[digitalradio] SW Ohio Digital Symposium, Saturday, 1/12

[Mark Thompson]

http://www.swohdigi.org/



Twenty Second Annual Southwest Ohio 
Digital Symposium  
Saturday 12 January 2008 
8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.



Planning is underway for the 22nd annual SW Ohio Digital Symposium to be held 
from approximfrom 8 AM to approximately 4:30 PM EST, Saturday, January 12, 2008 
in Thesken Hall, on the Middletown Campus of Miami University, Middletown, 
Ohio.  If you have a particular subject of interest which you'd like to 
present, or know of someone who is qualified to present, please contact,  Jay 
Slough, K4ZLE k4zle  embarqmail  com.


The 2008 program is being beaten into shape, and promises to be a good one.  
Times aren't fixed yet, but list in probable order of presentation is below

TIMES 
Welcome and Introduction -  Jay, K4ZLE and Carl, K8CM

to
Digital Communications Overview - Tom Holmes, N8ZM 

be
VOA Moonbounce Project Update - Mike Murphy, KA8ABR
determined
Design & Manufacturing in the Internet Age, LP-100
  -  Digital Vector Wattmeter: A Case Study
  - Larry Phipps, N8LP

Modern PC CAD Techniques - Bill Pollack, N0CALL

ARRL update - Joe Phillips, K8QOE & Jim Weaver, K8JE 

Lunch


AmSat Update - Gerd Schrick, WB8IFM and Steve Coy,K8UD

EME using WSJT cluster of programs - Tom Lubbers, K8TL 


PSK-Mail - Bill Kelsey, N8ET

Prize Drawing, Housekeeping and Farewell



There is no charge for attending the symposium.  A box lunch will be available 
on site.   Updates to the program will be posted here on the website, so please 
check in from time to time.  For further information please contact 

We will have a "demonstration room" for items on the program, plus any items 
which you'd like to display.  We'd like, in particular, and specialty APRS 
stations, a working PSK-31 station, and any other systems which you've found 
useful. 
For reference purposes, the program from last year's event is listed below. . 


Bring your portable or semi-portable digital station! 
We'd like to have as many types of stations, and as many demos as possible 
We'll have a secured room, open during the registration and lunch period, for 
demos. 
If you have an interest in CW, RTTY, Packet Radio, AMTOR, D-Star, etc., please 
plan to join us. 
 Send comments to: Jay Slough, K4ZLE 
k4zle  embarqmail  com


  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

RE: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm

[Rud Merriam]

I fully concur with Rick's comments. I find Bonnie's responses very
off-putting with respect to trying ALE. The same can be said for Winlink
2000 even though I run a Telpac node. 

 
Rud Merriam K5RUD 
ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX
http://TheHamNetwork.net


-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 7:46 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in
emcomm


Alan,


However, if you folks continue to attack your friends, you won't have 
many left! You can claim that only anti-digital hams are on QRZ, but 
more likely you will find  that QRZ is the true democratic melting pot 
of contemporary viewpoints. You may not like what most hams are thinking 
but they reflect the overwhelming majority view.


73,

Rick, KV9U

[digitalradio] The cat's meow of JT65A spots.

[Andrew O'Brien]

Thanks to a post by K7EK on the Multipsk reflector, I just discovered
a great resource for JT65A operators and thos interested in
propagation data.Check http://jt65.w6cqz.org , maybe everyone
already knows this site except me!
The site has "reverse beacons" that automatically post JT65A spots to
the website.   See below...  Tailor made for an old SWL like me,
reception reporting without a lot of work to do.

Andy K3UK



Reception Reports

K3UK (fn02hk) Heard N9DSJ(EN52) on 7075.98 KHz -13dB at 03:30Z using JT65A
VE3CDX/W7/RB [DM26ic] Heard N9DSJ(EN52) on 7075.98 KHz -11dB at 03:30Z
using JT65A
SYSTEM: As of 2008-01-11 03:30 UTC reception reports database contains
237661 entries with 2304 unique callsigns.
VE3CDX/W7/RB [DM26ic] Heard N9DSJ(EN52) on 7075.98 KHz -11dB at 03:28Z
using JT65A
W6CQZ/RB [CM87us] Heard N9DSJ(EN52) on 7075.99 KHz -18dB at 03:28Z using JT65A
W6CQZ/RB [CM87us] Heard WA5DJJ(DM62) on 7075.39 KHz -7dB at 03:25Z using JT65A
K3UK (fn02hk) Heard WA5DJJ(DM62) on 7075.39 KHz -15dB at 03:23Z using JT65A
W6CQZ/RB [CM87us] Heard WA5DJJ(DM62) on 7075.39 KHz -11dB at 03:23Z using JT65A
K3UK (fn02hk) Heard WA5DJJ(DM62) on 7076.00 KHz -11dB at 03:21Z using JT65A
W6CQZ/RB [CM87us] Heard WA5DJJ(DM62) on 7076.00 KHz -2dB at 03:21Z using JT65A
N9DSJ/RB [EN52ti] Heard W6CQZ on 7076.02 KHz -17dB at 03:20Z using JT65A
K3UK (fn02hk) Heard W6CQZ on 7076.00 KHz -12dB at 03:20Z using JT65A
N9DSJ/RB [EN52ti] Heard W6CQZ on 7076.02 KHz -18dB at 03:18Z using JT65A
K3UK (fn02hk) Heard W6CQZ on 7076.00 KHz -9dB at 03:18Z using JT65A
K3UK (fn02hk) Heard WA5DJJ on 7076.00 KHz -11dB at 03:17Z using JT65A
W6CQZ/RB [CM87us] Heard WA5DJJ on 7076.00 KHz -7dB at 03:17Z using JT65A
K3UK (fn02hk) Heard W6CQZ on 7076.00 KHz -7dB at 03:16Z using JT65A
N9DSJ/RB [EN52ti] Heard W6CQZ on 7076.02 KHz -17dB at 03:16Z using JT65A

-- 
Andy K3UK
www.obriensweb.com
(QSL via N2RJ)

[digitalradio] Re: Help files in vbdigi

[jhaynesatalumni]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "kh6ty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>

> What do you have on C: drive that makes Windows default to D: drive?
Maybe 
> that is a clue.
> 
What I have on the C: drive is Win95.  WinXP is installed on the D: drive.

Anyway, that fixed it - I removed it using the add-remove thing, and
then used search to track down and remove everything about NBEMS,
and then reinstalled and the help files work.  Thanks.

[digitalradio] Ale Sounding: What is it and how does it work?

[John Bradley]

 

Chris , ZL1BOE

 

you will be told by others that ALE is widely used to set up QSO's and QSY's
using the one line message ability . You will also be told that it is used
widely for keyboard to keyboard QSO's and that there are thousands of Hams
using ALE ( last figure I heard was 6000) . These are folks who are using
PCALE, who have aggressively set aside frequencies for ALE use in all bands,
and are promoting ALE as the answer to emergency communications. 

 

Granted, PCALE, in its MARS form may be a great piece of software to pass
messages from overseas but that ability is certainly not evident on the ham
bands. 

 

The reality is that there are likely under 50 hams active with PCALE
worldwide, those using PCALE spend most of the time sounding , with little ,
if any message traffic passed, and no QSO's. PCALE does not work very well
into the noise, and is certainly not user friendly when setting up a rig and
computer to run the program. Beyond using the sounding function there
appears not to be much interest in running nets, or exploring emergency
communications aspect of PCALE.

 

ALE400 (multiPSK) might be closer to your needs since it is narrow band and
works well into the noise. It can be readily used for soundings, file
transfer, and is a pleasure to use for digital QSO's, keyboard to keyboard.
The author is constantly working on the software, and appears to be moving
closer to the Holy Grail of being able to pass messages and files from HF to
the internet. It is simple to install, simple to use, (although the screen
can be a little overwhelming at first)  .There is a plan afoot which would
see some extensive cross Canada testing of this mode to determine it's
suitability for emergency communications.

