their obligations of GPL.
>>  > Leigh/WA5ZNU
>>  > On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 1:48 am, Rein Couperus wrote:
>>  >
>>  >>>  The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
>>  >>>
>>  >>>
>>  >> Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
>>  >>
>>  >> Rein EA/PA0R/P
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >
>>  >
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Dave Bernstein]

Its complicated, Rick. If RDFT is GPL'd, and changes were made to 
RDFT, then those changes would have to be released under GPL. 
However, if RDFT was not changed, but simply "used" in a larger 
application (e.g. SCAMP), then it depends on how it was used. At one 
time, static linking would supposedly send you down one path, while 
dynamic linking would send you down another. Short of talking to the 
FSF folks or getting to the point where a judge decides in court, the 
IP lawyers would say there are few certainies. 

As for timing, I believe that the requirement is independent of 
release; if you modify GPL'd code, you must release your 
modifications whether or not you ever release a product. Otherwise, 
one could elude GPL by simply keeping one's products in permanent 
beta.

Personally, if there's any open source code in stuff I work on, then 
I make that stuff open source. At some point I'll be extending 
PSKCORE to deal with assymetric sound cards, for example; that work 
will all be open source.

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kv9u <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If a programmer is experimenting with a work that is derived in 
part 
> from a program that has been GPL'd, I wonder if it has to be 
released?
> 
> In other words, once you release an alpha or beta, do you have to 
> provide source source to everyone else? Or does it have to be a 
> finalized and released code?
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
> 
> 
> Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote:
> > Now that NCI is no longer necessary, maybe we can get Bruce 
Perens 
> > interested in this topic and he can pursue the release of SCAMP 
source 
> > code through their obligations of GPL.
> > Leigh/WA5ZNU
> > On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 1:48 am, Rein Couperus wrote:
> >   
> >>>  The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
> >>>
> >>>   
> >> Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
> >>
> >> Rein EA/PA0R/P
> >>
> >> 
> >
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: screw WINLINK

[Dave Bernstein]

Sorry, I meant the first sentence below to be

"Having a WinLink user not transmit a request when the frequency is
already in use is necessary, but not sufficient."

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Having a WinLink user transmit a request when the frequency is 
> already in use is necessary, but not sufficient. The WinLink user 
may 
> find the frequency locally clear, and procede with his or her 
> request. But the WinLink PMBO that responds to that request may QRM 
a 
> QSO that the WinLink user could not hear.
> 
> The WinLink Development team pretends that a remote user's 
assessment 
> of the frequency is sufficient, but they know full well that this 
> approach doesn't prevent their PMBOs from QRMing ongoing QSOs. 
SCAMP 
> was a bona fide attempt on their party to address this problem, but 
> they seem to have lost interest.
> 
>73,
> 
>Dave, AA6YQ
> 
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "James Wilson"  wrote:
> >
> > First, I am not a winlink user.  
> > 
> > From their site
> > http://www.winlink.org/guidelines.htm
> > Listen First!  Because there is a live human being (control 
> operator) is always present at the initiating station, one common 
> theme is paramount to the successful operation of the system.  This 
> common theme, which is consistent with all Amateur Radio 
operations, 
> consists of simply listening on the frequency about to be used by 
the 
> initiating station in order to determine if that frequency is 
> occupied.  Obviously, if the frequency that is about to be used is 
> occupied, the proper procedure is to either wait until it is free 
> before transmitting, or find another Radio Message Server (PMBO) 
> whose frequencies are not otherwise occupied.  Not only is this a 
> common courtesy to other Amateurs, but it is also a specific 
> requirement of any Country's rules which regulate Amateur licenses, 
> Worldwide.  
> > 
> > 
> > To me this sounds like one of those situations that the product 
is 
> intended to break, but they put the blame on the user not the 
> system.  
> > 
> > Another example of this is a 110 horsepower motorcycle and in the 
> manual it says that speeding is dangerous and you should always 
obey 
> local laws and regulations.  Everyone knows they are going to break 
> the law but they put the responsibility on the end user instead of 
> the end user.  
> > 
> > Almost like the 2nd amendment.  
> > 
> > I think the best way to push winlink users to not interfere is to 
> log events where the intentionally transmit over other operators 
and 
> submit them in mass to ARRL and the FCC.  
> >   - Original Message - 
> >   From: Andrew O'Brien 
> >   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
> >   Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:31 PM
> >   Subject: Re: [digitalradio] screw WINLINK
> > 
> > 
> >   Just a friendly reminder that a rule of this group is that we 
> adhere to normal operational rules and not advocate deliberate 
> interference.
> >   Andy K3UK
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   On 3/9/07, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD  wrote:
> > "Live with it, and get used to it"
> > then QRM it.
> > 
> > david/wd4kpd
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   -- 
> >   Andy K3UK
> >   Skype Me :  callto://andyobrien73
> >   www.obriensweb.com
> >
>

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[kv9u]

If a programmer is experimenting with a work that is derived in part 
from a program that has been GPL'd, I wonder if it has to be released?

In other words, once you release an alpha or beta, do you have to 
provide source source to everyone else? Or does it have to be a 
finalized and released code?

73,

Rick, KV9U


Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote:
> Now that NCI is no longer necessary, maybe we can get Bruce Perens 
> interested in this topic and he can pursue the release of SCAMP source 
> code through their obligations of GPL.
> Leigh/WA5ZNU
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 1:48 am, Rein Couperus wrote:
>   
>>>  The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
>>>
>>>   
>> Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
>>
>> Rein EA/PA0R/P
>>
>> 
>
>   

[digitalradio] Re: screw WINLINK

[Dave Bernstein]

Having a WinLink user transmit a request when the frequency is 
already in use is necessary, but not sufficient. The WinLink user may 
find the frequency locally clear, and procede with his or her 
request. But the WinLink PMBO that responds to that request may QRM a 
QSO that the WinLink user could not hear.

The WinLink Development team pretends that a remote user's assessment 
of the frequency is sufficient, but they know full well that this 
approach doesn't prevent their PMBOs from QRMing ongoing QSOs. SCAMP 
was a bona fide attempt on their party to address this problem, but 
they seem to have lost interest.

