Re: [digitalradio] New

[J. Moen]

There's a good introduction to APRS at http://www.wa8lmf.net/bruninga/aprs.html

At the bottom of that page is a link to join the TAPR APRSSIG email list.  It 
is very active and I'd recommend you join.

My other suggestion applies if you would like to have some fun at home right 
off the bat.  Download a copy of UI-View32 from http://www.ui-view.org/

You can start out running this program to watch other position beacons as they 
are reported through RF digipeaters with IGate capability.  That is, you can 
play with APRS reporting from data on the internet even before you hook up your 
PC to your radio.  You can focus on any location you want, world-wide.  My 
first introduction to APRS, years ago, was when a friend took a vacation and 
beaconed the whole trip.  I could watch in near real time as he navigated 
across the US.  

In addition to UI-View32, you can use the findu.com site to lookup APRS info 
directly on the internet.  To focus on your home town of Joplin, MO, using 
findu.com, I looked for APRS activity near your lat/long as reported on qrz.com 
for your callsign:

http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/near.cgi?lat=37.034415&lon=-94.509317&last=240&distance=200&n=100&rate=1

It shows the activity in your area, and the fact that there's an IGate in 
Joplin.

Next you can connect to your radio and begin to have UI-View32 issue position 
reports from your home QTH.  You can configure UI-View32 with your fixed 
lat/long info and don't need a GPS for that.  Some people who have a home 
weather station that can connect to their PC will use that to have their home 
QTH APRS beacons contain the latest temp, wind, etc.

If it's still fun, I'd consider the other recommendations you've gotten.  As 
Jeff KE7ACY pointed out "If you want to send out APRS packets so that others 
can track your movements - all you need is a TinyTrak type device and an HT."  
That can be fun.  One time I was at Dayton for the Hamvention.  I typically 
bring along my HT and a mag mount for the rental car.  Hooked up the gps to the 
HT as I drove around the area.  I'd given my wife the findu.com link to track 
me, and she called me on the cell from back in California and asked why I was 
on the freeway going 8 miles per hour.  I thought that was pretty funny, while 
I sat there in the traffic jam.

As suggested by others, you can go whole hog while mobile and bring along a lap 
or netbook and hook your gps to that, and to the radio.  People do that, but I 
would first try some of the simpler ideas listed above to get started.  Good 
luck.

   Jim - K6JM

  - Original Message - 
  From: Dan 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 5:18 PM
  Subject: [digitalradio] New 
  I would like to try APRS, but have no idea where to start. I now have a GPS 
unit from TomTom. What else do I need and where do I start?
  Thank you,
  Dan Walker WD5CND

Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !

[W6IDS]

Thank you, John, Sir.

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN EM79NV

- Original Message - 
From: "John Becker" 
To: 
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 10:11 PM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !


> Me just thinking out loud..
>
> Would we be talking about this if one could operate Pactor 2 or 3
> on a 15 buck sound card from any wal*mart?
>
> I think not.
>
> I for one can run all 3 pactor modes having the modem.
> (by putting out the cash for the thing in the first place)
> and enjoy the many QSO's that I have had. Not every,
> and I think that really needs to be said again and again
> that not every pactor signal heard is some mail system.
>
> I have been QRMed many times because the other person
> was thinking "oh it's just another robot. Well guess what?
>
> But the good side of this now is that they (the robots) are now
> on WINMOR for the most part. So now you really must ask yourself
> before you QRM that pactor  "is that really a robot or 2 in a pactor QSO."
>
> John, W0JAB

[digitalradio] Re: A shot of my WSPR screen...

[Andy obrien]

I got a report

0316 -17 -1.1  10.140158  0 VE7THZ DN09 30

10386 was the receive "dial"  frequency that the software was tuned to



On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Andy obrien  wrote:
> Interesting, I get the same thing.  It has been months since I tried
> WSPR.  I checked my old guide
>
> http://www.frenning.dk/OZ1PIF_HOMEPAGE/Whisper_Guide.html
>
> Followed my own instructions and get NO decode.
>
> Will play around some more
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Robert L. Tucker  wrote:
>> ...showing spots but no decodes. BTW, I went through the steps to upload 
>> this image to the Photos section of the website, but it doesn't show up... 
>> just a little blue box with a ? inside.
>>
>> Robert
>> K5TD
>>
>>
>

[digitalradio] Re: CMSK63

[zl1bpu]

I suggest you read the help file. All your points are answered there.