 

There are some other software out there to look at. NBEMS has promise, but ,
since it uses BPSK for the most part, suffers from multipath flutter and
other ozone maladies. The authors state that it's intention was to run over
VHF/UHF, and , while I haven't tried it, would probably work very well. This
software is also under active development so will be interesting to see what
other capabilities it will have.

 

RFSM8000  gets very little mention  on these reflectors, since hams in the
USA cannot exceed 300baud speed. Dimitry and his team have posted the latest
version which looks interesting , but haven't tried it, but is something we
can run here in Canada on most bands except 30m.( bandwidth issues rather
than speed)  It apparently has the ability to pass traffic to and from the
internet from HF, using a sound card modem.

 

So much software, so little time

 

73's John

VE5MU

 

[digitalradio] Re: 30 meter Observations

[Don]

John VE5MU,
I agree with your observations...the band is great and under used. I 
can tell you it doesn't die at night, it is open most all night but 
just not used, thus the auto spotters to provide documentation along 
with the Propnet stations that are documenting 30m also.

de kb9umt Don EN50dp 30MDG#0001
www.30meterdigital.org



--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Curt Givens"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> John and others I just opened MixW and tuned up on 10.140 don't see 
anything
> on the waterfall but will try to watch and listen for a bit. XYL 
just got in
> from work and dinner will need preparing soon. See you on the 
waterfall.
> 
>  
> 
> 73's Curt
> 
>  
> 
> Curt Givens  KC8STE, AAR5VR Army MARS
> Earthdog and Special Programs Director
> GCDOC/GCAC
> Dayton, OH
> 
> "Registering lawful Americans who possess a gun to stop armed 
criminals, is
> like registering virgins to stop prostitution."
> 
> 
> 
>   _  
> 
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Bradley
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 5:24 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [digitalradio] 30 meter Observations
> 
>  
> 
> Over the past several weeks I have been operating digital modes on 
30m and
> have come to the conclusion that
> 
> This is a highly under-rated band.
> 
>  
> 
> Currently there are 3 automatic spotting stations running on 30M 
PSK on
> 10140.0. They are N9Puz, KF4IN, and VK2XGT. The spotting page is 
very rapid,
> with spots appearing as fast as you do.  VK2XGT is hearing very 
little North
> American stations, with only the occasional K6 showing up. The VK 
station is
> posting lots of European stations, however and I can only hope that 
our
> summer propagation on 30M is as good as what they are hearing.
> 
>  
> 
> From my QTH, which is DO70QK , N9PUZ is 1668km (1000 miles) away 
and KF4IN
> is 3197km (1900 miles) away.  Both stations are almost on  the same 
bearing
> from me (approx 130deg)
> 
>  
> 
> Most days, N9PUZ is able to hear me from about 1300Z to 0400/0500Z, 
and
> posts my call automatically . even when the band appears to be 
completely
> dead in the evenings, the N9 station usually posts my call after 
the first
> try. KF4IN will post calls from me at different times during the 
day mainly
> from 1600z to 2200z. I have not shown up on the VK station. 
> 
>  
> 
> It would be interesting to see a little more activity on 30M in the 
evenings
> to see what the propagation really does.
> 
>  
> 
> The 30M spotting page can be found at  http://www.projects
>  andparts.com/30m/
> 
>  
> 
> John
> 
> VE5MU
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
>   _  
> 
> No viruses found in this incoming message
> Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.1.4
> http://www.iolo.com  
> 
> 
> ___
> No viruses found in this outgoing message
> Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.1.4
> http://www.iolo.com
>

Re: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm

[Rick]

Alan,

The testing was completed months ago and you know that very well as I 
have discussed this before. I do not have a particularly strong position 
on ALE. Have you ever considered that it might be you and your group who 
take such a view? My view is in the middle as I have stated over and 
over. In fact, I have been a strong proponent of ALE 400/FAE 400. But it 
is not what you want to hear. You want hams to rally around your 
particular agenda of the 8FSK2000 ALE mode as a focal point of emergency 
communications, and most of us do not support you that far and you 
extend to take this to mean rejection. It is NOT negative to suggest 
that the wide bandwidth mode of ALE may have a small part to play in 
emergency communications. It is a realistic assessment and an honest 
assessment.

If you wish to use ALE for annunciation purposes on the amateur bands, 
you have no choice other than to designate a specific frequency or in 
the case of your group, many frequencies, that are used by those 
members. If soundings are being made on a regular basis by a number of 
stations, those frequencies can not easily be used for other purposes 
since you can not move off the frequency due to the channelized ALE 
paradigm. Otherwise the paradigm fails at that point! This is not  the 
most appropriate technology for a shared band. So you ignore basic 
reality and don't want to even discuss  it (debate it, as you say below).

 From the testing that a number of us operators have done, and many are 
from this forum and other as well, the honest truth is that in our 
experience, the 8FSK2000 ALE mode does not perform as well as other 
modes. It is not as sensitive and it has low throughput compared to 
those modes because the HF bands are frequently a difficult environment. 
Many of us have found that the ALE 400 and particularly the FAE 400 
(8FSK400) mode has the best combination of sensitivity, slow to moderate 
throughput, and robustness. I can think of no case where 8FSK2000 is 
going to be a better fit for shared frequencies. It is drastically 
wider, with much more interference potential, and much less sensitive. 
After all you do not need much throughput for a SELCAL, do you?

But you want to keep using a legacy 8FSK mode, which I think most 
reasonable digital hams would have to admit is an older technology that 
was intended for channelized commercial and military use. You want to do 
this because you want to support backward compatibility to embedded 
hardware.

Meanwhile, we have two ARQ sound card modes. The FAE 400 mode and now 
the NBEM system which works on both Linux and Windows and which can 
scale from a slow to sometimes moderate speed messaging . Perhaps it can 
be tied in with 8FSK400 someday or some other SELCAL approach?

However, if you folks continue to attack your friends, you won't have 
many left! You can claim that only anti-digital hams are on QRZ, but 
more likely you will find  that QRZ is the true democratic melting pot 
of contemporary viewpoints. You may not like what most hams are thinking 
but they reflect the overwhelming majority view.

I can assure you that those of us with reasonable and middle of the road 
positions get private comments from those who appreciate a more balanced 
view that looks at the pros and cons. Nothing in life is all one way or 
the other. There are trade offs. I am willing to stick my neck out and 
say if the emperor is not wearing any clothes. Most people won't do 
that. The people who do tend to speak out are those that have an agenda 
on one side of an issue or the other.

Like I always say, the people on the extremes do not want to provide you 
with all the information that could help you make an informed decision. 
They only want to support one side. I look at both sides and have to 
take heat from both. And I have, even on QRZ.com.

And as I have said, your spokesperson is one of your worst nightmares 
because she constantly attacks anyone who even remotely disagrees with 
her. I have never seen any time that Bonnie has EVER said, "you know, 
maybe you have a point there that I had not thought of." It is only her 
way or nothing. And as I have said you are paying a severe price for 
this on the general ham groups who will not tolerate that kind of 
behavior. She can not do like she did with me and prohibit posts on 
"her" group and later remove me from "her" group for comments made 
elsewhere because of her seething anger. Just read her inappropriate 
comments with an open mind for once.

My views are again, in the middle path of most of this. Just because I 
do not agree with some one lockstep is no reason to attack such views. 
It is better to discuss them specifically. Something that you and your 
group almost never do. They talk around the subject, but they never will 
deal with the specific item so it can never get resolved. You read so 
many of your biases into what others write, that you distort what they 
are saying as you have done repeatedly

RE: [digitalradio] 30 meter Observations

[Curt Givens]

John and others I just opened MixW and tuned up on 10.140 don't see anything
on the waterfall but will try to watch and listen for a bit. XYL just got in
from work and dinner will need preparing soon. See you on the waterfall.

 

73's Curt

 

Curt Givens  KC8STE, AAR5VR Army MARS
Earthdog and Special Programs Director
GCDOC/GCAC
Dayton, OH

"Registering lawful Americans who possess a gun to stop armed criminals, is
like registering virgins to stop prostitution."



