Re: [digitalradio] Re: CMSK Freq's
Juergen, I was listening/looking at that time and saw one signal but it was too weak to decode. I assume it was you. Bob, WU9Q - Original Message - From: "Juergen" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 5:58 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: CMSK Freq's > Looking at the JT65-signals on 14076 yesterday and comparing them with > other days the propagation was indeed very poor (at least on my side). The > RB reports on W4CQZ's webpage showed similar results. > > I will try to be qrv again today and tomorrow around 2200 UTC on 14076 + > 1000 Hz, USB in CMSK31 and CMSK63. > > 73 > > Juergen, DL8LE > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave 'Doc' Corio" > wrote: >> >> I alternated calls to you and calls to CQ and never heard another >> signal. Not sure how propagation is, though. >> >> 73 >> Dave >> KB3MOW >> >> -Original Message- >> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com >> [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on >> Behalf Of Juergen >> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 6:30 PM >> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com >> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: CMSK Freq's >> >> >> >> Called there in CMSK31 and 63 from 22.00 - 22.30 UTC. No reply. Will be >> there again tomorrow. >> >> 73 >> >> Juergen, DL8LE >> >> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "k8yzk" wrote: >> > >> > I know CMSK is mainly for 160/80 metes (which I currently can't do), >> but >> what freq's are being used currently on the other bands/ >> > >> > thanks and 73 >> > Kurt >> > >> > > > > > > > http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html > Chat, Skeds, and "Spots" all in one (resize to suit) > > Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522 > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
[digitalradio] Re: ROS back bigger and better !
g4ilo writes: > > But why are you all so worked up over this? It is the USA not > Soviet Russia, you aren't going to end up in Siberia are you? The late J Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI, used to exile FBI agents he disliked to Alaska, which was as close to Siberia as he could send them. However, you are right: the worst penalties which the FCC might plausibly impose on a US ham who lost an argument with them about whether ROS is spread-spectrum would be a fine or license revocation (the latter not likely for a first offense.) OTOH, most hams take seriously our obligation, as a disciplined and largely self-policing radio service, to operate within the both the International Radio Regulations AND the rules promulgated by our respective national administrations. This is independent of the penalties for a violation. There are exceptions, of course, but most of us WANT to follow both the rules and good practices at all times, so we also need to know what the rules are and what they mean. 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW), Chris
Re: [digitalradio] RE-NEW LICENSE
I use the free method of the FCC. http://wireless.fcc.gov/uls/index.htm?job=home On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 11:18 AM, "John Becker, WØJAB" wrote: > > > What does one have to do to re-new their ticket on-line > now? Been so lone I forgot > > > -- Mr.C.Robinson 73 DE KF6NFW
Re: [digitalradio] Opposing 60M proposal
James French writes: > Can it be 'justified' to 'clog up' a new band with allowing ANY digital > mode, > and I am also including digitized voice into this, just to have it be there? > Why not use what is already staged and developed and on the bands that > already > have the allocations? The reason for allowing digital modes on 60 is the same as the reason for allocating channels on 60 to hams in the first place: sometimes two stations are too close to work on 40 due to F-layer skip, and too distant to work on 80 due to D-layer absorption, while 60 will permit effective communication. This is equally true for any mode. W.r.t. EMCOMM, if a served agency needs hams for backup record communication using digital modes (whether email or radiograms), we don't want to be unable to serve that agency when propagation fails on both 80 and 40 meters while the phone lines are down, if 60m would work. Nor should we be reduced to reading radiograms over voice radio on 60m if a data mode would be both faster and more reliable. While much EMCOMM traffic is tactical rather than formal, some of it is not: EMCOMM hams should be prepared for both, and the regulations should not prevent us from doing both as effectively as possible. -- 73 de kw6h, ex-ae6vw, Chris
[digitalradio] Why does the ARRL continue to push for Pactor III support...
Rick Ellison writes: ... > This just makes no sense to me why you would push Pactor III on a > channelized frequency setting.. A good question: I was thinking of sending in a comment on that NPRM, recommending that instead of authorizing only PSK-31 and Pactor-III, that the FCC instead permit all publicly-documented data modes which fit within the authorized bandwidth. However, it appears that the FCC is going to do that in any case. I am still inclined to write in and suggest that digital operation in the 60m band be confined to local or remote control, not automatic, to minimize the chance of interference to the primary users. Unlike some members of this list, I have nothing against Pactor-III on 60m (waste of spectrum when used for keyboard-to-keyboard QSOs is not an issue with the fixed channels on 60m), and nothing against Pactor I and II at all. I do not choose to operate those modes, but neither do I wish to restrict *other* hams to operating as *I* choose. OTOH, I DO object to ham bots interfering with the primary users of spectrum which we share on a secondary basis with other services: it's bad for the amateur service's relationships with other spectrum users. Actually, I even object to the lid-bots on ham-only spectrum outside the automatic-control subbands. I'd like to see the automatic subbands made a bit wider, but the exception removed for automatic stations using 500 Hz or less in response to interrogation by a manually-controlled station. I'll just have to live what we have now, ince the FCC clearly disagrees with me. -- 73 DE KW6H, ex-A6VW, Chris, ae6vw-digitalra...@puffin.com
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Unattended narrow mode transmission "protection"
Ed G writes: > > Using your same logic below, it could well be determined that hams > who partake regularly in 75M evening nets, or even regular QSO, etc, > should take their conversations to FCC Part D Citizen's band, or other > service , because those communications on a regular basis could be easily > furnished through those alternative services too. > > I know, its stupid, but it also carries the same logic as the below > example . > > K7AAT Ragchews or roundtable nets with other hams could not be reasonably accomplished via another radio service, nor could the authorized purpose of improving international understanding via person-to-person contacts on the radio. (Any ham who is using 80m to work other hams within the reliable range of CB class D probably ought to consider QSY to 144 MHz or above, but that is wandering pretty far off the topic of this thread.) Daily vessel position reports, on the other hand, ARE done via the Maritime Mobile Radio Service, so obviously they CAN BE. For exchanges of email messages between yachts at sea and non-hams ashore via MM frequencies, see http://www.sailmail.com for a non-profit connection. I believe that for-profit public coast stations offer such services as well. 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW), Chris
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Unattended narrow mode transmission "protection"
Adding to Skip's remarks, I will point out it is considered almost an indecency among the daily-position-report hams to mention 97.113(a)(5) of the FCC rules, which states: (a) No amateur station shall transmit: ... (5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be furnished alternatively through other radio services. That means that a US-licensed ham violates the FCC regs when s/he regularly transmits vessel position reports, which could be transmitted using the maritime mobile service, over ham frequencies. Not being a lawyer, I am not qualified to say whether a fixed ham station which received those messages and forwards them to a web page is also in violation, though my unqualified guess is "no". I don't know whether hams licensed in other countries are subject to equivalent (or even more stringent) regulations against communications which could be furnished through other radio services, but I suspect that the answer is "yes", and that the basis for 97.113(a)(5) is to be found in the International Radio Regulations, which all administrations are required by treaty to implement. A documented confirmation or contradiction of my guess would be welcome. 73 DE KW6H, ex-AE6VW, Chris
[digitalradio] Re: New ROS Version 2.0.2 beta
Hi, where do you go to download the software? Thanks--- Bob C WU9Q --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "nietorosdj" wrote: > > Please download the latest version. >
Re: [digitalradio] Vista Run-time error and ROS
No, I get a run time error 50003. Bob C WU9Q - Original Message - From: Tony To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 7:50 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Vista Run-time error and ROS Has anyone had any luck running ROS with Vista? Tony -K2MO
Re: [digitalradio] Generator Interference
What methods did you use to test for the generator interference? Can you give any specs on the generator such as a trailer-ed unit. When was last maintenance done to the generator, and what? I suspect that you have a faulty plug or a bad shield somewhere in the unit. I would also suspect that when the D-Rat is connected to battery or other stable power source there is no known problems. I am curious though to hear more on this as we have been discussing a D-STAR/RAT, but have wondered about the pitfalls and the ability to fix them in the field much like legacy systems! On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Dave Sloan wrote: > > > Hello All, > I live in Colorado Springs, Colorado. We are getting ready for a 4 county > mass causality exercise. This last Saturday we were doing some training, > antenna work, and testing at the EOC. One of the tests involved was > deploying our mobile command post about 30 miles out into the county. We > were able to work 2 meter voice simplex without any problem. However, > digital wasn't a good. We were using D-Rats and we could see the other > stations without any problem. But, when we tried to send a message it would > fail. The generator was causing some sort of hash to be generated and it > was > causing the digital to fail when passing a message. We could go keyboard to > keyboard without any problems. What sort of suppression kit could we > install > on the generator to eliminate the interference? > > TNX & 73, > Dave N0EOP > 31033 > > > -- Mr.C.Robinson 73 DE KF6NFW
[digitalradio] Adobe Reader incompatible with amateur radio computer?
n0hnj writes: [problems with the latest Adobe Reader and MSIE on a reinstall of MS Windows.] Adobe has a long history of buffer overrun bugs leading to exploits. There are third-party readers for PDF documents that are safer. Since I don't run Windows, the readers I use (Xpdf and Okular) wouldn't work for you, but a web search should find some safer programs for viewing PDFs under MSWin. You should consider switching to Firefox as a safer alternative to the historically buggy and exploit-prone MS Internet Explorer. (I DO strongly recommend installing the NoScript add-on to Firefox, though.) I also suggest downloading PDFs to your local disk and opening them with a separate program, rather than letting your browser try to display them for you. I would expect that to be accomplished by right-clicking on the link and selecting a "save as" item from a menu, but I don't know whether that applies to MSIE. Sometimes convenience and safety are conflicting values. 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW), Chris Jewell
Re: [digitalradio] Is there a convention for stereo phone plugs?
