from:"\[EMAIL PROTECTED\]"

I left WSJT in mode JT65A monitoring last night as well.

80M, 3.576MHz on the dial and no deep search (see the 1 0 at the end 
of the captures).  Again, all whilst I was asleep.  HI.

043800  6  -18 -0.1   -3  3 *  CQ N4UPX EM50 1   0
043900  0  -18 -0.6   19  1   
044000  4  -17 -0.1   -3  3 #  AE9K N4UPX EM50 OOO   1   0
044100  0  -18  5.7   19  4   
044200  5  -18  0.0   -3  3 *  AE9K N4UPX R-08   1   0
044300  0  -19  6.2   19  2   
044400  2  -17 -0.2   -3  3 *  AE9K N4UPX RRR1   0
044500  0  -19  1.4   19  4   
044600  6  -18 -0.1   -3  3 *  AE9K 73 TU DA 1   0
044700  0  -22  9.7  412  6   

044900  4  -19  0.0   -8  3 *  CQ N9DSJ EN52 1   0
045000  0  -25 -0.5 -541  3   
045100  5  -18  0.1   -8  3 *  CQ N9DSJ EN52 1   0
045200  2  -23 -0.1  358  4 *  CQ N4UPX EM50 1   0
045300  1  -31   -89  3   73  ?   
045400  4  -21  0.0  358  4 *  CQ N4UPX EM50 1   0
   
045900 10  -15 -0.1   -8  3 *  CQ N9DSJ EN52 1   0
05  0  -25  9.7   19  2   
050100  4  -18 -0.2   -8  3 *  CQ N9DSJ EN52 1   0
050200  0  -24  9.2 -563  1   
050300  4  -18 -0.2   -8  3 *  CQ N9DSJ EN52 1   0
050400  1  -29 -0.2  573  3 * 
050500  2  -18  0.0   -8  3 *  WB8PMG N9DSJ -22  1   0

050800  3  -20 -0.2  498  0 *  CQ N4UPX EM50 1   0
  
053300  5  -20 -0.2   -3  3 *  CQ N4UPX EM50 1   0
053400  0  -26 -1.7 -253 25   
053500  3  -16 -0.2   -3  3 *  CQ N4UPX EM50 1   0

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Re: HF BBS systems

Demetre SV1UY wrote:
 --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose A. Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 wrote:
 [snip]
   
 Once, I had a clash with a british net controller, which I regarded 
 as 
 fascist instantly, imposing a limit of 5 K per piece of mail sent 
 to 
 the british network. It happened that one of my users had sent a too 
 large piece of e-mail. 
 

 Hi Jose again,

 I think that exactly this behaviour killed PACKET RADIO networks
 worldwide. Bad sysops like the one you are describing above existed in
 many parts of the world are responsible for this.

 NETROM BARONS AND PACKET KINGS!!!

   

I used the Packet network for many years, only as an operator and 
'interested party'.  I did talk to some sysops, and most were people who 
wanted the network to work.  However, there were some who I suspected 
had either become sysops because of the power that it gave them over 
their fellow Radio Amateurs, or who wanted to kill the system dead.  A 
common ploy in the business world.

Looking at the new systems, I'm sure they will find their users and 
devotees, but, to be honest, I'm not sure that they will catch on in the 
UK, or even most of Europe, to a great extent.

The obvious rival is internet email.  Love it or hate it, and argue that 
it's not using Amateur Radio all you like, and that it could be knocked 
out by accidents and any number of causes, but it's just too cheap, too 
fast and, mostly, too reliable to send stuff over the air instead.  Add 
to that the need to dedicate radios and antennas to it to make it work, 
which was why I did not run a BBS or an APRS node, as I prefer the 
freedom to use my own antennas whenever I wanted, and the added problems 
of not wanting to loose a band due to having a transmitter going on a 
nearby frequency for periods of the day, and it might seem selfish but I 
wasn't prepared to do that.  All cudos to those that did, and paid out 
to put node transceivers on towers etc., etc. but it takes alot of 
organising to do it...

There will always be the special interest groups, who will do it because 
they want to prove it can be done and those that live in places where 
sending email is expensive, or difficult, of course.  However, as 
Amateurs, it seems to me that we do seem to keep coming out with new 
ideas to reinvent the wheel at times.

Dave (G0DJA)

[digitalradio] JT65A reports

There seems to be a difference btween reporting systems between the US 
system and the European system on terrestrial JT65A contacts.

Can anyone explain to me when a contact is 'valid' between two stations 
using the two different systems please?

For example, I received the following today (callsigns obscured to not 
cause offence) on 20M

163700 12   -2  0.05  4 *  CQ EA*** JM**1   0
163900 10   -5  0.15  3 *  G0DJA EA*** JM** 1   0
164100  6   -6  0.05  3 *  G0DJA EA***  1   0
164300 10  -15 4  3   RRR ? 

That was it, no report, not even OOOs.  I was using what, in the 
guide, says is the European standard of sending the received dB signal 
strength, but the EA station was using the US version, appart from no OOO.

A quick read through the excellent Bozos guide gave me the clue that the 
other station was double left clicking on callsigns (US system 
reports)and I am double right clicking (Eu system reports).

Now, two questions occur to me at this point.
1. Is my EA contact 'good' or 'incomplete' and
2. What's going to happen when US stations and Eu stations work each other?