  _  

From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Bradley
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 5:24 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [digitalradio] 30 meter Observations

 

Over the past several weeks I have been operating digital modes on 30m and
have come to the conclusion that

This is a highly under-rated band.

 

Currently there are 3 automatic spotting stations running on 30M PSK on
10140.0. They are N9Puz, KF4IN, and VK2XGT. The spotting page is very rapid,
with spots appearing as fast as you do.  VK2XGT is hearing very little North
American stations, with only the occasional K6 showing up. The VK station is
posting lots of European stations, however and I can only hope that our
summer propagation on 30M is as good as what they are hearing.

 

>From my QTH, which is DO70QK , N9PUZ is 1668km (1000 miles) away and KF4IN
is 3197km (1900 miles) away.  Both stations are almost on  the same bearing
from me (approx 130deg)

 

Most days, N9PUZ is able to hear me from about 1300Z to 0400/0500Z, and
posts my call automatically . even when the band appears to be completely
dead in the evenings, the N9 station usually posts my call after the first
try. KF4IN will post calls from me at different times during the day mainly
from 1600z to 2200z. I have not shown up on the VK station. 

 

It would be interesting to see a little more activity on 30M in the evenings
to see what the propagation really does.

 

The 30M spotting page can be found at  http://www.projects
 andparts.com/30m/

 

John

VE5MU

 

 

 


  _  

No viruses found in this incoming message
Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.1.4
http://www.iolo.com  


___
No viruses found in this outgoing message
Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.1.4
http://www.iolo.com

Re: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm

[Shuler Burton]

IN SC we have a simialr system  SCHEARTS that we are building into
hospitals. grants provide the equipment and hams have instaslled it into the
hospitals.  then some of the staff have gotten ham licences also Ares /
races supplement the staff.  2M and 440 repeater system. the  digital part
is APRS and a backbone of linked repeaters across SC

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Oregon Governor Allocates $250,000 for Digital Communications Network

[Ed]

>Not knocking the volunteers for sure.  I do have a question.  How come
>the money wasn't invested in public safety equipment using public
>safety NTIA assigned frequencies to do the same thing?


  the cost involved to purchase 
commercial equipment, antennas, peripherals, labor to install, and money to 
implement training for multiple employees,  for every county in the 
State. That $250.000 would be a drop in the bucket.   The State is 
getting one heck of a deal by providing this equipment to the local ham 
ARES/RACES county groups and letting those hams provide all the rest of the 
necessities.


  Ed   K7AAT

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Curmudgions and an idea for digital operation

[Rick]

Hi Jim,

One of the "prime directives" of the ARECC Courses is that you and your 
family and their safety come first before others. That group was 
violating basic common sense and emergency recommendations that have 
been developed over a long time. You don't want someone distracted with 
personal issues in such an environment. Those of us who have served in 
the military did enough of that!

We do have some very peculiar people these days in leadership positions 
of various emergency groups who act very elitist and who claim that only 
hams trained by them or who have taken extensive courses are of much 
value. Needless to say, most of us know this is absurd since most of the 
skills can be learned on the job. I have been surprised how poorly some 
of the "trained" hams compared at times to those who had more practical 
knowledge.

This does not mean I do not recommend training. I have taken several of 
the FEMA courses and all three of the ARRL ARECC Level courses. The FEMA 
courses are of very limited value for most of us. It does not hurt to 
have an overall understanding of the naming conventions of the different 
levels and the various horizontal positions, but it is very difficult to 
even remember the material for the exam. And it does not always match up 
with other services, such as the miltary, but it is what they have 
decided will be the terminology so we must follow it. The ARRL courses 
were fairly good, and there is some leeway in the decision making 
processes although I really felt that the material could easily be 
compressed into two courses instead of three. I also would like to see 
the ARRL material freely available to everyone, just like the FEMA 
material is available. I have lobbied my Division Director to do this 
without even a response. I know they want the money for the coursework, 
but I would never pay for the courses if they had not been subsidized. I 
realize that depending upon your ARRL Leadership position, different 
Levels are mandatory, but I often wonder if they are having many sign up 
for the courses at their own expense. The digital material included in 
the course work is helpful although it had not really covered the 
transition toward moving digital in the current direction. I could tell 
that some of my mentors were not fully supportive of that.

As far as accepting government money, that is something that is not 
always easy to come by, but if we can get some grant money, we are more 
than willing to make suggestions on how to spend it. The equipment 
belongs to government in our case, and that has helped us a great deal 
with our repeater which because of its county emergency support, also 
has a fabulous location and long term emergency back up power.

73,

Rick, KV9U


jgorman01 wrote:
> Rick,
>
> Good posting.  I don't know how many times to say it, I'm not against
> volunteering and using ham radio for emergency communications. 
> However, for me ham radio does come after several other things.  I
> don't think some of the emcomm folks understand this.  For the folks
> that went to the South and helped with Katrina, more power to them. 
> I'm glad they didn't have family or job requirements so they could go
> there for what was obviously a quite long period of time.  To make
> snide remarks about the, I'll call them middle age hams, that didn't
> go is an indicator to me of the mindset.  
>
> Some years back I went to a meeting about joining an ARES group.  Let
> me tell you, they didn't want volunteers, they wanted conscripts.  To
> the point of even saying they expected us to leave our families to
> fend for themselves at times.  I threw the sign up form in the trash
> and never looked back.  My wife would have come home and smashed all
> my radio gear if she had been there.  My family comes first, my
> property second, friends and neighbors third, and ham radio last.  If
> I had a choice of going to my son's practice or a drill, my son would
> win out.  Tough cookies if the emcomm folks don't like my attitude.
>
> The whole point of the thread to begin with was not about doing emcomm
> work, it was about whether accepting government money to buy ham gear
> was a good thing.  Somewhere the thread got off track.
>
> Jim
> WA0LYK
>   

Re: [digitalradio] 30 meter Observations

[John Simon]

Hi John, I've often wondeered why I only see stns from Europe and not the 
USA.   I agree that 30Mx is a fascinating band, a lot like 6Mx only more 
fun.  B-)
The Call is VK2XGJ not T.


  73, John de VK2XGJ
 One of the reasons politicians try so hard to get themselves re-elected,
   because they couldn't live under the laws that they have passed!

- Original Message - 
From: "John Bradley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:23 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] 30 meter Observations


> Over the past several weeks I have been operating digital modes on 30m and
> have come to the conclusion that
>
> This is a highly under-rated band.
>
>
>
> Currently there are 3 automatic spotting stations running on 30M PSK on
> 10140.0. They are N9Puz, KF4IN, and VK2XGT. The spotting page is very 
> rapid,
> with spots appearing as fast as you do.  VK2XGT is hearing very little 
> North
> American stations, with only the occasional K6 showing up. The VK station 
> is
> posting lots of European stations, however and I can only hope that our
> summer propagation on 30M is as good as what they are hearing.
>
>
>
> From my QTH, which is DO70QK , N9PUZ is 1668km (1000 miles) away and KF4IN
> is 3197km (1900 miles) away.  Both stations are almost on  the same 
> bearing
> from me (approx 130deg)
>
>
>
> Most days, N9PUZ is able to hear me from about 1300Z to 0400/0500Z, and
> posts my call automatically . even when the band appears to be completely
> dead in the evenings, the N9 station usually posts my call after the first
> try. KF4IN will post calls from me at different times during the day 
> mainly
> from 1600z to 2200z. I have not shown up on the VK station.
>
>
>
> It would be interesting to see a little more activity on 30M in the 
> evenings
> to see what the propagation really does.
>
>
>
> The 30M spotting page can be found at 
> http://www.projectsandparts.com/30m/
>
>
>
> John
>
> VE5MU
>
>
>
>
>
>





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.0/1218 - Release Date: 1/10/2008 
1:32 PM

[digitalradio] [Fwd: Re: [multipsk] ALE Sounding : what is it and how does it work]

[Les Keppie]

One other thing - there will be NO beacon to tell you
that the server is there - you will have to try to connect
to VK2DSG to see if you can raise it
Regards
Les

John Bradley wrote:
>  

>  
> 
> RFSM8000  gets very little mention  on these reflectors, since hams in the
> USA cannot exceed 300baud speed. Dimitry and his team have posted the latest
> version which looks interesting , but haven't tried it, but is something we
> can run here in Canada on most bands except 30m.( bandwidth issues rather
> than speed)  It apparently has the ability to pass traffic to and from the
> internet from HF, using a sound card modem.