Tip is generally left side audio so as to conform and work when placed in a mono jack. ring is right and body is ground. As for a convention, not sure I know they have them for Trekkies, that is one stereotype! Have a nice weekend and hope that helps. On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:14 PM, jhaynesatalumni wrote: > > > I've never known if there is a standard for whether tip or > ring is left or right channel. And is left or right normally > used for the computer DSP radio software? > > >
Re: [digitalradio] City attempts to shut down ham radio .... !!
my take on the video was a couple middle aged hippies in an RV bitching about the county wishing to regulate the antenna height, but never said anything of real value other then a rant. The woman seemed to make a great stoned parrot though! I too am not a fan of youtube so I dont allow it on my personal system as it is blocked, but from the library I dont mind, I dont have to clean up the cookies and other junk! Chris KF6NFW On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:47 AM, mikea wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 05:58:25PM -0700, D.G. wrote: > > > > City attempts to shut down ham radio !! > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d5B9UPw_10 > > For us middle-aged fogeys who read news and mail using text-mode > software, would you (or someone else) mind posting a summary? > > Thanks & 73, de > > -- > Mike Andrews, W5EGO > mi...@mikea.ath.cx > Tired old sysadmin > >
Re: [digitalradio] WSJT JT65A on HF
You still need to click TxDF. When you click on TxDF, it turns red and shows the offset in the box...Bob WU9Q - Original Message - From: Dave 'Doc' Corio To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 8:52 PM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] WSJT JT65A on HF Thanks, Tony! One more question, if I could. When I double right-click on a call in the text window to answer a CQ, does that automatically set the transmit frequency, or do I still need to click the TxDF? Tnx es 73 Dave KB3MOW -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on Behalf Of Tony Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 9:46 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] WSJT JT65A on HF Dave, You need to click on TxDF. Tony -K2MO - Original Message - From: "Dave" To: Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 9:22 PM Subject: [digitalradio] WSJT JT65A on HF >I seem to be missing something using WSJT on the HF bands, such as 20M. >Even though I set the transmit to a specific frequency, the answers to the >CQs I get are all on the center frequency. > > For example, I will set the transmit frequency on SpecJT to -400, then > turn "Freeze" on in the WSJT window. I thought this placed my transmit > frequency on 400 Hz lower than the center frequency. Yet tonight all > answers I got to my CQs were on the center freq. As much as I'd love to > think that everyone else is wrong and I'm right, I suspect this isn't the > case! > > Can anyone point out to me what I'm forgetting to set? > > Tnx es 73 > Dave > KB3MOW > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Peek-a-boo sound devices
I had simmilar issues and found that I need to power down and reboot if I wish to swap out USB devices. When hot swaped it gave me hell. Now I make a point to make connections on USB devices with system off so it auto detects and remains with proper settings of my desire. On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Andrew O'Brien wrote: > > > I use an internal sound card for ham operations and an external sound > device , in the form of USB speakers, for routine PC/Internet work including > DX announcements via Spotcollector. This works well except that every know > and again ham applications that have been working well via the internal > sound device all of a sudden have their settings switched and the sound for > transmission gets sent to my speakers rather than to the rig. > > I can't figure out what triggers this? Sometimes Multipsk, Winwarbler, and > WSJT, just tell me that "USB AUDIO" is set for my transmitted audio even > though I had manually set it for the other device. It seems that is > connected with changes I may make, like unplugging and then plugging in the > USB speakers if I need to "borrow" the USB ports for something else for a > few minutes. > > I have missed few QSOs when caught by surprise with the wrong xmit card. > Ideas ? > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Sound Cards
I use an external soundcard the Creative labs Soundblaster X-fi is a very good unit. many hams are claiming that the Sound Blaster is the best out there for digi modes, and I have to agree. It works very well. On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 7:58 AM, lsumners wrote: > > > I am looking at upgrading my Dell on board sound card. Any suggestions for > digital radio? > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Interface
Jerry, Perhaps it is an interface made by Donner. I have 2 of them. Mine has 2 audio cables, the black one for connection to the line input for receive and the red one for audio out from the computer. It has a nine pin din for serial connection for rig control and the connector for either the Kenwood TS570 or Yaesu FT857D. Bob C. WU9Q - Original Message - From: Jerry Rappel To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 9:54 PM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Interface So maybe this won't work with my Yaesu? Jerry -- To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com From: w...@q.com Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 02:53:05 + Subject: [digitalradio] Interface Acording to the FT1000MP manual: Packet DIN plug is for external TNC, RTTY DIN jack is for RTTY terminal unit. Jerry
Re: [digitalradio] Unable to set time
Kim, Try using this software to set your computer clock. http://www.thinkman.com/dimension4/ Bob C WU9Q - Original Message - From: "Kim" To: Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 11:15 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Unable to set time > It became necessary to obtain a new computer to run digital modes. > I like running JT65A but I'm unable to reset my computer clock. I've tried > using the update feature in Windows where you go to Windows.com or > nist.gov. I've also tried the sites accessable through W6NEK Beacon > Tracker. I only get messages saying "There was an error in the process" > > Is there any reason I cannot connect to these sites? > > Kim AB7JK > > > > > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > http://www.obriensweb.com/sked > > > Recommended software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > Thinking Man Software - Dimension 4 v5.0.URL Description: Binary data
Re: [digitalradio] Re: illinoisdigital group
I didn't complain either, but after about 5 or so of his messages I added this to my .procmailrc: # advertisements in various Y! ham-radio mailing lists *From: .*wb9...@yahoo.com /dev/null 73 de kw6h, ex-ae6vw Chris Jewell
Re: [digitalradio] Re: DXPSK by F6GQK
Is this what you are looking for? http://dxfile.free.fr/dxpsk.htm Bob C WU9Q - Original Message - From: "kc4cop" To: Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 3:55 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: DXPSK by F6GQK > Jim: > > The link that you posted dead ends at a closed AOL Hometown website. > I checked the link mainly to see what you were talking about > (ex. "two channel"). > > Are you using the DXPSK software because it will run on an old > computer? If so, did you make your software choice based on needing a > program that is compatible with an old Windows operating system or > based on a computer's modest hardware such as old CPU, limited amount > of RAM etc? > > My Windows XP machine is out of service and I am unable to replace > it. I have an offer of a Pentium II machine that runs well using > Windows 98 SE. > > When my radio and computer equipment fails and I can no longer fix > it, I will have to let it go and look for older used equipment. I > can't find some of the parts for my older radio equipment that I need > to put the equipment back into operation. > > I have not found looking for older computer equipment very fruitful. > What I have heard several times is that people have been scared off > from the practice of recycling their old computers for fear of > someone stealing their identity and banking records from the hard > drives that in the computer. It is too late to educate a person in > how to wipe a hard drive if they have already disposed of their > computer. Because of this I can not be picky when looking for an old > but serviceable computer to use with digital sound card programs. > > Information on the requirements needed to run specific software is > appreciated. > > Dick Z., KC4COP > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew O'Brien" > wrote: >> >> Does this software still exist among digital hams >> >> >> >> Andy K3UK >> >> >> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" wrote: >> > >> > I just downloaded and setup DXPSK, by F6GQK (pskcore.dll by > AE4JY) and >> > reading the mail on two psk stations as I write this. The two >> channels is a >> > nice feature. >> > >> > One thing that confused me was the soundcard on off button on the >> top left >> > of the screen. To get the program to copy signals you must click > the >> speaker >> > icon, and a red X appears over the speaker. >> > >> > On start up the speaker icon is not red X'ed, and you do not see > any >> > waterfall, or see anything decoded. >> > >> > Dispite this very minor confusion, I think I'm going to be able to >> use this >> > program on my older 120mHz Compaq 1130T. Too bad I cant get > Digipan >> going, >> > but DXPSK should do very nicely. >> > >> > Get a copy of DXPSK at this website. >> > >> > http://members.aol.com/chramade/dxpsk.htm >> > >> > 73's de Jim KJ5TF >> > >> > > > > > > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > http://www.obriensweb.com/sked > > > Recommended software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: mftty
Hello Norbert, After following your instructions for a Vista machine, when I start MFTT I get the Run-time error '429', ActiveX component can't create object. I don't know what to do about this. Thanks--- Bob C (WU9Q) - Original Message - From: "Norbert Pieper" To: Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 8:15 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: mftty Hello to the Group!! I'm new here and have some goddies... I freshly released an update of MF Tele Type V 2.0.088 http://www.polar-electric.com/MFTT/ And yes it is possible to run MFTT under Vista Instructions: Launch program directly from it's Program folder location for example "c:\Program Files\HamRadioSoftware\MFTeleType\MFteletype.exe" In the properties table one must set: XP Servicepack2 ( right click on the MFteletype.exe file to access the properties tab and select XP Service pack 2) this step need be done only one time. Execute as Administrator (each time one runs the program, it is necessary to right click the .exe file and select to run it as Administrator. ) Whish you lots of fun with MFTT! Any feedback is welcome. 73 55 de Norbert Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Grouply spam/theft attacks
Oops! That .procmailrc rule should read ... :0 : *Received: from .*72\.20\.12[14]\.[0-9]+ /dev/null Sorry about the missing period. -- 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW), Chris Jewell
Re: [digitalradio] Grouply spam/theft attacks
Since the grouply folks, judging by their conduct thus far, don't seem like anyone I would ever want to have contact with, I did the following (output abbreviated.) $ host www.grouply.com www.grouply.com is an alias for grouply.com. grouply.com has address 72.20.121.3 grouply.com mail is handled by 0 smtp.grouply.com. $ host smtp.grouply.com smtp.grouply.com has address 72.20.124.3 $ whois 72.20.121.3 Bay Area Internet Solutions BAYAREA-BLK-1 (NET-72-20-96-0-1) 72.20.96.0 - 72.20.127.255 Grouply BAYA-72-20-121-0 (NET-72-20-121-0-1) 72.20.121.0 - 72.20.121.255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] $ whois 72.20.124.3 Bay Area Internet Solutions BAYAREA-BLK-1 (NET-72-20-96-0-1) 72.20.96.0 - 72.20.127.255 Grouply BAYA-72-20-124-0 (NET-72-20-124-0-1) 72.20.124.0 - 72.20.124.255 $ I then added ... deny ip from 72.20.121.0/24 to any in deny ip from 72.20.124.0/24 to any in ... to my FreeBSD firewall rule set (your firewall syntax may vary), and ... :0 : *Received: from .*72\.20\12[14]\.[0-9]+ /dev/null ... to my .procmailrc, so they cannot spam me via the @arrl.net forwarding service, which passes my firewall. 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW), Chris Jewell
Re: [digitalradio] 80 / 40 meter daylight activity
Hi Ed, I think 7.070 MHz is the PSK31 frequency to use. Try that. Bob WU9Q lmeeny wrote: > Hello, > > When last I operated, early 80's, there was a lot of SSB activity on > these lower bands during the day. You could always find someone to rag > chew with. I live in the North East with a high density of operators > yet I hear no daytime PSK31 stations.Calling CQ around 7.035 MHz has > not prompted responses. > > Are there better frequencies to operate on or do I just keep calling > into the aether :-) > > Thanks, > > Ed W2GHD > > > > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > http://www.obriensweb.com/sked > > Check our other Yahoo Groups > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Bands improving
On Feb 2, 2008 8:21 PM, Tooner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Leskep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > US ssb stations now readable on 7183 lsb at 0600 utc W5RG BOB > > s8/9 A lift in conditions maybe heralds things to come > > SF=71 A=19 K=5 and SSN is 19 > > Les VK2DSG > > We've had these numbers in the recent past, if memory serves. > > I thought ideal would be A and K indexes low, and SF and SSN numbers > high, right? Generally, yes. For current conditions the better number to go by would be K which is a 3-hour reading, opposed to Ap which is a 24-hour average of K values. It's also an interesting fact that K values are linked to atmospheric background noise, the higher the values the greater atmospheric noise heard on HF. To give an example, a K-index of 5 equates to about an S4-S6 atmospheric noise reading. Perhaps this slightly increased activity is related to the solar storms today, the time period between a solar flare and the time the shockwave reaches earth provides a window of elevated MUF, as well as improving 80M/40M for a short while. Probably triggered from this event: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/indices/events/20080130events.txt But that's just my guess :) Regards, Chris Vk2MOX
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Digitalradio Group
Rodney writes: > Just did a Group search and it's there. It's called, "FCCSUCKS", but > there's only ONE message on it and who knows if it even has a moderator!. > > I agree, someone (NOT me) needs to start an FCC Rules discussion group! > > Rod > KC7CJO It appears that the digipol Y!-group was set up for exactly this purpose, but there seem to be no members or messages. I have a vague recollection that our moderator may have established that group so he'd have someplace to which to banish the endless flamewars about the FCC subbands-by-bandwidth NPRM, WL2K sucks|rocks, automatic busy detection for bots "should is mandatory"|"is infeasible", etc, but I'm not sure I'm not confabulating here. :-) 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW) -- Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 1396 Gualala CA USA 95445
Re: [digitalradio] Re: The decline of Olivia and DominoEX
Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote: > I think MARS adopted it so it has some momentum there. Are they still > using it? Increasingly so. Since most traffic is pre-prepared the fact that keyboard interactive has some lag isn't considered a big deal. The region six AF digital net is pretty much an all MT63 show, and word has it that it's increasingly the most common mode on the Navy side as well. It's starting to leak onto TRANSCON, so there's no doubt that acceptance is spreading. Comparing modes is always a bit dodgy thanks to the affects of environmental conditions, but a fellow MARS operator did a comparison of MT63 vs. various Olivia submodes a while back using a short but still valid EEI message. His findings for said message: MT63 1kHz: 1 min 10 sec MT63 2kHz: 37 seconds Olivia, 32 tone, 1kHz: 4 min, 1 sec Contestia 4 tone, 500Hz: 1 min 14 sec Contestia 8 tone, 1kHz: 50 sec Contestia 4 tone 1kHz: 31 sec Contestia 8 tone 2kHz: 25 sec Contestia 4 tone 2kHz: 19 sec RttyM 8 tone 2kHz: 13 sec RttyM 4 tone 2kHz: 10 sec Naturally S/N degrades for reduced block size. MT63 isn't too bad with -8dB S/N minimum, and Contestia 8 tones, 1kHz isn't a slouch, either. One of these days we'll get around to observing how these things work under differing conditions and as they degrade, but it hasn't percolated to the top of the to-do list yet. -- Chris Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] AF6AP http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration..."