I wonder why two reporting systems were created for terrestrial JT65A?  
My guess is that the US one will win out anyway, as that just seems to 
be the way these things go and left clicking is more the norm than 
right anyway, so why the alternative systems?

Also, whilst I'm asking questions, why does double right clicking 
automatically turn Auto TX to ON?  If you are not careful, and want to 
pre-load a callsign to call at the end of an existing QSO, you end up 
accidentally TXing over the top of the person working the station you 
want to have a go at next.  This seems a bit like poor operating and 
it's not untill you do it for the first time that you realise what's 
happening...

Thanks for any help with these problems I'm having - Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] JT65A reports

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 That was it, no report, not even OOOs.  I was using what, in the 
 guide, says is the European standard of sending the received dB signal 
 strength, but the EA station was using the US version, appart from no OOO.

   
Sorry, my mistake, I missread the guide.  Seems that OOOs are the old 
system and dB reports are the new.  Not US/EU.

However, there still remains the problem of letting people know that 
they have not sent a report.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] More JT65A - gotaway

Andrew O'Brien wrote:
 Look like real ones to me,  now if only you could work them while sleeping !

   
No point in stopping up tonight though.


2008 ARRL RTTY Round-Up

Begins 1800 UTC Saturday, ends 2400 UTC Sunday (*January 5-6, 2008).

*At 1800 on the dot I had to give up any chance of anymore JT65A signals 
being received here.

Dave (G0DJA)
**

Re: [digitalradio] JT65A - gotaway

2008-01-04 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Mind you, I do have to pay attention to the difference between the 
column marked DT and the one marked dB when sending a report - Ooops!

I'm having a problem coverting to the HF reporting system from the MS 
one.  Well, that is my excuse.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] JT65A - gotaway

2008-01-04 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Andrew O'Brien wrote:
 Dave ,  there is a well known WSJT phenomenon whereby one receives
 FALSE CQs.  When I first started using WSJT on HF and left on
 overnight , I received a few CQs from Japan on 40M but I was on a
 frequency that is not used in Japan. 
That's why I *never* have deep search switched on.  Even on VHF/UHF.  
Sorry, I just think there's more chance that you think you have worked 
someone, when you have not.

Just like on CW - If I don't receive the whole callsign at least once, 
I've not made a contact...

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] NBEMS available for beta testing

Steinar Aanesland wrote:
 Hi Andy,

 7072 is not best the freq in my part of the world . Heavy QRM from SSB. 
 But I will try copy you
 of course ;)

 73 de LA5VNA Steinar
   

OK, I've got NBEMS running, and decoding signals on 20M, and I've run 
FLARQ and the file folders appear to be OK.

So, what can I do now?  Does anyone in Europe want to have a play at 
swapping files etc.?

I don't think I'll be dedicating a permanent station for this system, 
but it looks as if it might be interesting to have a play with.

Dave (G0DJA)

[digitalradio] NBEMS

Oh dear, fist trial with NBEMS was not a happy one, for me, I'm afraid...

Appart from not knowing my way round the program, which is not the fault 
of the program of course, I also had terrible trouble with it missing 
keystrokes.

Either it gave lowercase where I wanted uppercase, or it missed space 
bar keystrokes and it even missed several letters if I did not slowly 
and deliberately hit the keys as I transmitted.

Appologies to the LY2 station who tried to work me on 20M today, if he's 
logged onto this reflector, I accidentally clicked on the Beacon and he 
responded and it went downhill from there.

I guess it's not meant to be a chat mode system, but I'll be warry of 
how I play with it from now on!  I'm using Windows 2000 pro on a 1.9GHZ 
AMD Sempron with a fair amount of RAM, if that helps debugging what was 
going wrong.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] NBEMS

kh6ty wrote:
 Dave,

 Do not try to type at the same time you are linked with another station, 
 because flarq is going to be sending keystrokes to VBdigi, often at the same 
 time as you try to type. As you point out, NBEMS is a messaging system, not 
 a chat system. It is also primarily for 2m emergency messaging, or NVIS on 
 HF, where there is little QSB to contend with.

 The best way to play with it is to first establish contact without using 
 Flarq. Then one of you presses the beacon button and takes it from there, 
 only sending a stored email, stored text message, or picture and don't type 
 until the progress bar on Flarq has progressed from white to green to full 
 green and then white again.

 73, Skip
 KH6TY
   
I did unkey the beacon button, but I guess that putting the other 
persons callsign in the 'Callsign' box enables FLARQ?

QSB is a major problem, of course, with the bands the way they are.  And 
I'm guessing that the fading you get on bands like 23cm are going to 
make it difficult to use those bands as well?

I guess there might be some interest for JOTA.  Other than the age old 
'Radio verses non-Radio' communications I'm thinking this may not get a 
great following in the UK/Europe.  But, I could be wrong.

I'll certainly do some more reading before touching the TX button again!

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] NBEMS problem

Rick wrote:
 When you loaded your software, did you get a warning that a file was 
 newer on your computer and that it recommended you keep the file? In my 
 case it was one of the system32 files: MSCOMCTL.OCX.

   

Yes, that is a known issue.  You should have kept the newer file.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] NBEMS problem

Andrew O'Brien wrote:
 It makes sense to me.

 If you have TWO soundcards set in your PC, you need to tell VBdigi the
 soundcard settings you want to use.  I have the same setting as you, I
 have an internal motherboard based souncard and a Creative PCI card.
 The default Windows souncard is the PCI car BUT I have all the PC to
 rig audio cables connected to the internal card.  So, in DVdigi, I set
 mine to SC 2 and all came alive in the waterfall.
   