> So much software, so little time

> 73's John
> 
> VE5MU


Hi All
I will run my RFSM8000 mail server on 14109.5 from this message time
until 0300 utc with beam to short path USA - It will be running
in non-standard mode

Should you be able to hear it and connect to it you may like to send me
a reception report to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

You will need a test RADIOAMATEUR  licence from Dmitry which can be
obtained from Dmitry at

http://rfsm2400.radioscanner.ru/

> Current version is 0.525.
> 
> Attention! We invite all for receiving FREE trial callsign-based RADIOAMATEUR 
> license.
> For version 0.523 and above, anybody can send email([EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Subject: RFSM8000 trial) to us (with owned callsign),
> and we will send back trial RADIOAMATEUR license, which allows using of ALL 
> features of 
> RFSM-8000 (for testing purposes).
> Trial RADIOAMATEUR license is time-limited (trial period is 30 days), and 
> allows using 
> one pre-defined callsign.

You can send email to my mailbox (VK2DSG) on my server by sending the
email to  [EMAIL PROTECTED] -  the callsign -   VK2DSG   - MUST be
the first word in the Subject line of the email to be  delivered to
my email box on the server

If you can connect to the server (callsign  VK2DSG)  by radio -
a mailbox for YOUR callsign will be automatically generated
by the server - from then on you will then be able to receive email from
the internet and it will be placed in your Mailbox on the server for
collection by you at your leisure
(You cannot send emails to a callsign if a Mailbox in the name of that
callsign does not already exist on the server)

Hope to hear from someone
Regards
Les

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Help files in vbdigi

[kh6ty]

Ok lets start over. Uninstall NBEMS from Settings/Control Panel/Add or 
remove prograams. Check to see that D:\NBEMS is gone and if not, delete the 
folder.

To be safe, delete c:\NBEMS if it exists and c:\Program Files \NBEMS.

The download the installation program from http://www.w1hkj.com/NBEMS and 
reinstall.

I don't know what has gone wrong, but this problem has never been reported 
before. That does not mean it will never happen, but the VBdigi code looks 
for the files in the place that the installation program copies them to.

What do you have on C: drive that makes Windows default to D: drive? Maybe 
that is a clue.

73, Skip KH6TY



- Original Message - 
From: "jhaynesatalumni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 5:35 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Help files in vbdigi


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "kh6ty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Please try creating a folder, C:\Program Files\NBEMS, copying the files
> there, and see if VBdigi finds those.
>
No, it did not find them there either.







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.0/1216 - Release Date: 1/9/2008 
10:16 AM

[digitalradio] OT: ARES family priority

[Alan Barrow]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Rud Merriam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jim,
> 
> That yourself, family and property are supposed to come first, even
in ARES.
> It is common sense that a volunteer operator is not going to be
focused on
> their activity if they are worrying about all the other issues.

And in fact, exactly why volunteers are so critically needed in large
scale events like hurricanes.

The state EC and county EOC where I spent most of my time were both
MIA dealing with family. We understood, and filled a gap. 

The most visible local ham presence we had in the county I was
assigned was the 20yo no-code tech. manned, coordinated, and held
things together. He was a hero in our book, and from a demographic not
well respected in our hobby. I saw the video of his home being flooded
by the storm surge. Not just a bit, submerged and destroyed. The only
possessions he had were in a pile in the AV room of the local high
school. His car, an IC-706, and a 2m homemade jpole in a pvc stick. 

Like that ham, most of the local ARES team were heavily impacted
themselves. None were active, nor were the repeaters functional. And
not too long into the event the full county EOC was destroyed.
Leveled, including 911 & police dispatch. 

This does make for an interesting dynamic when the local teams do
surface, usually several days into an event. They find strangers setup
in ways they had not planned, under different control structures, etc. 

Lot's of arguments "we must use xyz repeater, because that's the
published plan" when well established simplex nets are encountered.
Nevermind the repeater was dead for the 1st N days, and has
compromised coverage even 2 weeks in, etc. Saw this in buckets at Hugo
and Katrina, two decades apart. Same dynamic. 

This really is to me the biggest gap in the amateur based planning. No
one planned for transition/handoff during recovery in large scale
events with lot's of outsiders. Very difficult when a third of the
counties in a state are impacted, and can't even get fixed at a
regional level because 3-4 states were heavily impacted. 

With regard to my comments about bitter old men, that's not pointed at
anyone here. Or an assumption that if you did not respond, you are in
that category. It's a commentary on the "consumer" mindset permeating
our hobby that Andy raised. 

For the record, I'm officially middle aged, had an understanding boss
and tolerant wife. I was able to respond. It was important that I did,
because I know many others could not. And some it flat out would never
have occurred to. The same ones that posted all the debates on how the
response was broken, should not have occurred, should  not have used
xyz technology, should not disrupt the "pottery collecting net" with
their red cross traffic, etc. 

At Hugo I had to deal with active jamming/interference for hours on HF
when trying to pass traffic. (And where I learned how much more
effective digital nets were)

If anything, the most challenging volunteers we had to deal with were
younger. Energetic, well intentioned, but a bit less steady on
average. No issues from the old timers. (And there were many). 

Again, We had two senior citizens relieve one shelter. They were a
hoot. One was almost blind, but heard well (and was 80+). Another was
very hard of hearing, but had full vision. Together they were a team.
Had never met before, but met on a net, traveled down, and went to
work. Did a great job. "Bob, I can't find my glasses do you see my
glasses? Bob??" Wish I could remember their calls, as to me
they were great examples. 

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

[digitalradio] Re: Help files in vbdigi

[jhaynesatalumni]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "kh6ty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> Please try creating a folder, C:\Program Files\NBEMS, copying the files 
> there, and see if VBdigi finds those.
> 
No, it did not find them there either.

[digitalradio] 30 meter Observations

[John Bradley]

Over the past several weeks I have been operating digital modes on 30m and
have come to the conclusion that

This is a highly under-rated band.

 

Currently there are 3 automatic spotting stations running on 30M PSK on
10140.0. They are N9Puz, KF4IN, and VK2XGT. The spotting page is very rapid,
with spots appearing as fast as you do.  VK2XGT is hearing very little North
American stations, with only the occasional K6 showing up. The VK station is
posting lots of European stations, however and I can only hope that our
summer propagation on 30M is as good as what they are hearing.

 

>From my QTH, which is DO70QK , N9PUZ is 1668km (1000 miles) away and KF4IN
is 3197km (1900 miles) away.  Both stations are almost on  the same bearing
from me (approx 130deg)

 

Most days, N9PUZ is able to hear me from about 1300Z to 0400/0500Z, and
posts my call automatically . even when the band appears to be completely
dead in the evenings, the N9 station usually posts my call after the first
try. KF4IN will post calls from me at different times during the day mainly
from 1600z to 2200z. I have not shown up on the VK station. 

 

It would be interesting to see a little more activity on 30M in the evenings
to see what the propagation really does.

 

The 30M spotting page can be found at  http://www.projectsandparts.com/30m/

 

John

VE5MU

 

 

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Curmudgions and an idea for digital operation

[Rud Merriam]

Jim,

That yourself, family and property are supposed to come first, even in ARES.
It is common sense that a volunteer operator is not going to be focused on
their activity if they are worrying about all the other issues. 

 
Rud Merriam K5RUD 
ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX
http://TheHamNetwork.net


-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of jgorman01
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 3:32 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Curmudgions and an idea for digital operation


Rick,

My family comes first, my property second, friends and neighbors third, and
ham radio last.  If I had a choice of going to my son's practice or a drill,
my son would win out.  Tough cookies if the emcomm folks don't like my
attitude.