Download the latest version.
73,
Murray ZL1BPU


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "my_call_is_ac4m"  wrote:
>
> I will be on 80m tonight using CMSK63 then switching to 31 after contact just 
> to see for myself how well this mode does under noisy conditions I will be 
> active on 3.587 tone frequency at 0100z but I have a few question does his 
> software have Macro commands like other software? And what is up with the 
> sample rate control? Is that for TX offsets?
>

[digitalradio] Re: CMSK63

[zl1bpu]

Hi folks,

There seems to be a fair bit of misinformation around regarding the new CMSK 
mode for LF/MF. I recommend you go back to my web site, read all about it, 
download the latest version, then READ THE HELP FILE CAREFULLY.

www.qsl/net/zl1bpu/CMSK/cmsk.htm

The mode is not intended for HF, and I won't answer questions regarding its use 
there (use MFSK16 or DominoEX please!), but I am willing to respond to 
questions about its use on 2200, 600 or 160m.

Pay particular attention to getting the sampling rate correct, especially on 
CMSK8, which is intended for beacon rather than QSO applications. You can 
expect it to take a while to get the tuning correct, and for text to appear, 
since the CMSK8 mode has long latency. This is a price you pay for narrow 
bandwidth and high sensitivity.

Once documentation is complete, we'll offer the mode for inclusion in 
multi-mode software such as FLDIGI and HRD, but for now the features may seem a 
bit limited, and that's on purpose.

73,
Murray ZL1BPU
Co-designer, CMSK

Re: [digitalradio] Re: New

[Jeff Moore]

Dan,

The TH-F6A DOES NOT have a modem in it.  It can be used with an external TNC 
(like a Kantronics KPC-3+, Open-Tracker, TNC-X, etc.).

Quite a few of the TH-F6A's suffer from a low deviation problem.  If people 
complain about your low audio, you WON'T be able to use the radio for packet 
comms, until the deviation problem is fixed.

Radios that do have TNC's in them:  TH-D7; Yaesu VX-8GR, FT-350;Kenwood 
TM-D700, TM-D710;  Alinco DR-635 (several other Alinco mobiles have an optional 
TNC module).  There are probably a few others I missed.  Most will require a 
separate GPS also.

How complicated it is depends on exactly what you want to do.  If you want to 
send out APRS packets so that others can track your movements - all you need is 
a TinyTrak type device and an HT.  If you want to be able to track others APRS 
signals on a map, then you need a full blown TNC, radio, and a computer running 
APRS software.  The in-between area (you don't need a map display) - you can 
use the self contained units like the Yaesu DX-8GR (includes the GPS) or the 
Kenwood D7 HT ( will need a GPS) or the mobiles with TNC's built-in that will 
also require a GPS.

Your best bet is to hook up with a local mentor that can help guide you through 
the ins and out of getting up and running on APRS.
73,

Jeff Moore  --  KE7ACY
Bend, Oregon

- Original Message - From: Dan Walker 

  
  Thank you, seems so complicated! very limited funds. Will try to get it 
setup with your help.
  Again Thanks,
  Dan

  --- On Sun, 8/29/10, Jerry W  wrote:


From: Jerry W 
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, August 29, 2010, 7:58 AM


  
Dan,

Although the TH-F6A has a Packet modem, that is not all you need to 
operate APRS with that HT. You will also need a computer, laptop if operating 
portable or mobile connected to the TH-F6A, see page 45 of the operating manual 
for cables ect. Then you would need a TNC that would connect with the GPS unit 
or manually enter in lat - long locations though software (see UI-View: 
http://www.ui-view.org/) that the TNC can send to the TH-F6A. You may want to 
look for a used Kenwood TH-D7A/G that has APRS as one of the built in features. 
There is supposed to be a new Kenwood HT, Kenwood TH-D72?  with built-in APRS 
and GPS, however no release date as to when the new HT will be available. You 
might watch the TH-D7 Yahoo group for more information: 
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Kenwood_TH-D7/  