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "James Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> First, I am not a winlink user.  
> 
> From their site
> http://www.winlink.org/guidelines.htm
> Listen First!  Because there is a live human being (control 
operator) is always present at the initiating station, one common 
theme is paramount to the successful operation of the system.  This 
common theme, which is consistent with all Amateur Radio operations, 
consists of simply listening on the frequency about to be used by the 
initiating station in order to determine if that frequency is 
occupied.  Obviously, if the frequency that is about to be used is 
occupied, the proper procedure is to either wait until it is free 
before transmitting, or find another Radio Message Server (PMBO) 
whose frequencies are not otherwise occupied.  Not only is this a 
common courtesy to other Amateurs, but it is also a specific 
requirement of any Country's rules which regulate Amateur licenses, 
Worldwide.  
> 
> 
> To me this sounds like one of those situations that the product is 
intended to break, but they put the blame on the user not the 
system.  
> 
> Another example of this is a 110 horsepower motorcycle and in the 
manual it says that speeding is dangerous and you should always obey 
local laws and regulations.  Everyone knows they are going to break 
the law but they put the responsibility on the end user instead of 
the end user.  
> 
> Almost like the 2nd amendment.  
> 
> I think the best way to push winlink users to not interfere is to 
log events where the intentionally transmit over other operators and 
submit them in mass to ARRL and the FCC.  
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Andrew O'Brien 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:31 PM
>   Subject: Re: [digitalradio] screw WINLINK
> 
> 
>   Just a friendly reminder that a rule of this group is that we 
adhere to normal operational rules and not advocate deliberate 
interference.
>   Andy K3UK
> 
> 
> 
>   On 3/9/07, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Live with it, and get used to it"
> then QRM it.
> 
> david/wd4kpd
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   -- 
>   Andy K3UK
>   Skype Me :  callto://andyobrien73
>   www.obriensweb.com
>

[digitalradio] EA PSK31 CONTEST 2007

[Andrew O'Brien]

Let's see who works the most provinces

Andy K3UK

EA PSK31 CONTEST 2007
Sponsored by Unión de Radioaficionados Españoles (URE). The manager of
the contest is
EA4ZB.
Participants: Any licensed amateur station.
Date: From 16:00 UTC March 10th to 16:00 UTC March 11th, 2007.
Mode: BPSK31.
Bands: 10, 15, 20, 40 and 80 meters, according to IARU Region 1 band plan.
Classes:
1) Single operator all band EA.
2) Single operator single band EA. (One band is only allowed during
the contest).
3) Single operator all band non-EA.
4) Single operator single band non-EA. (One band is only allowed
during the contest).
5) Multioperator EA, only all bands.
6) Multioperator non EA, only all bands.
NOTES:
a) The use of cluster is allowed for all classes, but it is not
allowed self-spotting.
b) In the single operator categories only one signal is allowed in the air.
c) In the multioperator categories only one signal is allowed by band.
Contest call: "CQ EA TEST".
Valid contacts: Any station can be contacted during the contest. Every
station can be contacted
once per band.
The points and/or multipliers derived from UNIQUE QSOs will be NOT valid.
Exchange: Spanish stations: RST + Province code (see below).
The foreign stations that transmit from the Spanish territory will be
considered as EA stations.
DX stations: RST + QSO number starting with 001. Multi-operator
stations, if used multi TX, shall
report separate serials per band starting with 001.
Scoring:
On 10, 15 and 20 meters, one (1) point for QSO within own continent,
and two (2) points for QSO
outside own continent.
On 40 and 80 m, three (3) points for QSO within own continent, and six
(6) points for QSO outside
own continent.
Multipliers:
- EADX100 entities.
- Spanish Provinces.
- USA, Canada, Japan and Australia call areas (VE3, VE6, W5, JA1...).
NOTES:
1) Each multiplier counts once per band.
2) The first QSO with W, VE, JA and VK stations, on each band, counts
for two multipliers
(EADX100 entity + call area)
3) The first QSO with EA, EA6, EA8 and EA9 stations, on each band,
counts for two multipliers
(EADX100 entity + Province).
Final score: Total QSO points by total multipliers in all bands.
Prizes: Trophy to the winner in each class and certificate for the
second and third places in each
class, if the valid QSO number is higher than 50.
Logs: All logs should be submitted in Cabrillo format via Internet to
the following E-mail address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Logs should be sent as an e-mail attachment, not in the text of the
e-mail, and the filename for the
log should be yourcall.log.
Deadline: All entries must be e-mailed by March 31th, 2007. Logs
lately received will not be
considered to any effect.
SPANISH PROVINCE CODE
A – Alicante AB – Albacete AL – Almería AV – Ávila B – Barcelona
BA – Badajoz BI – Vizcaya BU – Burgos C – Coruña CA – Cádiz
CC – Cáceres CE – Ceuta CO – Córdoba CR – Ciudad Real CS – Castellón
CU – Cuenca GC – Las Palmas GI – Girona GR – Granada GU – Guadalajara
H – Huelva HU – Huesca IB – I. Baleares J – Jaén L – Lleida
LE – León LO – La Rioja LU – Lugo M – Madrid MA – Málaga
ML – Melilla MU – Murcia NA – Navarra O – Asturias OU – Ourense
P – Palencia PO – Pontevedra S – Cantabria SA – Salamanca SE – Sevilla
SG – Segovia SO – Soria SS – Guipúzcoa T – Tarragona TE – Teruel
TF – SC Tenerife TO – Toledo V – Valencia VA – Valladolid VI – Álava
Z – Zaragoza ZA – Zamora

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

Re: [digitalradio] screw WINLINK

[James Wilson]

First, I am not a winlink user.  

>From their site
http://www.winlink.org/guidelines.htm
Listen First!  Because there is a live human being (control operator) is always 
present at the initiating station, one common theme is paramount to the 
successful operation of the system.  This common theme, which is consistent 
with all Amateur Radio operations, consists of simply listening on the 
frequency about to be used by the initiating station in order to determine if 
that frequency is occupied.  Obviously, if the frequency that is about to be 
used is occupied, the proper procedure is to either wait until it is free 
before transmitting, or find another Radio Message Server (PMBO) whose 
frequencies are not otherwise occupied.  Not only is this a common courtesy to 
other Amateurs, but it is also a specific requirement of any Country's rules 
which regulate Amateur licenses, Worldwide.  


To me this sounds like one of those situations that the product is intended to 
break, but they put the blame on the user not the system.  

