RE: [digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology
Its difficult to make a QSO in the newer modes because they aren't "better enough" than PSK or RTTY to motivate a broad-scale transition, so their use remains limited to a small number of afficianados. When someone develops and deploys a mode with significant improvements over PSK and no retrenchment, it will be broadly adopted -- and without need of postings berating PSK users to give it a try. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevin O'Rorke Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 7:42 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology garylinnrobinson wrote: > If most PSK operators are interested in rag chewing -they need to move > on to a better digital mode. PSK and RTTY are the two worst modes > available. And that's the problem. Too many people, groups, and > leaders in the Ham Community promoting OLD and less than effective > modes of communication. > > I came into the digital soundcard ham world in about 2003 and it has > ONLY been in the last year or so that the A.R.R.L. finally started > putting decent articles in their mag. And still PSK and RTTY reign as > the popular soundcard modes. Geeesh! > > ATTENTION PSKers : Try something else - CALL CQ in other modes - don't > just listen. And don't listen to what everybody else tells you about a > mode because misinformation reigns! Test it yourself and kick the > tires. Olivia, DominoEX, MFSK, ALE400, and many others all worth trying. > > - Hear Hear PSK31WAS a great breakthrough as compared with RTTY AT THE TIME of its introduction. There are many Digital modes available to the Ham now, that are a great break through compared to PSK. I think that we have here a case of "the dog chasing its tail" in that it is difficult (sometimes impossible) to make a qso in one of the newer modes, so to make a contact, one tends to go back to the psk area, thus compounding the problem. Perhaps more vigorous advertising of the frequencies used by other modes might help. Kevin VK5OA
RE: [digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology
On what basis do you claim that Olivia, DominoEX, and MFSK are "better" than PSK for ragchewing? Olivia is slow, and MFSK is difficult to tune. By design, DominoEX addresses both of these issues, but at the expense of increased bandwidth -- which makes panoramic reception less attractive. You provide no rationale for why you consider these modes to be better, nor do you provide any substantiation of your claim that PSK and RTTY "are the two worst modes available". If RTTY is a "less than effective mode of of communication", how do explain the fact that ops have achieved RTTY DXCC Honor Roll? How many DXCC entities have you confirmed using Olivia, DominoEX, MFSK, or ALE400? 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of garylinnrobinson Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 5:21 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology If most PSK operators are interested in rag chewing -they need to move on to a better digital mode. PSK and RTTY are the two worst modes available. And that's the problem. Too many people, groups, and leaders in the Ham Community promoting OLD and less than effective modes of communication. I came into the digital soundcard ham world in about 2003 and it has ONLY been in the last year or so that the A.R.R.L. finally started putting decent articles in their mag. And still PSK and RTTY reign as the popular soundcard modes. Geeesh! ATTENTION PSKers : Try something else - CALL CQ in other modes - don't just listen. And don't listen to what everybody else tells you about a mode because misinformation reigns! Test it yourself and kick the tires. Olivia, DominoEX, MFSK, ALE400, and many others all worth trying. --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Most PSK operators are interested in rag-chewing rather than DXing, > which does make it difficult for a DX station to achieve a reasonable > rate in PSK. When operating from a DX location, I operate PSK to take a > break between CW and RTTY pileups. > > The ability to decode many independent transmissions within one's > transceiver passband makes PSK in theory more effective for DXing than > any other mode we now have; its more effective than split frequency > operation because decoding multiple callers simultaneously assures that > you always have a station to call -- so your rate is continuous. But > its rare for there to be enough DXers QRV to sustain this rate for any > significant length of time. > > 73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill Lovell wrote: > > > > I think the basic problem is that fewer than 10% of PSK31 operators > have ever bothered to learn how to set up split operation. One more > reason that the mode is great for casual DXing, but next to useless for > serious DX work. > > > > 73, > > Bill > > >
[digitalradio] EasyPal
Anyone successful at Easypal (1 Jul 08) and Vista Home?? I have no problem using HRD/DM780, but EasyPal will not key my radio. I'm sure there is something I am not clicking or setting to make it happen. Thanks, Don KA5DON
[digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "John Becker, WØJAB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Not to long ago I was at a meeting of a big group of hams. > The subject came up about RTTY of who was using what program. > I was listening to all when I was ask what I use. My answer opened > many eyes whey I said that I was computer free for RTTY. Ask how > I do that I answered - the same way I have been doing it the last 35 > years with a RTTY machine. > John, W0JAB > Hi John, What model TTY do you have? In my earlier days in The Army, I did some TTY repair - I don't think I could even lift the Cast Iron cover of one of those Dinosaurs today. Most of them were built in the 1930's, and they were a lot simpler to work on than the later, lighter, and more compact models. Hank - KI4UMX
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology
At 04:21 PM 7/2/2008, you wrote in part: > And still PSK and RTTY reign as the popular soundcard modes. Geeesh! Interesting statement. Not to long ago I was at a meeting of a big group of hams. The subject came up about RTTY of who was using what program. I was listening to all when I was ask what I use. My answer opened many eyes whey I said that I was computer free for RTTY. Ask how I do that I answered - the same way I have been doing it the last 35 years with a RTTY machine. Since many was younger then my machines one said I would like to see one of them working. 5 miles away was my QTH. With a shack full of people I yell to the XYL - could you run out and get some more beer? LOTS of it. 02:14 CSDT say good night to the last of them and turn out lights - head for bed. Q how many hams can you fit into a shack 30 X 20 feet? A 24 with room for more. John, W0JAB
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology
garylinnrobinson wrote: > If most PSK operators are interested in rag chewing -they need to move > on to a better digital mode. PSK and RTTY are the two worst modes > available. And that's the problem. Too many people, groups, and > leaders in the Ham Community promoting OLD and less than effective > modes of communication. > > I came into the digital soundcard ham world in about 2003 and it has > ONLY been in the last year or so that the A.R.R.L. finally started > putting decent articles in their mag. And still PSK and RTTY reign as > the popular soundcard modes. Geeesh! > > ATTENTION PSKers : Try something else - CALL CQ in other modes - don't > just listen. And don't listen to what everybody else tells you about a > mode because misinformation reigns! Test it yourself and kick the > tires. Olivia, DominoEX, MFSK, ALE400, and many others all worth trying. > > - Hear Hear PSK31WAS a great breakthrough as compared with RTTY AT THE TIME of its introduction. There are many Digital modes available to the Ham now, that are a great break through compared to PSK. I think that we have here a case of "the dog chasing its tail" in that it is difficult (sometimes impossible) to make a qso in one of the newer modes, so to make a contact, one tends to go back to the psk area, thus compounding the problem. Perhaps more vigorous advertising of the frequencies used by other modes might help. Kevin VK5OA
[digitalradio] Re: New Hams and New Digital Technology
If most PSK operators are interested in rag chewing -they need to move on to a better digital mode. PSK and RTTY are the two worst modes available. And that's the problem. Too many people, groups, and leaders in the Ham Community promoting OLD and less than effective modes of communication. I came into the digital soundcard ham world in about 2003 and it has ONLY been in the last year or so that the A.R.R.L. finally started putting decent articles in their mag. And still PSK and RTTY reign as the popular soundcard modes. Geeesh! ATTENTION PSKers : Try something else - CALL CQ in other modes - don't just listen. And don't listen to what everybody else tells you about a mode because misinformation reigns! Test it yourself and kick the tires. Olivia, DominoEX, MFSK, ALE400, and many others all worth trying. --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Most PSK operators are interested in rag-chewing rather than DXing, > which does make it difficult for a DX station to achieve a reasonable > rate in PSK. When operating from a DX location, I operate PSK to take a > break between CW and RTTY pileups. > > The ability to decode many independent transmissions within one's > transceiver passband makes PSK in theory more effective for DXing than > any other mode we now have; its more effective than split frequency > operation because decoding multiple callers simultaneously assures that > you always have a station to call -- so your rate is continuous. But > its rare for there to be enough DXers QRV to sustain this rate for any > significant length of time. > >73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill Lovell wrote: > > > > I think the basic problem is that fewer than 10% of PSK31 operators > have ever bothered to learn how to set up split operation. One more > reason that the mode is great for casual DXing, but next to useless for > serious DX work. > > > > 73, > > Bill > > >