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dan Walker  wrote:

Plan on orerating mobile have Kenwood TH-F6A and my Tom Tom is not the 
highend unit I thought it was. TH-F6A says it has 1200bps modem for VHF. How do 
I put it all togather? Not even sure what I can do with APRS. Been off the air 
for a while.
 Dan
 

I would like to try APRS, but have no idea where to start. I now have a 
GPS unit from TomTom. What else do I need and where do I start?
 Thank you,
 Dan Walker WD5CND
 

[digitalradio] Re: A shot of my WSPR screen...

[Andy obrien]

Interesting, I get the same thing.  It has been months since I tried
WSPR.  I checked my old guide

http://www.frenning.dk/OZ1PIF_HOMEPAGE/Whisper_Guide.html

Followed my own instructions and get NO decode.

Will play around some more


On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Robert L. Tucker  wrote:
> ...showing spots but no decodes. BTW, I went through the steps to upload this 
> image to the Photos section of the website, but it doesn't show up... just a 
> little blue box with a ? inside.
>
> Robert
> K5TD
>
>

RE: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !

[John Becker]

Me just thinking out loud..

Would we be talking about this if one could operate Pactor 2 or 3 
on a 15 buck sound card from any wal*mart?

I think not.

I for one can run all 3 pactor modes having the modem.
(by putting out the cash for the thing in the first place)
and enjoy the many QSO's that I have had. Not every,
and I think that really needs to be said again and again
that not every pactor signal heard is some mail system.

I have been QRMed many times because the other person
was thinking "oh it's just another robot. Well guess what?

But the good side of this now is that they (the robots) are now
on WINMOR for the most part. So now you really must ask yourself
before you QRM that pactor  "is that really a robot or 2 in a pactor QSO."

John, W0JAB

Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem

[Kristoff Bonne]

Hi Trevor,


Op 29-08-10 11:08, Trevor . schreef:
>> I do not understand why -say- the IARU does not does this. I'm not
>> say they should endorce any "standard" of any technology.
>>  
> Unfortunately it would require a volunteer willing to put in a lot of hard 
> work to do. Volunteers are always in short supply.
>
Well, I don't know.
In the internet-world, RFCs are usually written by the people who design 
the protocol or the technology explained in the RFC. The IETF doesn't do 
that neither.


All the IARU should do is:

- encourage people who create new protocols and technologies to document 
it in a written document.

- Do "quality control" (e.g. concerning the exact wording of the RFCs)

- Publish them. (which just means "put them on their website").



Now I must say. Thinking about it.

Perhaps one of the differences in (say) an internet-protocol and ham 
digital modes is that the first group is usually created by teams of 
people, while I have the impression that a lot of the digital modes are 
created by just one or a very limited number of people.

In a team, there usually already is written documentation anyway (as 
part of the process of coming up with the specification and the 
discussions inside the team), it's probably much easier to "translate 
the final version into a RFC-document" and there usually already is 
somebody of the team assigned to documentation anyway.


If you do create something by yourself, most people have "something on 
paper, but most of it in my head". The task of asking "now write this 
all into a nice technical spec" is then much more work.



Perhaps what Dave (Rowe, creator of codec2) should do is to make a 
technical presentation on some ham conference (preferable filmed and 
available on youtube afterwards) so that somebody else can start write a 
technical specs based on that.

And, to be honest. Having to give a technical presentation is not 
necessairy a bad thing. I noticed myself that, having to make some 
slides and having to think on how to explain something, quite often 
leads to some insides into problems you are having.
:-)


> One existing source of info is
>
> http://www.arrl.org/technical-characteristics
>
> But this doesn't provide always provide detailed description of a mode, for 
> instance you couldn't recreate Pactor-III from the information supplied 
> there. Also I suspect it's not kept up to date with mode enhancements.
Thanks for the link. Very interesting.