Another example of this is a 110 horsepower motorcycle and in the manual it 
says that speeding is dangerous and you should always obey local laws and 
regulations.  Everyone knows they are going to break the law but they put the 
responsibility on the end user instead of the end user.  

Almost like the 2nd amendment.  

I think the best way to push winlink users to not interfere is to log events 
where the intentionally transmit over other operators and submit them in mass 
to ARRL and the FCC.  
  - Original Message - 
  From: Andrew O'Brien 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [digitalradio] screw WINLINK


  Just a friendly reminder that a rule of this group is that we adhere to 
normal operational rules and not advocate deliberate interference.
  Andy K3UK



  On 3/9/07, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Live with it, and get used to it"
then QRM it.

david/wd4kpd






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

   

Re: [digitalradio] Europe and IARU Region 1 Auto Sub-Bands

[Alan Tindal]

Hi Bonnie, I stand corrected but :-

Unmanned transmitting stations:

IARU member societies are requested to limit this activity on the HF 
bands. It is recommended that any unmanned transmitting stations on HF 
shall only be activated under operator control except for beacons 
agreed with the IARU Region 1 beacon coordinator, or specially 
licensed experimental stations.

Alan


- Original Message - 
From: "expeditionradio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 2:51 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Europe and IARU Region 1 Auto Sub-Bands


>> Alan Tindal G3VLQ wrote:
>> As far as I know we don't have automatic sub bands here but
>> we still get stomped on by Pactor 3 popping up on top of QSOs.
>
> Hi Alan,
>
> The 80 metres auto sub-band for IARU Region 1 is 3590kHz to 3620kHz.
> (europe/africa/mideast/russia)
> "automatically controlled data stations, unattended"
>
> It is 10kHz bigger than the 80m auto sub-band for USA.
>
> You can view the IARU Region 1 bandplan at
> http://www.hflink.com/bandplans/region1_bandplan.pdf
>
>
> 73---Bonnie KQ6XA
>
>
>
>
>
>  Yahoo! Groups 
>
>
> 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: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 
> 3/8/2007 10:58
>
> 

Re: [digitalradio] screw WINLINK

[Andrew O'Brien]

Just a friendly reminder that a rule of this group is that we adhere to
normal operational rules and not advocate deliberate interference.
Andy K3UK

On 3/9/07, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


  "Live with it, and get used to it"
then QRM it.

david/wd4kpd

 





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

Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Dave Bernstein]

>>>AA6YQ comments below

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
 
Seems I did not make my point. A large portion of Winlinks 
popping "out of nowhere" is because some  H I D D E N   (in the skip 
zone) user has  triggered it.

>>>That's exactly right, Jose. But if WinLink properly included a 
busy frequency detector, then it would refrain from responding to 
that H I D D E N user -- as would a human operator under the same 
circumstances. But since WinLink doesn't include a busy frequecy 
detector, and since WinLink doesn't respond to an operator 
sending "QRL, please QSY", it blasts away, QRMing the pre-existing 
QSO.

Andy, wasn't there another list to discuss this "I hate Winlink" 
stuff?

>>>There is indeed another list for discussing policy. Addressing  
inaccurate technical assertions seems in-scope for this list.

73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Rein Couperus]

What a terrible waste of intellectual resources! 

Sigh

Rein EA/PA0R/P

> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Gesendet: 09.03.07 18:28:28
> An: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Betreff: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz  Freq Coordination Info


> 
> The only known implementation was on Windows, Rein, and it was closed 
> source.
> 
>73,
> 
> Dave, AA6YQ
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rein Couperus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > > The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
> > > 
> > 
> > Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
> > 
> > Rein EA/PA0R/P
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
http://pa0r.blogspirit.com


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups.  See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lOt0.A/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM
~-> 


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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Jose A. Amador]

Kurt wrote:

> > Unfortunatelly all this name calling and mode bashing (you know,
> > the mode I support is better than yours etc) does not promote
> > digital radio at all.
> >
> > 73 de Demetre SV1UY
>
>
>  I am not bashing any mode, as I use most of them at one time or
>  another, and trying my hand at ALE right now. But I do not go and use
>  a freq without listening and asking if the freq is being used before
>  I start transmitting. This is not so much as a mode bashing as it is
>  to try to get it even across the board. I know here if you purposely
>  start transmitting over a on going QSO, and keep on doing it, you
>  will get a letter from the FCC stating that, it is a no-no, and they
>  will take your license and some money also. Seems though Winlink is
>  exempt from the law let alone common courtesy and practice.
>
>  Kurt K8YZK

Seems I did not make my point. A large portion of Winlinks popping "out 
of nowhere"
is because some  H I D D E N   (in the skip zone)  user has  triggered it.

Haven't you ever  been in a situation when calling a rare DX on a pileup 
and he never
comes back to you, because the BIG GUNS in the skip zone run over you 
and you never
notice ?

Andy, wasn't there another list to discuss this "I hate Winlink" stuff?

Jose, CO2JA





__

V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía y Educación 
Energética.
22 al 25 de mayo de 2007
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier

Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Kurt]

,
> 
> Unfortunatelly all this name calling and mode bashing (you know, the 
> mode I support is better than yours etc) does not promote digital 
> radio at all.
> 
> 73 de Demetre SV1UY

I am not bashing any mode, as I use most of them at one time or 
another, and trying my hand at ALE right now. But I do not go and use 
a freq without listening and asking if the freq is being used before I 
start transmitting. This is not so much as a mode bashing as it is to 
try to get it even across the board. I know here if you purposely 
start transmitting over a on going QSO, and keep on doing it, you will 
get a letter from the FCC stating that, it is a no-no, and they will 
take your license and some money also. Seems though Winlink is exempt 
from the law let alone common courtesy and practice.

Kurt
K8YZK

Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Dave Bernstein]

Pointing out a severe engineering deficiency in a mode is not "mode 
bashing"; its fulfilling one's responsibilities as an amateur radio 
operator. Its no different than reporting key clicks, chirp, or 
splatter to your QSO partner; most respond with "thanks for letting 
me know!".