RE: [digitalradio] Open wire feed line length
Where practical and available, instead of using a split-core ferrites, use a ferrite toroid. The split core will never achieve the level of magnetic coupling between the two halves that the toroid will, with its continuous magnetic structure, and all else being equal, that makes the toroid a better supressor. Adding more turns through either one helps two, as the inductance scales by the square of the number of turns. The control cable and coax for my screwdriver HF mobile antenna went to the front bumper by way of the engine compartment. By wrapping several turns of each cable through a ferrite toroid, one commonly used for HF baluns, I was able to essentially eliminate the ignition system RFI and the electrical noise from the screwdriver antenna, located inside the antenna. It also allowed me to operate using this antenna on 6M, something it was designed to do, without having the RF overload the engine CPU or sensors. Further, on 20M your ground wire is close to a quarter wavelength from ground - which causes it to create a fairly high impedance against ground. You might be able to benefit from a tuned ground, or if possible, run 1 or 2 1/4 wave counterpoise wires from the tuner, off along the baseboards of the room, to create a lower impedance RF at the tuner, and provide a path for the stray 20M RF currents that's not by way of your radio coax and cables to the computer, etc. MFJ makes an "artificial ground" that might be employed if none of these other things works out. I'd try to find one to borrow before pony up cash for one though. 73, Bob, KD7NM _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 2:39 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Open wire feed line length I have used that multiband antenna configuration both at my home station (140' doublet, 450 ohm ladder line, 1500 watts) and when travelling (70' doublet, 300 ohm TV twinlead, 100 watts). My experience: 1. Balanced tuners (e.g. the Johnson Matchbox) work better than an unbalanced tuner and a balun. MFJ recently introduced a balanced tuner; I haven't examined its schematic, but it sure looks like a Johnson Matchbox on the outside. 2. If you use an unbalanced tuner and an external balun, minimize the unbalanced connection length between the tuner and balun. My travel tuner is a small MFJ unit with a built-in balun, and it works very well 3. I almost always end up iteratively trimming the feedline length to enable the tuner to find a good match on all bands; I don't know of any effective formula or rule of thumb that would eliminate this process, so I just start with a lot more feedline than is physically needed and lop off 3' at a time until the tuner is happy everywhere. For RFI with a PC peripheral, I'd start by shortening your tuner-to-balun connection. If that doesn't help, then I'd wrap the peripheral-to-PC cable around a split rectangular ferrite. These were available from Radio Shack and are generally available at ham fests; I'm not sure who sells them now, but Google should find them. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of w4lde Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; TowerTalk Subject: [digitalradio] Open wire feed line length After reading several articles both on and off the WEB regarding a center fed antenna, only one article mentioned a recommended length for the feed line. My shack is located on the second floor of a new home, (24') #8 ground wire to 8' ground stake with a further connection to the common ground point for the power and the rebar in the pored walls and flooring of the basement, telephone and cable. I plan on additional ground rods around the property and at a new tower. In a new home so progress is on-going. The 1:1 current balum used to convert the 450 ohm balance line is external to the tuner, use about two feet of coax from the balum to the tuner. Antenna is cut for 80 meters and using about 60-70 ft of line to center of the antenna. Where the antenna lines leave the shack is about four 4 ft from the location inside of the rig and floor mounted PC. I use the antenna on all bands until such time I complete a new tower installation. I want to minimize stray RF around the shack since I rely on a PC and digital sound card as my primary source for ham enjoyment. I have already had some problems with a USB keyboard that I think may have been effected by RF when running over 50 watts on 20 meters only. One article recommended odd multiples of a wave length is desirable at the lowest operating frequency while other articles don't address this. I am having no problem with a match using the tuner on all bands 80-6 meters. Have used the center fed antenna since 1976 but always had the shack on the ground level and had a good and effective ground sy
