[digitalradio] Re: JT65A on 17 30M
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave dco...@... wrote: Does anyone use JT65A on 17 or 30 meters, and if so, what frequency is used on both? Tnx es 73 Dave KB3MOW Hi Dave, Thanks for the 80 meter jt65A contact tonight. Most use 10.139 for jt65a but it is crowded with Winlink, Propnet and WSPR. For 17 I have seen both 18.102 and 18.103 used. 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: ALE-400
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley jbrad...@... wrote: Hey man you are preaching to the choir!!! ALE400 is a great mode, even at higher latitudes such as I am. Now if we can only convince people to give it a try. John VE5MU Echo, preaching to the choir! I find it a great mode, relatively narrow but robust...now to get more to use/try it. 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: PSK-ARQ versus ALE-400
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: I'll agree with John, while many here will find ALE400 easy to tackle, many average hams will be intimidated by an unfamiliar process. That is why Skip Teller's concepts behind NBEMS are good, using mode that many hams use everyday. Andy K3UK I think Skip's ideas are very good and sound. Multipsk is not that hard to use though...might be an initial fear factor involved. I know Joe, W6CQZ is trying to make JT65x modes more easy (with alot of work). Perhaps a stand alone and truncated ARQ FAE ALE400 application would showcase its usefulness? 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: jpskmail can now send a binary attachment
I have not been able to get it to boot; no problems with the earlier release. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick W mrf...@... wrote: Have you been able to get this alpha to boot up? (Note: you have to change erac to esrac in the main url to access the site.) 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien k3ukandy@ wrote: I saw this message jpskmail can now send a binary attachment, some tweaking necessary earlier this morning from Rein PA0R . Looks like an important step and will make playing with the Java PSKmail fun this weekend. Andy K3UK The new release is out... http://tinyurl.com/cdu7ha
[digitalradio] Re: picture packet prgm
Hi Jim, Been awhile since I have see Picture Packet. If your version is missing features you probably have the lite version. See: http://www.huntting.com/picturepacket/ 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jim seeber wb3...@... wrote: Hi, new user here, Jim kw3u in NE Pa. our local ares/races group is putting a packet system together fm various tnc's and are now at the point where we would like everyone to use the same prgm. I have been checking out some of them and found an old one called picture packet that seems to work with all nicely, but a lot of the features are grayed out. If anyone has a full version it would be appreciated, I think it was in the 1990's. also any other simple to operate programs for windows. thanks Jim kw3u
[digitalradio] Re: NEW 20 METER HELL CALLING FREQUENCY
Thanks for the information, actually a good idea. Believe we used to have our original FeldHell club net in that area or up from there a bit; not a heavily used band slice usually, but might need to dodge some Winlink Pactor I and II stuff. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Kruh wb2...@... wrote: (or After much discussion, the Feld Hell club has decided to move the recommended 20 meter calling frequency for Hell Modes to 14.063 MHz (from 14.074.) This is being done to avoid the growing number of digital signals at 074. With this move we will free up 074 for the other modes, and provide Hell operators with a clearer area in which to operate. Thank you For more information on the move and on operating Hell Modes visit www.feldhellclub.org
[digitalradio] Re: CQ Men In Black?
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony d...@... wrote: All, Just copied a most interesting CQ message on 20 meter PSK31 (call sign purposely deleted) CQ Moon...CQ Mars...CQ Nearby Star Systems...CQ Alien Lifeforms Or Fellow Men In Black...DE X Calling CQ and Standing By An adult beverages may have played a roll in this : ) Tony -K2MO Hi Tony, Have heard similar; never heard any replies though (yet). Oddness abounds! 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: Newb digital mode guy with Newb questions
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, doug_helbling doug_helbl...@... wrote: Thanks for the welcome and the great advice and counsel, Patrick/Andrew/Christian/Marc/Simon/Siegfried et al. I did some more poking around on my rig, and found that my audio input to the PC was indeed the Mic input, not Line In, as suggested more than once. Unfortunately, on this PC (a laptop), there is no Line In, only Mike In ... but I think I found a different driver for the on-board audio that will allow me to reconfigure the jack. I will definitely give that a try. If it fails, I have an older / slower desktop machine and a drawer full of decent Soundblaster PCI cards I can try instead. It's a 1GHz P3, but it should probably be strong enough for this. If that fails, I've got a dual CPU 2GHz P4 gathering dust in the corner that's just waiting for a purpose. ;-) I'll also follow up on your other great suggestions, including pointers to other tools/modes and to specific bands/freqs. Cheers and thanks again. - Doug / KE7SEI Hi Doug, Alot of good suggestions you have received; also consider using: http://www.obriensweb.com/sked/ 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: CBer on JT65A
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Fred VE3FAL flesn...@... wrote: What frequency you folks been using? No idea where Kim is listening; I am usually on 3.576 near or after sunset and occasionally on 14.076 on the weekends during daylight. 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: CBer on JT65A
You might try reducing the AF level into your sound card; sounds like it is being over-driven...aim for about 0 db in your Rx noise box assuming you are using WSJT. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Kim kimme...@... wrote: There is a VA3 station on JT65A the past two days who is probably running an amp. All I see on my WSJT screen is a big white blotch. Very annoying. The program won't even decode it.
[digitalradio] Re: Name That Mode
Hello Ed, Most likely JT65A as activity on 20 meters is generally centered around 14.076. This mode is part of WSJT's suite of modes. It excels at weak signal work using very brief message formats and 60 second xmit/rx sequences. See http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/ for details. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, lmeeny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Around 17.075 MHz I've heard a mode I can't identify. It appears to have an 8 tone coding scheme and is about 150 Hz wide. By ear there are around two tones per second. The decoders provided by Ham Tadio Deluxe are ineffective. What am I hearing? Thanks, Ed W2GHD
[digitalradio] Re: Has anyone looked into FPGA-based digital modes?
To echo what Rick stated, FAE400 is an extremely useful ARQ mode that has a lot of potential; robust yet reasonably narrow. Works very well, just a shame so few use it. NBEMS is also a good ARQ suite, but a lot slower when using HF friendly modes. No sure the lock-up time using MFSK16 has been resolved but the new FLDIGI had the mode THOR, an incremental shift keying mode similar to DominoEX. Not sure if that will be implemented into NBEMS, although it certainly has that potential, especially as it retains DominoEx's tolerance to frequency accuracy. The ax25 packet structure was fine; problem was/is that ax25 at 300 Baud on HF, unless near MUF, is a less then optimum speed choice. It actually works fairly well at 110 Baud but it is slow. I think there are many good protocols out there, but not many want to experiment. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick W. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Matt, For the ARQ modes, the main one that works with the weaker signals is FAE400 and is only found in the Multipsk program invented by Patrick, F6CTE. He took the 8FSK 125 baud waveform from the old MIL-STD-188-141A ALE protocol and slowed the speed down to 50 baud, then added compression, and amazingly added memory ARQ, similar to what Pactor does and what others have said for years could never be done. The performance is dramatically improved over the 141A protocol and is competitive with other non-ARQ sound card modes. It is not quite as competitive as Olivia and MFSK modes, but then those modes are slower. http://f6cte.free.fr/index_anglais.htm - - - - - There are two other ARQ technologies that can work with weaker signals ... PSKmail and NBEMS. PSKmail runs only on Linux and is going nowhere here in the U.S. Perhaps better in some other countries? I am hopeful that it will catch on to a greater degree, but until a critical mass of hams adopt Linux here in the U.S. or PSKmail is developed for MS Windows (which the developer says will not happen), I don't see how it can become useful without enough available hams. My understanding is that PSKmail can also do peer to peer ARQ chat as well as automatic e-mailing. It can run on the Linux version of the EeePC for excellent portability. PSKmail uses various speeds of PSK, especially PSK63 and is designed primarily for HF use with the narrow modes. http://pskmail.wikispaces.com/ - - - - - NBEMS (Narrow Band Emergency Messaging System) is manually operated which requires operators at both ends. It allows for ARQ messages to be sent without error as files. It does not include peer to peer ARQ chat but can operate compatibly with non-ARQ chat modes such as PSK, MFSK, and even RTTY. w1hkj.com and http://w1hkj.com/NBEMS/index.html NBEMS is one of the only cross platform systems since it runs on Linux and MS Windows. It ARQ's the fldigi multimode software with flarq using fast light development. The Windows side currently uses VBdigi, but we have heard that Dave, W1HKJ, is working on a Windows version of fldigi. NBEMS can use several different sound card protocols, including PSK and MFSK and we have heard that they are developing a new mode(s)? for this system. It was initially developed primarily for VHF, but can be used on HF. - - - - - SCAMP (Sound Card Amateur Messaging Protocol) was developed several years ago by the Winlink 2000 software developer and was to be available as an alternative to the very expensive and single sourced proprietary SCS modem (~ $1000). I found the program to work extremely well when conditions were good (close to +10 dB S/N) since it had a top speed of close to 1000 wpm for the HF version. You had to see it in operation to see how powerful it was. But, as expected, using the RDFT protocol, it was not possible to handle even zero dB S/N signals, much less below zero dB as many improved sound card modes can do now. They discontinued all further development, but did say they were planning on making it available to the amateur community. As far as I was able to find out, they never did. not to do this. The only logical reason seems to me to prevent other hams from more easily developing systems that could compete with Winlink 2000. So with the new developments have been somewhat reinvention of the wheel:) The software had self destruct timers built in to insure that it could never be used after a few months and so is no longer available:( The higher speed version for VHF also did not appear to be developed further, however I only was involved with the HF side. Perhaps with the completion of major changes to the Winlink 2000 system, they will revisit further development? If you have any other questions please let us know. Often someone here has the information. 73, Rick, KV9U matt gregory wrote: where could one finds these modes MATTHEW A. GREGORY
[digitalradio] Re: What mode is it ???
Hello Francois, What frequency was it on? If it was on or about 14.070 USB dial frequency, it was most likely JT65A. JT65A sounds like very very slow DominoEX. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Francois Rochon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am listening on 20 meters to a very slow form of mfsk , seems to be 8 tones and probably on 2 chanels at the same time .. What is it ??? Francois VE2KV
[digitalradio] Re: Is there any digital DX on 40 metres ?
Hi Mel, Well from North America I work South Africa nightly on 7.076 using WSJT modes. The ZK/VK stations come later here, 0300 local or so. A few EU stations on 7.039/7.038 but difficult to copy here due to CW traffic. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Mel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, During the last few days there's been evening DX activity on 30 metres between Canada and the US and a number of European stations. Has anyone in the US observed or been active on 40 metre DX.? The European frequency used is around 7.038 and the US uses 7.070, so has any European phone activity been heard on 7.070 or European digital activity on 7.038 ? Mel G0GQK
[digitalradio] Re: Is there any digital DX on 40 metres ?