73,

 Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Demetre SV1UY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador"  
> wrote:
> > After waiting and watching what is going on with the larger 
picture,
> > I see a lot of obstination and fundamentalistic thinking in this 
> thread.
> > 
> > The fundamendalistic, blinds on, "taliban" quarreling going on 
> about 
> > POLICY is certainly out of the scope of this list to me.
> > 
> > A fundamental fact of propagation, the hidden station in the skip 
> zone 
> > is being disregarded repeatedly.
> > 
> > Period.
> > 
> > Jose, CO2JA
> > 
> > PS: I do own a cellphone and also watched LIVE the first steps of 
> Neil 
> > Armstrong on the moon.
> > 
> > ---
> > Prof. Jose A. Amador, E.E., MSc.
> 
> You are spot on Jose,
> 
> Unfortunatelly all this name calling and mode bashing (you know, 
the 
> mode I support is better than yours etc) does not promote digital 
> radio at all.
> 
> 73 de Demetre SV1UY
>

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Best software to use MFJ 1278

[Danny Douglas]

HMMM I might just have to dig the MFJ 1278 out, but then I need another darn
com port.

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: "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 11:58 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Best software to use MFJ 1278


> Actually, running an external RTTY modem in combination with
> soundcard RTTY (via the MMTTY engine) is quite powerful: you get
> panoramic reception and click-to-tune with the ability to decode two
> signals simultaneously -- which can either be used to more quickly
> break RTTY DX pileups, or for diversity decoding of the same signal.
>
> As Andy K3UK pointed out, WinWarbler supports this combination; its
> free, and available via www.dxlabsuite.com .
>
> So don't throw those RTTY modems away!
>
>73,
>
>Dave, AA6YQ
>
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Roger J. Buffington"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >  On 3/7/07, *kc7fys* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > >  I have the 13-pin and 5-pin DINs wired up and connected to my
> Kenwood
> > >  850S. The RS232 connected--now what software should I install
> for my
> > >  first HF data mode QSO? What is the best and easiest software to
> get
> > >  started enjoying digital modes with the MFJ 1278? I know it's not
> > >  one of the easiest TNCs to use, but I want to use it, since I
> paid
> > >  for the darn thing. As you can tell from my language, I'm a bit
> of an
> > >  appliance operator. Photos of my folly in "Ham Related" on
> > >  www.flickr.com/
> photos/jonathancharles/sets
> > >  Best regards, Jonathan
> >
> > You know, for awhile I did PSK31 and other sound card modes with at
> TNC
> > simply because, like you, I had paid for the darned thing and taken
> the
> > trouble to get it wired up.  I eventually realized that it really
> is
> > *easier* to dispense with the TNC and simply interface the rig
> directly
> > to the soundcard.  Once you have done that, things will likely be
> easier
> > and work better.  Well, it was for me.  The use of TNCs,
> particularly
> > the old MFJ, is about as dead as Julius Caesar and you will simply
> add
> > hassle to operating the digital modes if you stick with it.  My
> $.02.
> > My old SCS PTC-II TNC now gathers dust somewhere.
> >
> > de Roger W6VZV
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 3/8/2007
10:58 AM
>
>

Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Demetre SV1UY]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> After waiting and watching what is going on with the larger picture,
> I see a lot of obstination and fundamentalistic thinking in this 
thread.
> 
> The fundamendalistic, blinds on, "taliban" quarreling going on 
about 
> POLICY is certainly out of the scope of this list to me.
> 
> A fundamental fact of propagation, the hidden station in the skip 
zone 
> is being disregarded repeatedly.
> 
> Period.
> 
> Jose, CO2JA
> 
> PS: I do own a cellphone and also watched LIVE the first steps of 
Neil 
> Armstrong on the moon.
> 
> ---
> Prof. Jose A. Amador, E.E., MSc.

You are spot on Jose,

Unfortunatelly all this name calling and mode bashing (you know, the 
mode I support is better than yours etc) does not promote digital 
radio at all.

73 de Demetre SV1UY

[digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Dave Bernstein]

I agree, Walt. As long as the traffic is non-commercial, no one ham 
should be telling any other ham what can or can't be conveyed over 
the air.

And I further agree that emergency systems must be kept in continuous 
use; otherwise, proficiency problems get discovered at the worst 
possible time, which is during the emergency.

Unfortunately, the system ARRL has chosen for emergency use is an 
embarrassing piece of engineering administered by a team too arrogant 
to address its deficiencies. These "throw out the baby with the 
bathwater" arguments should not be a surprise given the frustration 
created by a system that callously QRMs ongoing QSOs. 

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with automatic operation on HF. 
Shoddy engineering or operation of any amateur radio station, 
however, is completely unacceptable -- whether analog or digital or 
manual or automatic or attended or unattended.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ





--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Define needless?  Whys is it needless?  Were the messages being 
relayed across the country by amateur radio stations in 1920 
needless?  There was AT&T and several other smaller telegraph systems 
that did the same thing.
> 
> The idea today  is to have a high level of confidence in our 
ability to send and receive messages via an RF link in case there is 
a need by the nation of in the world.  By exercising our systems on a 
regular basis, we can learn to depend on the systems and identify 
their shortfalls so that in a "real world" situation, the systems 
will function properly and without failure.
> 
> Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Walt/K5YFW
>  
>  -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Joe Ivey
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:40 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination 
Info
>  
> Rick,
> 
> I agree with what you are saying. I guess that no one really 
realized what would happen when the FCC allowed this. But I still say 
that most of the traffic that goes through the system right now is 
needless. With all the communications out there, internet, cell 
phones and the like it should not be allowed on the ham bands.
> 
> Joe
> W4JSI
>

[digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Dave Bernstein]

See http://gpl-violations.org/

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Leigh L Klotz, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Now that NCI is no longer necessary, maybe we can get Bruce Perens 
> interested in this topic and he can pursue the release of SCAMP 
source 
> code through their obligations of GPL.
> Leigh/WA5ZNU
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 1:48 am, Rein Couperus wrote:
> >
> >>  The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
> >>
> >
> > Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
> >
> > Rein EA/PA0R/P
> >
>

Obstination (was Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info)

[Jose A. Amador]

wa8vbx wrote:

 > Jose it might sound absurd, but then again man flying to the moon,
 > satellite communications and cellphones, they all at one time were
 > called absurded, but they are real now. Don't know in Cuba but here,
 > almost everyone has a cellphone.

After waiting and watching what is going on with the larger picture,
I see a lot of obstination and fundamentalistic thinking in this thread.

The fundamendalistic, blinds on, "taliban" quarreling going on about 
POLICY is certainly out of the scope of this list to me.

A fundamental fact of propagation, the hidden station in the skip zone 
is being disregarded repeatedly.

