Re: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot............
At 01:07 AM 1/18/2008, Danny wrote: See interspaced comments. Jack, I think I answered most of that just now, to another station. As long as you are setting there, and have checked that the freq is clear, fire away. If then you get someone coming in and connecting, you have already checked the frequency, so go ahead with your contact. But, if he hears you, transmits and then finds HE is causing interference, he should immediatly advise you, and quit tranmitting at his end. By the time he has connected and this text exchange takes place, with a TX/RX changeover, it could be 30 secondswhich is a long time. Just like SSB, I ask if its clear, and no one comes back, I transmit a CQ. Sonmeone answers, but he immediately is told the freq is busy. He quickly comes back and tell you and the two of you then slip to another freq, where both ask if its clear, and if so, have your contact. How do you ask IF the freq is clear in Pactor and expect any other modes, even Pactor to say yes, freq is in use? And get a readable response? Bye the way, if both of you had busy signal capability, his would have immediately told him he couldnt transmit-- but I would hope he would have heard it on the earphones before that, or seen it on a waterfall, or something. Surely all stations do check the freq before transmitting, keyboard to keyboard? He could then simply bypass the busy signal detect, and quickly advise you to QSY to for a QSO. A busy signal from what mode? Again, decoding who or what is there is not easy, Pactor hardware has no waterfall, you do not know what signal is there, unless your well calibrated ears interfaced to your brain, can understand what mode is transmitting, it may even only be an ALE sounding? Who knows? No not asking for perfection, just an attempt to get as close as possible. I know - easier said than done - but that takes place hundreds of times a day on CW or SSB, and is doable. 2 modes, the ears can decode very easily, Tx with Mic or Keydigital modes are a little different, particularly those that are hardware/firmware based. When someone comes up with a piece of software that is a simple decode only program for ALL digital modes, it would give listen and identify signal, before using freq, things may get better, but still not perfect as you would need a full blown laptop to run it. When some Pactor and Packet (some PSK31) operators can even use a dumb terminal to drive their Pactor/Packet/PSK31 hardware. 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] Pactor Operations.....
Hi All, Pactor running from 2000z to 1900z on following freqs being scanned, Pactor I II connects accepted. Call is VK4JRC and mailbox is on while I am busy here at home. Dial Frequencies USB: 14.078, 14.079.5, 18.100, 18.105, 21.078, 21.093, 24.920, 24.925, 28.105, 28.110 The scan rate is 3 seconds per frequency, and the tones are Mark 1600 Space 1400 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] Pactor Operations.....
Hi All, Sorry, made a mess of the time in the last post. The system is on, from 1300z to 1200z. 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] Pactor Callsign???
Hi All, Someone has tried to call my system today, twice. Using MY callsign The connect crashed both times with errors and timeout.. Dial Frequencies USB: 14.078, 14.079.5, 18.100, 18.105, 21.078, 21.093, 24.920, 24.925, 28.105, 28.110 The scan rate is 3 seconds per frequency, and the tones are Mark 1600 Space 1400 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] I, am a Pactor Robot............
The subject says it all. I run a Pactor mailbox, just like the Packet mailbox that I used to run, many years agojust like MOST of you did, back then too. I am just another Ham, TRYING to enjoy my hobby... 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] I, am a Pactor Robot............
Jack Chomley wrote: The subject says it all. I run a Pactor mailbox, just like the Packet mailbox that I used to run, many years agojust like MOST of you did, back then too. I am just another Ham, TRYING to enjoy my hobby... 73s Jack VK4JRC At 11:06 AM 1/17/2008, Roger wrote: We understand, Jack. But please remember the Three Laws of Robotics that govern the behavior of you Robots: 1. A Robot shall not harm a human being (including QRMing a human being) or, through inaction, allow a human being to be harmed or QRMed. 2. A Robot must obey the orders of a human being but only if such order does not conflict with the First Law. 3. A Robot must protect its existence, but only if such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws. So, you see, when a Pactor robot QRMs others, it is violating the First Law. Can't do that. Hey, sorry for the sad attempt at humor. Some of my best friends are Robots. de Roger W6VZV I can't deliberately QRM anybody! My SCS PTC-IIPro Mailbox can sit here active, for 100 years and do nothing, UNLESS someone tries to connect to it. Once a connection is established, it lasts as long as the connectee wants to stay connected :-) They choose when to disconnect, not the mailbox. So.my Robot mailbox is controlled essentially by any people connecting to it. It does not just fire up by itself :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot............