Sorry for the typo, meant ZL/VK...keys far too close together! --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Mel, Well from North America I work South Africa nightly on 7.076 using WSJT modes. The ZK/VK stations come later here, 0300 local or so. A few EU stations on 7.039/7.038 but difficult to copy here due to CW traffic. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Mel Gzerogqk@ wrote: Hello, During the last few days there's been evening DX activity on 30 metres between Canada and the US and a number of European stations. Has anyone in the US observed or been active on 40 metre DX.? The European frequency used is around 7.038 and the US uses 7.070, so has any European phone activity been heard on 7.070 or European digital activity on 7.038 ? Mel G0GQK
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hi Frank, I am running it under Vista on this box without any problems. I like Multipsk for a variety of reasons. It offers many modes and despite what some claim is a cluttered interface, I prefer being able to change modes without fighting through numerous pull-down menus. Suspect the biggest reason people like it is due to Patrick himself - he is very responsive to any questions or suggestions. I use ALE on occasion, mostly ALE400 as it has a great deal to offer in a relatively narrow bandwidth but far from the only reason I prefer Multipsk to other apps. I am not a fan of fatter is better in and of itself. To me registering Multipsk was one of my few good investments. I do use a variety of other programs, but still prefer Multipsk when running a mode it supports. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tooner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC
[digitalradio] Re: RF feedback problems
Hello David, I have not had that exact problem, so others might be able to shed more light than I can. First thing I would do is check for an open ground or a ground loop. Also consider that your ptt ground is not necessarily your audio ground. Does the problem go away when you transmit into a dummy load and/or at reduced power? Does it improve when you drop the audio level into and from your interface? Are you in close proximity to your antenna with your radio, computer and interface? Does this happen on just one band or on all bands? Not familiar with that interface, but is the interface audio hot and the mic hot tied together or are you using an aux port? Also what does the your signal sound like, other than terrible? Sorry for so many questions. If all else checks out, the ferrite chokes are a fairly inexpensive fix, if indeed it is your cable that is picking up the RF. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Bowman WB0QIR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a Kenwood TS-680S rig and am using a psk31/rtty soundcard interface from Associated Radio. Whenever The db9 data cable from the interface is plugged into a computer my signal is terrible when I transmit data or use the microphone. Unhooking the microphone does not help. Before I buy some ferrite chokes I wanted to see if anyone has any other ideas of how or what the problem may be and how to fix it.
[digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot............
Hello Howard, I was actually agreeing with John; sorry to all if it was poorly worded. When operating Pactor (and in the past using Amtor), I too have been interfered with and when I queried the other stations they said something to the effect that, I thought you were a bot. Obviously no excuse. 73, Bill - Original Message - From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:16 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot Hello John, Well I have seen no others, aside from you, complaining about qrm when operating Pactor modes on the sole basis that you were using Pactor. I am sure it happens as we all get benign qrm. SNIP SNIP
[digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot............
Hello John, Well I have seen no others, aside from you, complaining about qrm when operating Pactor modes on the sole basis that you were using Pactor. I am sure it happens as we all get benign qrm. As I have posted often, it is sad some think Pactor modes are the issue when it is the Winlink system that is at issue. I too have been operating Pactor only to get a station right on top of me...when queried they sometimes say, I thought you were a PMBO bot ... no excuse but I do understand why they think so. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So tell me (and others) how someone operating a mode with a waterfall display and seeing a signal (so be it a pactor signal) QRM that ongoing keyboard to keyboard QSO? It seems to be that *any* pactor signal is fair game for anyone that *only* knows that is a pactor signal to QRM it. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Re: multipsk
Hello Lynn, That is not a normal install. Perhaps you inadvertently unzipped the files into your desk top? You might also ask on the dedicated Multipsk group - alot of very helpful people there, although I am sure Patrick monitors this group also. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, n0alo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings Am new to the list and do have a problem. I downloaded multipsk and was able to run the program but when I shut it down, it left the desktop full of folders. Did miss something in the installation? Thanks Lynn
[digitalradio] Re: (was : Trouble at mill RTTY contesters war
Hello Jose, You are correct, it does not seem that attended stations are always listening stations. Have seem many clients qrming each other and probably, to some locations, qrming the PMBO itself as they are calling the PBMO that is already linked. Might explain why, even though supposed busy detector will allegedly on detector Pactor (in the Winlink example), that it is oft turned off. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For me, the proven offenders can be ATTENDED stations. The past week I was linked to a Winlink station on 40 meters when somebody started calling on top of us. I turned on my linear, and he kept on calling. Three options to be heard: my correspondent, me, and me and my half gallon linear. And he / she kept on calling on top...I could not see who was, I could not monitor the failed attempts while linked. I did not lose my link even when an ALE 141A station started calling also on top of the ongoing QSO. Something that has been spoken about very little...QRM from other clients. 73, Jose, CO2JA
[digitalradio] Re: PSK63 Party: Congratulations to Dave AA6YQ and others
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gee I did no make the list. Well, John, you did at least as well as I did or better. 73. Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: Trouble at mill RTTY contesters war with HFlink
Hello Bonnie, Thanks for the reply. It just seemed pretty convoluted; and, at best, nebulous. To be honest I have never heard anyone complain about soundings, but I may miss a lot. Compared to some best-not-be-mentioned systems, ALE operations have not shown up on my qrm map. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin bmc@ wrote: Hard to discern what is actually happening; seems like a tempest in a teapot. 73, Bill N9DSJ Hi Bill, This is simply childish backlash directed at me personally because I opposed the Digital Stone Age Petition. It really has nothing at all to do with HFLINK or ALE. It will go away. Bonnie KQ6XA
[digitalradio] Re: WSJT Advanced features
Hello Leigh, Yes this happens, but more commonly using MS -- check out random hours(s) sometime. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This brings to mind the converse: it would be interesting if possible to have multiple TX going in the same passband on JT65. Because of the synchronized time frame start time, you could hold several simultaneous odd- or even-minute qsos, somethich which is not possible to do on other digital modes which lack the coordination of tx/rx switchover times. 73, Leigh/WA5ZNU
[digitalradio] Re: Measure of JT65A activity
And this: As of 2008-01-12 21:51:22 UTC database contains 244754 entries with 2326 unique callsigns. I know this is culled regularly by Joe for false decodes and incorrect frequencies and such..but note that these are only JT65A receptions; does not include the other WSJT modes. 73, Bill N9DSJ (with a paltry 256 unique calls heard) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One measure of the JT65A activity to be had... VE3CDX/W7 14076 JT65A 15548 725 VE3CDX's station has heard 725 unique callsigns, not bad for a mode that was not even on HF less than a year ago ! -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
[digitalradio] Re: Trouble at mill RTTY contesters war with HFlink
Hard to discern what is actually happening; seems like a tempest in a teapot. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After Tony Blair has solved the Israel-Palestine issue, he may be needed to address those old fashioned RTTY folks who appear to be preparing IED's for Bonnie. (for trouble at mill reference, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLDVIViWW74 ) Andy K3UK -- Forwarded message -- From: George Henry [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Jan 12, 2008 3:57 PM Subject: Re: [RTTY] Bonnie To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] So far, according to the moderator of the IllinoisDigitalHam group, who is also a member of the HFLINK forum, there has been nothing said on the HFLINK group about the fact that their favorite mode is facing FCC scrutiny... Bonnie is probably waiting for a Commission decision, so she doesn't have to admit up front the possibility that she may be wrong about something. I just sent Riley another message where I picked apart her totally ridiculous claims about what ALE soundings are and how they supposedly comply (they don't) with Part 97. If there's sufficient interest, I will cross-post it, but we're straying pretty far from RTTY talk. Oh, in the a rose by any other name category, over on the hflink.net/qso page, Bonnie has re-labeled the soundings in the ALE Activity Now log from Station ID to Communication, as if changing the label somehow makes them legal. I will keep everyone posted on the outcome of all this. And I'm sure it'll make the ARRL letter when the decision comes down. George, KA3HSW - Original Message - From: Anthony W. DePrato To: George Henry Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:43 PM Subject: Re: [RTTY] Bonnie would be nice if someone would copy what is going on to this ref for us hi... 73 Tony I'd love to know what she's saying about me over on the Yahoo HFLINK group, but you have to be a member to read messages, and there's NO way she'd ever approve me for a membership now! QBE ZUT DE WA4JQS ___ RTTY mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
[digitalradio] Re: Trouble at mill RTTY contesters war with HFlink
Or This Was :) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patricia \(Elaine\) Gibbons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's the way I look at it, Bill ... soapbox A sounding message is simply the station's callsign as the ALE ID, and soundings are only done if the station has an operator present, otherwise, the unattended stations are simply scanning the channels on the HFlink netplan, and only respond if called by another station.. As far as the sounding messages, they are no different than coming up on the air in any other mode and saying .. This is wa6ube... ..
[digitalradio] ARQ FAE - ALE400 - NBEMS dumb question
All, ARQ FAE in ALE400 has proven, in my limited experience, to be extremely robust compared to other ARQ modes and occupies reasonable bandwidth. How difficult would this mode be to port to FLARQ/NBEMS? It seems to me to be tailor-made for this application (but what do I know?). Is it a matter of using Multidem or Gui_serv_Multipsk to link to FLARQ? Sorry for the ignorant questions, but that is what I do best. 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
Hello Jack,
In MultiPSK, the RS ID provides this function...automatically
changes mode and frequency also, when implemented. Not sure of any
other software that uses this function but it works very well and can
decode mode and center frequency fairly deep into the noise.
73,
Bill
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jack Chomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
{snip}
No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify
signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something
like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle
will get worse.
{end of snip}
[digitalradio] Re: Mode identification
Understood; RS ID tells the other station the mode and frequency. I
think you are correct in that analysis of a signal is difficult. Some
modes are very easy to recognize by ear (Throb, for example), others
are much more difficult. One I had trouble with the other day, was
Clover, but had not heard it in so long I had forgotten what it
sounded like.
73.
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose A. Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but the RS ID signal has to be transmitted.
I believe that Jack refers to some thing like a function PK-232's
had to
analyze and identify the mode.
Something could be done using MultiPSK Analysis function.
But for an example, today I attempted to decode a signal tha APPARENTLY
was PSK250 on 10138, and could not reach a conclusive copy or ID.