Period.

Jose, CO2JA

PS: I do own a cellphone and also watched LIVE the first steps of Neil 
Armstrong on the moon.

---
Prof. Jose A. Amador, E.E., MSc.
AMSAT-NA LM 1209
Linux User 91155



__

V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía y Educación 
Energética.
22 al 25 de mayo de 2007
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier

[digitalradio] Re: Best software to use MFJ 1278

[Dave Bernstein]

Actually, running an external RTTY modem in combination with 
soundcard RTTY (via the MMTTY engine) is quite powerful: you get 
panoramic reception and click-to-tune with the ability to decode two 
signals simultaneously -- which can either be used to more quickly 
break RTTY DX pileups, or for diversity decoding of the same signal.

As Andy K3UK pointed out, WinWarbler supports this combination; its 
free, and available via www.dxlabsuite.com .

So don't throw those RTTY modems away!

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Roger J. Buffington" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> >  On 3/7/07, *kc7fys* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
> >  wrote:
> >
> >  I have the 13-pin and 5-pin DINs wired up and connected to my 
Kenwood
> >  850S. The RS232 connected--now what software should I install 
for my
> >  first HF data mode QSO? What is the best and easiest software to 
get
> >  started enjoying digital modes with the MFJ 1278? I know it's not
> >  one of the easiest TNCs to use, but I want to use it, since I 
paid
> >  for the darn thing. As you can tell from my language, I'm a bit 
of an
> >  appliance operator. Photos of my folly in "Ham Related" on
> >  www.flickr.com/ 
photos/jonathancharles/sets
> >  Best regards, Jonathan
> 
> You know, for awhile I did PSK31 and other sound card modes with at 
TNC 
> simply because, like you, I had paid for the darned thing and taken 
the 
> trouble to get it wired up.  I eventually realized that it really 
is 
> *easier* to dispense with the TNC and simply interface the rig 
directly 
> to the soundcard.  Once you have done that, things will likely be 
easier 
> and work better.  Well, it was for me.  The use of TNCs, 
particularly 
> the old MFJ, is about as dead as Julius Caesar and you will simply 
add 
> hassle to operating the digital modes if you stick with it.  My 
$.02.  
> My old SCS PTC-II TNC now gathers dust somewhere.
> 
> de Roger W6VZV
>

[digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Dave Bernstein]

The only known implementation was on Windows, Rein, and it was closed 
source.

   73,

Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rein Couperus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> > The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
> > 
> 
> Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
> 
> Rein EA/PA0R/P
>

[digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Kurt]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think that sending messages and relaying messages by amateur 
radio was ever ment to restrict the content to amateur radio only 
subject matter.  In fact, if you look at the ARL numbers, you will 
find that most of them are NOT related to amateur radio subject matter.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Walt/K5YFW
>

Walt I have to agree. While stationed in the military, I did a lot of 
phone patches/radiograms thru hams while in the states and had nothing 
to due with ham radio, and of course used mars when overseas. If I 
remember right you can even order pizza thru your local 2 meter 
repeater phone patch, but you can not due business over the radio.
My main problem with WinLink is that it comes on without knowing if a 
QSO is in progress on the freq and as others have stated, I have heard 
them from 14.110 down to 14.070. How much room do they need?
Now days with sat's internet and cellphone, if you have enough money 
to buy a ship to go out into the ocean, how much more to setup a sat 
cellphone/internet account for surfing the net?

Kurt
K8YZK

[digitalradio] screw WINLINK

[David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD]

"Live with it, and get used to it"
then QRM it.

david/wd4kpd

RE: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA]

I don't think that sending messages and relaying messages by amateur radio was 
ever ment to restrict the content to amateur radio only subject matter.  In 
fact, if you look at the ARL numbers, you will find that most of them are NOT 
related to amateur radio subject matter.

73,

Walt/K5YFW

-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Joe Ivey
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 3:42 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info


I have yet to understand why the FCC allowed automatic stations on the ham 
bands in the first place. I hate to see ham radio being used as an internet 
email service that in 99% of the case the mail is not related to ham radio.

I think that 99% of the ham support handling emergency traffic and would stay 
clear of any frequency that was being used for such a purpose. A lot of people 
including hams do not really understand the term "emergency traffic". Simply 
put it means the threat to life, injury. and property. 99.99% of all 
emergencies are confined to a general local area. It very rare that one needs 
to send traffic from the west coast to the east coast or Washington DC. Ham 
radio serves a great purpose in these cases and we as operators should help out 
when we are needed. But for someone out in his boat just wanting to check is 
email should not be allowed on the ham bands.

My 2 cents worth.

Joe
W4JSI

RE: [digitalradio] Disputed territory:

[DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA]

Remember...the ARRL is making a suggestion, Part 97 is the LAW.
 
73,
 
Walt/K5YFW

-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Joe Ivey
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:48 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Disputed territory:


Ok, but how many are licensed by the ARRL? My license does not have any 
reference to ARRL. So where am I going to operate? Wherever the FCC says in 
their rules says I can.
 
If any U S ham is operating with licenses issued by the ARRL then they are 
operating Illegal.
 
Joe
W4JSI
 

- Original Message - 
From: DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA   
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 2:33 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Disputed territory:



Disputed territory:
3580 - 3600 kHz in North America 

Where the FCC says I can operate digital modes in North America:

1.800 - 2.000 kHz
3.500 - 3.600 kHz
7.000 - 7.100 kHz
10.100 - 10.150 kHz
14.000 - 14.150 kHz

ARRL Band Plan and FCC Authorizations:

160 Meters
ARRL 1.800 - 1.810 Digital Modes 
ARRL 1.810 CW QRP 
Part 97 1.800 - 2.000 Digital Modes
Part 97 1.800 - 2.000 CW 

80 Meters
ARRL 3.570 - 3.600 RTTY/Data 
ARRL 3.590 RTTY/Data DX 
Part 97 3.500 - 3.600 Digital Modes
Part 97 3.500 - 4.000 CW

40 Meters:
ARRL 7.040 RTTY/Data DX 
ARRL 7.080 - 7.125 RTTY/Data 
Part 97 7.000 - 7.100 Digital Modes
Part 97 7.000 - 7.300 CW

30 Meters
ARRL 10.130-10.140 RTTY 
ARRL 10.140-10.150 Packet 
Part 97 10.100 - 10.150 Digital Modes/CW

20 Meters
ARRL 14.0700 -1 4.095 RTTY 
ARRL 14.0950 - 14.0995 Packet 
ARRL 14.1005 - 14.112 Packet 
Part 97 14.000 - 14.150 Digital Modes
Part 97 14.000 - 14.350 CW

Ok...I can move over (up or down) between CW stations...just tune the band for 
myFuzzy Mode signal.