Re: [digitalradio] Re: SCAMP?
On 6/9/07, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have wondered about this as well. The author said he thought he would > eventually release it and, at the time, I had very little knowledge of > the GPL. I am still not totally clear on this, but since SCAMP was only > a beta test, and not a fully released product, perhaps that allows you > to not release the code? This is not the case. The GPL specifically requires that you make source code available, under the GPL, to anyone to which you distribute compiled binaries. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] RE: JT65A HF query/observations
Phil, One of the columns shown in the WSJT main window (where signals are decoded) is "DF". This stands for "delta frequency" and displays how many Hz +/- you must tune to be exactly on top of the decoded station. As for logging RST, I always use OOO. It's weird for HF, yes, but is the standard signal report exchange for moonbounce. 73. -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols
On 6/1/07, Howard Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please consider RealBasic as a tool instead of VB.net. With MS there > is no such thing as 'free' or 'cross platform". With RealBasic you can > code cross platform and there is no charge for the Linux version. Howard, Actually, with the .NET environment, this isn't quite true. .NET has a lot of standards associated with it; an open-source project called Mono is reimplementing all these standards. The result is an open-source C# compiler and .NET runtime environment. I'm not sure that there is the same level of support for VB.NET as there is for C#, but people are working on it. Check out http://www.mono-project.com/ 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: JT65A HF query/observations
It is true that, for a good number of QSOs, JT65A's insane sensitivity is not needed and you merely take a lot longer to exchange the QSO data than you would with another mode. However, I have completed a number of QSOs that simply would not have been possible otherwise. The best example of such: some weeks ago, I worked ZS6WAB at 0450z on 40 meters. My TX power was 40W; my antenna was a 40m Hamstick dipole mounted vertically on my apartment balcony. Willem ZS6WAB was (I believe) using a doublet of some sort. He was just barely audible on my end; I was apparently not audible at all on his end. So JT65-on-HF does have its uses. As you pointed out, Phil, I am surprised that there is not JT65 on 10m right now. The properties of the mode and current HF conditions seem like a perfect match. As for logging JT65, I have been using DXKeeper and I haven't had any problems. JT65 is one of the listed modes. I use OOO as the signal report (and make sure to also enter the grid square in the grid square field). Uploads to LoTW work just fine with the program's built-in LoTW export. 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Here's a silly thought
Rodney, There have always been boneheads on HF, regardless of the Morse requirement. The 75m phone band has been a great example of this for years and years and years. I'm one of those awful, ignorant, inconsiderate, no-good, don't-give-a-damn-about-regulations-or-operating procedures no-Morse HF ops. And I always take mild offense when I see a message like yours. I always listen for a few minutes and then "QRL?" before I CQ. I don't run unreasonable amounts of power (in fact, the most power I've ever run is 50W). And if I get the impression I'm doubling with someone, I stop and listen. Please don't place blame where it shouldn't be placed. There have been inconsiderate morons on the bands for as long as there have been people on the bands. The lifting of the Morse testing requirement has little to do with it. 73, -chris N2YYZ
[digitalradio] 6m psk31
Guys & Gals, What would be the 6m psk31 frequency in the US? Thanks--- Bob C. (WU9Q)
[digitalradio] Re: Hams should have encryption
expeditionradio writes: > > Bill N9DSJ wrote: > > Can see no valid reason for encryption on our frequencies. If one > > could provide an single example I would be interested.. > > Hi Bill, > > Hams should certainly have the capability to pass over-the-air > encrypted traffic or scrambled speech for emergencies and disaster > relief. There are other situations where it would be useful, too. In > order to have seamless capability in an emergency, hams should be > familiar and proficient with the use of it on a regular basis. > > Encryption should not be with the sole intent to obscure the content > from other hams, but it should be availble to hams when there is a > need to shield sensitive data and information from evil-doers. > > Here are a few reasons for hams to use limited encryption in the > over-the-air communication: > > 1. To shield private data > 2. To shield private telephone numbers > 3. To shield sensitive email addresses The many administrations which don't permit amateurs to carry third party traffic at all (in many cases to protect their national government's monopoly position as a provider of secure radiocommunication within their borders) seem unlikely to agree to revise the International Radio Regulations in a way which would make it easier for their hams to conceal that they might be carrying third-party traffic. > 4. To shield system passwords Logins over potentially-compromised media (including ham radio) should use technical means to cryptographically authenticate transmissions, but that does not require cryptographic concealment of the content. If I chose, I could use private-key encryption to ssh into my shell account at my ISP, while passing the text of my session in the clear. Someone who sniffed my packets would be able to see what I was doing during my session at my ISP, but would not be able to masquerade as me using the information gleaned from tapping my lines or sniffing my packets. Something similar involving, e.g., exponential key exchange, could be used over ham radio. Multiple-use passwords sent in the clear became obsolete for network use more than a decade ago: there is no reason why ham radio should adopt content encryption to make up for the weaknesses of such obsolete methods of authentication. > 5. To shield station remote control Concatenate the command and a timestamp, and use a crytographically strong a hash of the combination to prove that the command comes from someone authorized to remotely control the station, and to prevent replay attacks. There is no need to cryptographically conceal the command itself, only to cryptographically sign it. Challenge-response single-use passwords are another possible solution, still not requiring cryptographic concealment. > 6. To secure access to stations Same answer as number 4 or 5, depending on what exactly is meant by that. > 7. To control satellites The same as number 5. (ISTR that crypto concealment for control of ham satellites is already authorized, but I assert that there is no technical need for it: crypto authentication would be sufficient.) > 8. To shield messages sent by a 3rd party to ham Same answer as numbers 1-3. > 9. To protect medical information Now we *may* be getting somewhere, but I'm still not sure. It seems to me that, e.g., a hospital could call via ham radio for helicopter evacuation of a patient to a regional trauma center, providing sufficient information about the case to justify dispatching the helicopter, but provide the actual name of the patient to the EMTs along with the patient's file and the patient himself when the helicopter arrives, rather than by radio. Is it really necessary to transmit personally-identifiable medical information over ham radio in emergencies? > 10. To protect 3rd party traffic requiring confidentiality See reply to items 1-3. > 11. To control repeaters See reply to item 5. > 12. To shield identities of children It's not clear to me exactly what that means. > I'm sure there are more reasons... but that's some of the things I > thought of in the few minutes it took to write this. > > Bonnie KQ6XA It may be that I am wrong, that Bonnie is right, and that the world at large (not just the FCC) is willing to permit hams to conceal the content of our traffic by cryptographir means, but I don't see a lot of evidence of that yet. It also may be that, say, on 2M and above, where F-layer propagation is unknown, hams could be permitted the use of crypto without disturbing international agreements too much. -- 73 DE KW6H (ex AE6VW), Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Some notes on JT65-on-HF operation
On 4/5/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nice summary Chris. I wonder if your JT65A software does the > following? Last night a few folks had their clocks wrong, to > cope with that I transmitted manually rather than 'auto". > Whenever I did manual xmisions, my rig and software would > transmit, end, and them immediately re-key and send tones again > for about 12 seconds. I eventually used the "stop tx" command > when this happened. It never happens when in auto mode, but > always happened in manual. Andy, I noticed the same thing. It's the main reason why I only use "Auto is ON". I suspect the buttons may only be intended to switch message transmission while already transmitting, and not to transmit manually. -chris
[digitalradio] Notes on JT65-on-HF part deux: decoding signals
is what you'd expect -- some sort of noise blanking. I've left it on, but I'm not sure if it's actually necessary. "Zap" somehow attempts to "zap" away receiver birdies. I usually keep this off. Enabling either probably reduces sensitivity slightly. There's another feature of WSJT that is useful for very weak signals -- so weak that they can't be decoded in one RX period. It has two slots (one for the even slot, one for the odd -- I think; not sure on this) where it stores averages of past signals. These are displayed in the two-line textbox below the main textbox. Thus it is possible to monitor a "dead" channel for a few RX periods, and suddenly see a signal "pop out of the noise" once you've done enough averaging. To use this effectively, though, you must occasionally clear the averaging buckets and allow new data to accumulate. That's what the "Clear Avg" button is for. (I haven't actually decoded an otherwise-unreadable signal with this functionality myself, but maybe one day.) I hope this helps, and that it explains more than it confuses. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] "free text" in JT65A
On 4/6/07, Steinar Aanesland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Some of you are typing long massages in a JT65A qso on HF and I wonder > how you do that. > Chris N2YYZ wrote "Always click the "Auto is OFF" button to make it so > "Auto is ON"." but when Auto is ON is on there is no way I am able to > type in a text. I simply don't have time. Few seconds after decoding a > signal the auto transmission kicks in, and my Norwegian brain is to > slow. My head will never be able to translate from Norwegian into > English, and get something understandable on the air when the time is > sow extreme limited. I hope this was understandable;) Is there a trick > here I'm missing? Steinar, Usually when I put in a long message, I have it ready to go before my TX slot (e.g. "73 TNX! BEST-19"). However, you can turn auto off, type your message, and then turn auto back on when you are done. You will begin TXing as soon as you turn it back on, and if only 10 or so seconds have passed, the other station should still be able to get a decode. I have noticed that TXing manually sometimes makes me TX past the end of my timeslot. Haven't figured that one out yet. Auto always seems to end at the right time, though. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] Chris' Fun 0n 40M
On 4/5/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Great work Chris! Is this an indoor antenna ? Andy, I have a Hamstick dipole mount on a second story balcony railing. It's rather close to the building but it's the best I can do. For 20m and up I mount it so the antennas are horizontal; for 40m I mount it vertically, in the hope that a (very much shortened) vertical dipole will get a better radiation angle, given that I'm not very far above ground. Still need to get sticks for the bands above 20m, now that the solar cycle is starting to pick up... -chris
Re: [digitalradio] Chris' Fun 0n 40M
On 4/5/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I enjoyed wataching Chris get some DX on 40M JT65A tonight, here is > some of the side exchange from the JT65 Terrestrial Link. > > 04/05 03:58 wow Al, you heard me? :) (N2YYZ Chrisd NY FN12sk Haha, yeah. I saw Al's CQ, called him back, and was very surprised to then see: 035700 5 -15 -0.1 -24 3 * N2YYZ XE2AT DL81 1 0 So now I have XE on 40m. What a fun mode. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] Chris' Fun 0n 40M
On 4/5/07, Chris Danis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So now I have XE on 40m. What a fun mode. And now, ZS as well -- which is a new entity and a new continent for me. Thanks to Willem ZS6WAB! My best RX of his signal was -13dB SNR and his best RX of mine was -16dB. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
[digitalradio] Re: Some notes on JT65-on-HF operation
On 4/5/07, Chris Danis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This message got a bit longer than I had wanted it to be, so here's a > quick summary of the points (if you don't follow these, many stations > will not be able to work you!): > - Always keep your clock synchronized, to one second or better accuracy > - Always click the "Auto is OFF" button to make it so "Auto is ON". Two more quick points I forgot (sorry!): - Only set "Auto is ON" when, you know, you're trying to make a contact and you want to TX. But *always* use it to trigger TXing. - On HF, always use JT65A. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
[digitalradio] Some notes on JT65-on-HF operation
Hi all,
JT65 is a very different mode from more conventional "keyboard" modes.