Jim
WA0LYK

Re: [digitalradio] Pactor & Packet Spot Page now up.

[w6ids]

- Original Message - 
From: "vk4jrc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 9:19 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor & Packet Spot Page now up.


> Hi all Pactor & Packet people,
>
> Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor &
> Packet operators.
> See  http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/
> Hope this will stir up some interest
> Thanks Sholto :-)
>
>
> 73s
>
> Jack VK4JRC
>
>
>
> Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at
> http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php
>
>
> View the DRCC numbers database at 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1207 - Release Date: 1/2/2008 
> 11:29 AM
>
> 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Help files in vbdigi

[kh6ty]

Please try creating a folder, C:\Program Files\NBEMS, copying the files 
there, and see if VBdigi finds those.

Skip


- Original Message - 
From: "jhaynesatalumni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 4:09 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Help files in vbdigi


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "kh6ty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> VBdigi is looking for the following files in D:\Program Files\NBEMS
> directory:
>
>
> emailsetup.rtf
> flarq.rtf
> logbook.rtf
> messaging.rtf
> vbdigi.rtf
> vbdigisetup.rtf
>
> Do a search for flarq.rtf and tell me where it is located on your
system.
>
That's where it is:  D:\Program Files\NBEMS\flarq.rtf








No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.0/1216 - Release Date: 1/9/2008 
10:16 AM

[digitalradio] Re: Curmudgions and an idea for digital operation

[jgorman01]

Rick,

Good posting.  I don't know how many times to say it, I'm not against
volunteering and using ham radio for emergency communications. 
However, for me ham radio does come after several other things.  I
don't think some of the emcomm folks understand this.  For the folks
that went to the South and helped with Katrina, more power to them. 
I'm glad they didn't have family or job requirements so they could go
there for what was obviously a quite long period of time.  To make
snide remarks about the, I'll call them middle age hams, that didn't
go is an indicator to me of the mindset.  

Some years back I went to a meeting about joining an ARES group.  Let
me tell you, they didn't want volunteers, they wanted conscripts.  To
the point of even saying they expected us to leave our families to
fend for themselves at times.  I threw the sign up form in the trash
and never looked back.  My wife would have come home and smashed all
my radio gear if she had been there.  My family comes first, my
property second, friends and neighbors third, and ham radio last.  If
I had a choice of going to my son's practice or a drill, my son would
win out.  Tough cookies if the emcomm folks don't like my attitude.

The whole point of the thread to begin with was not about doing emcomm
work, it was about whether accepting government money to buy ham gear
was a good thing.  Somewhere the thread got off track.

Jim
WA0LYK

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Guys,
> 
> You both have valid views. Isn't it more that one is mostly discussing 
> smaller types of disasters, the ones that are the most common, and the 
> other is discussing much larger scale incidents that rarely happen (but 
> they do happen and we may wish to consider preparing for them as
best we 
> can)?
> 
> Mostly it is a matter of degree. How much infrastructure survived? How 
> many hams remain in the area and who are not affected by the situation 
> to the point of not being able to help locally? How bad is the 
> situation? How many resources is government putting into the area?
> 
> In an ideal world, when disasters occur, there will be enough resources 
> from emergency management to handle any situation. But realistically we 
> know this is not possible. Therefore, volunteers help to temporarily 
> alleviate the shortfalls of at least some of the resources. We hams can 
> lend our assistance to communications shortfalls and even other
areas if 
> we wish to do so.
> 
> While most hams do not participate with emegency groups on a regular 
> basis, my experience has been that many will help the call goes out. It 
> is a lot to ask someone to do this. We saw that recently with our flood 
> disaster her in SW Wisconsin this past summer.
> 
> There is often a substantial amount of politics involved in any 
> volunteer activity of this type and it turns off many who would 
> otherwise be active. This is more true of amateur radio because in
order 
> to be in a leadership position in ARES you must be an ARRL member. That 
> excludes almost 80% of hams. If they live in a Section with different 
> emergency groups, they may be able to find their comfort zone with
other 
> groups or agencies. In our Section, we have one amateur radio group, 
> which is a combined ARES/RACES structure.
> 
> On thing I want to reinforce, is that just because you don't totally 
> agree with each other is no reason to claim that this forum is 
> "anti-emcomm." Many of us have this as one of our primary interests and 
> some cases may have been involved in this activity with CAP, MARS, and 
> ham radio, for many decades.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
> 
> 
> Alan Barrow wrote:
> > jgorman01 wrote:
> >   
> >> Hate to tell you but some of us cranky, bitter, and rude (old) men
> >> have simply been there and done that.  
> >> 
> > I certainly saw and worked with some generous & kind old man hams
in my 
> > efforts. (Shared a shelter operation with an 80 year old!!) But
did not 
> > see hardly any of the same ones that annoy us all on HF there. The
rude, 
> > cranky, selfish types.
> >   
> >> For example, do you think a permanently installed "ham" antenna
> >> is going to survive on a roof top when all other commercial grade
> >> antennas have been destroyed?  
> >> 
> > This tells me you've not been there, and are missing the point.
Yes, ham 
> > antennas do survive when properly installed on hospital & shelter 
> > rooftops. It's the repeaters and high sights which do not. Even in a 
> > hurricane. Now if the EOC is leveled, as happened in the county I
worked 
> > in coastal Miss, all bets are off.
> >
> > The reason hospitals (and such) preinstall antennas is not to support 
> > their communications, it's to be able to communicate with ad-hoc 
> > shelters & relief efforts. IE: With the very volunteers you mention. 
> > Most often on 2m, but at times you need HF.
> >
> > No, the HF dipole won't survive. But the coax to the roof, the radial 
> > net

[digitalradio] Re: Help files in vbdigi

[jhaynesatalumni]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "kh6ty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> VBdigi is looking for the following files in D:\Program Files\NBEMS 
> directory:
> 
> 
> emailsetup.rtf
> flarq.rtf
> logbook.rtf
> messaging.rtf
> vbdigi.rtf
> vbdigisetup.rtf
> 
> Do a search for flarq.rtf and tell me where it is located on your
system.
> 
That's where it is:  D:\Program Files\NBEMS\flarq.rtf

RE: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm

[Rud Merriam]

I walked the piney woods and hills of East Texas in cold and rain looking
for the astronauts and parts of the shuttle Columbia. Ham radio via
repeaters was the only way to communicate on a wide scale in that area at
that time. Yes, cell phones worked in some areas but would have been a PITA
when you wanted a message to all the numerous groups deployed in the woods.
The FBI manager directing the effort said, "If we wanted a message to go
through, we gave it to the hams."

Right now we are organizing for a communications disaster should a repeat of
the Rita evacuation occur in the Houston area. Cell service gets wiped out
when 1,000s of people are stuck bumper to bumper on the freeways. The NGOs
like United Way and the Food Bank do not want to allocate their resources
toward developing communications capabilities. They will provide stations.
We provide the people. 

 
Rud Merriam K5RUD 
ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX
http://TheHamNetwork.net



So I'll ask the folks on this list what have you contributed to amateur 
radio at all, much less public service? Besides help us understand every 
possible interpretations of various part 97? :-)

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Curmudgions and an idea for digital operation

[Rick]

Guys,

You both have valid views. Isn't it more that one is mostly discussing 
smaller types of disasters, the ones that are the most common, and the 
other is discussing much larger scale incidents that rarely happen (but 
they do happen and we may wish to consider preparing for them as best we 
can)?

Mostly it is a matter of degree. How much infrastructure survived? How 
many hams remain in the area and who are not affected by the situation 
to the point of not being able to help locally? How bad is the 
situation? How many resources is government putting into the area?

In an ideal world, when disasters occur, there will be enough resources 
from emergency management to handle any situation. But realistically we 
know this is not possible. Therefore, volunteers help to temporarily 
alleviate the shortfalls of at least some of the resources. We hams can 
lend our assistance to communications shortfalls and even other areas if 
we wish to do so.