IIRC, pactor 2 and pactor 3 use patented technology so I doubt it will 
be freely documented somewhere. :-(


> 73 Trevor M5AKA
>
Cheerio!

Kristoff ON5ARF (ex ON1ARF)

RE: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !

[Dave AA6YQ]

>>>AA6YQ comments below

-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on
Behalf Of John B. Stephensen
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 4:29 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !



The ARRL response was that the final proposal retained the existing
automatic subands.

>>>My recollection is that a flurry of desperate activity preceded the
ARRL's retracting its proposal; if part of that flurry included a
modification that would have retained the automatic sub-bands, I don't
recall seeing it.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


- Original Message -
>>>When that 1 percent deploys unattended stations that transmit without
first checking to see if the frequency is in use, they can create havoc far
out of proportion to their fraction of ham community.

Regulation by bandwidth and not by mode seems to be working everywhere that
it is allowed. under a bandwidth regulatory environment, there is no "phone
band."

>>>True, if ops generally have the courtesy to not QRM existing QSOs. Those
who rudely deploy unattended stations without competent busy frequency
detectors are what make "regulation by bandwith" unacceptable.

BTW, it wasn't "winlink" that wanted anything, it was the ARRL who wrote the
proposal. There were flaws in it, but it was headed in the proper direction.
it will return as we move toward a digital future.

>>>The ARRL withdrew its "regulation by bandwidth" proposal because it had
no effective response to the factual assertions that this proposal would
greatly expand the frequency range accessible to unattended stations without
providing any means of ensuring that such stations would not QRM existing
QSOs. When those who deploy unattended stations upgrade them to rarely QRM
existing QSOs (emergency conditions excepted), "regulation by bandwidth"
will become possible.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !

[John B. Stephensen]

The ARRL response was that the final proposal retained the existing automatic 
subands. 

73,

John
KD6OZH
  - Original Message - 
  >>>When that 1 percent deploys unattended stations that transmit without
  first checking to see if the frequency is in use, they can create havoc far
  out of proportion to their fraction of ham community.

  Regulation by bandwidth and not by mode seems to be working everywhere that
  it is allowed. under a bandwidth regulatory environment, there is no "phone
  band."

  >>>True, if ops generally have the courtesy to not QRM existing QSOs. Those
  who rudely deploy unattended stations without competent busy frequency
  detectors are what make "regulation by bandwith" unacceptable.

  BTW, it wasn't "winlink" that wanted anything, it was the ARRL who wrote the
  proposal. There were flaws in it, but it was headed in the proper direction.
  it will return as we move toward a digital future.

  >>>The ARRL withdrew its "regulation by bandwidth" proposal because it had
  no effective response to the factual assertions that this proposal would
  greatly expand the frequency range accessible to unattended stations without
  providing any means of ensuring that such stations would not QRM existing
  QSOs. When those who deploy unattended stations upgrade them to rarely QRM
  existing QSOs (emergency conditions excepted), "regulation by bandwidth"
  will become possible.

  73,

  Dave, AA6YQ

Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !

[KH6TY]

 On 8/29/2010 2:12 PM, k4cjx wrote:


BTW, it wasn't "winlink" that wanted anything, it was the ARRL who 
wrote the proposal. There were flaws in it, but it was headed in the 
proper direction. it will return as we move toward a digital future.


Steve, k4cjx, aaa9ac

Let's not try to distort history. The "ARRL" was essentially taken over 
by Winlink, in this instance. when the proposal was written 
http://www.zerobeat.net/bandplan-dissent.html so it was really Winlink's 
proposal, not the ARRL's proposal, and was roundly rejected by both 
phone band hams and digital operators, and rightfully so. As so many 
have complained, the bandwidth of ROS is hugely inappropriate for the 
digital portions of the bands, for what it can accomplish in comparison 
to much more narrow modes, and even lacks the basic busy detector which 
would allow it to share the frequencies with other stations, just as 
Winlink stations lack, and often do battle among themselves, for a 
frequency instead of sharing it on a first-come-first serve basis.