When you have set the card, go into Control Panel and then Sounds and 
Multimedia Properties.  Select the soundcard you want to use and make 
sure the correct Line In is selected under the Audio tab by clicking on 
Recording Device and select the appropriate soundcard.

You may find that, if you want to use Line In which is the prefered 
option, that microphone is selected, or vice versa.

Dave (G0DJA)

[digitalradio] JT65A - gotaway

If only I didn't have to sleep!

Found a load of the following CQ calls on 80M, from leaving WSJT running 
overnight...

   
034600  3  -16  1.6  100  3 *  CQ KD5JGA EM161   0
034700  0  -15  3.3 -471  3   
034800  5  -15  1.6  100  3 *  CQ KD5JGA EM161   0
034900  0  -15  8.1 -471  3   
035000  3  -17  1.7  100  3 *  CQ KD5JGA EM161   0
035100  0  -16  5.4  108  3   
035200  4  -16  1.6  100  3 *  CQ KD5JGA EM161   0
035300  0  -16 -1.9 -471  3   
035400  5  -16  1.8  100  1 *  CQ KD5JGA EM161   0
035500  0  -15  6.7  108  3   
035600  2  -18  1.9  100  1 *  CQ KD5JGA EM161   0

Oh well.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Comments on the JT65A and Olivia contests

Andrew O'Brien wrote:
 Of the 15 or so logs received so far, the comments appear to be.

 The bands (40 and 20M) were in very poor conditions

   
I'm sorry that I wasn't able to be as active as I wanted to be.  A 
family illness and a guest staying overnight on New Years Eve/New Years 
Day hampered my access to the station.

I did leave JT65A running, and I can email a text file of what I picked 
up if anyone wants it, rather than clogging up the reflector with it.

I made 3 contacts using Olivia, and one 'gotaway' that I did not count 
as he got my callsign slightly wrong just before the signals faded out 
completely.

My brief Olivia log looks like this (I will submit it properly Andy, 
don't worry :-)  )

7000 RY 2008-01-01 2101 DL8LE 599   
7000 RY 2008-01-01 1816 UT1XA 599   
7000 RY 2008-01-01 1734 IV3AVQNot Completed 
7000 RY 2008-01-01 1704 OZ1TMK599   

Cheers - Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments on the JT65A and Olivia contests

Dave Bernstein wrote:
 15 QSOs in about 2 hours of operating, just under half with European 
 stations, all on 20m. There was an MFSK-16 station QRV that 
 threatened my sanity; it wasn't the QRM, it was listening to 2 hours 
 of that moronic music that made me feel like Red Buttons in the 
 Longest Day.

I tend to operate with the sound down on the radio, and only use the 
various monitor functions sparingly, so it's usually quiet in the shack 
when I'm playing digital modes.

The only exception being CW, as I prefer to read that myself, rather 
than use automatic decode, which has its own problems of course.

Dave (G0DJA)

[digitalradio] DRCC database export

I am trying to update my DRCC member tracker, designed to help me keep 
track of the DRCC members that I work per band and mode.  However, the 
latest database system exports the information with speechmarks arround 
the DRCC number and name and I don't want them.

Can anyone advise how best to remove the speechmarks without having to 
do this manually please?  I'm importing the CSV formatted file into Excel.

Thanks - Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] DRCC database export

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I am trying to update my DRCC member tracker, designed to help me keep 
 track of the DRCC members that I work per band and mode.  However, the 
 latest database system exports the information with speechmarks arround 
 the DRCC number and name and I don't want them.

 Can anyone advise how best to remove the speechmarks without having to 
 do this manually please?  I'm importing the CSV formatted file into Excel.

   

All sorted now. :-)

Andy (K3UK) reminded me of the search and replace function...

Cheers - Dave (G0DJA)

[digitalradio] Friendly people about...

This is what often puts me off HF...

I see this.
13:40:02 Main
aoytc n ?SK
CQ CQ CQ DE UV5QA UV5QA UV5QA
CQ C
CQ CQ CQ DE UV5QA UV5QA UV5QA
CQ CQ CQ DE UV5QA UV5QA UV5QA
PSE K

So, I call him, to get this...

13:40:13 Main

DX DX DX DX DX DX DX DX DX DX DX DX DX DX
CQ CQ CQ DE UV5QA UV5QA UV5QA
CQ CQ CQ DE UV5QA UV5QA UV5
PSE K

If he wanted only DX, why not start with that in the CQ?

Another one for the ignore list I guess.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Digital Radio Century Club JT65A New Years Crawl, 12/31/2007, 6:00 pm

2007-12-31 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Mark Thompson wrote:
 Digital Radio Century Club JT65A New Years Crawl 


   

Updated rules and new operating times below...

--
 Default  Revised JT65A Crawl rules and operating times.
Here are the rules, revised, for the Jan 1 2008 JT65A Crawl. Due to 
several requests, an extra hour of operating time has been added The 
three hours you can operate are now -0100 , 0600-0700, and 1200 - 
1300 UTC.

Somebody with an actual brain pointed out that my original scoring 
method could result in a score of zero if they worked NO multipliers in 
the contest.

So I have revised... the continental multiplier has been eliminated. 
Now, even if a person has just one contact they will have at least one 
multiplier.