It is designed for EME operation with very weak signals, and to allow
for just the bare minimum amount of information that defines a contact
to be exchanged. This leads to some quirks in its operation, which I
will do my best to explain below (I'm hardly an expert on this -- only
been trying my hand at it for a few days!).
This message got a bit longer than I had wanted it to be, so here's a
quick summary of the points (if you don't follow these, many stations
will not be able to work you!):
- Always keep your clock synchronized, to one second or better accuracy
- Always click the "Auto is OFF" button to make it so "Auto is ON".
Those who are interested in why, read on...
The software has a notion of timeslots (as in EME operation). One
station TXes, beginning at the start of a minute, for 48 seconds, then
goes to RX for the remaining 12 seconds. The other station calls back
at the start of the next minute, for 48 seconds, while the first
station RXes for that full minute. This is the standard that stations
follow -- if you don't conform to it, they will probably not be able
to decode you.
Thankfully, the software will enforce this timing for you if you press
the "Auto is OFF" button. The button will then change to "Auto is ON"
and will also be highlighted in red. Also tied in with this
functionality is the "Tx First" checkbox: if checked, your TX slot
will be the even minutes of the hour ("first" meaning "first minute of
the hour"). If unchecked, your TX slot will be (you guessed it) the
odd minutes of the hour. Obviously, one should pick the opposite of
the station they are trying to work :) While "Auto is ON" you will
always TX in your TX period -- so when you are done, make sure to turn
it off, hi.
Whether "auto" is on or off, the software will automatically attempt a
decode at 52 seconds into the minute. If by the time you've decoded
you're already into your TX cycle, just press the appropriate "TxN"
button on the far right, where N is the number of the message you want
(you'll see). If you ever need a quick reference on which is the
appropriate message to send, just hit F5 (or menu item "Help -> What
message to send?").
Also note that decoding isn't an instantaneous procedure: pressing
"Decode" while you are less than 52 seconds into the minute will
attempt to decode last minute's tones again. One must wait for the
end of the transmission cycle to get the latest decode.
Hope this helps!
best & 73,
-chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] JT65A
On 4/5/07, John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After just playing with it a bit I have found that there is no output after > running this software till I re-boot the system for any other program also. > > Still open to any ideas. John, Since you've checked the mixer settings, this leads me to believe (this is just a hunch) that WSJT somehow makes your soundcard drivers flake out. Can you perhaps find updated soundcard drivers for your version of Windows? Alternatively, I believe that recent PSKmail LiveCDs include WSJT for Linux. Burn one of those, boot up with it in your drive, and it will run directly from CD-ROM, without touching your hard drive at all. If your problem is indeed OS/driver-related, this could be a good workaround. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] JT65A
On 4/5/07, Chris Danis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alternatively, I believe that recent PSKmail LiveCDs include WSJT for > Linux. Burn one of those, boot up with it in your drive, and it will > run directly from CD-ROM, without touching your hard drive at all. If > your problem is indeed OS/driver-related, this could be a good > workaround. Whoops -- forgot to give a link! http://pskmail.wikispaces.com/live_distro -chris
Re: [digitalradio] Re: JT65A Confused
On 4/4/07, Chris Danis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah, dial frequencies. Audio frequencies typically used for JT65 (at > least in every QSO I've seen/worked) have been around 1200Hz. I should add (sent that a little too soon) that JT65 is the easiest mode to tune I've ever seen: the software searches across a very wide frequency range automatically (to compensate for EME Doppler). -chris
Re: [digitalradio] Re: JT65A Confused
On 4/4/07, Jose A. Amador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are all those DIAL frequencies? Jose, Yeah, dial frequencies. Audio frequencies typically used for JT65 (at least in every QSO I've seen/worked) have been around 1200Hz. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] HF metor Scatter
On 4/4/07, n0ziz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How do we know that sigs received via JT65A are by MS and not via > inosphere refraction? Dan, They aren't. JT65A sigs on HF are propagated via ionospheric refraction. FSK441 is the mode in the WSJT suite that is used for meteor scatter -- it's a high-data-rate mode that relies on the "pings" you get with high-speed meteor scatter. JT65A is a very-weak-signal very-low-data-rate MFSK mode that was designed for EME work (can copy inaudible signals around -20dB SNR; possibly better -- don't remember offhand). There are a few that are using it for low-power HF work. I've been making contacts with it for a few days on 20m and 40m. (So far only stateside stations -- probably has something to do with my compromise antenna.) best, -chris
Re: [digitalradio] does this look right
On 4/3/07, Danny Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are many URs concerning this software. What one has the most recent > version?? Danny, Official site is at http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/ -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] 20M JT65A today
On 4/3/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, that is what I am using. I don;t see any area within the > software where it even asks what soudncard I am using. I do think it supports multiple sound cards. When the program starts up, it opens in a console window that prints a list of available sound devices. Each has a number in front of it. And in the Setup -> Options dialog box, you can enter a number for "sound in" and "sound out". I haven't tested this, though... -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] CQ JT65A
On 4/2/07, John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > sure > At 08:44 PM 4/2/2007, you wrote: > >7076 USB, want to try John? You guys still around? I'm now monitoring 7076 USB. -chris
Re: [digitalradio] FCC Announcement
I thought this was to be announced on April 1st.73...Bob C. WU9Q Andrew O'Brien wrote: > > FCC Announcement > > It was announced today that Kellogg's and the Federal Communications > Commission have signed a pact to issue Amateur Radio Licenses on > specially marked boxes of Corn Flakes. In this unprecedented move the > FCC believes this will not hurt amateur radio but allow all > individuals to receive an amateur radio license without having to > demonstrate any skills with the exception of being able to use a pair > of scissors to cut out their operating permit from the breakfast > cereal box. > > Kellogg's spokesperson commented that they were proud to have been > selected by the government to be the issuer of licenses for amateur > radio in the US and hope to soon make an agreement with other cereal > loving countries. They also expect that will be issuing certificates > of achievement for DXCF for confirmed contacts with 100 corn flakers. > > Following the announcement that new amateur radio licensees will be > able to operate in the HF spectrum without knowledge of Morse Code, > the 2- meter handi-talki manufacturers have responded to what they > view as a threat to their business. Said Hiram Bumble, CEO of > whatawaste.com, the number one HT maker in the world, "We are not > pleased at all about the new FCC rule. Our business has depended upon > the rapid entry of no-code technicians who buy an HT, use it a couple > of times, and then quit the hobby. Now, with the prospect of HF > operation, a lot of these techies will forego their HTs." > > The HT manufacturers have decided to imitate Kodak's defense against > electronic photography. They will begin making cardboard HTs that cost > only $19.99. Once the battery is depleted, they are meant to be tossed > away. It is hoped that the low price tag will make these disposable > HTs a more compelling purchase than the more costly HF gear. The HT > manufacturers all also lobbying the Federal government to adopt > national CC&Rs which will prevent most people from erecting any sort > of antenna that is more than one meter in length. > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Gray Areas of Ham Radio Regulations and Rules
kv9u writes: > What rule do you think is stopping U.S. hams from using RFSM2400 other > than if it is not yet posted with a technical description? 97.307(f)(3) "... The symbol rate may not exceed 300 bauds ..." That applies to all the "cw,data" subbands below 28 MHz. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not. We need regulation by bandwidth only, but that proposal seems to be stalled. :-( -- Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ex-ae6vw) Gualala CA USA 95445
Re: [digitalradio] Re: FNpsk
Walt DuBose writes: > How can 1200 baud = 1320 WPM? In the case of AX.25 baud=bps since a > mark-space=one bit. > > An 8 bit ASCII character with start and stop bits would be 10 bps so 1200 > bps=120 CPS. > > If a word is 6 characters, then 120 CPS = 20 WPM which we know is too slow. (120 chars/sec) / (6 chars/word) = 20 words / second (not per minute) 20 x 60 = 1200 words/minute. Besides, while I don't know a lot about AX.25, I'm pretty sure that X.25, from which AX.25 is derived, is synchronous (no start or stop bits). -- 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW) Chris JewellGualala CA USA
Re: [digitalradio] Codeles N2YYZ
On 1/20/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > yes, asking someone to meet you on-air and get you set up > will be the best. You can post here when you are ready. > Do you have an HF transceiver yet? Andy, Yes, I've been slowly assembling an HF station as time and budget permit. I currently have an FT-840, a power supply, and an antenna tuner. For an antenna, I am going to try a random wire with some counterpoises, and possibly some shorter dipoles as well. I've also been considering building a smaller magnetic loop. best, -chris
Re: [digitalradio] Codeles N2YYZ
On 1/19/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris, you will be most welcome on HF... > > Andy K3UK Andy, Many thanks for your kind note. I appreciate the welcome. Once the date finally rolls around where I can operate HF, where would I go to set up a digital mode sked? Would this list be appropriate? I suspect I'll need a bit of help getting things set up at first -- I want to make sure I have a clean signal on whatever modes I operate, and I'd also appreciate any advice on operating HF as an apartment dweller. best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] PSKMAIL : Turning an old PC in to a Linux box?