It is not that simple, after all, at least, so far.
73,
Jose, CO2JA
---
Bill McLaughlin wrote:
Hello Jack,
In MultiPSK, the RS ID provides this function...automatically
changes mode and frequency also, when implemented. Not sure of any
other software that uses this function but it works very well and can
decode mode and center frequency fairly deep into the noise.
73,
Bill
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jack Chomley engineering@
wrote:
{snip}
No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify
signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something
like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle
will get worse.
{end of snip}
__
Participe en Universidad 2008.
11 al 15 de febrero del 2008.
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.universidad2008.cu
[digitalradio] Re: Mode identification
Yes. A radio. No re sparkI even hear CW from time to time! 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jhaynesatalumni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin bmc@ wrote: One I had trouble with the other day, was Clover, but had not heard it in so long I had forgotten what it sounded like. You heard a Clover signal?! What kind of time machine do you have there? Heard any spark lately?
[digitalradio] Re: NBEMS testing
Hi John, If you want to set up a sked this weekend let me know. I use Winmail to genrate NBEMS data mostly because I hate Outlook :) Also, to be fair, FLARQ seemed to prefer the Winmail format to any Outlook file I could generate. Maybe outlook express does better but not willing to chance it. And feel comfort in that vbdigi is a Windows app. So far I am very impressed with NBEMS's performance..especially considering it was not meant for non-NVIS HF pathsfor non-NVIS HF paths you might consider lowering the FLARQ exponent parameter to 2 or 3it shortens frame length and makes for less re-tries. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking forward to trying the software. Have it installed using sylpheed software rather than Microsoft outlook express. The way this sets up, it would be a simple matter to move messages from the internet to the outbox using flarq is pass the traffic Hope that I can find Sholto or Terry (or ?)on in the AM . Will be listening on 10137.0 1000hz Man , with Sylpheed, Flarq, and vbdigi, I feel like I have fallen into a linux rabbit-hole hi hi John VE5MU
[digitalradio] Re: NBEMS setup
You might try creating a shortcut to the mail folder and then drag the shortcut wherever you desire. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jhaynesatalumni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm trying to follow the instructions in VBdigi under Help-Radio email setup. I navigate to C:\NBEMS\Mail I put the mouse pointer on the ARQout folder and hold down the right mouse button and try to drag it to the menu bar at the bottom of the screen, and I get the slashed-circle not symbol. (and all my open windows get minimized).
[digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
Yes for receive. Also, MultiPSK can also receive and transmit Pactor I FEC. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sholto Fisher wrote: You know I head a Pactor-1 FEC call around 14,061 a couple days ago but I don't have my PK-232 anymore so couldn't reply. I wonder if it was someone in this group? 73 Sholto KE7HPV. I might be wrong but I think that MixW can parse Pactor1 FEC. de Roger W6VZV
[digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
Hello Howard, I use Pactor I every now and then for keyboard to keyboard. It is hit and miss for me; more a novelty than an oft-used mode. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, w6ids [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There have been recent comments attesting to the demise of PACTOR I. Is this true for all intent and purposes? For curiosity, who's using PACTOR I for keyboard QSO's with an outboard TNC such as the venerable PK-232 and others? If there is such activity is is hit 'n miss or quasi-scheduled? Regards, Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
[digitalradio] Re: Unknown signal ID ?
I suspect you are hearing JT2 which is very narrow and uses 2FSK and DBPSK modulation for sync and data or JT4A at 17.5 BW and 4.375 spacing. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jhaynesatalumni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Around 2045Z Friday the 30th Freq. 14076+1750 Mostly a steady tone, with several clicks per second, the clicks being probably PSK transitions.
[digitalradio] Re: VHF digital setup
I tend to agree with Charles in regard to a packet-only setup; Flex32/Paxon is pretty slick. MultiPSK in packet mode is more than just a terminal program; it needs no external driver and does APRS, digipeats and mail (and probably more). It is abit of a learning curve after using a more conventional TNC but it does work well. Glad there are people still interested in packet - it shares frequencies well and is an intermeshed network not an outdated star topography dependent network. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Charles Brabham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My personal favorite for home VHF/UHF Packet is Flex32 with the excellent PAXON terminal. There are step-by-step tutorials for both of these programs at USPacket.Org, featuring a screen shots for each step involved in installation and setup. These tutorials are very popular, I had to purchase additional bandwidth for USPacket after publishing them. Flex32: - This tutorial also includes an introduction to soundcard interfaces, and how they work. Several Packet modes are supported, plus IPX and Q15x25 mode: http://www.uspacket.org/flex32/flx_32.htm Paxon: - A great Packet terminal with sophisticated features for transferring files, and direct support through the Flex32 kernal: http://www.uspacket.org/paxon/paxon.htm For HF Packet, MixW is the best choice by far. Other software does this too, but thier interfaces all suck. ( Comparatively speaking ) If you are going to operate HF Packet, then unfortunately you must also learn how to deal with harmful interference from WinLink robots and thier 'customers'... MixW is good for this problem, as you can set up a second Rx window that receives PACTOR I on the same frequency you are QSOing on, in Packet mode. - This gives you the WinLid customer's callsign, and the call of the WinLid server they are ceaselessly polling on top of your QSO, while the server on another frequency. If he comes back to the customer and wipes out everything on the passband, then you know which server was being polled, right? At WinLink-Watch ( http://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htm ) we have found a good screen-capture utility that makes it easy to capture evidence of WinLid QSO-crashing activity. ( http://www.uspacket.org/pqrm.htm ) MixW also has a record last 20 seconds of audio feature which is also useful in this respect. For more info on this, stop by at WinLink-Watch. Nobody has to stand by and just enjoy radio rape by mindless QRM factories on HF. For a Packet BBS, once again MixW is far and away the best choice for an HF Packet TNC. See the paragraph above, about dealing with interference issues. How can you use MixW as a TNC? - In Packet mode, MixW has an option to be set up as a Packet modem with a KISS TNC interface so it can be utilized by any Packet BBS software that is out there. My HF Packet BBS looks like this. ( It runs on BPQ32, not visible in the screenshot ) BPQ32, WinFBB alpha, MixW, and a PK-96 for VHF access. http://s239.photobucket.com/albums/ff206/arwatch/N5PVL/?action=viewcurrent=newsetup-1.jpg Note that this is a large image on PhotoBucket, If you zoom it up to full size, all the text is clear and easy to read. This is what a modern Packet BBS station looks like. 73 DE Charles, N5PVL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[digitalradio] Re: ALE400 Good
Agree, After several ARQ FAE qsos and some via unproto, the ALE400 mode does surprisingly well both on the lower and higher bands...well worth further investigation. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Patrick may be on to something here, ALE400 with ARQ FAE worked very well in my QSO on 30M with Sholto KE7HPV. ALE without a wide bandwidth ! GREETINGS TO ANDY FROM SHOLTO IN REPUBLIC, WA[23h51m29s] [AMD] [from KE7HPV ] [to K3UK] (his BER=30 + SINAD= 7) ok we got a connect there Andy. copy me ok? the FAE mode is a lot easier than the AMD messages I am running around 30W here Andy. Seems good so far. have u had many qso's in it yet? you can do most of the stuff u need in the 'aux functions' window. that's the way i use to call you. some[ back again Andy. The ARQ was struggling there. Lots of QSB today yes i am Andy. without error too! our path is very marginal Andy. Better say 73 and CUL ok? K3UK DE KE7HPV SK
[digitalradio] Re: NBEMS
Hello Omar and all, http://www.w1hkj.com/emcpup.html 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, o. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Andrew and also hello to Darrel and all the group. Thank you for the information. Where do I get to download the software? Best 73 Omar YK1AO
[digitalradio] Re: jt65a is an automatic mode
Hello Bonnie, Not sure I proved anything :) If I fall asleep on my keyer is that an unattended CW mode? If I leave my vox on and background noise keys the xmitter is that an attended SSB mode? What is at issue is *intentional* automatic modes, not my cat stepping on the ptt. JT65 is not an automatic or semi-automatic mode in any sense of the definition. 73 and be well, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill N9DSJ wrote: I would be hard pressed to fit JT modes into any definition of unattended, semi- automatic or automatic operation. Hi Bill, You proved my point that what we now consider just a normal feature of software or radio operation, is something that we once considered automatic before. JT65A may certainly be operated in an automated way. The operator can program specific transmissions that happen by computer control, on a time schedule. The transmissions happen regardless of other traffic on the channel. The transmissions may be in responses to specific calls or sequences of other stations. Case closed. Bonnie KQ6XA
[digitalradio] Re: jt65a is an automatic mode
*confused look* --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill N9DSJ wrote: JT65 is not an automatic or semi-automatic mode in any sense of the definition. Bill, JT65a is certainly an automatic mode. It is as automatic as any other automatic system. Department of Redundancy Department It perfectly fits the definitions of automatic in both the strictest sense and in many other ways, figuratively, literally and as used in RF communications: 1. It has an AUTOMATIC button. So does my dishwasher; think the issue at hand is not as simple. 2. The operator programs the software to transmit, and it starts sending various transmissions automatically. The operator keys it to transmit and it sends a message under local operator control. 3. It responds automatically to other stations with pre-programmed sequences. No, it does not. It does not transmit without an operator initiating the transmit sequence. It does not respond automatically to other stations as you well know. 4. It automatically logs other stations. In a sense..it listens :) 5. It automatically sends and receives a series of canned QSOs. It sends macros when the control operator tells it to; as does my cw keyer..not sure it matters what it receives. 6. It automatically send CQs every minute. No it does not, know of no others that do so without operator intervention. You must have yours horridly mis-configured or hacked. 7. It sends confirmations automatically. No it does not. You must have yours horridly mis-configured or hacked. 8. It automatically tunes and prints stations in that may be off frequency. It decodes other signals within its passband, same for a human op using CW given a good ear. Actually Multipsk and others decode psk31/63, CW and RTTY within the passband too. This is in receive mode so hence not sure it is what the controversy it about. 9. It automatically QSOs with other stations using JT65A while automatically ignoring any other mode that may be on the same channel. No it does not. 10. It transmits automatically various transmissions repeatedly or according to a programmed schedule until it is released by the operator. It is under local operator control, you are correct in that. 11. The operator does not need to be present for the completion of a QSO... hit the AUTO button, walk away, and come back later to view the confirmation of your automatic QSO. Incorrect; really Bonnie, you have used jt65A and know better...there is no way to walk away, and come back later to view the confirmation of your automatic QSO unless you mean only seeing a final 73 or rrr sequence later much the same as rtty or any other digital mode, if anyone that has ever used JT65 can explain this, I am all ears 12. It sometimes even automatically receives calls, where none really existed, depending on how automatic it is programmed to be :) Turn of the deep search option, Bonnie, will kill the bogus decodes. As you can see by the above examples, JT65A certainly fits the definition of automatic. Actually no, I cannot see that. But is it an *intentionally* unattended/automatic mode that reponds to queries? Is that not the question at issue? So, Bill, there's no reason to deny that JT65A is a wonderful automatic mode. Only reason might be the facts. It's one of the best weak signal QSO modes to come along. The fact that JT65A is automatic is nothing to be ashamed of. Is not automatic, so hence no shame involved :) And even if it were, do you equate shame to automatic modes? Definition of Automatic Main Entry: au·to·mat·ic Pronunciation: o-t-'ma-tik Function: adjective Etymology: Greek automatos self-acting 1. done or produced as if by machine : MECHANICAL the answers were automatic 2. having a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism an automatic transmission 3. of a firearm : firing repeatedly until the trigger is released no the answers were automatic no an automatic transmission no firing repeatedly until the trigger is released And perhaps at the root, not self-acting which is the core etymology. BTW, I have no problems with the automatic, semi-automatic or unattended stations in of of itself. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA Be well Bonnie, 73 Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: jt65a