January 1 -2008 JT65A New Years Crawl

Terrestrial JT65A using existing software is quite a challenge for 
contest scenarios, please read the suggested exchange format carefully.

Use of standard WSJT transmission/reception time intervals is recommended.

Announcing the Digital Radio Century Club New Years Crawl

Date : January 1 2008

Time : Z to 0100Z and/or 0600-0700 and/or 1200Z to 1300Z (total 
operating time - up to 3 hours. You can operate all three time periods 
or just a portion of them if you want )


Mode. JT65A ONLY


Suggested CQ.. See below

Bands : 20M or 40M ONLY. (suggested frequency 14074-077, 7035-40, or 
7076 USB )



Class: Single operator low power only
(under 100 watts)


Exchange:

Report (S/N,OOO,RO are valid) plus ...

DRCC members : DRCC Number (e.g. DRCC 001)

Non-DRCC members : 73,88 or RRR

Example exchanges. There can be three differing QSOs:

1. Contact between two stations that are DRCC members
2. Contact between one DRCC member and another station that is not a member

3. Contact between two stations, both not members.

Typical exchanges for the above three situations are listed below. 
Assuming clear reception, each station transmits three times during the 
QSO.

1. --- Member / Member ---

calling station CQ K3UK FN02
(calling station sends CQ,, their callsign once, and their grid square )

replying station K3UK 7L4IOU PM95
(station replies with both callsigns and their grid square)

calling station 7L4IOU K3UK -10
(calling stations sends boths calls and SNR report from WSJT software)

replying station K3UK 7L4IOU R-05
(both calls and SNR report)

calling station DRCC 001
(Calling station sends their DRCC number)

replying station DRCC 086
(Replying station sends their DRCC number)


2. --- Member / Non Member -
CQ K3UK FN02
K3UK JR1BAS PM95
JR1BAS K3UK -10
K3UK JR1BAS R-05
DRCC 001
K3UK JR1BAS 73


3. --- Non Member / Non Member -
calling station CQ ZZ1XXX AB01

replying station ZZ1XXX JR1BAS PM95

calling station JR1BAS ZZ1XXX AB01 OOO

replying station RO

calling station RRR

replying station 73

Note : WSJT software has limitations on the size of the transmited text. 
If you have an unsually long callsign you may need to be creative in how 
you abbreviate the suggested exchange.

Scoring :

5 points each DRCC member contact

1 point each non- DRCC member contact


Stations can be worked once per band

Multipliers:

There are TWO different multipliers.

1. Number of stations worked with DRCC numbers under 100 and
2. Number or unique grid squares (e.g. FN02 is one, FN03 is two, PM95 
makes three! )


Scoring :
5 points each DRCC member contact

1 point each non- DRCC member contact

Stations can be worked once per band

Example 


K3UK works 6 DRCC stations , 30 points.

K3UK works 6 non-DRCC stations, 6 points

sub-total = 36 Points (30+6 )


Of 6 DRCC stations worked on the two bands, 4 gave
DRCC numbers below 100.

36*4 =144 points

Of 12 QSOs on the two bands, 7 different grid squares were worked.

144 * 7 = 1008 TOTAL CONTEST SCORE.

(multipliers count PER band, e.g. K3UK DRCC number 000 , worked on 40 
and 20M is two multipliers. Grid square FNO2, worked on 40M and 20M, is 
two multipliers



Submit a log SUMMARY in ASCII format to [EMAIL PROTECTED] by Feb 1 2008.


Results will be posted at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/files/

Those who wish to obtain a DRCC number prior to December 31 may do so
by sending a request to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Suggested Software: WSJT . Score the
contest manually or via home brewed spreadsheets.

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Current balun

2007-10-20 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Phil Wells wrote:
 --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
   
 Dave wrote:
 
 I understand the basics of using a balun, but have a question
   
 about the specifics.

   
 Sorry to have to ask this Dave, but if you understand the basics,
 
 why don't you know the difference between a 6:1 and a 4:1 transformer
 ratio?

 WOW! What a nice, friendly forum this is!  Makes a person want to post
 questions and learn (but be careful how you WORD those questions...
 hoo boy)

 Phil Wells
 AF6AV

   
Only if you read my post as confrontational.  I was asking for 
clarification as to what the qustion was...

Perhaps you should say but be careful how you word your replies?  I 
wasn't thinking, I guess, that people would so easily missread my words 
and take offence.

You might, I also guess, think that this is meant in a rude and terse way?

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] CQ DRCC...

2007-10-19 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 n6vl wrote:
   
 Let's give the DRCC a shot!


   
 
 Hi Steve,

 I wasn't aware of DRCC, ut then I guess no one can keep up to date with 
 everything that goes on.  HI.

   
Ah, now I have a very red face, as I didn't recognise the name of the 
group that I'm already a member of. (Blush).

I will try to be a bit more active and add thmy DRCC number to my sign 
off at the end of my QSOs, which is how I became aware of the OMC in the 
first place.

It's Jamboree On The Air (JOTA) this weekend, and I've promised to help 
at a local Scout group and take one of my partners grandsons with me, 
which may mean I can't be as active from home as I would like.

However, I will try and be more active next week as well.

Dave (G0DJA)
DRCC #08

Re: [digitalradio] CQ DRCC...

2007-10-19 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

n6vl wrote:
 Let's give the DRCC a shot!


   
Hi Steve,

I wasn't aware of DRCC, ut then I guess no one can keep up to date with 
everything that goes on.  HI.