RE: [digitalradio] Open wire feed line length
I have used that multiband antenna configuration both at my home station (140' doublet, 450 ohm ladder line, 1500 watts) and when travelling (70' doublet, 300 ohm TV twinlead, 100 watts). My experience: 1. Balanced tuners (e.g. the Johnson Matchbox) work better than an unbalanced tuner and a balun. MFJ recently introduced a balanced tuner; I haven't examined its schematic, but it sure looks like a Johnson Matchbox on the outside. 2. If you use an unbalanced tuner and an external balun, minimize the unbalanced connection length between the tuner and balun. My travel tuner is a small MFJ unit with a built-in balun, and it works very well 3. I almost always end up iteratively trimming the feedline length to enable the tuner to find a good match on all bands; I don't know of any effective formula or rule of thumb that would eliminate this process, so I just start with a lot more feedline than is physically needed and lop off 3' at a time until the tuner is happy everywhere. For RFI with a PC peripheral, I'd start by shortening your tuner-to-balun connection. If that doesn't help, then I'd wrap the peripheral-to-PC cable around a split rectangular ferrite. These were available from Radio Shack and are generally available at ham fests; I'm not sure who sells them now, but Google should find them. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of w4lde Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; TowerTalk Subject: [digitalradio] Open wire feed line length After reading several articles both on and off the WEB regarding a center fed antenna, only one article mentioned a recommended length for the feed line. My shack is located on the second floor of a new home, (24') #8 ground wire to 8' ground stake with a further connection to the common ground point for the power and the rebar in the pored walls and flooring of the basement, telephone and cable. I plan on additional ground rods around the property and at a new tower. In a new home so progress is on-going. The 1:1 current balum used to convert the 450 ohm balance line is external to the tuner, use about two feet of coax from the balum to the tuner. Antenna is cut for 80 meters and using about 60-70 ft of line to center of the antenna. Where the antenna lines leave the shack is about four 4 ft from the location inside of the rig and floor mounted PC. I use the antenna on all bands until such time I complete a new tower installation. I want to minimize stray RF around the shack since I rely on a PC and digital sound card as my primary source for ham enjoyment. I have already had some problems with a USB keyboard that I think may have been effected by RF when running over 50 watts on 20 meters only. One article recommended odd multiples of a wave length is desirable at the lowest operating frequency while other articles don't address this. I am having no problem with a match using the tuner on all bands 80-6 meters. Have used the center fed antenna since 1976 but always had the shack on the ground level and had a good and effective ground system short runs with feed lines around the 90 to 100ft in length. never had a RF problem or surge problem. Any recommended WEB sites or comments are welcomed. 73 de Ron W4LDE
[digitalradio] Off Topic: Re: Open wire feed line length
This is quite off topic, but hopefully the moderators will cut some slack since even digital ops want a good antenna like anyone else:) I do have some experience with using a modified form of W6JJZ's, "The Suburban Multibander." This antenna is described in the ARRL Antenna Compendium, Volume 2, pp 102 - 105. His design took some of the G5RV concepts, but selected a combination of dipole length and 450 ohm transmission line length that allowed the congugate match to work well on several bands. His basic size was an 88.8 foot dipole with a feedline that was 46.2 feet x VF for the favored frequency of 40 meters. It works out that the feedline transforms the complex impedance at the antenna feedpoint (both R + jX and R - jX) to 50 ohms resistive at the rig side of 450 ohm line. He found that his design worked well on 40 and 20, but had a "near miss" on 80 and 10. On other bands it will have some highly reactive impedances and would be a compromise antenna that will work, but not as well as a cut for size dipole, but it could be "force fed" with a wide ranging tuner." I doubled the size so that the two points would be close to 50 ohms resistive at resonance on 80 and 40 meters and with near misses on 160 and 20. It was not that close really and tweaking it was nearly impossible since cut and try probably has some interaction. Installation was as an inverted vee dipole with apex at about 35 feet. From recollection, my antenna was about 180 feet long with a feedline of about 83 feet or so just using a ballpark 90% VF for the 450 ohm line. At least it did match fairly well and since it converts from 450 ohm line to coax, using a 1:1 choke balun, the feedline issue and using a balanced tuner is unnecessary. Because of my