Yes, In a sense - it actually switches to the next *manually selected* sequence when the time clicks; it is in no-way linked to any over by another station (I know you know this Leigh, but just to clarify for others). It is the same as sending any macro or otherwise pre-canned message on about any mode I can think of; although I would be hard pressed to fit JT modes into any definition of unattended, semi-automatic or automatic operation. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WSJT features an auto checkbox, which, when enabled, automatically switches to the next message in sequence, after each over. The transmit times for both stations are defined and are on odd/even minute boundaries. From the documentation at http://2yf444 (select the English PDF) Auto: toggles on or off an automatic sequence of transmit and receive periods Since each over is one minute long, it's quite possible to get a cup of coffee and not notice another station on the waterfall while WSJT itself goes ahead and sends RRR or OOO or whatever you have programmed as the next message in sequence. However given the short timeframe and the fact that your QSO is already in progress, it isn't the same as a pactor semi-auto responding willy-nilly. In summary, I think Bonnie's point is that it is part of a sliding scale, and there are at least some unattended aspects of WSJT operation possible without going all the way to beaconing or unattended initiation of QSOs. 73, Leigh/WA5ZNU On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 11:27 am, Dave Bernstein wrote: Thanks, David. I was just responding to Bonnie's assertion that some JT65 stations operate unattended. I guess her claim was incorrect. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD wd4kpd@ wrote: The same is true for unattended JT65 stations that transmit on schedule i have been on hf/jt65a since its birthday. while not knowing it all, i have never heard of a jt65a beacon or unattended operations. the mode COULD be used for a beacon just like the cw beacons run by the california group. jt65a can't operate unattended, the message operation must have an operator present to switch messages. pse don't include this mode with anything like winlink which does USE unattended operations for some portions of its program. david/wd4kpd NEVER TOO OLD TO LEARN Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Re: jt65a
Yes, In a sense - it actually switches to the next *manually selected* sequence when the time clicks; it is in no-way linked to any over by another station (I know you know this Leigh, but just to clarify for others). It is the same as sending any macro or otherwise pre-canned message on about any mode I can think of; although I would be hard pressed to fit JT modes into any definition of unattended, semi-automatic or automatic operation. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WSJT features an auto checkbox, which, when enabled, automatically switches to the next message in sequence, after each over. The transmit times for both stations are defined and are on odd/even minute boundaries. From the documentation at http://2yf444 (select the English PDF) Auto: toggles on or off an automatic sequence of transmit and receive periods Since each over is one minute long, it's quite possible to get a cup of coffee and not notice another station on the waterfall while WSJT itself goes ahead and sends RRR or OOO or whatever you have programmed as the next message in sequence. However given the short timeframe and the fact that your QSO is already in progress, it isn't the same as a pactor semi-auto responding willy-nilly. In summary, I think Bonnie's point is that it is part of a sliding scale, and there are at least some unattended aspects of WSJT operation possible without going all the way to beaconing or unattended initiation of QSOs. 73, Leigh/WA5ZNU On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 11:27 am, Dave Bernstein wrote: Thanks, David. I was just responding to Bonnie's assertion that some JT65 stations operate unattended. I guess her claim was incorrect. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD wd4kpd@ wrote: The same is true for unattended JT65 stations that transmit on schedule i have been on hf/jt65a since its birthday. while not knowing it all, i have never heard of a jt65a beacon or unattended operations. the mode COULD be used for a beacon just like the cw beacons run by the california group. jt65a can't operate unattended, the message operation must have an operator present to switch messages. pse don't include this mode with anything like winlink which does USE unattended operations for some portions of its program. david/wd4kpd NEVER TOO OLD TO LEARN Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] JT65A HF resource
Thanks to Joe's efforts try this site for a very useful JT65A HF site. Thanks for your efforts, Joe. Bill, N9DSJ
[digitalradio] JT65A HF resource
Thanks to Joe's efforts the below site is highly recommended for anyone working JT65A on HF: http://jt65.w6cqz.org/ 73, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: [hflink] New release (4.4) of Multipsk
Hi, GMDSS DSC is receive only in Multipsk and the frequency mentioned was correct...corresponds to channel 70 on the marine VHF allocations. Am sure someone will correct me if this is not correct 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dr. Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: in the vhf listing 156.525Mhz is out side the ham bands, do you mean 146.525Mhz? Dr. Dana-Renee Lee PhD
[digitalradio] Re: JT65A HF query/observations
Hi, The appeal of JT65 is multi-faceted...works great deep into the noise so I can work stations as meager as more own at some distance. Also the freq tolerance, as you mentioned. It is automated so a double right click on another call sets things in motion - sit back and watch! Socially it means one need not pass more than minimal info -- a pleasure to ones not wanting to engage discussion with morons like me! Interesting all around, me thinks.. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: but the nature of the WSJT software is that it will decode signls within a 600 Hz range. So, unlike many other modes, even if you are off frequency and not able to hear anything...it will decode. Andy On 5/30/07, Brian A [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me play devil's advocate. Regarding HF JT65A operation in practice in the presence of the usual atmospherics. If I can't hear a signal, chances are near zero that it will be found tuning about the band by looking at the waterfalls. One almost needs to sked such difficult paths. You have to know he's going to be there before looking. OK but much different from the normal HF mentality of tuning for random QSO's. So you have to depend upon the other guy hearing/seeing your CQ to establish one of these random marginal QSO's. But all things being equal, he likewise won't find you at random for the same reasons. I was just wondering how many of these random really weak signal contacts actually occur on HF. Like I said in my case it has been zero. 73 de Brian/K3KO --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com digitalradio% 40yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewobrie@ wrote: All good comments. I agree with Danny AND Rick. I think I can safely say that this group is responsible for the sudden explosion of JT65A activity on HF, remember it is just one month old as a common HF mode. I'm perplexed too, I can find JT65A activity almost 24 hours per day but rarely hear ALE and Olivia these days. I hear Hell and MFSK16 but not as much as JT65A, by a big margin. As Danny correctly identified , JT65A, is simply amazing for extra weak signal detection. Actually, I am not sure if it's the mode or just the WSJT software, maybe the combination. I think however, that if someone like Patrick developed software that would perform Olivia , ALE, DominoEx, etc , etc...in the same manner as WSJT, hams would use it . Thus, I think we have found that many hams enjoy a software product that enables precisely timed beacons with simple responses to validate reception and a legitimate exchange. In summary, JT65AWSJT performs well under weak conditions and the timing divisions are attractive to experimenting hams. Give the same ability to Olivia and Dominoex, easily, and I am sure use of those modes would increase. Andy K3UK On 5/30/07, Danny Douglas N7DC@ wrote: The excitement of using the JT65 program on HF is NOT for those signals you can clearly hear and probably operate with another mode, but for those times that the propagation shows not to be there, you dont hear anything but possibly a slight raise in static on a band, etc. Then you can put this mode up, leave it alone, and see what pops out. Its for playing not really trying to communicate. FYI if anyone in P5 wants to work it, plse do so. Whether we can hear you or not, we will be there. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED]digital_modes% 40yahoogroups.com digital_modes%40yahoogroups.com moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk - Original Message - From: Rick mrfarm@ mrfarm%40frontiernet.net To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com digitalradio% 40yahoogroups.comdigitalradio%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] JT65A HF query/observations I too have been perplexed why these modes that were developed for weak signals on VHF and above and only have the most meager rudimentary exchange, would have any value on HF, relative to already existing weak signal modes. Perhaps because it seemed new, some focused on trying it out? What I still would like to see is a sound card ARQ modes that is scaleable in speed and also can work with weak signals, QSB, etc. 73, Rick, KV9U Brian A wrote: I've been playing around with this on 20M. The new version which does the decoding starting at 48 seconds is a big help. Of the the 25
[digitalradio] Re: Digital Voice Repeaters on HF
Hello Leigh, Guess it depends on the operator, but do not think time is an issue if the end result is worth itin the EME and MS world, an HF JT65A contact speeds along, usually. Not to mention endless time some spend in a pile-up, waiting for a net to come around to one or listening to white noise for a vhf opening on a dead band. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, my point is just the opposite. There is delay, but I don't think it accumulates. JT65a on HF shows me 2 things: 1. Hams will spend a minute per over to get a contact when the band is dead 2. Timed TX start is possible and gives a great value One of the problems of digital speech is the S/N figures requires, but if we relax the real time requirement, we can get by with a worse ratio. Couple this with the repeater idea, and you get a real advantage. So, let's say you can (just to pic a random number) send 10 seconds of spech in 30 seconds. So you TX for 30 seconds, starting on the :00 minute boundary. Then you RX for 10 seconds to the higher-power repeater to get (close to) realtime audio. That leaves the other end of you QSO 20 seconds to think and talk 10 seconds worth before :00 comes around and he or she starts to TX. This isn't like PTT for the AOR DV system, but it wouldn't require new hardware designs, just soundcard software. It would have a similar feeling to the JT65a system, which we know people are willing to experiment with. And, it doen't accumulate delay. Leigh/WA5ZNU
[digitalradio] Re: My First post
Hi, Well with and JT65/JT6M/FSK441 modes you will not see a qso as such...that you see shorthand messages like RO and OOO says your setup is ok...these modes are not qso modes...it is for exchange of calls, location and report and little more. You should see calls and grid locations on the non-shorthand decodes though. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, search_and_demolish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello group I'm a new member today so here goes ! Currently trying out J63A mode decoder, but not having much sucess in getting callsigns on the screen (Lol) seem to be getting 'RRR' and 'RO' status messages but have yet to get an actual QSO on screen. I get the usual figures for width, dB, Rpt and DF etc Can anyone assist me, only need it for Rx as I am not yet licensed Regards SD
[digitalradio] Re: New Digitalradio interactive spotting/sked webpage
Yes, Thanks Joe.. Worked Cesco using PSKAM10, a mode I suspect few would otherwise look for blindly. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to tremendous work of Joe N8FQ, we now have a new method of interacting and arranging skeds for digital mode QSOs. It is modeled after the successful interactive pages run by Chris N0UK for WSJT modes. Please continue to use NOUK's pages for JT65 and FSK441 work but our new page should be used for ALE, Olivia, PAX, Dominoex, SSTC, digital voice, Hell, Chip, and more. I already stirred up some USA to Switzerland 40M Olivia traffic . Weak but Cesco copied me. It is currently under test mode but fully functional, after Joe has finished his masterpiece it will be moved to my web site. Again thanks to Joe ! Connect to http://www.electroblog.com:8090/drsked/drsked.php -- Andy K3UK Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 www.obriensweb.com
[digitalradio] Re: Deep Search on JT-65a
Hi Brian, It is under options on the main program window, not the SpecJT window. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, c6alk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks: I have not been able to find how to turn off the Deep Search function in WSJT version 5.9.0. The excellent Bozo guide mentions that the selection is under the Options, menu selection in the SpecJT display. then decode, then JT65. However my menu does not display the Decode selection under the Options menu selection. I searched the .INI file as well, bit found no Deep Search entry. Is there a newer version of the WSJT program of which I am not aware? Brian K7RE
[digitalradio] Re: verify callsign?