On 1/20/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am interested in trying PSKMAIL but don't want to screw up my PCs > that are using Windows XP. I have an old 500 Hz CPU PC sitting around > doing nothing. What would I need to do to turn this totally in to a > linux computer running PSKMAIL ? Andy, There is a PSKMail live-CD image available: http://pskmail.wikispaces.com/live_distro If you burn the image to a CD-R (as an ISO image), you'll have a bootable CD that will run Linux and PSKMail directly from the CD, without touching anything on your computer's hard drive. Once you're done, you can reboot, eject the disc, and everything on your computer is still exactly as it was before. I believe that the disc also has some way to easily install to a hard disk should you choose to do so, but I'm not sure. As long as the PC can boot from CD-ROM and has >= 256MB of RAM, you should be fine. I've never actually tried any of this myself, so if you run into troubles, the PSKMail mailing list is definitely where to go: http://pskmail.wikispaces.com/Mailing+list best & 73, -chris N2YYZ
Re: [digitalradio] US Hams Codeless Feb 23
On 1/19/07, Danny Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "This change eliminates an unnecessary regulatory burden that may > discourage current Amateur Radio operators from advancing their > skills and participating more fully in the benefits of Amateur > Radio," the FCC remarked in the Morse code R&O. > B A L O N E Y > SK Dan, I am sorry you feel this way. I've been licensed for 13 years now -- as one of those dirty, no-code Techs. I've always wanted to get on HF but could never quite find enough time to learn Morse (despite a failed attempt or two). I am now, however, eagerly awaiting the next VE exam in my area so I can take the General and Extra elements. If it makes you feel any better, I promise to always listen before I transmit, to always "QRL?" before I CQ, and generally, to be a courteous op and to not be a lid or a nuisance on the air. I admit that I may not be the common case, but I don't think that removing the Morse requirement is going to be to HF what "the September that never ended" was to Usenet [1]. 73, -chris N2YYZ References: [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
RE: [digitalradio] 1 more shedule for the science fair
are you there now danney? -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Danny Douglas Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 10:06 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 1 more shedule for the science fair Thats fine with me. Looking at the charts for tomorrow, it would appear that 30/20/17 are all to be open from 1600-2200z tomorrow. If you have 30, that might be a good starting point. Send me an email when you are ready to start and we look for you around 10.139 on PSK (that is actual freq - VFO+sound card freq). We can figure out the other mode from there. Ill be around all day, far as I know. 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] moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk - Original Message - From: John Bradley To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 1 more shedule for the science fair tell me when and where ...mid morning January 1 would work since propagation isn't bad john VE5MU - Original Message - From: Chris Edwards, AE4XO To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: [digitalradio] 1 more shedule for the science fair Hello gang, I need to have at least 1 more schedule with a station that can do both olivia and psk31 to help finish up the science fair experiment that I am helping with. please contact me off th elist to set it up thnaks ! chris ae4xo No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.1/611 - Release Date: 12/31/2006 12:47 PM
[digitalradio] 1 more shedule for the science fair
Hello gang, I need to have at least 1 more schedule with a station that can do both olivia and psk31 to help finish up the science fair experiment that I am helping with. please contact me off th elist to set it up thnaks ! chris ae4xo
[digitalradio] Re: Effective Date ? FCC Drops Morse Code
Bill McLaughlin writes: > I thought the convention was 30 days to effectivity after the > announcement? Changes in US regulations are normally effective 30 days after they are published in the Federal Register. For example, the omnibus changes were announced in October, but not published in the FR until 15 November, and took effect on 15 December, despite the fact that the October announcement included the full text of the adopted changes, unlike Friday's press release. I'll be surprised if the effective date is earlier than 1 February. -- 73 DE KW6H, ex-AE6VW Chris Jewell, Gualala CA USA
[digitalradio] anyone round tonight? friday.
Anyone on olivia t0night? Just wanted to do some psk / olivia trials.
[digitalradio] Re: New ARRL Petition
expeditionradio writes: > In fact, it would be quite difficult to get a handle on what is > automatic and what is non-automatic, since automation is a moving > target in our changing world of technology. In the FCC's Amateur > Radio Service rules, as far as I know, there are no such terms as > "Fully Automatic" or "Semi-Automatic" used. If a data station can transmit without a control operator exercising his/her function at a control point, then it must be "automatically controlled". There is nothing difficult about that. Some "automatically controlled data stations" only respond "to interrogation by a station under local or remote control" (we usually call them "semiautomatic"), AND limit their bandwidth to 500 Hz, in accordance with 97.221(c), so they may transmit on any frequency where their emission type is permitted. Others transmit WITHOUT waiting for interrogation by a station under local or remote control (we usually call them "fully automatic"), OR occupy more than 500 Hz, so they are limited to transmitting on the frequency segments listed in 97.221(b). It is NOT difficult for me to know which kind of station I am running, nor to know on which frequencies I may legally transmit. Starting this Friday, there will be nowhere legal between 3.5 and 4 MHz, if my data station is either "fully automatic" in the sense above or wider than 500Hz, and located within the jurisdiction of the FCC, unless the FCC grants the ARRL's request for a stay. Some prefer to change this situation (I'm one of them: I prefer that the stay be granted, and that automatic data stations remain legal betwen 3.620 and 3.635), but there is no basis for a claim that the rules do not say what in fact they plainly do say. The terms "semiautomatic" and "fully automatic" are mere shorthand: that those terms do not appear in the regs is not germane to the discussion. -- 73 DE KW6H (ex-AE6VW) Chris Jewell Gualala CA USA
[digitalradio] olivia tonight
Anyone availble for olivia tonight at 9PM EST? on 40 meter
[digitalradio] (unknown)
Skip Teller writes: > My suggestion is definitely not to follow your suggestion! Just leave PSK31= > activity where it is now! 3525-3600 is open for CW, Data, and RTTY by FCC = > R&O for all license classes, and there is no reason for PSK31 on 3580-3583 = > to move, nor for W1AW CW code practice on 3581.5 to move, just because you= > say it should.=20 Hmmm. I wish I had seen Skip's comment before I posted my last one. How about this: 3500-3550 CW only 3550-3580 Any modes, with wide data modes starting just below 3580, and working down 3580-4000 Any modes <500 Hz. Narrow data modes stay where they are now; wide modes grow down, CW grows up, and they meet in the middle as needed. The boundary between suggested CW-only and suggested wide data could be 3540 (like Bonnie's proposal) or 3550 (my previous suggestion), without it mattering too much, since they grow towards each other as needed. -- 73 de kw6h, ex-ae6vwChris Jewell, Gualala CA USA
[digitalradio] Re: New 80m USA Keyboarding Digi Frequencies
expeditionradio writes: [snipped] > Let's be blunt together, but let's focus on the topic instead of > personality. The fact is, there's a proposed solution on the table. If > you have a truly constructive suggestion, let's hear it. Sexist or > condescending remarks do nothing to advance the discussion. Right on target. The other posters' remarks strike me as regrettably personal and non-constructive. Below are my comments on the proposal. [snipped] > 80 meter Bandplan 2007 for USA: > == > > 3500-3540 = CW > 3540-3560 = Any Mode, 500Hz Bandwidth > 3560-3600 = Any Mode Given what the FCC has done to 80 meters, nobody is going to get everything they'd like out of any new USA band plan. Still, it seems to me that as advocates for the data modes, we are more likely to obtain the cooperation and agreement of those with whom we share 3500-3600 KHz if our proposals leave half of the new band for the CW ops. Accordingly, while I can live with Bonnie's suggestion as presented, I suggest moving the boundaries up by 10 KHz. 3500-3550 = CW 3550-3570 = Any mode up to 500Hz bandwidth 3570-3600 = Any mode That gives general and advanced CW ops 25 KHz of mode-exclusive space instead of 15, and extras 50 KHz instead of 40. It still leaves room for about 12 concurrent 2.5 KHz-wide data-mode QSOs above 3570, or 10 if the wide mode operation are assumed to occupy 3KHz each. I think that's enough. (Of course, I *would* think that, since I'm not much interested in wide data modes below 10M. ) Now let's move all of the keyboarding frequencies up by 10 Khz from Bonnie's proposals: > PSK31 = 3545kHz USB (3545.3-3548.0 kHz) PSK31 = 3555kHz USB (3555.3-3558.0 kHz) > QPSK31/PSK63/125 = 3547kHz USB (3547.3-3550.0 kHz) QPSK31/PSK63/125 = 3557kHz USB (3557.3-3560.0 kHz) > MFSK = 3548kHz USB (3548.3-3551.0 kHz) MFSK = 3558kHz USB (3558.3-3561.0 kHz) > OLIVIA500 = 3549kHz USB (3549.3-3553.0 kHz) OLIVIA500 = 3559kHz USB (3559.3-3563.0 kHz) > CONTESTIA/DOMINO, etc = 3550kHz USB (3550.3-3554.0 kHz) CONTESTIA/DOMINO, etc = 3560kHz USB (3560.3-3564.0 kHz) > HELL/FMHELL = 3552kHz USB (3552.3-3555 kHz) HELL/FMHELL = 3562kHz USB (3562.3-3565 kHz) > RTTY/FSK = 3555+ (3555.3-3565 kHz) RTTY/FSK = 3565+ (3565.3-3575 kHz) > PAX/MT63/OLIVIA1000 = 3560kHz USB (3560.5-3563) PAX/MT63/OLIVIA1000 = 3570kHz USB (3570.5-3573) As always, the CW folks, when they need elbow room, are free to move up the band, but we can at least hope that they will go fight it out with the Pactor3/Winlink crowd at the top of the band, rather with the experimenters and narrow-mode operators in between. Comments? -- 73 DE KW6H, ex-AE6VW, Chris Jewell Gualala CA USA
Re: [digitalradio] Band Plans
Joe Ivey writes: > John, > > What I am saying is that the ham bands should be the same world wide. > Everyone is not going to like it but then you can't please any 10 people on > anything. > > Joe The only way the ham bands could be the same world wide is if, for example, Region 2 hams stopped using 3.8 to 4.0 MHz, because in Region 1 that spectrum belongs variously to the fixed, land mobile, aero mobile, and broadcast services, with no hams allowed. That's not going to happen. -- 73 DE KW6H, ex-AE6VWChris JewellGualala CA USA
Re: [digitalradio] APRS/Packet experiment on 80M tonight
I did not know that APRS could be used that way. May I'd love to see that ! chris ae4xo > > From: "Andrew J. O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/12/05 Tue PM 07:56:38 CST > To: > Subject: [digitalradio] APRS/Packet experiment on 80M tonight > > > > Subject: APRS/Packet experiment on 80M tonight from 0100 to 0300 UTC. > IF anyone in North America wants to test some of the Multipsk APRS > Packet features that were just released for testing, I will be around > on 3624 USB tonight , I will beacon every 3 minutes. If you hear me, > we can perhaps do some "echo" tests. > > > > -- > Andy K3UK > Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 > www.obriensweb.com > >
[digitalradio] psk31 and olivia for science fair
Hello , I am Chris Ae4xo . I have a new ham, Rebecca KI4QAS that has asked me to help with her Science fair project for 7th Grade. Basically what we want to use Olilvia since it is a new mode for this project. What we need from some one not in the State of Georgia to spend a few nights with me on 20 meters, etc doing some trial transmissions of Olivia versus PSK? Different power levels, conditions antennas , etc? We just need about 5 or 7 data points to show that in deed the mode of choice for error proof and excellent signals is Olivia. Thanks in advance and I look forward to hearing from you Chris AE4XO [EMAIL PROTECTED] Byron, GA
[digitalradio] USA FCC: Technology Death Row for HF Data