73,

Walt/K5YFW


 

[digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[expeditionradio]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kv9u <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I believe if you check the regulations, the automatic area on 80 meters 
> is even narrower at 3585 to 3600.

Thanks for the correction Rick.

Bonnie

RE: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA]

Define needless?  Whys is it needless?  Were the messages being relayed across 
the country by amateur radio stations in 1920 needless?  There was AT&T and 
several other smaller telegraph systems that did the same thing.

The idea today  is to have a high level of confidence in our ability to send 
and receive messages via an RF link in case there is a need by the nation of in 
the world.  By exercising our systems on a regular basis, we can learn to 
depend on the systems and identify their shortfalls so that in a "real world" 
situation, the systems will function properly and without failure.

Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.

73,

Walt/K5YFW
 
 -Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Joe Ivey
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:40 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info
 
Rick,

I agree with what you are saying. I guess that no one really realized what 
would happen when the FCC allowed this. But I still say that most of the 
traffic that goes through the system right now is needless. With all the 
communications out there, internet, cell phones and the like it should not be 
allowed on the ham bands.

Joe
W4JSI

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Rick Scott]

> Bonnie KQ6XA

With that attitude Bonnie you have now revealed your
real coordination.


We WINLINK will Take what ever we want and the rest
can just STFU ...

That about sum it up ?



 

Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Leigh L Klotz, Jr.]

Now that NCI is no longer necessary, maybe we can get Bruce Perens 
interested in this topic and he can pursue the release of SCAMP source 
code through their obligations of GPL.
Leigh/WA5ZNU
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 1:48 am, Rein Couperus wrote:
>
>>  The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
>>
>
> Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
>
> Rein EA/PA0R/P
>

Re: [digitalradio] Disputed territory:

[kv9u]

Because Canada is so close to the U.S., it does impact you at some 
times. It is not easy to operate digital modes when the frequency has 
voice modes. I notice an increasing use of the area just above 3600 now 
for Extra Class Licensees operating SSB voice.

Most of us agree with you about the bizarre decision by the FCC to 
reduce text digital mode space. Of course they did increase image and 
voice digital mode space by a large amount.

While I don't see any possible way to get the FCC to reverse its 
decision, what I hope will eventually happen is that the FCC will allow 
wide digital modes (meaning the width of voice SSB signals) to operate 
in the voice/image portions of the bands, no matter what the content.

When you are operating a program such as WinDRM, which can do digital 
voice, digital image, digital text, etc., there is no way to determine 
what content is being sent by just hearing the audio. It escapes me why 
they would want to prohibit the sending of text data as part of the mix 
of data types. And so I think that it may be possible to convince them 
that if the mode is basically the same as existing modes that are 
permitted, then the content should not matter.

However, I would definitely NOT include any increased bandwidth for 
automatic operation.

It will be interesting if and when the FCC acts on the bandwidth 
proposals. But maybe they will make things worse? Hopefully not.

73,

Rick, KV9U




John Bradley wrote:
>  
>
> Don't involve us Canadians in this argument. This problem was
> created by the USA, is a problem only within the USA ,
> and the solution has to come from the USA.
>
>  
> As an outsider, it seems that the FCC was overly zealous in
> allowing another 200khz for SSB operations,
> and stuffing everyone else in a 100khz segment. In actual practice
> , very few SSB signals are heard below 3700 khz
> so why not campaign for the FCC/ARRL to allocate 3650 up for SSB
> and 3650 down to 3550 for digi and the rest for CW
> I don't understand why they messed with this in the first place.
>  
> John
> VE5MU
>

[digitalradio] Europe and IARU Region 1 Auto Sub-Bands

[expeditionradio]

> Alan Tindal G3VLQ wrote:
> As far as I know we don't have automatic sub bands here but 
> we still get stomped on by Pactor 3 popping up on top of QSOs. 

Hi Alan,

The 80 metres auto sub-band for IARU Region 1 is 3590kHz to 3620kHz. 
(europe/africa/mideast/russia) 
"automatically controlled data stations, unattended"

It is 10kHz bigger than the 80m auto sub-band for USA.

You can view the IARU Region 1 bandplan at
http://www.hflink.com/bandplans/region1_bandplan.pdf


73---Bonnie KQ6XA

 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[kv9u]

I believe if you check the regulations, the automatic area on 80 meters 
is even narrower at 3585 to 3600.

Because of the poor implementation of busy frequency detection, one can 
expect much more QRM from automatic stations. Eventually, I expect that 
the regulations will be written to prohibit operation of any HF 
operation without human or machine automatic detection.

The problem is that the narrower, 500 Hz, semi-automatic modes may 
operate anywhere in the text data part of the bands. On 80 meters, that 
would be from 3500 to 3600 here in the U.S. However, good amateur 
practice and the bandplans would not agree with that wide a use of the 
bands and a ham doing that could be cited for improper operation.

73,

Rick, KV9U

expeditionradio wrote:
> In USA the FCC set the new auto subband at 3580-3600kHz. 
> No one should be surprised that hams are using this subband 
> for auto operation exactly as FCC intended it to be used. 
>
> No one is forcing anyone else to operate non-auto in the auto subband.
> Space is available for non-auto data/texting 3500-3580kHz without the
> limitation.
>
> Many of us were not happy when the FCC shrunk the size of the
> data/texting sub-band, but we must live with it now.  
>
> There is really no question that auto stations exist and will continue
> to exist. Live with it, and get used to it. Auto operation at various
> degrees will undoubtedly be a part of normal operation on the ham
> bands, there is no turning back the clock to the horse and buggy. We
> as hams should continue, and will continue, to use any and all types
> of communication systems we can dream of. That's what we do.
>
> Bonnie KQ6XA
>
>   

Re: [digitalradio]

[kv9u]

John,

The content is extremely important. Commercial use of amateur radio is 
not permitted under Part 97. There is no question that the Winlink 2000 
system is allowing commercial use, since these are messages that would 
otherwise go through commercial channels.