The problem with creating another organisation that encourages digital 
modes is that there are already two that I know of, which are quite 
closely related, called the European PSK Club  ( 
http://eu.srars.org/index.php ) and the Olivia Modes Club ( 
http://www.oliviamodesclub.net/ ).  Although EPC uses 'European' in its 
title, there are members from several non-European countries who have 
become members, in the same way as the GQRP Club has a number of members 
who are not in the UK, but are able to be full members anyway.

Then there is the Digital QSO Club ( http://dqso.net/start.html  ) and 
probably others that I've not yet come across.

Cheers - Dave (G0DJA)
EPC number 1117
OMC number 069

Re: [digitalradio] Current balun

2007-10-18 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Dave wrote:
 I understand the basics of using a balun, but have a question about the 
 specifics. Using a dipole, what would be the difference between using a 
 4:1 balun compared to a 6:1 balun? Which would I choose, and why would 
 I choose it? Planning on feeding the dipole direct from the tuner in my 
 IC-746 (non-Pro), if that makes a difference.


   

Sorry to have to ask this Dave, but if you understand the basics, why 
don't you know the difference between a 6:1 and a 4:1 transformer ratio?

What impedances are you trying to transform to/from?  The 4:1 or the 6:1 
may, or may not, be applicable anyway.

I presume you mean a half wave dipole? Although any antenna with two 
radiating ends can be called a 'dipole'.

What feeder are you planning to use?  Open wire feeder or coaxial 
cable?  I presume it will be coaxial cable, as you say you want to go 
from Unbalanced (feeder) to Balanced (antenna).  So, what is the ratio 
of the impedance of the feeder to the antenna?  If it is a dipole (75 
ohms in perfect space) to 50 ohm coaxial cable, you have a problem!  You 
probably want a 1:1 balun, even though the dipole feed point is not 
going to be 75 ohms as it's probably too close to buildings or the ground.

Looking at the last part of your question.  You are trying to use an 
Unbalanced to Unbalanced tuner in your radio, presumably feeding coaxial 
cable up to the dipole at the top of the feeder?  Well the ratio of the 
impedance at the point where the dipole elements meet the coaxial feeder 
will vary dependant upon the length of the wire in the dipole/doublet 
and the characteristic impedance of the coaxial cable feeding it.

So, the real anser is that 4:1 or 6:1 is only relavant at particular 
frequencies, with specific wire lengths on the doublet and for specific 
feeder impedance.

Sorry, but your question is just too wide for a specific answer...  Dave 
(G0DJA)

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] NEW WSJT EXPERIMENTAL MODES JT2 AND JT4

2007-10-17 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Zack wrote:
 From the ARRL CONTESTER'S RATE SHEET, 17 OCTOBER 2007

 Joe K1JT reports, Some of us have been experimenting recently with
 two new narrow-band digital modes called JT2 and JT4.  A basic
 description and a status report is now available at
 http://tinyurl.com/2c7ktb
 If you are interested in making some tests of your own you can 
 download WSJT version 5.9.8 r558 at
 http://tinyurl.com/2glh9g
 Please make your observations known either to me or on


 Zack
 N8FNR
   

Now, that's frustrating...  either to me or on...  so, where is Joe 
inviting comments, I wonder?

I may just drop him an email asking thwe question about the low receive 
audio performance of the later versions of WSJT, but if there is a forum 
for such questions, it would be useful to know about them please.

Thanks - Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Correction; Re: NEW WSJT EXPERIMENTAL MODES JT2 AND JT4

2007-10-17 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Zack wrote:
 I left out part of the last line.

 From the ARRL CONTESTER'S RATE SHEET, 17 OCTOBER 2007

 Joe K1JT reports, Some of us have been experimenting recently with
 two new narrow-band digital modes called JT2 and JT4.  A basic
 description and a status report is now available at
 (http://tinyurl.com/2c7ktb) If you are interested in making some
 tests of your own you can download WSJT version 5.9.8 r558 at
 (http://tinyurl.com/2glh9g) Please make your observations known
 either to me or on a relevant reflector. We will all benefit from
 your input.


   
And it doesn't look like he was specific about which one.  LOL.

I decided to send him an email direct with my question about why the 
latest version seems much less sensitive, from the point of view of an 
audio input from the fixed audio from the TS2000X, than earlier versions.

Dave (G0DJA)

[digitalradio] D-Star use in UK?

2007-10-15 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I'm considering getting a new radio for the car and the choice, at the 
moment, is between the Icom IC-E2820, with the optional UT-123 board, or 
the Kenwood TM-D710E or V71E.  Depending on whether I decide that I'm 
going to be active with APRS again in the future.

Now, all the other specifications and pros/cons of each radio are fairly 
clear, but I am interested in the D-Star system, hence the question to 
this group.

Does anyone have an idea about how much activity is there already in the 
UK using D-Star?  Are any other UK stations considering getting D-Star 
enabled radios?  Bearing in mind that the cost of the UT-123 is £150 
(about $300 at current exchange rates) for the UT-123 it's not a cheap 
option to have sitting inside the radio doing nothing.

If there's likely to be little or no D-Star activity in the UK then I 
may have to keep the money in my pocket and await increased use in the 
future.  However, that then produces one of those 'chicken and egg' 
problems, in that if no one gets a D-Star radio then there's never going 
to be any activity and so no one buys the radios...

Thanks for any help with my purchasing decission.