Hi, 7L4IOU and EA7DUD are both real; Don't under-estimate yourself or the mode! 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, WN1Z [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howdy folks, I had my first JT65A qso with wb6mlc, just maybe 200 miles distant, no challenge there ... we often talk on SSB ... then Sunday with EA7DUD in Spain. I normally don't even try to work Europe, too much competition with other stations stateside. Personally i detest contesting. Can anyone else state they have QSOd with EA7DUD and they believe this is not someone just pirating that callsign? I know this sounds suspicious and wacky, but i know Bill k6acj also is wondering about some of this DX. There is no insult intended here, just looking for some assurance please ... I also heard 7L4IOU, Japan, and the distance from here in California is maybe 5000 miles to Japan and not quite 6000 to Spain, so Spain is believable. Orrin wn1z
[digitalradio] Re: Straight talk on JT65a
All, Actually an old controversy re JT65* modes in the EME community, dead horse oft beaten but still think it is the mode suite of choice for MS and EME; also think more to the point is what other weak signal modes work as well or better with bandwidth taken into balance on HF? If for a 60 second transmit sequence would other weak signal modes work as well (Throb, Olivia, DominoEx at low baud rates come to mind as well as KAM10) given the minimal information exchange in JT65? Interesting to try and find out! Be curious to try a 4 baud DominoEX with FEC (for example) transmit sequence sending just call and grid for one minute and see what happens on HF. Remember the WSJT modes were meant for EME, MS and weak signal VHF/UHFanything else is a bonus. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good work Leigh, I was wondering about some of those -31 readings that I could hear with my ears. I think Olivia testing is a good thing for this weekend. Bonnie, the fad is an interesting issue. Certainly weak signal performance is a popular goal, but I wonder if it JT65A is popular in part to the format. If we used Olivia in short bursts with very structured exchanges, and the Olivia software popped up SNR reports (like MixW does for Olivia, or PC-ALE does for ALE) , I wonder if Olivia would outperform and be more popular than JT65A?I'll argue that its not just the performance of JT65A but the format. Andy On 4/20/07, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com digitalradio% 40yahoogroups.com, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. leigh@ wrote: My conclusion is that this mode is about 10-15 dB worse than it appears to be, and we should start doing more careful tests alongside Olivia and plain old MFSK as controls in side-by-side propagation conditions. 73, Leigh/WA5ZNU Hi Leigh, After a week or so of monitoring JT65A on 14MHz and 7MHz, I tend to support your conclusions. It appears that not-pre-defined-QSO texting on JT65A is similar to Olivia 250/8 for weak signal robustness on HF. Although the throughput of texting via Olivia 250/8 is rather slow, it far exceeds glacially slow JT65A. Nonetheless, the recent fad flurry of activity on 14076 with JT65A demonstrates the enthusiasm for any potential new extreme weak signal modes during the bottom of the solar cycle. Bonnie KQ6XA -- Andy K3UK Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 www.obriensweb.com
[digitalradio] Re: Straight talk on JT65a
No argument from me. Alot to be garnered from this...both technically and socially. The discussion alone is of value. The mode suite is pretty much what it is in context of its intent. That it provokes interest on HF might be an arrow pointing towards abit different goal. Might even mean that because it is not conversational, it allows people to make contacts without having to converse with people like me :) In context, it is the tool of choice for me on MS and EMEthat it can even be functional on HF is a side benefit. As for the other modes, keep experimenting... 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think W1JT has done an excellent job not only with the DSP and mode design but also with the software, making it open souirce, documenting it well both technically and for users, and seeding further development with a group of others. I don't mean to detract from this work at all. I think there are lessons to learn from JT65a on HF, and we should make sure we understand why it works and how, and that includes the social processes and the technical ones, before we go tweaking it. I think there is definitely room for a new mode that brings some of its advantages, and as Bonnie says, this time in the sunspot cycle is the perfect crucible. So, let's keep using it and getting experience, but also make the effort to look critically and deconstruct it. 73, Leigh/WA5ZNU
[digitalradio] Re: My Own JT65A Monday - FINALLY
Hi Howard, Congrats! Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, w6ids [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, All. I've been playing with this mode and making piece meal contacts as it were while learning. Mostly, I've been receiving. I know the thing works, but there's this thing about a learning curve, time accuracy, etc. So, I was kind of surprised when I actually pulled off the sequence of making a contact that is located elsewhere besides CONUS: 222800 0 -21 7.1 -127 3 222900 10 -5 1.5 -124 0 * CQ JS1OYN PM951 0 223200 4 -7 1.8 -16 3 * W6IDS JS1OYN PM95 1 0 223400 4 -9 1.1 -16 3 # W6IDS JS1OYN PM95 OOO 1 0 223600 10 -20 -17 3 RRR ? 223800 10 -19 -17 2 73 ? I had to dial the station in manually; it was originally +135 from me, so on the fly didn't do too badly. For Bill P., this kinda reminds me of PSK63 testing (GRIN) but with more hope for success it seems. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
[digitalradio] Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off
All, Per topic, deepsearch is great for EME, a wonderful feature. But on HF is is of little value and will only lead to false decodes and stations answering you when you haven't transmitted. Decode menu, JT65, check No deep search Hope this helps.. 73 Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off
Hi John, Sure you already know this but the key was the 0 3 082600 1 -14 5.2 584 3 * GM4SLV SM2LKW KP15 ? 0 3 No RS decode but a deep search decode. Joe provided us with wonderful software, but not envisioned for HF usage. Guess we need to adjust abit :) As I hope I made clear; deep search using call3.txt is great for EME, with known precautions. On HF it is less useful. Perhaps running -30 db S/N of HF with a dedicated HF call3.txt file it might be entertaining.food for thought. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John GM4SLV [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 00:19:11 - Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All, Per topic, deepsearch is great for EME, a wonderful feature. But on HF is is of little value and will only lead to false decodes and stations answering you when you haven't transmitted. Too right! How confusing is it to see :- 082600 1 -14 5.2 584 3 * GM4SLV SM2LKW KP15? 0 3 and wonder how in the world SM2LKW could possibly know I was listening!? There's some freaky maths in this software, but ESP? Turn off Deep Search if you want to only see what has actually been received, not what the software thinks is the most likely thing to have been received. I suppose what needs to be done is the compilation of a new HF operator's CALL3.TXT to get some use out of this aspect of WSJT's functionality. Cheers, John GM4SLV Shetland Is. IP90 / EU-012
[digitalradio] Re: JT65 5mw QSO with XE2AT!
I don't believe it happened. Would need to see it myself. Opps, I did see it happen Good going Tony and Al. Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All: Managned to work Al, XE2AT on JT65 with 5mw this evening on 20 meters. All was using a 40 meter Bazooka antenna with tuner. Turned the power down to 1mw (according to Oak Hills WM2 QRPp wattmeter) while sending 73 and Al heard me! Amazing mode... Tony KT2Q
[digitalradio] Re: JT65A Slow decoding
Hi, Also go to the decode psuedo-button and disble deepsearch options...might miss a weak sign in the deepsearch file but will speed up the decodes... 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Darrel Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Marc With my Compaq Deskpro 731Mhz usually decodes at 6 seconds after the minute with nothing else open.If I have other apps open it could be a long as 10-11 secs. I just double click the callsign and hit auto very quickly and I still make the contacts. Darrel On 16-Apr-07, at 2:36 PM, g0azs_marc wrote: Hello All I'm just getting into decoding some JT65A on 14076 and I seem to have a problem that's probably computer related... but I would appreciate some advice. My clock is sync'ed OK but at the end of a minute (and when I have even seen strong traces) it is 25 seconds into the next minute before decoding finishes. Is this normal? It seems that this would make a QSO difficult... Look foward to your comments. 73 Marc G0AZS PS Computer is AMD 450 MHz 320MB RAM
[digitalradio] Re: 10mw QSO JT65
Saw that Tonyseems like 2.5 mw would work although with little margin! 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KT2Q [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All: Managed to work Justin (N5BO) with 10mw on 20 meters. Justin's report was -23db so it would seem there was some room to go even lower. There's no doubt that you could microwatt with this mode under ideal conditions -- amazing! 04/17 02:27 021900 2 -23 0.08 4 # N5BO KT2Q FN30 OOOTony KT2Q
[digitalradio] Re: WAC on JT65A
Well done! Congratulations... Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Juan Carlos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Andrew anda John: Oh. Sorry by delay in the answer, but today I was involved in a local special Radio Chidrens Event, a kind of field-day to show how the radio is. I should have included in the WAC message all the QSO log as: 2007-Apr-08,22:57,WD4KPD,FM15mm (North America East) 2007-Apr-05,00:14Z,VE7TIL(North America West) 2007-Apr-05,13:52,XE2AT,DL81uu (Central America) 2007-Apr-15,23:10,LW1EXU,GF15ac (South America) 2007-Apr-07,18:49Z,DF4UE (Europe) 2007-Apr-10,11:10Z,7L4IOU (Asia) 2007-Apr-14,12:04Z,ZS6WAB (Africa) 2007-Apr-14,22:06Z,ZL2IFB (Oceania) Do you agree ? I add you on my Skype but never received your ACK. Congrats by your effort in the Bozo's manual. It's very usefull !!! Many Thanks and hope to contact you asap. from LU9DO
[digitalradio] Re: JT65 Reports / Messages
In WSJT, F5 key is your friend! RO means you received the OOO it is a shorthand roger for the OOO report... Bill N9DSJ --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tony, I got confused when trying to explain, maybe you will be better. Can you explain whch steps can be skipped and which cannot? Some got stright to RO without sending an original OOO. Andy On 4/14/07, KT2Q [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All: Seems to be some confusion about what message to send when running JT65 and what the reports mean. That's understandable since the mode was developed for EME and not HF. The morse letter O (not zero) is used during EME CW QSO's to indicate that signals are readable and both calls were copied. The JT65 mode uses the digital version of this. The RO means ROGER I've received your O report and your report is also O. If you're not sure what message to send, hit F5 with WSJT running and a small help window will pop-up. It shows the correct message to send for each mode. Hope this helps... Tony KT2Q
[digitalradio] Re: ZS6WN JT65 14076
Glad I have never ever done that! (and if you believe that..) Bill N9DSJ --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], KT2Q [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy, Not sure what that was about -- could be that he forgot to click the next message -- it happens ). Tony
[digitalradio] Re: 001000 5 -11 -0.2 277 3 * CQ DX WD4KPD 14076.0 kHz
Hi Bill, Not ignorance at all, it is not very intuitive! It means (basically) that Tony heard WD4KPD calling CQ DX in JT65 mode on 14.076. file ID (time based): 001000 sync: 5 strength: -11 db time offset: -0.2 (in seconds) freq offset: 277 (in Hz) sync width: 3 message type: normal (*) hence: 001000 5 -11 -0.2 277 3 * 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill Aycock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pardon my ignorance but what does this subject line mean? Bill-W4BSG
[digitalradio] Re: Japan on 40M to east coast USA!