And, according to Part 97, it is not only the content, but the regular 
use of such transmissions that makes it illegal.

Further, all modes on amateur radio were intended to be monitored by 
other hams. This is nearly impossible with Pactor 2 and 3. In fact, the 
owners of the Winlink 2000 system made light of that some time back as 
to how secure it was using the compression of data plus the protocol. 
While it is theoretically possible to monitor with the right software, I 
often wonder how many owners of Pactor modems (P2 and P3 primarily) are 
able to discern the messages. Perhaps some SCS modem owners can describe 
their experiences.

73,

Rick, KV9U




John Becker wrote:
> If the guy at sea was a ham why would care what type of a message 
> he was sending?
>
> At 07:42 PM 3/8/2007, you wrote:
>
>   
>> I'm with you on that.  Why the ARRL supports what is essentially long 
>> range Citizen's Band or Marine Band is beyond me.
>>
>> de Roger W6VZV
>> 
>
>   

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[kv9u]

SCAMP was developed using the RDFT protocol, which in itself  is GPLand 
comes from Linux. The author indicated several years ago that he would 
release SCAMP's protocol as GPL. He has not done this. Partly, I think 
because of time constraints and also because of keeping things 
proprietary and not willing to share.

I have never seen such negative thinking in amateur radio is all the 
years I have been involved since first licensed in 1963. It used to be 
that hams were more than happy to share new ideas and others would build 
upon those ideas and for the most part, most hams enjoyed that 
progression. This seems much less common with computers and software, 
even when they are directly associated with ham radio.

My hope is that as we see more GPL and open software, and the last few 
years have almost been explosive with this software, we will see this 
happen in amateur radio as well.

73,

Rick, KV9U


Rein Couperus wrote:
>> The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
>>
>> 
>
> Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?
>
> Rein EA/PA0R/P
>   



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/hOt0.A/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM
~-> 


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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [digitalradio] Best software to use MFJ 1278

[Joe Ivey]

Jonathan,

You did say what digital mode you wanted operate. If I remember correctly the 
MFJ 1278 is an older TNC. It will only operate RTTY, CW, Packet, and maybe 
Pactor. It does not do any of the newer digital like PSK31, MFSK16. These modes 
requires a sound card in the PC.

Joe
W4JSI

  - Original Message - 
  From: kc7fys 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 8:19 PM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Best software to use MFJ 1278


  I have the 13-pin and 5-pin DINs wired up and connected to my Kenwood
  850S. The RS232 connected--now what software should I install for my
  first HF data mode QSO? What is the best and easiest software to get
  started enjoying digital modes with the MFJ 1278? I know it's not one
  of the easiest TNCs to use, but I want to use it, since I paid for the
  darn thing. As you can tell from my language, I'm a bit of an
  appliance operator. Photos of my folly in "Ham Related" on
  www.flickr.com/photos/jonathancharles/sets
  Best regards,
  Jonathan



   

Re: [digitalradio] Best software to use MFJ 1278

[Andrew O'Brien]

>  My old SCS PTC-II TNC now gathers dust somewhere.
>
>

As does my PK232 and MFJ 1276.
-- 
Andy K3UK
Skype Me :  callto://andyobrien73
www.obriensweb.com

Re: [digitalradio] Best software to use MFJ 1278

[Roger J. Buffington]

>  On 3/7/07, *kc7fys* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
>  wrote:
>
>  I have the 13-pin and 5-pin DINs wired up and connected to my Kenwood
>  850S. The RS232 connected--now what software should I install for my
>  first HF data mode QSO? What is the best and easiest software to get
>  started enjoying digital modes with the MFJ 1278? I know it's not
>  one of the easiest TNCs to use, but I want to use it, since I paid
>  for the darn thing. As you can tell from my language, I'm a bit of an
>  appliance operator. Photos of my folly in "Ham Related" on
>  www.flickr.com/ photos/jonathancharles/sets
>  Best regards, Jonathan

You know, for awhile I did PSK31 and other sound card modes with at TNC 
simply because, like you, I had paid for the darned thing and taken the 
trouble to get it wired up.  I eventually realized that it really is 
*easier* to dispense with the TNC and simply interface the rig directly 
to the soundcard.  Once you have done that, things will likely be easier 
and work better.  Well, it was for me.  The use of TNCs, particularly 
the old MFJ, is about as dead as Julius Caesar and you will simply add 
hassle to operating the digital modes if you stick with it.  My $.02.  
My old SCS PTC-II TNC now gathers dust somewhere.

de Roger W6VZV

Re: [digitalradio] Busy Channel Detection

[Tom Azlin, N4ZPT]

Does not seem to me that the issue is with ALE radios but I guess your
point is the technology exists and is being used in them. Sure would be
nice if busy channel detection would be adopted by the other semi-auto
or auto modems, software, and stations.  Seems to me if what is being
shipped is email, then it can stand a few minutes delay at one node or
another while a direct person to person QSO is underway.

73, Tom n4zpt

expeditionradio wrote:
> Automatic channel busy detection has been standard in ALE transceivers
> for many years. These are transceivers that have ALE embedded in the
> microprocessor inside the radio, and they don't need an external
> computer. 
> 

Re: [digitalradio] Best software to use MFJ 1278

[Andrew O'Brien]

I have never actually used a TNC with the digital modes (usually just use
the soundcard) other than old fashioned RTTY and AMTOR.  I suggest you start
with Winwarbler because I have seen some referenced to use of this software
with old fashioned TNCs.  Winwarbler provides RTTY and PSK31 and is well
supported.
Andy K3UK

On 3/7/07, kc7fys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


  I have the 13-pin and 5-pin DINs wired up and connected to my Kenwood
850S. The RS232 connected--now what software should I install for my
first HF data mode QSO? What is the best and easiest software to get
started enjoying digital modes with the MFJ 1278? I know it's not one
of the easiest TNCs to use, but I want to use it, since I paid for the
darn thing. As you can tell from my language, I'm a bit of an
appliance operator. Photos of my folly in "Ham Related" on
www.flickr.com/photos/jonathancharles/sets
Best regards,
Jonathan

 





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

[digitalradio] Best software to use MFJ 1278

[kc7fys]

I have the 13-pin and 5-pin DINs wired up and connected to my Kenwood
850S. The RS232 connected--now what software should I install for my
first HF data mode QSO? What is the best and easiest software to get
started enjoying digital modes with the MFJ 1278? I know it's not one
of the easiest TNCs to use, but I want to use it, since I paid for the
darn thing. As you can tell from my language, I'm a bit of an
appliance operator. Photos of my folly in "Ham Related" on
www.flickr.com/photos/jonathancharles/sets
Best regards,
Jonathan

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Alan Tindal]

I entirely agree with you Joe.