As far as the phone bands being opened to digital operations is 
concerned, there is still lacking a practical means to cross-communicate 
between phone and digital in order to effect frequency sharing. This is 
a major reason that there must continue to be legal separation between 
digital operators and phone in order to protect the phone bands from 
being dominated by digital operations, and until phone operators and 
digital operators can cross-communicate and cooperatively share 
frequencies, it is probably going to stay that way.


Our limited ham bands must be shared by all interests and do not exist 
just for the convenience and pleasure of a minority that does not 
subscribe to, or practice, frequency sharing. We are fortunate to have 
REGULATIONS in this country, instead of merely bandplans (which are only 
recommendations), to prevent the dominance of the bands from a few who 
refuse to adopt frequency sharing practices or technologies. If you do 
not live under FCC jurisdiction, you also need to be thankful for the 
same reguations that have protected you also, as radio waves often obey 
no international boundaries.


73, Skip KH6TY

RE: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !

[Dave AA6YQ]

>>>AA6YQ comments below

-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on
Behalf Of k4cjx
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 2:12 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !




Amazing that one thinks that 1 percent can cause any type of difference,
anywhere, especially on the Phone bands.

>>>When that 1 percent deploys unattended stations that transmit without
first checking to see if the frequency is in use, they can create havoc far
out of proportion to their fraction of ham community.

Regulation by bandwidth and not by mode seems to be working everywhere that
it is allowed. under a bandwidth regulatory environment, there is no "phone
band."

>>>True, if ops generally have the courtesy to not QRM existing QSOs. Those
who rudely deploy unattended stations without competent busy frequency
detectors are what make "regulation by bandwith" unacceptable.

BTW, it wasn't "winlink" that wanted anything, it was the ARRL who wrote the
proposal. There were flaws in it, but it was headed in the proper direction.
it will return as we move toward a digital future.

>>>The ARRL withdrew its "regulation by bandwidth" proposal because it had
no effective response to the factual assertions that this proposal would
greatly expand the frequency range accessible to unattended stations without
providing any means of ensuring that such stations would not QRM existing
QSOs. When those who deploy unattended stations upgrade them to rarely QRM
existing QSOs (emergency conditions excepted), "regulation by bandwidth"
will become possible.

73,

 Dave, AA6YQ

[digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !

[k4cjx]

Amazing that one thinks that 1 percent can cause any type of difference, 
anywhere, especially on the Phone bands. Regulation by bandwidth and not by 
mode seems to be working everywhere that it is allowed.  under a bandwidth 
regulatory environment, there is no "phone band."

BTW, it wasn't "winlink" that wanted anything, it was the ARRL who wrote the 
proposal. There were flaws in it, but it was headed in the proper direction. it 
will return as we move toward a digital future.