Hi Andy, May well be, what JT65 decode parameters do you have set? It is a valid call in the deep search file: JA7BJP,QM07GNnote the 0 10 decode at the end of the line -- it gives one a clue as to the source of the decoded text/call - in this case 0 means no Reed-Solomon decode but a 10 (high confidence) deep search decode. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now I suspect it was a false decode since 0413 UTC is the middle of the afternoon in Japan. Probably was KA7BJP calling me. Andy K3UK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewobrie@ wrote: How about this 041300 1 -18 4.6 11 3 * K3UK JA7BJP QM07 0 10 JA7BJP calling me at 0413 UTC today on 7076 USB.The only problem, I was fast asleep. I left JT65A monitoring 7076 overnight with a wide tolerance and aside from some North Americans, and Europeans, there was my chance to work Asia on this mode , 40M.Oh well. I'll have to look for an opening around that time tonight. -- Andy K3UK Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 www.obriensweb.com
[digitalradio] Re: New to Digital
Hello Dan, First, congratulations on the General ticket! Am sure if you give us details as to the software you are using and what modes are of interest (hopefully they coincide!), there are many hear that would be glad to help you. Suspect PSK31 would be the easiest mode to start with; the usual watering holes are 3.580, 7.070 and 14.070 USB. Listen alot, ask questions and have fun! 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dan Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Dan here KD7UFF in CN77 Forks, WA I got my Gereral ticket on 3/31/07 and just got my Tigertronics SL-1+ USB version for my 706MIIG... I will (with some of your help) try to start getting this thing going.. As Far as I know I am the ONLY person in CN77 running digitalor anything in Forks.. So I am game (with your help if needed) I guess my 1st questiin would be what freqs for what bands.. Thanks all 73 Dan/KD7UFF/AG
[digitalradio] Re: New to Digital
Hello Dan, First, congratulations on the General ticket! Am sure if you give us details as to the software you are using and what modes are of interest (hopefully they coincide!), there are many here that would be glad to help you. Suspect PSK31 would be the easiest mode to start with; the usual watering holes are 3.580, 7.070 and 14.070 USB. Listen alot, ask questions and have fun! 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dan Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Dan here KD7UFF in CN77 Forks, WA I got my Gereral ticket on 3/31/07 and just got my Tigertronics SL-1+ USB version for my 706MIIG... I will (with some of your help) try to start getting this thing going.. As Far as I know I am the ONLY person in CN77 running digitalor anything in Forks.. So I am game (with your help if needed) I guess my 1st questiin would be what freqs for what bands.. Thanks all 73 Dan/KD7UFF/AG
[digitalradio] Re: HB9TLK JT65 7076.0
A tribute to my Big 15 Wattson an 80 meter antenna :( says alot about the mode 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewobrie@ wrote: Good contact Tony. Let me see Cesco squeeze a DV codec of this mode! What power were you both using? Looks like Bill got there too... 030800 4 -16 0.5 -24 4 * HB9TLK N9DSJ EN52 1 0 030900 7 -15 0.1 -291 3 # N9DSJ HB9TLK JN47 OOO 1 0
[digitalradio] Re: HB9TLK JT65 7076.0
Hi Tony, Good to see alot of MS/EME guys on HFthe use of JT65 on HF should also prompt more vhf MS/EME activity... if it was easy anyone (even a Caveman) could do it! Jerry (KC0HLN) is one we need to get on HF :) 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KT2Q [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill, Nice going and yes, it does say a lot for this mode. Been a while since we QSO'd on 6 meter meteor scatter. Worked Jerry (KC0HLN) the other day... 031800 11 -5 0.1 -16 3 # KT2Q N9DSJ EN52 OOO 1 0 Tony KT2Q From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 11:27 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: HB9TLK JT65 7076.0 A tribute to my Big 15 Wattson an 80 meter antenna :( says alot about the mode 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewobrie@ wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewobrie@ wrote: Good contact Tony. Let me see Cesco squeeze a DV codec of this mode! What power were you both using? Looks like Bill got there too... 030800 4 -16 0.5 -24 4 * HB9TLK N9DSJ EN52 1 0 030900 7 -15 0.1 -291 3 # N9DSJ HB9TLK JN47 OOO 1 0
[digitalradio] Re: help prevent qrm
Echo... No need for everyone to be on the same exact freq..spread out abit. 200 Hz is usually enough. You can work multiple qso's at the same time if you watch the DF...but not if everyone is one the same freq during the same sequence.. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 20m was a mess today, everyone planting on 076. this is not necessary ! try this... set in spectrum the jt65 DF axis option freeze the program to 0, with tol to 200 tune whichever station you wish to tune by shifting your dial to place the sync tone on 0 the 200cps tol will effectively give you a filter 400cps wide around the other stations rf freq and it will not decode anything outside the window, this eliminates lots of qrm to you. if you rig cant quite tune that close, when most of the other stations tones are withing that window you can re-freeze the idea is to not use a large DF and take up more space than needed, and spread everyone out a bit. 300cps is more than enough to ensure no qrm. daivd/wd4kpd
[digitalradio] Re: sked
Hi Les, you were -15 to -21 db here but decoded well on my 80 meter antenna. N5SIX heard you better on his 8ft wire :) 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Les Keppie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD wrote: i need a vk/zl and a s.america for wac on jt65. who can give me a skedis long weekend here, and glad to try just about any time and band. pse reply direct [EMAIL PROTECTED] cuall on PJ/jt65 david/wd4kpd Hi David Am transmitting 14.076127 approx from 2320 utc 5th That is now hihi de Les vk2dsg
[digitalradio] Re: 80M USS-South Africa link via JT65A
3.576 seen both usb and lsb used.. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any idea what frequency is used for 80m JT65a? - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 7:20 PM Subject: [digitalradio] 80M USS-South Africa link via JT65A Text from the JT65A board... 04/06 01:48 i aint believing it !! (WD4KPD David NC FM15mm 04/06 01:49 FIRST ZS /USA JT65A ON 80M (ZS6WAB Willem xx KG46rc rrba-ip-pcache5-vif0.telkom-ipnet.co.za) 4/06 01:51 Congrats! (AI6O Ed CA DM12lt ip68-7-40- 41.sd.sd.cox.net) 04/06 01:50 -25 Willemdone deed ! (WD4KPD David NC FM15mm 4/06 01:52 FB COPY -25DB (ZS6WAB Willem xx KG46rc rrba-ip-pcache5-vif1.telkom-ipnet.co.za) 04/06 01:52 forgot to say had -6db att in to keep noise down (WD4KPD David NC FM15mm Announce your digital presence via our DX Cluster telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Our other groups: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Re: Re-inventing the JT65A messages for HF?
Hi Andy, Think there is a mixed bag; some of use have used the WSJT modes for some time on vhf/uhf for EME and MS;p so we tend to stick to known conventions. So far I have seen no reason to deviate from that... 73 es be well, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see a few are confused about the proper sequence and meaning of the EME/MS related messages within JT65A of WSJT. So, am I. I wonder if us HFer's should try to be more straight forward? The general use is described as.. When a station copies both calls, he sends calls and report. If he gets both calls and a report, he sends his report Roger. If he gets report and Roger, he sends Rogers. When both get a pair of Rogers, the QSO is officially complete. The report mentioned above is traditionally the gridsquare in JT65A, I find that useful. So , How about these messages CQ P5DX K3UK replies with message 1 P5DX K3UK FN02hk P5DX sees both calls and sends K3UK P5DX PM27 OOO QSL K3UK receives the report and sends QSL , thanks PD5DX sends... RRR 73 K3UK sends ... RRR 73 I would keep RO, OOO, RRR in the messages because they also get displayed in the waterfall. I'm not sure how/why yet, but that is my weekend learning objective. As I read more about the mdoe and the software, K1JT advocates the use of standard operatings procedurees. So, maybe changing his convention is not a good idea? Andy
[digitalradio] Re: K3UK On Understanding JT65A for HF.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, w6ids [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sheesh! What are you talking about, Andy?
{snipped}
I blame Joe Taylor.