expeditionradio writes: > Wow. It appears that the FCC has actually redefined "Data" below 30MHz > at less than 500Hz... "data" in the common way that 99% of hams send > data using digital modes on computers and ham transceivers. > > I've often said that the antiquated content-based FCC rules have been > like a Technology Jail for USA hams. > > Just when it appeared that we might be given our freedom, joining the > rest of the world's hams using state-of-the-art HF digital > technology... someone at FCC just sentenced us back to the Digital > Dark Ages. Was this cruel act done by intention or was it just a > sloppy error? Who knows? > > 15 December will be a very sad day indeed... USA hams will be sitting > on Technology Death Row for HF data. :( > > Bonnie KQ6XA I agree that the present arrangement is bad, but I'm hoping that the FCC acts soon on regulation-by-bandwidth, at which point all modes less than 3KHz wide will presumably be legal from 3.6 to 4.0 MHz, with regional band-planning rather than government regulation to split the available spectrum among voice, data, SSTV, and whatever we haven't thought of yet. I certainly wish that regulation-by-bandwidth had been rolled into the current rulemaking, but the next-best choice is for the Commission to act promptly on that matter now that the current rules are out. (I also think that the bottom of the extra-class phone or widemodes area should have been at 3650 KHz or higher, because the new rules interfere with existing CW traffic nets, but that's another discussion.) Even so, of course, there will still be isses: the band plan for IARU Region 2 between 3.6 and 4.0 MHz should be such that US General class licensees can use up-to-3KHz data modes to communicate with hams in other countries in the region, or better yet, world-wide, without violating the band plan. 73 DE KW6H (ex ae6vw) Chris
[digitalradio] Re: BPL-Busting Modes/Techniques
jgorman01 writes: > just did this using my RF generator. WWV at 5 Mhz is about 10 over > S9. The generator is at about S5 with no antenna connected and the > lead just resting on top of the transceiver. When I switch the > generator on, the S-meter moves not a bit. You would expect it to > jump considerably if the RF signals were being added together. If the S-meter calibration is the classic 6 dBs per S-number, the ratio between S5 and S9+10dB is 34 dB, or a factor of more than 2500:1. 1 uW added to 25 mW, for example, should not be expected to make a visible difference in a meter reading. 73 de KW6H, ex AE6VW -- Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gualala CA USA 95445 Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [digitalradio] Re: RTTY Hall of Shame
Dave Cole (NK7Z/NNN0RDO) writes: ... > Unless there has been a rule change, enforcement of this must be on a > voluntary basis, period, I saw a post about involving the OOs, and the FCC. > Has this frequency been officially allocated? If not, then involving an OO > would be real abuse of power, as they are supposed to enforce rules not > wishes. 14100 kHz +/- 500 Hz at least is designated exclusively for beacon operation in the band plans of all 3 IARU regions. I'm assuming that I decoded the Region 3 plan correctly: it's a MSWord document, and nothing on my system understands those, so I had to guess the meaning of the output from "strings | more". Someone who runs Windows is welcome to check my reading w.r.t. Region 3. Whether the FCC (and other national administrations) treat violating an IARU Region band plan as violating the "good amateur practice" provision of the rules is unclear to me. However, an OO notice, even if not an FCC citation and fine, does seem (IMHO) appropriate for violating the band plan. I do doubt, though, the value of a privately-sponsored public pillory for the offenders. While many contesters operate courteously (I try to on my rare forays into contesting), it is clearly true that some contesters think nothing in the world is more important than their point score. However, I doubt that the kind of lid who QRMs even disaster traffic for the sake of contest points is going to be motivated to improve his manners by appearing in anyone's online "Hall of Shame". Such people are probably incapable of shame. If they even notice their nomination, the most they might do is send a reply in gutter language to the OP, and go on behaving at least as badly as before. My first reaction to the Hall of Shame posting was delight that Bonnie had called the lids on their misbehavior, but upon further reflection, I doubt that any good will come from it, beyond Bonnie's personal satisfaction in calling a spade a spade. I'll close by inviting readers' attention to the late Richard Mitchell's essay "Yet Another Losing Season": http://www.sourcetext.com/grammarian/newslettersv09/9.6.htm. It makes no mention of ham radio, but if you read it, you'll see why I thought of it in this context. -- 73 DE KW6H, ex AE6VW Chris Jewell Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] -tor modes and PCs
jhaynesatalumni writes: > I'm willing to believe that the timing tolerances in -tor modes > are so tight that ordinary PC operating systems cannot cope with > them the way a dedicated processor can. What I don't understand > is why the tolerances need to be so tight. The transmitter sends > a packet and then listens for an ACK or NAK. Why can't it wait > arbitrarily long? The ACK time could be made as long as you like, but the throughput would suffer accordingly. For example, with Pactor I, (according to p. 9-24 of the 2005 ARRL Handbook), the sender sends the packet in 0.96 seconds, then propagation delays and receipt of the ACK takes 0.29 seconds, for a total of 1.25 seconds per packet. If we increase the ACK delay to be the same as the transmit time, the total time per packet would be 1.92 seconds for the same amount of data as Pactor I sends in 1.25 second, and the throughput would be 1.25/1.96 or approximately 0.65 times what the present protocol delivers. Is it doable? Yes. Would most hams want it? I have my doubts. To get the same throughput with a longer ACK time, you have to make the transmit time longer too, so it bears the same relationship to the total time as it does now. That means either a much longer data packet, or a pipelined group of packets covered by a single ACK. The longer the packet, the greater chance that a static crash or other event will corrupt the packet, so we're back to talking about pipelined packets. -- 73 DE AE6VW Chris JewellGualala CA USA Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] New to Digital HF -- PACTOR setup and hardware maybe needed???
KV9U writes: > Chris, > > What is your view on using "pipelined" programming such as what was used > in the SCAMP mode to get around this issue with moving the ACK to the > next packet. The main penalty is latency for the user, but it seems > manageable. I haven't read any detailed specs of the SCAMP protocol, only vague descriptions, and I understand that the source code is not available for public inspection at this time, but in principle a pipelined approach seems like a good way to handle the problem of OS latency in ACK/NAK at the application level, without requiring expert hackery in low-level OS details. My previous reply was just an attempt to describe the problem of non-realtime operating systems and lockstep ARQ modes such as Pactor for someone who had asked. I note that another reply said that there is a alternative real-time-capable kernel for Linux systems, so for those willing and able to use Linux, the ARQ problem may be already solved. However, a solution available to the Windows and Mac users seems like a good thing even so. In TCP, the receiving host periodically sends an ACK that responds NOT to a specific incoming packet, but instead says "I have received correctly everything up to byte number N". If the sending host doesn't get an ACK up through the bytes in a given packet within a certain interval, it resends the data and all following data. This allows communication to succeed eventually if some ACKs or NAKs don't get back to the sending station. Of course, TCP/IP was conceived for full-duplex media: the sender can keep the outgoing pipe full, provided the ACKs arrive soon enough. The window size (how many bytes ahead of the ACK the sender may send) needs to be larger for faster circuit, and also larger for a circuit with a long round-trip time, such as via geosynch satellites or with many overloaded routers in the path; the window can be smaller for terrestrial circuits with few routers between the communicating hosts. Partly because incorrect packets are going to be more frequent on HF radio than on land lines, we probably should not duplicate the TCP solution in ham radio, but it gives us a starting point to think about. A system for half-duplex HF radio circuits has to provide for periodic turnaround. Short packets with frequent ACK/NAK cycles a la Pactor or GTOR allow the receiver to promptly notify the sender of changing propagation on the channel. A deep pipeline postpones that feedback, so more data may need to be resent when the circuit is unstable, BUT also makes it straightforward to implement on a typical multitasking OS. It's all a matter of trade-offs. Given that we deal with noiser circuits than were envisioned by the designers of TCP/IP, we probably want a fixed (or periodically adjusted) packet size, and a fixed number of packets sent before turnaround. The ACK would then say which of the packets arrived clean and which need to be resent. The sender could then resend those packets which need it, and add some more new ones to make up the agreed number to be placed in the pipeline. (For the sake of argument, how about 8 Pactor-sized packets followed by an ACK window 8 times as long as Pactor uses?) This is off the top of my head: if anyone has already been thinking more deeply about this and has better suggestions, by all means offer them. I'm an old computer geek but a new ham: I'm happy to learn about either computers or radio from anyone who can improve my understanding. -- 73 DE AE6VW Chris Jewell[EMAIL PROTECTED]Gualala CA USA 95445 Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] New to Digital HF -- PACTOR setup and hardware maybe needed???
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:02:33 -0500, John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >It was on a linux system > >But that does not matter. > >The problem is EVERY time the computer "thinks" > >what do I need to do now - the timing is lost and so > >is the link. > > ??? > now, I am not a geek for computers, but my Perl mobo has a pair of 3.1ghz > cpus > running with huge cache, and 2gb of ram. the soundcard is running along with > a pretty wide gateway and its own gb or so of ram. > > i just don't think that the wait states, if there are any, are going to be > sufficient to bog down a real, damned slow modem since most of those are > probably running at 1200 to 2400bps. which is real slow. > I have a dsl which supposedly is running at 3.2kbips but it is uploading > slower than my pc is pushing it up the line. > > I am definitely confused which is NOT unusual in the least. Suppose you're using your sound card as a modem to receive Pactor I data. Your sound card takes care of turning tones from the receiver into 1s and 0s. There's no problem there. However, when a packet is finished arriving (and getting turned from frequency shifts into bytes of data), the application program running on the PC must verify the check, turn the radio around to transmit, and send either a positive or negative acknowledgement, then turn it back to receive mode so it can hear the next packet. The problem is that the OS may have dispatched some other process at the time, and the process that does the checking and sending of the ACK or NAK may not get a time slice from the OS soon enough to meet the timing requirements of the Pactor acknowledgement. If you were using a TNC, the processor in the TNC would be old and slow by current standards, but it would have nothing else to do EXCEPT check the checksum and send the ack or nak, while the much faster CPU in your Linux (or even worse, Windows) PC may be busy doing something else at the crucial time, since it is running a multitasking, and even potentially multi-user, OS. In principle, it seems that it should be possible to manage that problem in the Linux environment by: 1. adjusting the dispatching code in the OS so that it gives very short timeslices to processes, so the Pactor process can get CPU time sooner; and 2. running the Pactor process with a high dispatching priority (which the superuser can accomplish with a negative priority value on the renice command.) Shortening the time slice means that more of your CPU power is used up on trips through the dispatcher portion of the OS, rather than in running whatever user-mode application programs are ready to run, but with a fast computer that doesn't have a lot to do, that should be okay. In FreeBSD, you would issue a command like this as root: # sysctl kern.sched.quantum=1 The quantum is measured in microseconds. The default value is 100,000, or 100 milliseconds. By changing it to 10,000, or 10 milliseconds, you make it possible for the highest-priority task to get use of the CPU within 10 milliseconds, rather than 100. I'm not really a Linux guy, so I don't know whether there is a comparable sysctl variable in Linux, or whether you can build a custom kernel that uses a shorter scheduling quantum, or what. -- 73 DE AE6VW, Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gualala CA USA Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] The digital throughput challenge on H
KV9U writes:
> If you want to "broadcast" a message from one to many, then the only
> practical alternative is to use a non-ARQ mode, typically with a large
> amount of FEC. While this is done on amateur frequencies for sending a
> bulletin, calling CQ, and having a roundtable, if your goal is to have
> accurate messaging, then I don't see any option other than a good ARQ
> system.