While most hams do not participate with emegency groups on a regular 
basis, my experience has been that many will help the call goes out. It 
is a lot to ask someone to do this. We saw that recently with our flood 
disaster her in SW Wisconsin this past summer.

There is often a substantial amount of politics involved in any 
volunteer activity of this type and it turns off many who would 
otherwise be active. This is more true of amateur radio because in order 
to be in a leadership position in ARES you must be an ARRL member. That 
excludes almost 80% of hams. If they live in a Section with different 
emergency groups, they may be able to find their comfort zone with other 
groups or agencies. In our Section, we have one amateur radio group, 
which is a combined ARES/RACES structure.

On thing I want to reinforce, is that just because you don't totally 
agree with each other is no reason to claim that this forum is 
"anti-emcomm." Many of us have this as one of our primary interests and 
some cases may have been involved in this activity with CAP, MARS, and 
ham radio, for many decades.

73,

Rick, KV9U


Alan Barrow wrote:
> jgorman01 wrote:
>   
>> Hate to tell you but some of us cranky, bitter, and rude (old) men
>> have simply been there and done that.  
>> 
> I certainly saw and worked with some generous & kind old man hams in my 
> efforts. (Shared a shelter operation with an 80 year old!!) But did not 
> see hardly any of the same ones that annoy us all on HF there. The rude, 
> cranky, selfish types.
>   
>> For example, do you think a permanently installed "ham" antenna
>> is going to survive on a roof top when all other commercial grade
>> antennas have been destroyed?  
>> 
> This tells me you've not been there, and are missing the point. Yes, ham 
> antennas do survive when properly installed on hospital & shelter 
> rooftops. It's the repeaters and high sights which do not. Even in a 
> hurricane. Now if the EOC is leveled, as happened in the county I worked 
> in coastal Miss, all bets are off.
>
> The reason hospitals (and such) preinstall antennas is not to support 
> their communications, it's to be able to communicate with ad-hoc 
> shelters & relief efforts. IE: With the very volunteers you mention. 
> Most often on 2m, but at times you need HF.
>
> No, the HF dipole won't survive. But the coax to the roof, the radial 
> net, the antenna mount, and the HF vertical carefully stored in the 
> closet will. And will go up in 15m.
>
>
>   
>> Part of our ability to do emcomm is
>> using our OWN equipment in a portable fashion to replace that which
>> has been destroyed.  The other part is the geographic spread of hams
>> in a location.  It makes what gets destroyed somewhat random.  Relying
>> on prepositioned equipment is no better than public safety doing the
>> same.  
>>   
>> 
> You've never had to stand outside a large building to get coverage then. 
> Or deal with running coax out a door, around the side of the building, 
> etc. 300' of coax pinched in a door to keep skeeters out rather than a 
> nice clean run of prepositioned coax.
>
> I spent quite a bit of time with the head of mtc of one of our local 
> hospital families. He's a good friend, and wanted a joint debrief on 
> what he & I both saw at Katrina. His action was to pre-position multiple 
> coax runs, dual band antenna (short diamond type), etc. Common sense 
> stuff. If the need arises he's now setup to communicate with ham 
> volunteers. This means those manning red cross shelters, ferrying relief 
> supplies, ferrying staff, etc. Not hospital business, but community 
> recovery efforts.
>
>
>   
>> Have you ever told the ARC or SA they should include
>> commercial radios in their shelter standard inventory?  
>> 
> Again, it's clear you've never participated in a large scale relief 
> effort by your questions. ARC has dedicated low band freqs for their 
> primary ops. What they do not have, and will be unlikely to ever afford 
> is radios/gear/ops for every

Re: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm

[Alan Barrow]

Rick wrote:
> As we have been finding out through testing,  
Hmm, you've been testing ALE? Don't see you in many of the logs.

I've been testing/using/linking ALE for a couple of years now. Getting a 
really good understanding of what works well, what does not, etc.

I know you have a very strong position on all things ALE related, so not 
going to debate it here.

> ALE may have a place in a 
> few niche interest areas but it is likely to be of limited value on the 
> ham bands, and not well supported, 
I know you have a very strong negative position on all things ALE 
related, so not going to debate it here.
> since the shared nature of the bands 
> do not lend themselves well to this kind of continuously dedicated 
> frequencies. 
Dedicated frequencies?? Huh? We share the most contested 5khz of 
spectrum in all hamdom!! And try to be good neighbors.
> If the FCC does rule that ALE soundings are a legal 
> activity, there is the potential for unintended consequences if we allow 
> beaconing throughout the HF bands.
>   
The ALE network still adds significant value even without sounding. Not 
going to debate sounding here, you've already asked for clarification.

> The data transfer of ALE is not good enough from what the majority of us 
> have tried when using the wide bandwidth form of 8FSK2000, 
Can you point to a higher throughput soundcard data transfer protocol? 
Freely available? Which can interoperate with HW ALE radios?

It's not perfect, in fact there is still much to do. I'd have to concede 
for througput, P2 & P3 still win. But at a high cost in dollars and 
philosophy. And only because we cannot use the faster modes due to 
symbol rate. There are versions of the FS protocol which have had the 
symbol rate dialed back which would be legal and work great.

> however the 
> narrow 8FSK400 mode has proven itself to be quite robust, a far better 
> fit for a shared frequency band, and with better throughput, in many 
> cases, because it works under much more difficult conditions. 
The current thought process for the ALE teams is to enable use of any 
data transfer modes the linked stations would like. Pactor, psk, olivia, 
8fsk400, fae, whatever.

> If you really want to get support for your special interest area, 
I don't have an agenda. I do feel there are some significant advantages 
to ALE, and that it's the best horse we have to ride right now. But 
never have promoted one to the detriment of others. I have challenged 
the "nothing else comes close" & "soundcards can't do hi thruput" 
positioned expoused by hardware TNC bigots. But I also use other digital 
modes, including the hated pactor. But also olivia, fae, etc
> Because one of your spokespeople takes an extreme attitude toward 
> others, you have paid a dear price. One only has to look at the vitriol 
> on qrz.com and other forums, when something like ALE is brought up. 
Ahh, the personal axe. I get it. Say no more.

I've figured out that the QRZ forums are populated largely by 
anti-digital (in any forms) hams. With some strong PSK31 advocates. They 
are not keen on newer modes of any kind, including Olivia, etc. So there 
will never be a receptive audience there, nor would I expect one.

eham.net is more open minded, and I find the quality of the posting to 
be a step above the personal attacks tolerated on QRZ. I now scan QRZ 
mainly for entertainment value, but it's a sad commentary on our hobby.

And ever one of those flame wars brings more users online. They just 
don't post. Same even here. I've already been receiving private email on 
this whole thread. Comments like this: "I have been waiting for a cogent 
and cohesive response to the nonsense on the digital radio group (Yahoo) 
about public service, winlink, etc.  You provided it.  Thanks."


> You claim that "some are saying we have no business even providing 
> emergency service." and yet no one from  this group has claimed that 
> hams should not be involved with emergency communications. 
>   

Have you read the threads from the last few days?

" Mlooks like enough money to "buy" some dedicated 
commercial frequencies, to move WinLink off the Ham bands :-)"

I'm not going to dig them out, but it was enough to push me out of 
lurker mode.

General tone: Emcomm assist from hams is not needed, not welcome. Use 
commercial
> Instead of complaining about RTTY contests 
Actually, I did not complain about rtty contests. I just pointed it out 
as an example of other modes/operations which are doing the same exact 
action you criticise the winlink ops of doing. And it's factual, a known 
issue, been discussed multiple times, annoying cw, psk, all the digital 
ops, and even some ssb ops.

One of my best friend is a hard core rtty contester. And even he admits 
this is an issue. I think sometimes it's people calling with the decode 
sw set incorrectly. Other times it's splits.
> vs a digital mode that may 
> not be legal, you should be welcoming clarification

Re: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm

[Steve Hajducek]

Hi Rick,

 From reading your comments I see you still fail to fully understand 
the potential value of ALE to Amateur Radio, especially to ECOM.