Re: [digitalradio] D-Star use in UK?

2007-10-15 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Rick wrote:
 The problem that I have, is that except for narrower bandwidth and some 
 non  amateur radio applications through the internet, I just have not 
 been able to come up with solid reasons. And there are some serious 
 negative trade offs you have to make.

   
Thanks for the feedback Rick,

After sending the message on this forum I decided to Google D-Star UK 
and came up with a few(ish) forum put up by Icom (which should not be a 
surprise I guess) which told me that one group in my area had bought 
70cm and 23cm D-Star repeaters and were planning on installing them soon 
and another, in an area where I often have to travel to for work, were 
planning a similar set up.  Which encouraged me a bit.

I wonder what the negative trade offs are?  I presume that a D-Star 
enabled radio can still be used in 'standard' FM mode as well as Digital 
mode?  The main downside, that I can see, is the limitation of having to 
have an Icom radio.  Whereas, I *could* (if I were dedicated enough) get 
a licence to operate as an Echolink node and either build a board that 
would interface to any radio or buy one of the new Kenwoods, which are 
also much cheaper than the Icom, and anyone with a radio of any make 
with DTMF tones could use it. Although that's not 'real' digital of course.

When I last looked at the repeater kit, it did seem a bit pricy and I 
can't see the local repeater to me (GB3RB on 433.200MHz) going that way 
as it's mainly paid for by one person, who is also the repeater keeper, 
with a few of us as shut-down operators.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Introducing Digiital Radio Century Club numbers

2007-10-08 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Lou Everett, Sr wrote:
 This link definately doesn't have any list, nor does it terminate as it 
 should.

   Lou  WA5LOU

 Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   It took a while, but I have mined the information associated with 
 the
 2900 plus members of the Digitalradio mail list and created membership
 numbers from those that were obvious amateur radio call signs. Of the
 2900+, I managed to find 1415 call signs. Just about 50%

 You can find the membership list , by call sign and number, at
 http://www.obriensweb.com/drccalpha.xhtml
   
It works OK for me...

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Overcrowded on 14109.5

2007-10-07 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Steinar Aanesland wrote:
 I don't want to be a policeman , I think it is to many of them already, 
 but I have a wish. 14109.5 seems to be a bit overcrowded when
 everyone  are sounding and trying to make a AMD qso. What about QSYing
 to another frequency when a contact is establish on 14109.5? 14112.0  is
 a great frequency. It is perfect for playing with Patrick's wonderful
 ARQ FAE mode.
I will admit that I have looked at, but steered clear of ALE for a 
number of reasons, which are all personal and maybe based upon my 
incomplete understanding of what ALE is designed to do.

1st off, ALE seems like a sort of digital net system, where stations 
sign in and out and there is some system to see what frequency might or 
might not be better to contact each other on.  Again, please bear with 
my incomplete or partial knowledge, this is all based upon reading other 
emails on the subject...

2nd, it seems like the sort of mode that standing groups would find very 
useful.  I was a member of RAYNET (the UK Amateur Emergency Network) way 
back in the 1980s and 90s and they used early Packet radio systems (like 
Cambridge Packet) before AX.25 became the standard Amateur system.  The 
problem that I could see is that, if too many stations joined in then 
the channels become overloaded and the advantage of being able to 
validate contact with certain stations becomes lost.

The next issue is defining a 'contact'.  Many Amateur awards and 
certificates are based upon two way peer-to-peer contacts.  Nets are, of 
course, valid as long as the two stations are in direct contact.  
However, in my own logs I differenciate between direct QSOs and AX.25 
contacts, either direct or via digipeaters of some sort, as I cannot 
always remember what was direct and what was via an intermediary such as 
a digipeater, IGATE or some other 3rd party system, as it's not always 
obvious unless you are very careful to log where each contact went and 
came via at the time.

Now, ALE may, or may not suffer from these issue at the moment, but 
automatic systems which allow one station to be relayed from one 
frequency to another are not uncommon these days and I could see the 
advantages, to a network of stations, of having automatic gateways from 
one band to another.  These exist in APRS now.  So, ALE is one of those 
things that I've not become involved in whilst I try to build up more 
peer-to-peer digital contacts.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Here's some frequencies for unattended HF operations

2007-09-22 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Andrew O'Brien wrote:
 I'm an odd ham in that I smile with amusement when amateur radio
 groups rush to defend frequencies and worry about some non-hams
 getting our frequencies.  I happen to think we have more than we
 need and can easily give some away. 
   
I read the rest of the message and was grateful that my favourite bands 
(VHF, UHF and SHF) did not appear.

The problem with the arguement about 'giving some away', in my opinion, 
is that what one person decides to give up for their own interest are 
the bands that other people use...

OK, so, if I said I would happily give up all of the 15m band and the 
10m band if 'we' got more allocations in the microwave bands, would 
you be happy with that?

I'm taking a wild guess that the answer would be an loud No and I can 
understand why...  So, why do people think that they can offer up the 
bands, and parts of bands that they do not use in order to gain 
allocations that they might be interested in?

Re: [digitalradio] QRV MT63

2007-09-16 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I will be monitoring 14,077.5 tomorrow.  Today the only thing I heard  was a 
 noise that sounded like someone playing a flute badly.
  

   
That was probably JT65A or one of the other WSJT modes.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Soundcard Calibration

2007-09-13 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Simon Brown wrote:
 Doesn't this assume an accurate system clock? I think I see a class in gMFSK 
 / fldidgi to compare input = output but for calibration we need an 
 accurate source.
   