Steve, k4cjx, aaa9ac


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY  wrote:
>
> Julian,
> 
> For example, five years ago, Winlink attempted to get the FCC to allow 
> then to use Pactor-III ALL OVER the phone bands, with the argument that 
> the bandwidth was no greater than a phone signal.
> 
> Do you think that should have been allowed for the benefit of that 1% of 
> the US ham population and therefore wrecking the phone bands for over 
> 50% of hams worldwide? Perhaps you have never had a QSO destroyed by a 
> Pactor-III or Pactor-II mailbox...
> 
> Regulations in this country protect as well as hinder sometimes.
> 
> 73, Skip KH6TY
> 
> On 7/20/2010 7:23 AM, KH6TY wrote:
> >
> > Who is to decide what is harmful to the general population or not - 
> > the individual looking out for himself, or the public looking out for 
> > everyone (in the form of a republic) including that individual?
> >
> > 73, Skip KH6TY
> >
> > On 7/20/2010 4:34 AM, g4ilo wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
> >> , KH6TY  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Just use common sense..
> >> > Garrett / AA0OI
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Common sense" says follow the regulations, because they were made for
> >> > the benefit of everyone, and not just for what a few who would like to
> >> > do what they wish without regard for others that want to use the bands.
> >> >
> >> > Regulations are not "guide lines" - they are LAW for the benefit of 
> >> all.
> >> > Band plans are "guide lines", not regulations.
> >> >
> >> > What may seen nit picking to you may seem necessary to others. The
> >> > regulations are a great balancing act to both protect and enable as 
> >> many
> >> > users to be treated as fairly as possible.
> >> >
> >> > 73, Skip KH6TY
> >> >
> >>
> >> We also have a saying over here, "the law is an ass".
> >>
> >> Whilst I'm not advocating anarchy, I guess most people in this 
> >> discussion have broken the law at one time or another by, for 
> >> example, exceeding the speed limit in their car, something that could 
> >> arguably have more serious consequences than using a transmission 
> >> mode that some regulation appears to ban even though no harm would be 
> >> caused by using it.
> >>
> >> I think a sense of proportion is needed.
> >>
> >> Julian, G4ILO
> >>
> >
>

Re: [digitalradio] Re: New

[Dan Walker]

Thank you, seems so complicated! very limited funds. Will try to get it setup 
with your help.
Again Thanks,
Dan

--- On Sun, 8/29/10, Jerry W  wrote:


From: Jerry W 
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, August 29, 2010, 7:58 AM


  



Dan,

Although the TH-F6A has a Packet modem, that is not all you need to operate 
APRS with that HT. You will also need a computer, laptop if operating portable 
or mobile connected to the TH-F6A, see page 45 of the operating manual for 
cables ect. Then you would need a TNC that would connect with the GPS unit or 
manually enter in lat - long locations though software (see UI-View: 
http://www.ui-view.org/) that the TNC can send to the TH-F6A. You may want to 
look for a used Kenwood TH-D7A/G that has APRS as one of the built in features. 
There is supposed to be a new Kenwood HT, Kenwood TH-D72?  with built-in APRS 
and GPS, however no release date as to when the new HT will be available. You 
might watch the TH-D7 Yahoo group for more information: 
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Kenwood_TH-D7/  

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dan Walker  wrote:

Plan on orerating mobile have Kenwood TH-F6A and my Tom Tom is not the highend 
unit I thought it was. TH-F6A says it has 1200bps modem for VHF. How do I put 
it all togather? Not even sure what I can do with APRS. Been off the air for a 
while.
 Dan
 

I would like to try APRS, but have no idea where to start. I now have a GPS 
unit from TomTom. What else do I need and where do I start?
 Thank you,
 Dan Walker WD5CND








  

[digitalradio] Re: New

[Jerry W]

Dan,

Although the TH-F6A has a Packet modem, that is not all you need to
operate APRS with that HT. You will also need a computer, laptop if
operating portable or mobile connected to the TH-F6A, see page 45 of the
operating manual for cables ect. Then you would need a TNC that would
connect with the GPS unit or manually enter in lat - long locations
though software (see UI-View: http://www.ui-view.org/) that the TNC can
send to the TH-F6A. You may want to look for a used Kenwood TH-D7A/G
that has APRS as one of the built in features. There is supposed to be a
new Kenwood HT, Kenwood TH-D72?  with built-in APRS and GPS, however no
release date as to when the new HT will be available. You might watch
the TH-D7 Yahoo group for more information:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Kenwood_TH-D7/

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dan Walker  wrote:

Plan on orerating mobile have Kenwood TH-F6A and my Tom Tom is not the
highend unit I thought it was. TH-F6A says it has 1200bps modem for VHF.
How do I put it all togather? Not even sure what I can do with APRS.
Been off the air for a while.
  Dan


I would like to try APRS, but have no idea where to start. I now have a
GPS unit from TomTom. What else do I need and where do I start?
  Thank you,
  Dan Walker WD5CND

Re[4]: [digitalradio] New

[Vlad_UA6JD]

Hello, Dan.
   I am design page to you and send sample link to your YAHOO e-mail.
Please check your personal post

You wrote :
> Never had a page, how does it work and how will I get there? Like to try.
> Dan

> --- On Sat, 8/28/10, Vlad_UA6JD  wrote:


> From: Vlad_UA6JD 
> Subject: Re[2]: [digitalradio] New
> To: "Dan Walker" 
> Date: Saturday, August 28, 2010, 10:57 PM


>   



> Hello, Dan.