ALE is the great facilitator to follow on communications, nothing 
aside from MIL-STD AQC-ALE and the host of copy cat systems such by 
the likes of CODAN, RHODE & SCHARTZ and TADIRAN even come close to 
the HF linking capabilities of ALE.

Rick you continue to spew out all kinds of negative comments and spin 
that is just not correct with just enough positive comment that there 
is hope for you in understanding ALE yet. Keep it up as it likely 
benefits someone that may read what you have to say and gets 
interesting in looking into ALE as they may not otherwise get 
interested, much like there is no such thing as a stupid question, 
someone may benefit from the question being asked.

The FCC sub bands for automated operation 100% appropriate for ALE 
operation when a station is Sounding, attended or unattended in the 
digital sub bands and other uses of ALE are appropriate under the 
rules outside those sub bands, as well as outside the digital sub 
bands altogether if one lives within FCC jurisdiction.

After the ALE link has been established based on whatever type of ALE 
call has been made, preferably based on the best ranked LQA frequency 
selection, the follow on protocols/waveforms used are NOT limited to 
the 125 wpm AMD protocol (which is a very basic FEC protocol) but 
rather allows for anything to be used after the ALE link. However the 
DTM and especially the DBM protocols are very good, DBM ARQ is every 
bit as robust if not more so than GTOR or PACTOR I as a matter of fact.

Another benefit at this point in time WRT ALE as applied to the ARS 
is that it is no longer limited to a hardware only solution with a 
narrow range of expensive options as it originally was, this was the 
stumbling point of ARS interest when ALE was first introduced to the 
ARS in the pages of QEW and QST. ALE tools being software 
modem/controller based using the PC Sound Device Modem (PCSDM) has 
brought ALE to any Radio Amateur interested, we are only at the 
starting gate with respect to ALE and ARS application, you really 
have not seen anything yet compared to what is to come.

What you just don't seem to get is that an ALE network provides the 
best means of supporting 24/7 HF networking in the selection of 
frequency and station(s) of interest via numerous linking call types 
to enable either one to one or one to many station communications, 
attended or unattended, local drop or store/forward, bridged to one 
or more automated delivery systems with return paths outside HF radio 
or not. There really are no limitations to the application of ALE 
within or outside of the ARS when it comes to HF communications link 
establishment, it is truly and unlimited system. Can the application 
of ALE be adapted within the existing limited framework of ARS 
operations, yes, it already has, should ARS welcome and adapt to the 
full potential of ALE is really the question, for which I feel the 
answer is Yes. However I am not running around pushing that as an 
agenda, I you have not noticed my posts are in response to those with 
questions or positions where the facts need presenting. In my view 
either the ARS ( especially those involved with ECOM ) will grasp the 
application of ALE and put it to work for the benefit of the ARS or 
not, if not then it will be a wasted opportunity to improve Amateur 
Radio HF networking in my opinion.

Rick, I can't put my finger on just what it is yet, but something is 
standing in your way of really seeing the potential of ALE.  The 
potential of ALE based communications to the Amateur Radio Service 
for HF networking is huge, you seem to be part way there, I hope you 
hang in there.

Anyhow, lunch time is running out and I need to finish up and get 
back to my day job work.

73

/s/ Steve, N2CKH

At 11:22 AM 1/10/2008, you wrote:
>As we have been finding out through testing,  ALE may have a place in a
>few niche interest areas but it is likely to be of limited value on the
>ham bands, and not well supported, since the shared nature of the bands
>do not lend themselves well to this kind of continuously dedicated
>frequencies. If the FCC does rule that ALE soundings are a legal
>activity, there is the potential for unintended consequences if we allow
>beaconing throughout the HF bands.

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Curmudgions and an idea for digital operation

[Alan Barrow]

jgorman01 wrote:
> Hate to tell you but some of us cranky, bitter, and rude (old) men
> have simply been there and done that.  
I certainly saw and worked with some generous & kind old man hams in my 
efforts. (Shared a shelter operation with an 80 year old!!) But did not 
see hardly any of the same ones that annoy us all on HF there. The rude, 
cranky, selfish types.
> For example, do you think a permanently installed "ham" antenna
> is going to survive on a roof top when all other commercial grade
> antennas have been destroyed?  
This tells me you've not been there, and are missing the point. Yes, ham 
antennas do survive when properly installed on hospital & shelter 
rooftops. It's the repeaters and high sights which do not. Even in a 
hurricane. Now if the EOC is leveled, as happened in the county I worked 
in coastal Miss, all bets are off.

The reason hospitals (and such) preinstall antennas is not to support 
their communications, it's to be able to communicate with ad-hoc 
shelters & relief efforts. IE: With the very volunteers you mention. 
Most often on 2m, but at times you need HF.

No, the HF dipole won't survive. But the coax to the roof, the radial 
net, the antenna mount, and the HF vertical carefully stored in the 
closet will. And will go up in 15m.


> Part of our ability to do emcomm is
> using our OWN equipment in a portable fashion to replace that which
> has been destroyed.  The other part is the geographic spread of hams
> in a location.  It makes what gets destroyed somewhat random.  Relying
> on prepositioned equipment is no better than public safety doing the
> same.  
>   
You've never had to stand outside a large building to get coverage then. 
Or deal with running coax out a door, around the side of the building, 
etc. 300' of coax pinched in a door to keep skeeters out rather than a 
nice clean run of prepositioned coax.

I spent quite a bit of time with the head of mtc of one of our local 
hospital families. He's a good friend, and wanted a joint debrief on 
what he & I both saw at Katrina. His action was to pre-position multiple 
coax runs, dual band antenna (short diamond type), etc. Common sense 
stuff. If the need arises he's now setup to communicate with ham 
volunteers. This means those manning red cross shelters, ferrying relief 
supplies, ferrying staff, etc. Not hospital business, but community 
recovery efforts.


> Have you ever told the ARC or SA they should include
> commercial radios in their shelter standard inventory?  
Again, it's clear you've never participated in a large scale relief 
effort by your questions. ARC has dedicated low band freqs for their 
primary ops. What they do not have, and will be unlikely to ever afford 
is radios/gear/ops for every shelter in a large scale disaster. That's 
where ham's fill the gap. There were hundred's of shelters in Katrina. 
Each with dozens to hundreds of people in them. 20+ shelters in the 
single county I worked.

Only one of them had communications during the hurricane itself, because 
a lowly no code tech barely out of highschool had the foresight to 
preposition his IC-706 and a dual band antenna prior to the storm. As 
soon as it was safe, he erected HF dipole so he could monitor the nets, 
and as soon as other ham's arrived they were linked.

The others simply were out of communication. No way to get medical 
assist. No way to get law enforcement. (the two main types of 
communications assist shelters need)
> These are all issues some of have dealt with and have experience in. 
> Some of us have lost our predilection with being ham-centric in all
> things radio related.
>
>   
Let's see, we used:

- GMRS
- Red Cross low band (for several days I had a Red Cross mobile radio 
installed in my truck)

Again, far afield from digital radio. I had not realized that the 
digitalradio forum was so anti-emcomm, which is a bit sad, as it's a 
natural fit. Last post from me on this subject.

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

Re: [digitalradio] Pactor & Packet Spot Page now up.

[w6ids]

On the Spot Page and monitoring 14.078 as of 1615Z 

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN

- Original Message - 
From: "vk4jrc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 9:19 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor & Packet Spot Page now up.


> Hi all Pactor & Packet people,
> 
> Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor &
> Packet operators.
> See  http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/
> Hope this will stir up some interest
> Thanks Sholto :-)
> 
> 

Re: [digitalradio] Emergency agencies/ ham equipment/ hams in emcomm

[Rick]

As we have been finding out through testing,  ALE may have a place in a 
few niche interest areas but it is likely to be of limited value on the 
ham bands, and not well supported, since the shared nature of the bands 
do not lend themselves well to this kind of continuously dedicated 
frequencies. If the FCC does rule that ALE soundings are a legal 
activity, there is the potential for unintended consequences if we allow 
beaconing throughout the HF bands.