I use Dimension-4 to keep my PC clock on time, but there are other 
similar programs about.

I suspect that you could either advise people to install such systems, 
or embed one in your application?

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] The decline of Olivia and DominoEX

2007-09-10 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Simon Brown wrote:
 Expect more Olivia in a few days, possibly some Domino modes next week.

 Why - because I'll be letting my test team lose on a new DM780 kit which 
 already supports Throb and MFSK.
   

Just had my 1st MFSK-16 QSO uning Simons' DM780 multi-mode digital 
program and I have a program that will run DominoEX, although I've not 
used it in anger as yet.

I'd like to give Throb (Simon has coded Throb-1, -2, -4 and ThrobX-1 
already into a test version) and Olivia (not yet available, but as he 
says, soon to be so.

I have to admit that my HF antennas are not the best in the world, but I 
can muster quite a good 23cm array...

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

2007-01-23 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Hi Dave, sorry you been having so many problems.

Yes you are correct, that is, with the Rascal GLX all
you have to do is connect the soundcard cable, Mike
in, sound out, from the Rascal to you soundcard.  The
other end of the Rascal go's to you computers comport
and give PTT and FSK.  The third cable go's to your
ACC1 jack on the back of the 746.  That is it!

Yes the ACC1 provides audio in and out.  So you can
run RTTY with FSK, RTTY with AFSK, SSTV, Voice Keying
and you will have audio in for CW receive but you have
to use your own CW interface to key the rig.

My Rascal and the ones at my club station just lays on
the floor behind the desk as there is nothing to do
with it, no knobs or adjustments.  During the RTTY
Roundup a couple of weeks ago, we made 1149 Q's on
rtty with the IC-775DSP/KW with the RASCAL and no RFI.

Why so cheap?  Remember all the interface is a few
wires, 2 audio transformers and a couple of
opto-isolators for PTT and FSK.  You could build the
whole thing for less that $10.00.  My webpage give the
diagram that the Rascal uses.

73 and good Luck

Joe K0BX
--- Dave Corio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Joe, thanks for the info! What puzzles me is
 that I sent an email to 
 Buxcomm asking specifically for an interface that
 would let me run FSK 
 on my 746, and all they suggested was a simple
 cable.
 
 Is that Rascal all I need, or is there something
 I'm missing? It 
 sounds as though I can just plug one end into my PC,
 and the other into 
 the ACC1 jack of the 746, and that will give me FSK
 keying. Is it really 
 that inexpensive and easy? I don't really care about
 CW, as I have an 
 interface already that does that. Do you know if the
 Rascal also picks 
 up the audio output from the ACC1 to send to the PC?
 
 Thanks loads for your reply and information!
 73
 Dave
 KB3MOW
 
 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  As far as I can determine the BUXCOMM GLX Rascal
 is
  the same for the 746 and 756 series.
 
  You should go to:
 
 

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

http://www.commparts.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=8products_id=130236
 
  and get this one, plug it in and be working FSK in
  less than 10 minutes.
 
  I am using the BUXCOMM GLX Rascal on our clubs
  IC-775DSP, IC-756PRO2 and IC-756. At home I am
 using
  one on my IC-706MK2G and IC-756PRO3. All worked
 the
  first time and all with FSK for RTTY and AFSK for
  PSK31 and voice keyer. It is a no brainer. Using
  MMTTY for rtty is far better than any of the
 terminal
  unit like the PK-232.
 
  AS far as CW is concern. The Buxcom GLX Rascal
 does
  not do CW. Computer send CW uses pin 4(9 pin) or
 pin
  20(25 pin connector). It is easier to just build
 up a
  one transistor interface for CW keying. You can
 find
  the circuit in many places or on my website at:
  http://www.qsl.net/k0bx http://www.qsl.net/k0bx
 and look under cw 
  keying.
 
  I hope this helps.
 
  Joe K0BX
 
  
 


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

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

2007-01-22 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

You should go to:

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

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

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

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

I hope this helps.

Joe K0BX

Re: [digitalradio] anyone getting these messages ?

2006-06-07 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]


It looks like there was an attachment too.

Hopefully, you didn't open it; I would suspect this as a
spam and suspect the attachment (if I'm reading this right).

AND.no, I didn't receive any myself.  It looks like some
bait for you to respond to by looking at the attachment to 
see what YOU did wrong with one of your alleged messages.

It seems to me anyway.

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN

-- John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Anyone else getting these messages from  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and  [EMAIL PROTECTED] when they post to the list ? ?


At 06:14 PM 6/7/2006, you wrote:
MDaemon has identified your message as spam.  It will not be delivered.

/ / / / / / / / / / S N I P



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Home is just a click away.  Make Yahoo! your home page now.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/DHchtC/3FxNAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM
~- 

Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

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

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

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

Re: [digitalradio] Why PACTOR for WL2K ?

2006-06-04 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]





Hi John.

Thanks, Sir. I understand where you were coming from now. I'm 
a bit sensitive about the WL2K EMCOMM project I guess. I have
seen one line of thought which held that if the system was a
little out of reach of the average ham, the system would not
be bogged down by over-population.

I think EMCOMM should be a KISS endeavor, not complicated,
nor reliant upon assets from a single source supplier.