A protocol for sending email messages over HF could have the
following behavior:
1. Sending station sends the message in packets of a specified or
negotiated size.
2. Each packet begins and ends with reserved control characters
and is followed with a CRC-16 of the packet.
3. Receiving station keeps track of which packets were received with
good CRC and which were garbled.
4. Upon receiving end-of-message, or at a pause after a defined or
negotiated number of bytes or packets have been sent, the
receiving station acknowledges all, or all up to a certain packet,
or requests repeats of those packets which were received in error.
It sends a complete ack only after all the packets have been
received successfully.
5. The sending station resends the failed packets then continues with
send further packets of this message, or starts the next message
using a higher packet number, or whatever.
This is analogous to CW/voice traffic handling, where the receiving
station either acknowledges receipt or sends "?wa", "?aa", "say
again {word|all} after", or the like.
This suggestion has at least one disadvantage compared to ARQ modes:
the sending station does NOT get feedback after each packet telling it
that it can switch to a faster and less robust submode, or that it
should switch to a slower and more-robust one. Therefore, it may take
longer than necessary to get the message through, whether due to
repetitions that wouldn't have been necessary with prompt feedback, or
by sending more slowly than necessary. On the other hand, it
eliminates the ACK turnaround timing problems that prevent both some
radios and some PC OSes from working well for ARQ comms.
In essence, we are moving the reliability issue from the transport
layer to the application layer. Such an email system could sit on top
of anything from unchecked BPSK31 to FEC'ed MFSK-16 or MT-63, though
of course many more retransmissions would be needed with the former
than with the latter. Our choice of mode may depend partly on the
band, BPSK-31, -63, or even -125 on 20M meters and up, but MFSK16 or
MT63 on 160, 80, and 40, for example.
It might be better to establish a separate layer between transport and
application that could be shared by applications such as email, SSTV,
and file transfer.
This is a very old idea: IP sends packets which may get lost; TCP uses
IP but retries until the data gets through, or gives up and tells the
application layer that it failed; SMTP uses TCP's reliable data stream
to deliver email. It's just that a reliable delivery layer for
half-duplex HF radio is quite different from one for a full-duplex
terrestrial WAN or a full-duplex satellite relay, or even PTP which
carries TCP/IP, IPX, etc over landline modems or ISDN. Between half
duplex with longish turnarounds, and such "joys" as QSB and QRN, the
HF case is much more challenging.
I'm sure that other hams are working on such ideas already, and we may
be able to borrow techniques developed for commercial or military HF
datacomm at small or no monetary cost. PCALE and Open5066 are
examples, though I don't yet know much about the latter, and so have
no opinion as to whether it will prove fit for ham use. Obviously,
the people working on it think it is, and they know much more about it
than I, so I'm hopeful.
--
73 DE AE6VW Chris JewellGualala, CA, USA
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] help with digipan
kf4uul writes: > Trying to get digipan running on a laptop running xp. > Have it downloaded ,when it starts up all I get is a box saying error > opening com 4, try again yes or no. If you click yes box stays if you > click no, a new box comes up that says digipan has encountered a > problem and needs to close. Anyone had this happen, how did you fix > it.Thanks for any help. KF4UUL Without direct experience with the program, I'd look for a menu setup item or an entry in a configuration file to tell the program to use COM1 instead of COM4. I doubt that any laptop has a COM4 port. 73 DE AE6VW, Chris -- Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: A bit off-topic - antenna question
Dave writes: ... > When using a dipole antenna fed with 450-ohm ladderline, does the > length of the feedline matter? The dipole I'm going to order comes with > 100 feet of ladderline, but I'll likely only use 40 or 50. Is it safe > to cut off the length not needed, or will this mess things up? If I > can't cut it, what do I do with it? ... Short answer: you can probably cut it to length; the settings on your antenna tuner will be different, but it will still work. OBTW: you do *not* want to COIL UP excess ladder line: it is too easy to disturb the balance of the line that way, causing the line to radiate. Slightly longer answer: the 450-ohm line transforms the impedance of the center-fed doublet to some other impedance at the antenna side of your tuner, and the tuner transforms *that* to the 50 ohms that the rig needs. It seems unlikely to me that a different-length window line will happen to transform the antenna impedance to something that an external tuner cannot in turn transform to 50 ohms on one of your operating frequencies, but I could be wrong. An equation giving the input impedance at the transmission line as a function of the characteristic impedance of the line, the feedpoint impedance of the antenna (different for each frequency), and the length of the transmission line in wavelengths (also different for each frequency), can be found in the "Input Impedance" section of the "Transmission Lines" chapter of the _ARRL_Antenna_Book_. (It's on p. 24-12 in the 20th edition.) Jose's reply is correct, and I suggest learning about the stuff that he mentions. It will certainly be educational if you work out the answers using antenna modelling software (to determine the feedpoint impedance) and the equation for input impedance, instead of just taking my guess that it'll work okay. 73 DE AE6VW, Chris -- Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 1396 Gualala CA 95445 707-884-9406 Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Preferred PC-to- Rig Interface?
kd4e writes: > Hmmm. Sounds as though if I wish to cover all modes I > will need something more than a sound card as some of > them need more interface help than others! Perhaps not, since you're a Linux user. Although I haven't tried it myself yet, I *think* you'll find that hfterm on Linux runs PACTOR-1 and AMTOR in ARQ mode with a sound card. Windows users need a multimode controller for ARQ modes, because Windows doesn't respond to interrupts quickly enough, but Linux does not. Let us know how hfterm works out for you in the ARQ modes. Good luck. 73 de ae6vw, Chris Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to telnet://208.15.25.196/ Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Sound Card Sample Rate - Olivia Pointing Out Something Interesting
Hello Kevin You can look it up on some mails and articels I wrote last year. The 12000Hz sample rate for Mixw is only needed for some new type of soundcards. One of them is very often used on laptops and new systems. Its called, Soundmax Device. As I can recall the chipset is built by analog devices. The problems is that on WinXP different drivers are used for the RX and TX side. The Rx side looks of bu the TX is off, so your opposite receiving station gets a errorrate of 50% when the default 11025Hz are set. As you said, a 12000Hz samplsrate corrects it perfect. So no need to fiddle around with sampleratesettings, except on has one of the new mentiond soundcards and 12000Hz corrects it. Merry Chrismas ! - Chris HB9BDM Kevin der Kinderen schrieb: Hello all: I've been experimenting [on | with] others lately. When I get poor copy on them in Olivia the sample rate ususally shows up something close to 1% or greater. Their copy of my sig is also pretty poor. The experiment was to ask them to change their sample rate of the sound card from 11025 to 12000. In each case, this brought the sample rate error down to 0% (or close enough) and copy improved to 100% on both ends. Last night there were four of us in a chat on Olivia 500/8. I had 12000 Hz sample rate and the others were at 11025. One of the 11025ers had poor copy both ways with all the others. The others looked good. I asked him to try 12000 Hz and copy went to 100% all around. This was the first time I think I proved to myself that I wasn't just matching his miscalibration to my miscalibration as the other two 11025ers had great copy all around. When I've done the sound card calibration (using both MixW SSTV and MMVARI), it appears the correction for 12000 Hz is always less than for 11025. It was something in the MMVARI documents I read and may have misinterpreted that led me to experiment with this. Apparently at 12000 Hz, the TX and RX sample rates are generally closer together. Unfortunately, not being very scientifically minded, these experiments were not controlled. I have no idea what sound cards were in use by others. One was a laptop but I think the others were desktops. I'm using an old SB16. So the theory I'm proposing is that 12000 Hz sample rate for some (many?) sound cards will generally provide better accuracy than 11025. Is this too far a stretch? Can someone possibly shed some more light on the subject? I'm not proposing calibration is unnecessary of course, just that it might be easier at 12000 Hz than 11025. 73 & Happy Holidays, Kevin – K4VD Kevin der Kinderen http://kj4qf.net/ Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to telnet://208.15.25.196/ Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ Looking for digital mode software? Check the quick commerical free link below http://www.obriensweb.com/digimodes.html YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: RTTYM now !
I think you have to wait till the mode is open, or ask Nick for it Chris Leigh L Klotz, Jr. schrieb: Are there specifics for coding tables publicly available? I would be interested in testing this out with gMFSK. On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 3:30 pm, Chris Gerber wrote: > No big deal about Contestia and Rttym mode. Its the same as Olivia, > except Olivia uses 7bit, Contestia 6bit > and Rttym 5bit, which then increases the speed compared to Oliva by > factor 2 or more. > So its not a new mode, same principle, just something Nick or Denis has > added in Mixw. > It works great. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to telnet://208.15.25.196/ Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ Looking for digital mode software? This group suggests you try either : MixW, Multipsk, DX Lab (suite), Hamscope, Chip64, MMVARI,or Logger32 (RTTY and PSK). SPONSORED LINKS Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply Ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: RTTYM now !