The data transfer of ALE is not good enough from what the majority of us 
have tried when using the wide bandwidth form of 8FSK2000, however the 
narrow 8FSK400 mode has proven itself to be quite robust, a far better 
fit for a shared frequency band, and with better throughput, in many 
cases, because it works under much more difficult conditions. This is 
especially pronounced during emergency situations with low power and 
mediocre antennas!

If you really want to get support for your special interest area, I 
might suggest that you need to be careful with your choice of words. It 
is far better to work with human nature, and not against it. You need to 
come up with positive reasons to support something and if you have 
really have something of value to offer, others may gravitate toward it 
over time.

Because one of your spokespeople takes an extreme attitude toward 
others, you have paid a dear price. One only has to look at the vitriol 
on qrz.com and other forums, when something like ALE is brought up. It 
is nearly universally derided by 95% or more of the posters. You need to 
think about why that is.

Consider the belief that older technology is of reduced value compared 
with new technology. It is these very same "old technologies" that 
actually work during an emergency. Particularly, the one main need of 
tactical voice which is the most needed emergency communications. This 
is one of the inherent values of amateur radio over other forms of 
emergency communications. The high technology systems can fail and when 
they do it is the low tech systems that can temporarily provide limited 
emergency assistance. It can not replace the previously damaged 
infrastructure but it can help. Having digital modes can be helpful too, 
if they work. The more complicated systems, and the more they depend 
upon the internet for most of their operation, such as Winlink 2000, the 
more risk you have that it won't be there when you most need it. 
Building decentralized systems that can also interoperate with existing 
systems, (even Winlink 2000) makes much more sense.

You claim that "some are saying we have no business even providing 
emergency service." and yet no one from  this group has claimed that 
hams should not be involved with emergency communications. 
Misrepresenting other hams' viewpoints does not lend credence toward 
your views. Why make such statements?

Instead of complaining about RTTY contests vs a digital mode that may 
not be legal, you should be welcoming clarification from the FCC. And if 
the FCC rules against you, you should then petition them to change the 
rules. But your group is not doing this. Instead you try to silence 
anyone who even tries to get some clairity on what is and what is not 
responsible behavior in such cases. Is it because you know the rules do 
not support what you are currently doing and it makes you uncomfortable 
to have other hams point out that what you are doing appears to be in 
violation of the rules? It appears so to me. Why else would your 
spokesperson act in such a malignant manner and personally attack those 
who want clarification?

The ironic part of all this is that most of us have a lot more in common 
than have differences. Most all the hams I personally know want to help 
at some level depending upon their interests and abilities.But when you 
are unwilling to deal with basic issues and attack those who do, you 
ought not be wondering why you do not get the support you are looking for.

73,

Rick, KV9U

>> Andy wrote:
>>
>> Digital communication for ham emcomms is similarly a farce.  ALE is
>> underused and grossly misunderstood by hams. Winlink appears effective
>> but out of the reach of most hams (on HF) , and other modes without
>> ARQ are just not going to cut it.  NBEMS is too new to evaluate, PSK
>> Mail  has promise but does not have enough users.
>>   
>> 
-

Alan wrote: 

It really disillusioned me that the most advanced network we could 
assemble in coastal MS was 2m voice nets with HF interstate links. 
1950's tech. We could have well used packet capability from 80's, but 
largely MIA. Needed email/hf links, but few had airmail/P23. (But those 
who did provided a real and valuable service)

---
> Alan also wrote: 
>
> I would not call it a farce, but somewhat agree otherwise. But that's in 
> our control. What are we going to improve that? Write it off?
>
> I don't think ALE is a panacea, but it offers much. We are still 
> learning new ways to use it, and are buildi

[digitalradio] Re: Curmudgions and an idea for digital operation

[jgorman01]

Hate to tell you but some of us cranky, bitter, and rude (old) men
have simply been there and done that.  You just don't want to hear
that.  For example, do you think a permanently installed "ham" antenna
is going to survive on a roof top when all other commercial grade
antennas have been destroyed?  Part of our ability to do emcomm is
using our OWN equipment in a portable fashion to replace that which
has been destroyed.  The other part is the geographic spread of hams
in a location.  It makes what gets destroyed somewhat random.  Relying
on prepositioned equipment is no better than public safety doing the
same.  

Some of us are trying to point out that if you want to be a pro, then
stand up and be one.  Don't just recommend ham radio as the salvation.
 Have you or others ever recommended that a hospital invest in a
commercial system for communications backup rather than amateur radio
and then helped them take bids and supervise the installation?  Do you
look at public safety radio equipment first and ham radio last for
backup purposes?  Have you ever told the ARC or SA they should include
commercial radios in their shelter standard inventory?  Something
simple that a REACT person could set up.  That way when you've moved
out of state for your job, Tom has a new wife and twins, Joe is laid
up from a job accident, and Bill simply can't get there they have a
communications system independent of ham radio volunteers.

These are all issues some of have dealt with and have experience in. 
Some of us have lost our predilection with being ham-centric in all
things radio related.

Jim
WA0LYK

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Alan Barrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> jim writes:
> > Look I'm not saying we shouldn't volunteer.  However, beware strangers
> > bearing gifts and all that.  I don't know how old you are but you
> > appear to have a bias against us older folks.  
> To be clear: my "old fart" comment is in reference to a mindset and 
> behavior, not any individual's age. I have my share of gray, been 
> licensed not quite 30 years. Born before the 60's hit.
> 
> But if I was to do a black box analysis of the "ham radio system", it'd 
> be hard not to conclude that HF is populated solely by cranky, bitter, 
> and rude men. :-)
> 
> Not the curmudgeon patina earned by our vintage members. :-)
> 
> > Let someone older and
> > wiser tell you it would be very unusual for government money to come
> > with no strings attached.  Strings that can be pulled sometime.  For
> > instance, should a serious recession or god forbid a depression come
> > around, you can bet that "sunk" investment will look mighty good for
> > day to day use.  All I'm saying is that what might happen might not be
> > the best for ham radio.
> >   
> Back to circular argument number 15 from QRZ.. most agencies (and 
> certainly hospitals) cannot send their non-emergency traffic via ham 
> radio methods. We are a very weak & limited fallback. But still the
"one 
> eyed man"
> 
> So I personally believe the risk of being annexed because we put
reserve 
> coax, antennas, and maybe even radios in agencies is very small.
> 
> But back to digital radio I've got an idea to stack 3 psk signals 
> together side by side and run in a normal SSB radio. Multiplex the data 
> across the multiple psk paths. I think that would be legal, and 
> technically possible. No restriction I see on multiple transmissions 
> with different data streams.  Any single signal meets symbol rate & 
> bandwidth fcc restrictions even as proposed by the new petition. Might 
> could even do 4! Or maybe do the same with Pactor 1 to get ARQ, already 
> looking at the linux source.
> 
> Kind of like the fsk/afsk debate. Is it a different mode if you can't 
> tell the signal's apart remotely? Turing test for radio.
> 
> That's what I'll move to if we ban the wider data modes. Think it
will work?
> 
> Have fun,
> 
> Alan
>

Re: [digitalradio] Help files in vbdigi

[kh6ty]

VBdigi is looking for the following files in D:\Program Files\NBEMS 
directory:


emailsetup.rtf
flarq.rtf
logbook.rtf
messaging.rtf
vbdigi.rtf
vbdigisetup.rtf

Do a search for flarq.rtf and tell me where it is located on your system.

Thanks.


Skip


- Original Message - 
From: "jhaynesatalumni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 11:06 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Help files in vbdigi


I have vbdigi installed in D:\Program Files\NBEMS
The help files are in there but when I click on help in
vbdigi it doesn't find them.  Where is it looking for
them?







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.0/1216 - Release Date: 1/9/2008 
10:16 AM