climate here in SW Wisconsin, I don't like the changing impedances with open wire type line, especially the plastic hole 450 ohm which can get covered in moisture and/or ice and snow. Especially as I was using a manual tuner. With an automatic tuner it is less critical because the tuner takes care of the differences. I later tried a full size 160 meter inverted vee dipole at a later date, but for most NVIS operation, my quarter wave sort of "L" attached to my Butternut HF-9V vertical worked about as well without the difficulty I had with matching various bands to the dipole. I do have over 30 ground radials from 30 to 100 feet long around my Butternut, so it does have reasonable efficiency. One thing we have learned in the past decade, is that the losses in the tuner can be very substantial, even if the theoretical losses in the open wire line are low. 73, Rick, KV9U jhaynesatalumni wrote: > 100 feet of ladder line is sort of a magic number for being > easily tunable on all the bands. One of my friends bought > a ready-made 80M dipole with 100 feet of ladder line and a > tuner; and the instructions were not to cut much if any off > the ladder line. I learned the reason for that later when I > ran across a web page (which I can't find right now) where > the guy has a similar antenna that he tunes by inserting > various lengths of feedline. He has a graph showing that > 100 feet comes pretty close to being a good match on all > the ham bands. > > Here it is http://www.w5dxp.com/notuner.htm > >
[digitalradio] Re: Open wire feed line length
100 feet of ladder line is sort of a magic number for being easily tunable on all the bands. One of my friends bought a ready-made 80M dipole with 100 feet of ladder line and a tuner; and the instructions were not to cut much if any off the ladder line. I learned the reason for that later when I ran across a web page (which I can't find right now) where the guy has a similar antenna that he tunes by inserting various lengths of feedline. He has a graph showing that 100 feet comes pretty close to being a good match on all the ham bands. Here it is http://www.w5dxp.com/notuner.htm
[digitalradio] Open wire feed line length
After reading several articles both on and off the WEB regarding a center fed antenna, only one article mentioned a recommended length for the feed line. My shack is located on the second floor of a new home, (24') #8 ground wire to 8' ground stake with a further connection to the common ground point for the power and the rebar in the pored walls and flooring of the basement, telephone and cable. I plan on additional ground rods around the property and at a new tower. In a new home so progress is on-going. The 1:1 current balum used to convert the 450 ohm balance line is external to the tuner, use about two feet of coax from the balum to the tuner. Antenna is cut for 80 meters and using about 60-70 ft of line to center of the antenna. Where the antenna lines leave the shack is about four 4 ft from the location inside of the rig and floor mounted PC. I use the antenna on all bands until such time I complete a new tower installation. I want to minimize stray RF around the shack since I rely on a PC and digital sound card as my primary source for ham enjoyment. I have already had some problems with a USB keyboard that I think may have been effected by RF when running over 50 watts on 20 meters only. One article recommended odd multiples of a wave length is desirable at the lowest operating frequency while other articles don't address this. I am having no problem with a match using the tuner on all bands 80-6 meters. Have used the center fed antenna since 1976 but always had the shack on the ground level and had a good and effective ground system short runs with feed lines around the 90 to 100ft in length. never had a RF problem or surge problem. Any recommended WEB sites or comments are welcomed. 73 de Ron W4LDE
[digitalradio] Fw: SILICON CITY HAM MEET 2008 IN BANGALORE
- Forwarded Message From: varadarajan G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 29 June, 2008 6:07:33 AM Subject: SILICON CITY HAM MEET 2008 IN BANGALORE ALL ARE INVITED FOR THE SILICON CITY HAM MEET 2008 IN BANGALORE ON 10 th AUGUST 2008 VENUE : INDIAN INSTITUTE OF HAMS (VU2IIH) CLB STATION SHREE KANTEERAVA OUT DOOR STADIUM - 2ND FLR. KASTURIBA ROAD. BANGALORE 560 001 NEAR CORPORATION OFFICE AND CUBBON PARK 1. PRESENTATION OF PAPERS ON HOME BREW PROJECTS. 2. DEMONSTRATION ON. SDR PROJECTS DIGITAL MODE COMMUNICATION AND ECHOLINK MODES. 3. SALE OF HAM EQUIPMENTS AND COMPONENTS FOR HOME BREWERS BY VETERAN HAMS. 4. GREAT BALL NO DELEGATE FEES FOR THE MEET. PLEASE SEND YOUR PRESENTATION BY Ist OF AUGUST 2008. PLEASE INFOR ABOUT YOUR SALE OF COMPONENTS BY 1st OF AUGUST 2008 PLEASE CONFIRM YOUR ATTENDENCE ON BAND OR OL QSL TO P.O BOX 1927. BANGALORE 560 019. PLEASE COME AND ENJOY REGARDS VU3ITI(VARADAN) Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin. Meet people who discuss and share your passions. Go to http://in.promos.yahoo.com/groups/bestofyahoo/