No big deal about Contestia and Rttym mode. Its the same as Olivia, except Olivia uses 7bit, Contestia 6bit and Rttym 5bit, which then increases the speed compared to Oliva by factor 2 or more. So its not a new mode, same principle, just something Nick or Denis has added in Mixw. It works great. Chris HB9BDM Paul schrieb: Andrew, While you are waiting to see if you can distribute (including install instructions) the Contesia and RTTYM modes, perhaps you can tell us a little more about them. Why one would chose them over the current offerings for example. That is, I'm guessing for someone to put the effort into developing a new mode, it must have some advantage over what is already out there. So whats the run down on Contesia and RTTYM? Thank you and 73, Paul Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to telnet://208.15.25.196/ Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ Looking for digital mode software? This group suggests you try either : MixW, Multipsk, DX Lab (suite), Hamscope, Chip64, MMVARI,or Logger32 (RTTY and PSK). YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[digitalradio] G3VFP web link for control software
I searched and it was very easy….but try this…. www.g3vfp.org The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Winlink vs. Winlink 2000 et al
Andrew J. O'Brien writes: > > > For the record, I don't even want to > >use ANY software that had such potentially disabling code. > > > I may have missed some of this thread, are you talking about > software that would "disable" if there was a signal present on the > frequency? I I don't think so. The quoted message was NOT about code to prevent QRMing an existing QSO, which I'm pretty sure everyone on the list would agree is a good idea, if not mandatory. Replacing "robot lids" with "robot considerate ops" is surely progress. :-) The Winlink guy said that the programmers SHOULD have put a timebomb in the original WL program, so it wouldn't run after a certain date (now in the past), and added "lesson learned", which I interpret to mean that there is probably a timebomb in WL2K, and that there will surely be one in future programs from the same person or team. I think the message you quoted means that timebombed code is bad: I certainly agree, especially w.r.t. emergency communications. I'm a worker-bee emcommer, not the drafter of my local group's plans, but I certainly hope that no one involved in EmComms planning depends on any program supplied by people who think that timebombs are a good idea. Given the earlier message from the WL guy, and the League's position promoting the use of WL2K for emcomms, there is a risk that ham radio may avoidably fail to deliver a message needed to prevent deaths, injuries, or property damage in an emergency. A program that must be reliable, because human safety depends on it, should be a simple as it can be and still get the job done. Features that are not necessary should be omitted, because they may harbor disabling bugs that could get someone killed, or at least could prevent them being saved or assisted. In such a context, a timebomb is certainly an unnecessary feature. Software development decisions that are acceptable for games or business software can get people killed when used in programs critical to human life. 73 DE AE6VW, ex-KG6YLS -- Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 1396 Gualala CA 95445 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM ~-> The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Olivia Hints
Olivia on Mixw seems to be runner. To avoid further chaos on 20 meter, here a few hints! Leave 14109.500 Khz free for MT63. (Some new MT63 stuff may be in the pipeline) Use channels from 14108.500 Khz down to 14101.500 Khz in exact 1 Khz steps. Make sure you have set 1000Hz frequency at the Mixw bottomline, when using 1000/32 mode. Avoid using Manuel tuning - not needed. Check your transceiver frequency accuracy. Use WWV or 14995.000 Khz USB to see a signal at 1000 Hz (Waterfall) Avoid tuning on the TRX dail during reception, just leave it fix. Mixw Olivia copys inbetween +/- 60 Hz perfect. Never transmit at 14108.000 Khz or any other odd frequency, or you jam two adjacent channels. When strong adjacent channels and AGC gave up, if possible, use a narrow 500 Hz filter. Olivia can copy 100% with only 50% channel information. (Try it out). The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com SPONSORED LINKS Hobby and craft supply Craft hobby Hobbies and crafts Ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[digitalradio] Olivia Newcomers
Hi Fellows Seems Mixw started a new trafficjam, when adding Olivia to Mixw. Its great to see so many new stations using the mode. I was monitoring Olivai traffic a lot at 20 meters over the last few days and would like to bring to attention two very important points, which are needed for a fluent traffic with so many staions active at the same time. First Olivai is very tolerant to each other, unless a other olivia station comes direct into the working channel. So its absolut MUST to stay as accurate as possible in a 1 Khz channel raster. We are used to work as calling channel 14108.50Khz . So if contact is established, one can move 1 Khz up or down. Never just go only 500Hz otherwise you jam 2 adjacent channels. Same thing is happen when stations are calling CQ on let me say 14108.00Khz, what I have seen from many new stations, and others are answering there. Jaming of 2 channels at the same time is programmed. Its so easy to follow this simple advices and all can work perfect beeside each other. The second problem I observed, was that, so many stations are not aware of using a soundcard which has the wrong samplerate frequency. In contrary to all other modes Oliva as well as MT63 need a very accurate samplerate. Pawel the author of Olivia has even built in a monitoring system in order to see a samplerate offset of the transmitting station, because he was aware of the importance. Now to my point, most Om's are using different soundcards, new ones old ones. Seems some older cards are better then many new ones. Some new built in soundcards like Soundmax on ASUS boards or others, have a big problem with WXP sounddrivers. The samplerate is different on the RX side to the TX side. I pointed that out already last year concerning MT63, same problem with Olivia. When using such a card with WXP and MIXW the default setting is 11025 Hz. With this you receive a 100% print. But when you transmit the opposite station might receive only a 50% copy, due to the fact that the TX sample rate is off. I checked it on a Soundmax card at a 8000Hz base, RX 8000Hz, TX 8100Hz. Same applys to 11025Hz. I found if I set for such a card, the default 11025Hz to new 12000Hz then both RX and TX rates are correct and you are working transceive. I know some Om's have done it already. 73 Chris HB9BDM Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM ~-> The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Chip64 and chip128
Kevin qsl, tell me about it when done, I am quit interested on it. Chris Kevin der Kinderen schrieb: > I'm running a dual P3 system. Would I have to disable one of the > processors maybe? I'll have to give that a shot. > > > > Thanks, > > Kevin K4VD > > > > Kevin der Kinderen > > http://kj4qf.net/ > > > > > > From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Gerber > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 22:50 > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Chip64 and chip128 > > > > Hello Kevin > > If you are using a Intel CPU with Hyperthread - you have to disable > Hyperthread in the Bios Setup, then it should work. > I had the same problem here and informed Nino about it. > > Chris HB9BDM > > > > > The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ > More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com > > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > * Visit your group "digitalradio > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio>" on the web. > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM ~-> The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Chip64 and chip128
Hello Kevin If you are using a Intel CPU with Hyperthread - you have to disable Hyperthread in the Bios Setup, then it should work. I had the same problem here and informed Nino about it. Chris HB9BDM Kevin der Kinderen schrieb: > I just downloaded the Chip65 software if anyone wants to try around > 7090 (I'm in Virginia). > > > > I've noticed that the software crashes if any window gets in front of > the waterfall. I get resourse allocation and other errors. I'll make a > not of them next time. > > > > Kevin K4VD > > > > Kevin der Kinderen > > http://kj4qf.net/ > > > > > > From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kurt > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 19:58 > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [digitalradio] Chip64 and chip128 > > > > I see there are some qso's going on 7090, what other freq's are being > used for now? > 73 > Kurt > > > > > > > The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ > More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > Hobby and craft supply > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w1=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w2=Craft+hobby&w3=Hobbies+and+crafts&w4=Ham+radio&c=4&s=84&.sig=Sz5ebNg-ZsVyHTzaR4PnAg> > > Craft hobby > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Craft+hobby&w1=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w2=Craft+hobby&w3=Hobbies+and+crafts&w4=Ham+radio&c=4&s=84&.sig=_8V4kQCK4PEN_MzUUBx-hQ> > > Hobbies and crafts > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hobbies+and+crafts&w1=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w2=Craft+hobby&w3=Hobbies+and+crafts&w4=Ham+radio&c=4&s=84&.sig=J-__6L1W_lZQ58dekNdHLA> > > > Ham radio > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Ham+radio&w1=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w2=Craft+hobby&w3=Hobbies+and+crafts&w4=Ham+radio&c=4&s=84&.sig=OzrEr-gq6h7guAFs73WsoQ> > > > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > * Visit your group "digitalradio > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio>" on the web. > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM ~-> The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] New release (3.9.1) of MULTIPSK
Hello Patrick I would like to thank you for the wonderfull job you did on the Olivia Mode of your last Multipsk version 3.91 Well done. It asures now a 100% compatibility with the Original programs like Olivia Aid and Linux gMFSK. So hope many Om's are going to make use of this wonderfull mode when using Multipsk. Enjoy your holidays and bring back some good new ideas. Chris HB9BDM The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[digitalradio] Olivia/Multipsk
Thanks to Patrick F6CTE we encountre a great number of new Olivia Mode users. Thanks Patrick, well done ! I M P O R T A N T N O T E ! We have now two different versions of Olivia. The original, used with Olivia Aid and gMFSK on Linux, and Olivia on Multipsk. Since Patrick just issued a new Version 3.9, which allows Bandwitdh and Tone change, which was always possible on Olivia original and gMFSK (Linux) I would like to bring to attention the differences between the two versions Olivia Multipsk and Olivia Original, in order to avoid chaos when one station is using Multipsk and the other station Olivia Aid or gMFSK. Both versions are compatible as long as we use the default modes like Standard (32/1000) or Fast (16/1000) then the centre Frequency on both programms should be set to 1000Hz (Lowest tone 500Hz) (Highest 1500Hz) But if you have now two station with different programms one station gMFSK the other Multipsk working Standard (32/1000) and want to change to Olivia mode Normal (8/500) they are in trouble. Why is that so ? Well Pawels SP9VRC original version used in gMFSK and Olivia Aid uses fixed frequencies - Multipsk can change. On Pawels versions the lowest Tonefrequency is always fixed at 500Hz. Therefore the Centerfrequency changes when changing bandwitdh and is then: Standard (32/1000) t 1000Hz Fast (6/1000) at 1000Hz Normal (8/500) at 750Hz Average (16/500) at 750Hz Slow (8/250) at 625Hz So it is advisable when changing Olivia modes on Multipsk to narrow, set the lower tone always to 500Hz and you ensure compatibility to Olivai Aid or gMFSK as they stay fixed at 500Hz (Lower Tone) This is especially important when using channel modes on bands like 20 meter 14108.500 or 14107.500 Mhz as many stations are stby there because they always leave the TRX fixed. Also when band condx are bad and you change mode from Normal (8/500) to Standard (32/1000) (more robust) and you cant see any signal appearing in the waterfall display . Again, allways try to set Lowest Tone on all Multipsk Oliviamodes to 500Hz ! Chris HB9BDM The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ More info at http:///www.obriensweb.com YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Hamshack Hack v.05 available at SourceForge
Hi Skip I just downloaded the iso version of Hack 05 and burned it. Then tried. All was working perfect on both of my installed soundcards. One is a built in analog soundmax device installed by intel. The other is a soundblaser 128 PCI card. Both are taken and working perfect even the timing was ok on the PCI card the other I have to check first. I am also running a Suse 9.2 installation and that also works great with gMFSK and HF Term on both soundcards Chris HB9BDM Skip Teller schrieb: >Harv, > >The Hamshack Hack version 0.3 you sent me works OK and detects my Soundblaster >soundcard. >It is based on KNOPPIX version 3.7. > >Versions 0.4 and 0.5 do not detect the soundcard, and both of those are based >on KNOPPIX >3.8. > >I also ran KNOPPIX version 3.3 and it detected the soundcard. > >So, anyone who finds that version 0.5 boots up OK, but the speaker icon in the >lower fight >is "x'd" out, and bringing up KMIX from the "start" menu shows blank (no >mixer), might be >using a soundcard that KNOPPIX 3.8 does not recognize. > >I tried booting 0.5 with both kernel selections and the result was the same - >no audio >mixer, because the soundcard was not detected. > >I downloaded 0.5 from the New York mirror (some US mirrors do not yet have the >ISO), in >just over one hour using cable broadband, burned a CD, and it booted up fine, >but gMFSK >would not work because it could not find a working soundcard. > >73, Skip KH6TY > > > > >The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