As far as I know we don't have automatic sub bands here but we still get 
stomped on by Pactor 3 popping up on top of QSOs.

The "emergency traffic" tale is just used to justify the use of these infernal 
automatic stations.

Alan
G3VLQ

  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Ivey 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:41 PM
  Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info


  I have yet to understand why the FCC allowed automatic stations on the ham 
bands in the first place. I hate to see ham radio being used as an internet 
email service that in 99% of the case the mail is not related to ham radio.

  I think that 99% of the ham support handling emergency traffic and would stay 
clear of any frequency that was being used for such a purpose. A lot of people 
including hams do not really understand the term "emergency traffic". Simply 
put it means the threat to life, injury. and property. 99.99% of all 
emergencies are confined to a general local area. It very rare that one needs 
to send traffic from the west coast to the east coast or Washington DC. Ham 
radio serves a great purpose in these cases and we as operators should help out 
when we are needed. But for someone out in his boat just wanting to check is 
email should not be allowed on the ham bands.

  My 2 cents worth.

  Joe
  W4JSI


  - Original Message - 
From: Jose A. Amador 
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info


Rich Mulvey wrote:

> Kurt wrote:
> > I'm afraid that there is no simple solution to the problem of who
> > is working what mode where. But each operator must be diligent to
> > try as best possible not to QRM another signal on the portion of
> > the band that they are "working."

If others are not "hidden" to him by distance or propagation.

> > Walt and others this is the problem. We are required to check to
> > make sure the freq is not busy and to not interfer with other
> > communications, if we hear them.

Big IF

> > Yet WinLink is automatic and never checks before it starts
> > transmitting.

This has been said here more than enough times. Winlink response is 
triggered by a user
who calls the station and most likely does not hear the others.

> > So who is at fault the operator in qso on a certain
> > freq, or the automatic station that comes on over the qso in
> > progress.

The automatic station is triggered to answer. Or should it remain 
silent, as if it were deaf
to the calls because others are hidden to the station calling the 
Winlink station ?

I wonder why someone would choose the frequency of such an automatic 
station to park on...
ignorance (of published lists, I mean) would be the most likely excuse.

Both attitudes should be questionable. Because ignorance does not excuse 
you of obeying laws,
even those you don't know. Tell that to the policemanif he is a 
nice guy, he will let you go...he, he...
didn't you know? C'mon...

It has not the same weight, but it bears resemblance, at least to me.

> > Simple logic would say that the automatic station is wrong,

I would say simplistic logic, the "victims" logic.

> > but it seems that FCC/ARRL/IARU if not others, do not care
> > if the automatic station comes on over the stations already in qso.

Triggered by someone hidden to those in QSOhow would he know?

> > Being this is the digital radio, maybe somewhere down the road a
> > programmer will get a program going that will listen before it
> > transmits, but I guess I will continue to use the computer between
> > my ears to make sure the freq is not busy.

Even when you do that, there will be always some possible hidden 
station around you.

How an arbitrary, even mistuned signal, could be positively identified 
from "noise"?
What is a signal? What is noise? How would YOU program that? Or it 
should be some 
"anti vox" triggering the brakes even by the hint of a cat's meow ?

> > Hey it's an old computer but still works great.

Imagine if we were to be trashed as PC's are when we get two years 
oldughh !!!

> It's quite clear that automatic stations in the automatic sub-bands
> are not going away.
>
> But hey - let's try something truly radical: How about - wait for
> it, this is truly a novel idea - how about manually operated stations
> operate somewhere away from the automatic subbands?

Guess this is a really novel idea, a big discovery for quite a few.

> I know, I know, just because there are *wide* swaths of practically
> unused frequencies that are legally available for use for digital
> modes doesn't mean that they're any fun 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Roger J. Buffington]

expeditionradio wrote:

>  There is really no question that auto stations exist and will
>  continue to exist. Live with it, and get used to it. Auto operation
>  at various degrees will undoubtedly be a part of normal operation on
>  the ham bands, there is no turning back the clock to the horse and
>  buggy. We as hams should continue, and will continue, to use any and
>  all types of communication systems we can dream of. That's what we
>  do.
>
>  Bonnie KQ6XA

The horse-and-buggy people are the automatic stations which do not have 
the capability to listen before transmitting, despite the fact that the 
technology and capability are readily available.  We can hope that this 
will, in fact, decrease as internet access becomes more universal at RV 
parks and the like, and there is less incentive for RVers to use Winlink 
as a means of cheap internet access.

de Roger W6VZV

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Rein Couperus]

> The SCAMP busy detector has been around for several years.
> 

Is this available for Linux? Source code? GPL?

Rein EA/PA0R/P


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups.  See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lOt0.A/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM
~-> 


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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [digitalradio] 7070 and 14070 - was - 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info

[Roger J. Buffington]

John Becker wrote:
>
>  Don't buy this either having played RTTY - Amtor - Pactor, and packet
>  that was above 100 Roger please don't try that with me - I'm been
>  doing digital (RTTY) and the above mode since 1970.
>
>  At 08:32 PM 3/8/2007, you wrote:
>
> > Very simple. Because the 070 frequencies have always been
> > keyboard-to-keyboard freqs, with the modes changing over time.
> > Amtor in the 80s, Pactor (back when it was a qso mode,
> > keyboard-to-keyboard) for a few years, now PSK and MFSK and the
> > like. The oddball out are the automated stations, who used to be
> > confined up in the old Packet subband.
> >
> > de Roger W6VZV

Well, I've been doing digital since 1967.  What I said, above, is 
absolutely true.  The 070 frequencies have always been keyboard to 
keyboard frequencies, and the automatic modes are recent interlopers 
there.  If they had stayed above 14.100 or 7.100 we would not have all 
of the Pactor QRM against ordinary hams having 2 way QSOs that today we 
do, in fact, have.  Your attempt to revise history is unsuccessful.

de Roger W6VZV