> If you like samples - let me know and I will design qrzcom page for
> you with APRS clickable logo in.

> You wrote :
>> Thank You,
>> Dan

>> --- On Sat, 8/28/10, Vlad_UA6JD  wrote:

>> From: Vlad_UA6JD 
>> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] New
>> To: "Dan" 
>> Date: Saturday, August 28, 2010, 10:01 PM

>>   

>> Just my two cents worth..

>> About QRV APRS .
>> I think nobody use it now.
>> It possible to add APRS logo to your qrzcom page and when you click
>> on it show your position
>> You can see sample of use it in the few pages now, for example click
>> to:

>> http://www.qrz.com/db/k8waw or

>> http://www.qrz.com/db/do3nn

>> You wrote :
>>> I would like to try APRS, but have no idea where to start. I now
>>> have a GPS unit from TomTom. What else do I need and where do I start?
>>> Thank you,
>>> Dan Walker WD5CND

>> Best regards
>> 73 Vlad UA6JD 
>> web design in www.qrz.com
>> Sample and download books
>> on http://www.qrz.com/db/Ua6jd

>> 

> Best regards
> 73 Vlad UA6JD 
> web design in www.qrz.com
> Sample and download books
> on http://www.qrz.com/db/Ua6jd









>   



Best regards
73 Vlad UA6JD 
web design in www.qrz.com
Sample and download books
on http://www.qrz.com/db/Ua6jd

Re: Re[2]: [digitalradio] New

[Dan Walker]

Never had a page, how does it work and how will I get there? Like to try.
Dan

--- On Sat, 8/28/10, Vlad_UA6JD  wrote:


From: Vlad_UA6JD 
Subject: Re[2]: [digitalradio] New
To: "Dan Walker" 
Date: Saturday, August 28, 2010, 10:57 PM


  



Hello, Dan.

If you like samples - let me know and I will design qrzcom page for
you with APRS clickable logo in.

You wrote :
> Thank You,
> Dan

> --- On Sat, 8/28/10, Vlad_UA6JD  wrote:

> From: Vlad_UA6JD 
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] New
> To: "Dan" 
> Date: Saturday, August 28, 2010, 10:01 PM

>   

> Just my two cents worth..

> About QRV APRS .
> I think nobody use it now.
> It possible to add APRS logo to your qrzcom page and when you click
> on it show your position
> You can see sample of use it in the few pages now, for example click
> to:

> http://www.qrz.com/db/k8waw or

> http://www.qrz.com/db/do3nn

> You wrote :
>> I would like to try APRS, but have no idea where to start. I now
>> have a GPS unit from TomTom. What else do I need and where do I start?
>> Thank you,
>> Dan Walker WD5CND

> Best regards
> 73 Vlad UA6JD 
> web design in www.qrz.com
> Sample and download books
> on http://www.qrz.com/db/Ua6jd

> 

Best regards
73 Vlad UA6JD 
web design in www.qrz.com
Sample and download books
on http://www.qrz.com/db/Ua6jd









  

Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem

[Trevor .]

--- On Sat, 28/8/10, Kristoff Bonne  wrote:
> I do not understand why -say- the IARU does not does this. I'm not 
> say they should endorce any "standard" of any technology.

Unfortunately it would require a volunteer willing to put in a lot of hard work 
to do. Volunteers are always in short supply. 

One existing source of info is 

http://www.arrl.org/technical-characteristics 

But this doesn't provide always provide detailed description of a mode, for 
instance you couldn't recreate Pactor-III from the information supplied there. 
Also I suspect it's not kept up to date with mode enhancements. 

73 Trevor M5AKA