73,
Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: VK2DSG JT65
Hi Danny, Seems ok; select a mode then hit the monitor buttonscreen will be black until you go into monitor mode... Bill, N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK Guys Ive gotten hung up from the git go here on setting this thing up. Went thru the basic tutoral and kinda understand that. But now I am ready to look at some live freqs. Setup - Options: my call I understand Grid Locatoryep id interval - 10 Ptt port 2 audio in 0 ? audio out 2? what do those mean? I have my regular soundcard feeding the RigBlaster Plus, and audio from the rig going into the soundcard. So whats with the numbers? See the WSJT6 screen says 0 20 Microsoft Sound Mapper - Input 1 20C-Media Wave Device 2 02Microsoft Sound Mapper - Output 3 02C-Media Wave Device Dfault Input 0 output 2 requested input 0 output 0 opening device 0 for input, 2 for output audio streams running normally. Rate in 1 rate out 1 DXCC prefix K Source RAQ ) ??? Source DEC ? As you can probably tell, there is nothing on the waterfall - just black. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card.
[digitalradio] Re: Best mode for severe QRN?
Hello Rick, Try MT63 under heavy QRN conditions; alot of downsides but for bucking qrn/qrm have found this about the bestCHIP modes also seem to do well in high qrn environmentsboth are wide bandwidth (relatively) so this may well be a part of it all.. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kv9u [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, tonight my experimenter friend and I got taken out by QRN when it came to digital modes. We often run a Tuesday night sked. We started on MFSK16 and then tried to go to the ALE 141A mode and no luck with that or FAE. It just could not handle that much QRN. We then went back to MFSK and decided to try DEX11/FEC which I was hoping would work as well as it has been during quieter times. No luck. Hardly any print so dropped down to 8 baud and still no good. What a disappointment. Back to MFSK, but even that was getting more and more spotty with lots of hits and even long stretches of no print at all. The QRN levels were at or exceeding 50 microvolts (S9 on my calibrated S-meter). The signals seemed to have deteriorated as well and actually appeared to get much weaker. I don't think it was just the S/N ratio causing this but was a combination of weaker signals and stronger QRN. In fact, I got so desperate for any kind of mode that I switched to CW and eventually I moved up a bit and he realized that I was sending CW in his passband. Even then, the communications were extremely difficult with the CW tones being chopped up badly by the QRN which were at the serious popcorn level. Increasing filters did not really help much. It did increase the S/N ratio but the noise bursts tend to block the signal, making it more difficult to copy than with a wider filter. Of all the sound card modes we have now, I would like to hear some opinions of what you think is the best one for these kinds of conditions. 73, Rick, KV9U
[digitalradio] Re: psk31 Anyone???
Hello Jeff, Congratulations on the upgrade. for BPSK31 your best bets are to poke arounnd 3.580, 7.070 or 14.070 - that is where the bulk of activity is depending upon conditions and time of day. 73 and good luck! Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jeffnjr484 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Just got my general upgrade and im interested in digital operations want to check my psk31 out anyone willing to meet me on Hf for a qso? Im available this wednesday ,Thursday or Friday April 4,5,6, interested in a chat let me know a frequency and a time and I will do my best to be on at that time or contact me off the group to setup a particular timeframe Jeff kd4qit/ag
[digitalradio] Re: Odd tones on 20M
Hi Joe, my guess (and indeed it is a guess) is 4 or 5 baud DominoEX or one of the JT65 (A,B,or C) modes...hard drive on the computer died so cannot play it back to decode it until I get it all up and running 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Joe Veldhuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds like JT65 to me... -Joe, N8FQ On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:20:25 - Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone care to identify this signal http://www.obriensweb.com/signal.mp3 Sounds throb-like but not exactly. Heard tonight on 14076 USB. Andy K3Uk
[digitalradio] multiple posts -
Odd,
Posted this once and see mutiple instances of it --- believe the same
thing is being observed on other Yahoo groups but apologies in any case,
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Joe,
{snipped}
[digitalradio] Re: Getting RFSM2400 Approved for US Hams
Hi John, No problem; I would be happy to help work towards an STA for RFSM2400, if that is indeed a worthy goal. Think part of the issue is that due to our position in the sunspot cycle *usable* bandwidth for experimentation, at least in the evenings in North America, is very limited. Would need to take that into account...suspect we work from different perspectives (who doesn't?) but no need to let that impact the goal... 73 es be well, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought we decided somebody else said that? (HI) Chris Imlay worked pretty hard for us. He was able to get an FCC consensus on encryption being OK for Hams to use when the FCC staff in the SAME office had somewhat different views on the same subject! I don't know what the ARRL pays him, but he earned his wage that day! He also gets impatient with some of the nit picking questions Hams ask, so I am forced to like him (HI). Vy 73, John K8OCL Original Message Follows From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Getting RFSM2400 Approved for US Hams Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 03:54:49 - --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Champa k8ocl@ wrote: John, I thought you said, Kill all the lawyers, guess that does not include the ARRL legal staff.. Prohibitions are fairly simple; and no, that is not the same as permissions :) 73 es be well, Bill N9DSJ
[digitalradio] Re: CQ CH?
I can do a sked :)
73,
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Joe Serocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
{snipped}
TRY to find someone on any rant on a digital mode.
{end snip}
[digitalradio] Re: Getting RFSM2400 Approved for US Hams
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John,
I thought you said, Kill all the lawyers, guess that does not
include the ARRL legal staff..
Prohibitions are fairly simple; and no, that is not the same
as permissions :)
73 es be well,
Bill N9DSJ
{snipped for brevity}
As for RFSM2400, I am unaware of any specific prohibitions
by the FCC, but that isn't the same as permission, or so I
was told. I would like to try it out someday, so I would
first get it posted to the ARRL Standards page, then I
would discuss it with Chris Imlay, and if he was cool with
it, I would go ahead and use it.
Unfortunately, I don't know what to post! Can anybody
(Bonnie?) give me the protocol / standard and I will talk
to the appropriateARRL webmaster at the League and get
it posted. After that I will send the URL to the League's legal
guru and ask to schedule a discussion meeting with him.
{snipped)
[digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
To be argumentative, this quote was from the play Henry VI, believe Dick the Butcher made it. He also wanted to execute all those that could read or write. Shakespeare apprenticed for a law firm and do not think he would wish for my family to be deprived of income thru death :) Also doubt Shakespeare knew morse code! Now back to our regularly scheduled programming --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want to have a revolution, first you must kill all the lawyers. William Shakespeare Does that include barracks lawyers? Just kidding guys. Keep it light! HI HI 73, John K8OCL
[digitalradio] Re: MPSK vs OFDM vs MFSK for HF High Speed Data
Hi Bonnie, Thanks for initiating this discussion: Throw the prospect of incremental frequency shift keying into the mix for discussion; know a few are working on this mode(s)also. The OFDM (AM-QPSK)+6dB better SNR may or may not be an issue...it depends on usagethe usual HF near LUF versus nearer MUF or VHF/UHF question. The key may well be your comment later, all other factors being equal. Greater raw throughput seems very dependant upon S/N (we all know this intuatively). You are correct, PSK overall is a known quantity...QPSK abit less so. In a sense you have hit upon the crux of the issueam simple so bear with me. If the SNR is high enough, then higher raw throughput is available. Question (well one of them) for discussion; where is the threshold? Also some mitigating factors such as robustness (never sure that has been defined) and the ever-lovable bandwidth. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since there is work presently being done to advance HF data communications, I thought it would be good to start a dialogue here about the advantages of PSK signals on HF, over some of the other choices. I'm not a world expert on these particular systems, however, I have used them and have an understanding. I have also been involved in design engineering of commercial radio communications using high speed data OFDM, AM-QPSK, and MPSK on DSP platforms. I hope that some of the individuals who are working on new HF data systems and data modes will engage in this discussion. Background. PSK signals have been long proven for HF communications. The MIL STD 188-110 type PSK signals have been in constant use by government and other entities for HF data and email, and they are now being adopted by hams. The standard 188-110 serial tone modem is an example of a Multi-Phase PSK signal (8PSK) running at a phase shift symbol rate of 2400 symbols per second. That means it shifts a constant carrier's phase between 8 different polar degree positions 2400 times per second. This raw bit speed is modified by software to get a data channel at various selectable levels from 75 baud to 4800 baud. The lower baud rates such as 75 baud, provide more robust comms, capable of low SNR, and operation in weak signal conditions. The highest baud rates such as 2400 baud provide faster data throughput but require a somewhat better quality channel, not weak signals. This -110 MIL Standard 8PSK signal is about 3kHz wide. It has an audio baseband signal approximately 300Hz to 3300Hz with a center frequency of 1800Hz. Some of the newer ham radios have adequate passband width for this signal. Since most ham radio and commercial SSB transceivers have a more narrow passband (~2.5kHz), at least 2 modified non-standard versions of the -110 PSK signal were independently developed (MARS-ALE and RFSM2400) to fit within the narrower SSB passband of ham transceivers. The RFSM2400 uses a 6PSK signal at 2000 symbols per second for its narrow non-MIL-standard mode rather than the 8PSK MIL-standard signal. It is centered on 1500Hz, and provides an audio baseband signal that is approximately 300Hz to 2700Hz. It also uses a short burst of BPSK signal for sync/control. Why Multi-Phase PSK? Phase detection is inherently faster than tone frequency detection such as used with FSK or MFSK signals. In the present state of the art for Frequency Shift Keying demodulation, the tone is present for several cycles to be detected reliably at audio baseband, so this makes rapid shifts having fewer cycles less reliable, thus limiting the data speed. Phase detection, on the other hand, is reliably detected within a a cycle. With a 6-phase (6PSK) signal or 8-phase (8PSK) signal, a greater number of raw symbol bits provides more throughput than the more common 2-phase (BPSK) or 4-phase (QPSK) signal. How the raw symbols are used, and how they are coded for redundancy and FEC at the software level, can be balanced for optimization of robustness and throughput for given conditions. Why not OFDM or AM-PSK? The use of full power constant amplitude, with 8 phase shift or 6 phase shift also makes the -110 PSK type signals more robust for HF than signals that depend upon amplitude level, such as OFDM (AM-QPSK or AM-MPSK). Perhaps an OFDM (AM-QPSK) signal with 2-level amplitude shift and 4 position phase shift, could achieve similar robustness to a 6PSK signal. Such an OFDM signal potentially has more throughput because the number of raw symbols, and thus number of bits per second, are higher. In weak signal conditions, however, the advantage of PSK over OFDM (AM-QPSK, AM-BPSK, AM-MPSK) becomes apparent... Since this OFDM (AM-QPSK) signal requires amplitude modulation, there is an inherent sacrifice of raw link margin threshold above noise for the receiver demodulator to
[digitalradio] Re: RFSM-2400
Well, was on the internet very early...mostly only .edu and .mil domains back thenhence I listened and tuned around alot on the radio :) 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Les Warriner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What did Ham Radio do before the Internet E-Mail?
[digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Hi Andy, I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious as to why it is not legal. Is it speed and/or bandwidth? Thanks in advance, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a reminder to the USA based hams , this mode is not considered legal on HF in the USA. -- Andy K3UK Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 www.obriensweb.com
[digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Or the 2400 Baud option :) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KT2Q [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill: I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious as to why it is not legal. Is it speed and/or bandwidth? Was just reading the docs and noticed it's 2000 baud! Tony - KT2Q - Original Message - From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 8:37 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110 Hi Andy, I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious as to why it is not legal. Is it speed and/or bandwidth? Thanks in advance, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewobrie@ wrote: Just a reminder to the USA based hams , this mode is not considered legal on HF in the USA. -- Andy K3UK Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 www.obriensweb.com
[digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
I do not believe so, they use MIL-STD-188-141A Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Haven't the HF-LINK folks been using this mode for over 5 years? John. K8OCL Original Message Follows From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110 Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:37:47 - Hi Andy, I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious as to why it is not legal. Is it speed and/or bandwidth? Thanks in advance, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewobrie@ wrote: Just a reminder to the USA based hams , this mode is not considered legal on HF in the USA. -- Andy K3UK Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 www.obriensweb.com
[digitalradio] Re: RSM2400 / MIL-STD-188-110
Hi Bonnie, Excuse me for being dense (is what I do best)...is the difference in this discussion MIL-STD-188/110 versus MIL-STD-188/141A ? I know the /xxx takes precidence; as do all slash sheets. But am missing the point (I should read the MIL specs, but have to do that everyday at work so wince at doing so at home); is the bottom line that -141A is legal in the US but -110 is not? Thanks in advance, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John K8OCL wrote: Haven't the HF-LINK folks been using this mode for over 5 years? Hi John, Yes. MIL STD 188-110 is in PCALE software (along with standard ALE). Operators have been using -110 (outside USA) for data files. I was using the RFSM2400 while I was in Hong Kong, China. It is a good system, and the modified narrow version takes no more bandwidth than some other digital modes or SSB voice. As you know, USA has an arbitrary 300 symbol/second limit in the USA Data Subbands. But there is no such 300 baud limit in the phone and image subbands, so some of us in USA have used -110 to send image files. It does that quite well, but the real forte of -110 is data FTP and email. Wow... 2007... a shame that USA hams are living under those antiquated FCC rules made for the previous century's technology. USA hams still sit rotting in the FCC's technology jail. The rest of the world's hams can use RFSM2400 freely for data or mail. Bonnie KQ6XA
[digitalradio] Re: RSM2400 / MIL-STD-188-110
Doubt you or Rick are missing anything. 300 baud ax.25 packet works poorly on HF unless near the MUF. I still like the mode but after 20+ years I agree to its shortcomings... PAX/PAX2/ARQ FAE all work better at the expensive of bandwidthax.25 packet at 110 baud works better too when down from MUF (although slow). All seem a compromise, but they all provide ARQ... a trade-off in speed versus bandwidth.. Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now I'm I missing something - I don't seen to have a problem with HF packet. But then again I don't use a sound card for it either. At 09:29 PM 3/15/2007, you wrote: It still seems a bit non-intuitive that using a 2400 baud rate with two tones can work well and yet 300 baud packet hardly works well at all. There is something that I am missing here. 73, Rick, KV9U
[digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info
Hi, Not sure I see that anyone is trying to keep the 50 or so hams from getting a message back to home. I really thought the number to be much, much larger given it is the argument used for alot of Winlink2000. Is this the real crux of the discussion? If so, that is alot of RF bandwidth per ham (BWPH?), with commercial alternatives to serve the same purpose. 73 Bill M9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After looking at the winlink position report page there must be 50 or so hams at sea. Now why in the world would anyone not want them to be able to send a message back to home. We have been down this road many many time in the last 2 years on this list. We ain't going to take that bumpy ride again. The horse has been beat to death many time already. Get you best shot in and put a lid on it. John, W0JAB so there !
[digitalradio] Re: 3580kHz-3600kHz Freq Coordination Info
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snipped...shows I had a bad day at work when I cannot type my call correctly and then fail to proof-read] 73 Bill M9DSJ Actually my ticket reads n9dsj
[digitalradio] Re: narrow filters/PSK
Well, You are all correct... as usual it depends; in this case it depends on mode, band and operating style. If I were, for example, using the panoramic type operation to look for a snap-shot of what was going on in cw, rtty or psk modes using Multipsk, I would opt for a fairly wide open filter of 3000 Hzif I then started a qso I would drop in a filter of as narrow as possible for the given mode. For some modes this is obviously not an option (of yet) as one is not decoding, say Olivia, on a panoramic waterfall (visual ID's using CMT Hell excluded as are RS ID's). I find the more narrow than stock filters are the reason I use the IC-746 Pro over my IC-718; but milage varies from person to person. If all I was to operate was 6 meters, using most any digitial mode, there would be little need for a more narrow than SBB filter as there is (sadly) no qrm. On the other hand, using a digital mode on 80 in the evening without a more narrow filter would make things even more miserable. 73 Bill N9DSj --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agee with Danny and don't quite get what Leigh is saying. Dave's question is an interesting one because with my 3-week old DSP capable rig I, have been experimenting with the issue Dave raised. I have the ability to go down to 50 Hz IF-DSP filtering , but to be honest I find the digital bands to be so sparsely populated that I have not needed to use th filtering tha much. I'm waiting for a big contest to test this further. With regard to what Leigh is saying, I have been anxious to find out if my variable AGC and/or DSP filtering offer any significant improvement over the infamous strong PSK signal 'desenses' other signals in waterfall issue. With my admittedly little playing around, I have not found the AGC settings to make that much difference. I just noticed a strong PSK31 signal way out at the 1700 Hz mark on my waterfall. When he transmits my Multipsk waterfall darkens considerably. Turning a fitter on , in this case 1000Hz, eliminates the strong signal at 1700 and the waterfall at the lower end returns to normal. I still have not figured out how to best center on the remaining waterfall with software commands to center on 1000 or 1500 Hz, since these commands center you to parts of the band that you may have filtered out. Still need to find time to practice more. I guess I need filter out the strong signals, shift the remainder of the waterfall so that it is centered on 1000 Hz an then use align or center macros. Sounds like work though. Dave, I think 500 Hz should be all you need for all but the most unusual situations.
[digitalradio] Re: Turkey being served on 80M
I agree for just BPSK31 that Multipsk can be intimidating..but even I sorted it out after abit of floundering about. As for ALE, it is more a system than a modeARQ FAE is actually fairly simple compared to PC-ALE and its counterparts. ARQ FAE might best be viewed as a connected mode independant of ALE; more like PAX/PAX2 on steroids (and hence wider, like people on steroids :) ARQ FAE works quite well, had numerous qso today using that mode but still cringe abit on using a 2000 Hz wide signal for data modes... 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I thought that. Multipsk is the software you need. On 03 Mar 2007 19:09:17 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just referring to ALE in my post... Gary
[digitalradio] Re: Noise Reduction and the digital modes
Hi Andy, Assume you mean DSP noise reduction...have never seen any real effect of note either way on digital modes...even on HELL. The noise blanker degrades some WSJT modes but otherwise have seen little impact on received digital decodes. On Hell, at least Feld Hell, the AGC seems to matter alot moreslower AGC seems to de-blur the received print and reduce screen noise. Interesting question though. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Noise reduction on my old rig never did much. Now I have a new rig the NR buttons actually appear to do some things. What about noise reduction and the digital modes, is it really helpful? I did just notice that with a Hell QSO NR made the print more blurred. For other modes I have not noticed much other than a lot less speckles in the waterfall. Maybe a graphically empty waterfall helps when a weak signal comes along but i worry the weak signal may get zapped by the NR. Comments ? -- Andy K3UK Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 www.obriensweb.com
[digitalradio] Re: Turkey being served on 80M
Hi Andy, Well many cringe on hearing me, regardless of mode...at least ARQ FAE is more narrow than the umpteen ssb signals that abound. Is interesting conceptually. Saw you on 80 also but condx between us seemed less than optimum...am sure another night will bode better. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep, I was cringing watching you Bill, seems awfully wide. I did try a connect to you earlier on 80M but no link. Andy.
[digitalradio] Re: 141A
Hi John, Heard you, Andy, and VE3FWF but more like working WSJT modes due to conditions which are horrid herelinked to W6JVE using ARQ FAE later...worked ok but need to balance the mode with the conditions as Jim in Arkansas is usually very strong here. Also I am worn out from a 2 hour commute both going and coming home from work due to weather, so not at my best (if there is a best) 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I give: conditions are terrible, around 0100z 80 was great , listening to some nets on 80 and copying stations 1500 miles east of me to 1500 miles west. don't think I could hear anyone across the city right now I'll be monitoring 14109.5, and have it set so that if you call me using unproto, and have my callsign in the little box, then my rig should tell you what your sig strength is. John VE5MU
[digitalradio] Re: 141A
Hi Dan, Here is a link to the MIL-STD-188-141A/ALE channels. The root webpage gives alot of information as to what MIL-STD-188-141A/ALE is and does.. http://www.hflink.com/channels/ 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, n0ziz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is 141a? What frequencies are used for this mode Dan N0ZIZ
[digitalradio] Re: 25-02 crashes
Steve, I noticed the same behaviour here using test versions 24_02_20 and 25_02_20; reverted back to 19_02_20. 73 Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Patrick, Bad news as soon as MultiPSK 25-02 receives an ARQ FAE linking call the following happens, I have tested this between two stations on a few PC's in my test bed. I have reverted back to 19-02 I have 20 or my 50 core MARS-ALE testers working with 19-02 within a few hundred miles of each other testing robustness WRT multipath, its working great. I have almost 400 beta testers working with MARS-ALE that communicate via a single e-mail forum. There are over 2,600 Army MARS members alone ( not sure how many Air Force and Navy MARS members) waiting for a production release of MARS-ALE to debut. /s/ Steve Emacs!
[digitalradio] Re: 141A
You, EA2AFR and KQ6XA were very solid here on all modes - also CO2JA abit later...ice did a number on my antenna so was in monitor mode only. Antenna is back up so will try 80 meters later... 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: EA2AFR and I tried for quite a while to get this running, but sigs were not strong enough. Could communicate unproto and also had a good chat with 100% copy using Olivia 1000/32 Also heard KV9U and KQ6XA briefly another day, maybe. John VE5MU