There's plenty of talk about the out-of-date PK232/PACTOR I
and EMCOMM but relatively nothing about the PK232 still being
a viable option for every day use by Hams; no less viable than
RTTY, etc. Old? Sure thing, but still quite useable, all the
new exotic modes not withstanding. If RTTY can be used with
the Model 28 today for fun, so can the PK-232MBX with upgrades
and PACTOR I. That's no different than my continuing to use
my Collins KWM-2A and the Drake B Line along with my newer
IC-746.

I make occasional random contacts today with PACTOR I but, 
sadly, it seems there's still a whole bunch of PK232s still 
sitting in a closet after being declared old hat following 
the advent of PSK and the other modes.

Thanks again

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN


John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Howard my point was that one need not spend $1K to get 
on pactor unless they are looking to get on II or III.

I have no activity with WL2K other then I do copy some 
of the traffic.

At this time I have the PK-232 on a FT-840 parked on
7075.

The PTC is on the FT-847. 2nd FT-847 is used for satellite 
only.








Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)










  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Ham radio
  
  
Craft hobby
  
  
Hobby and craft supply
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Re: [digitalradio] Why PACTOR for WL2K ?

2006-06-03 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Hello John

I don't normally quote the whole message but it lost intelligence
when I tried quoting just you.

It was made clear to me and others in wl2kemcomm that the PTC III
unit is the preferred choice. Much discussion focuses on that
preference and, has been said more than once, if one is serious
about that emcomm work, a PTC will be purchased. OR, one will endeavor to convince an agency to dig down into the coffers and
include the PTC purchase in its budget preparations. Primary reason
is the disappointment in seeming limited capability that will be
felt by agencies if it's not used.among other reasons. One
in particular is the deliberate growth of incompatibility of
PACTOR I for the wl2k system. So, the comment that wl2k would
be an expensive proposition seems pretty on target to me.

I use PACTOR I AEA PK232 with upgrades on the Ham bands still
today for fun, but again, it was made clear to me that use of
the PK232 with wl2k is a pipe dream. So, I dropped the notion
of some sort of participation and stopped receiving the forum.

I don't know what YOUR activity is with wl2k and the PK232 is
but I and others are strongly discouraged from trying it. Are
you using the PK unit on 7075 or is it the PTC unit? You are
bloody fortunate to be able to drop the bucks for one of the
SCS offerings.

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN

John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

At 10:41 AM 5/26/2006, you wrote:

If I am correct, WL2K HF system is dependent on PACTOR. PACTOR is a
proprietary system that is extremely expensive , not something
available easily to all hams. Reliable hardware for PACTOR II and III
is more expensive than a new HF rig these days.

Not really, If you are looking for PACTOR [one] under 100 bucks
will get you up and running. There is 2 AEA PK-232MBX's on EBAY
at this time. I just got my 4th PK-232 last fall off EBAY.

If you are looking to play PACTOR II or III then you will have to put
out the big bucks. One of the SCS PTC-IIex will set you back just
over 900 bucks. I just got one this spring and having a ball with it.

I do have a rig on 7075 most all the time.

Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)

Re: [digitalradio] Oops: CQ PACTOR 7074kHz afsk de KU2A freq correcti on






Nick.

Was on 7074 at 1345 - 1350Z LSB PACTOR I - nothing heard as yet.

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN








Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)










  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Ham radio
  
  
Craft hobby
  
  
Hobby and craft supply
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Re: [digitalradio] CQ PACTOR 7074kHz afsk de KU2A





Hey Doc...

Not to me. I'm using an AEA PK232MBX PACTOR I here...

Bet Ten meters will be pretty good as I'm hearing quite a few
strong PSK signals on 10.120 right now at 1430Z.

Will be looking for Nick on PACTOR on 7074 at 1411Z as he indicated,
then the other freqs as needed.

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN



Doc K4DE wrote:

 Nick wrote:
 CQing again 1411z. Hope to connect Howard. I will switch to 10137kHz
 if no answer and then 14074 +/- contester QRM.

Does it matter which version of PACTOR is
being used?

I hope to get on sometime in the next few
weeks and am trying to get a handle on the
protocols.










Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)










  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Ham radio
  
  
Craft hobby
  
  
Hobby and craft supply
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Re: [digitalradio] CQ PACTOR 7074kHz afsk de KU2A





Nick..

Will be there and will see what happens Will move with you
as conditions require. Strong signals on 10.120 PSK right now.
Beacons are doing pretty well, with the K5AB Beacon in Central,
Texas coming in here at a solid S9 on 28.278

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN


Nick, you wrote:

CQing again 1411z. Hope to connect Howard. I will switch to 10137kHz
if no answer and then 14074 +/- contester QRM.
 











Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)










  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Ham radio
  
  
Craft hobby
  
  
Hobby and craft supply
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Re: [digitalradio] CQ PACTOR 7074kHz afsk de KU2A





NO Sir.The AEA is a vey old AEA Multimode Terminal Unit
that can handle PACTOR I only insofar as PACTOR is concerned.

I got mine in 1991, in California.

Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN

Doc KD4E http://bibleseven.com Wrote:

/ / / / / / / S N I P

I am guessing that the AEA PK232MBX PACTOR handles
Pactor I  2 but not 3?

-- 
Thanks!  73, 
Ham Links: http://bibleseven.com/hl.html










Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)










  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Ham radio
  
  
Craft hobby
  
  
Hobby and craft supply
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Re: [digitalradio] CQ PACTOR 7074kHz afsk de KU2A