At 01:14 PM 1/17/2008, Danny wrote: Jack. We on the other side see THAT as exactly the problem. Your mailbox sits there silent. Somone else gets on the freq and calls it. It comes up - and causes interference to someone else that is already using the freq (which you would have heard if you were physically sitting there operating). The origninal caller to you, because of propagation, did not hear the other ongoing QSO- but YOU would have. Therefore it is your transmitter that caused the interference. All quite easily taken care of if our software had a busy signal capability, and simply didnt respond to the other guy, while other signals were up and on the air. That software has been written, and from my understanding would be made available to the Pactor software people, if they would just accept it. If its been done, other software writers can do the same. Your mailbox needs to be controlled by YOU, not the other end, as long as there is no busy signal detection. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB All 2 years or more (except Novice) Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred, I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do. Well, even IF I am at the keyboard, I do not know IF someone is about to connect.until they do. When that happens, do I just switch the box off? Yep, I could do that and the station at the other end would scratch his head and wonder what is going on, like he connected and next minute he is cut off by me. If it was me trying to connect.then I would keep trying, just like he would. Looking for contacts in this hobby, is what its all about. I mean, this kind of operation was done on HF Packet for many years, BBSs forwarded on frequencies and everyone simply got along, generally :-) A busy signal scheme will only work while there is a signal present, the moment there is a break in the signal being heard, the busy detect would drop and.the station would fire up, unless the busy detect had a timer, which counted x time after loss of heard signal, before the station transmitted. Danny, I think you are asking for a perfect solution, when given all the modes we now have..its a big ask. Unfortunately, we have to accept some QRM at some time or another and thats it, in the real world. I think the Pactor mode has been somewhat tainted by the WinLink wars, to a large degree. I mean, I could set up a Packet Mailbox and start beaconing, looking for contacts :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] VK4JRC Pactor Operations......
Hi all Pactorologists! I now have my band scanning function running (I think!) for Pactor connects. The controller talks to my Icom 718 to scan 10 frequencies in 5 bands, the scan delay for each frequency is 3 seconds. My tones are Mark 1600 Space 1400 with USB mode on all frequencies. Keyboard connect call is VK4JRC, mailbox is VK4JRC-8, I am hoping to have the configuration correct, but its untested, you may need to send // to access the mailbox. Or there is a possibility NOTHING may work at all, anyway nothing venturednothing gained :-) Pactor 1 connects accepted Frequencies: 14.087 14.079.5 18.100 18.105 21.078 21.093 24.920 24.925 28.105 28.110 This fits with Region 3 Band Plan, please let me know IF it fouls up other Region Band Plans, or MAY step on other people's toes who are already running established NETs etc, on any of my chosen frequencies. Times of operation at this stage are 1900z to 1200z daily (under manual control) 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] VK4JRC Pactor Operations......amendment!
Hi all Pactorologists! Sorry, the first frequency should read 14.078 NOT .087 Back to yourscheduledprogramme! 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: VK4JRC Pactor Operations......amendment!
At 08:27 PM 1/14/2008, Demetre wrote: Hi Jack, Are these frequencies CENTER frequencies? I will try to connect you today sometime and keep trying different times until we can link. Back to yourscheduledprogramme! 73s Jack VK4JRC 73 de Demetre SV1UY Hi Demetre, They are DIAL frequencies, and I am running my published tones. IF a few people want to coordinate other dial frequencies and standardize on a different tone set, I am happy to change anything needed. Just had to start somewhere :-) Sadly, my antenna cannot accommodate 30 metres.. 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: VK4JRC Pactor Operations......amendment!
At 08:45 PM 1/14/2008, Skip wrote: Jack, I use my 80m base-loaded, tophat, vertical on 30m, and it works great! 80m and 30m are harmonically related. 3.5 x 3 = 10.150. Similar to using a 40m antenna on 15m. 73, Skip KH6TY Skip, Thanks for that. Unfortunately its a Cushcraft MA-5V 20m through 10m, incl WARC bands :-( I am working on a 30m solution, can do auto antenna switching off the TNC scan function, so I can run a second separate antenna, to fix my problem. Another job to dosometime! 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: VK4JRC Pactor Operations......amendment!
At 10:01 PM 1/14/2008, you wrote: --- In mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.comdigitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jack Chomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Demetre, They are DIAL frequencies, and I am running my published tones. IF a few people want to coordinate other dial frequencies and standardize on a different tone set, I am happy to change anything needed. Just had to start somewhere :-) Sadly, my antenna cannot accommodate 30 metres.. Calling you now on 21.078 Jack. I will also try your 18MHZ and 14MHZ qrgs. 73s Jack VK4JRC 73 de Demetre SV1UY OK Demetre, I will leave it run for another hour or so, before I go to bed. I would leave it run all night, but the transceiver band switching relays will keep me awake! Fire it up again at 1900z 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Robust Packet-Radio (RPR)
At 09:27 PM 1/11/2008, Andy wrote: I found the item (below) on the SCS web site. Anyone use this new class of packet ? Robust Packet-Radio (RPR) Up to now Packet-Radio over shortwave has been basically a non-starter, it has even been heavily criticized because of the low effective throughput and repeats. AX.25 is for shortwave not an ideal protocol, but with automatic FRack-setting and a small MAXFrame value the protocol should, however, function much better on a shortwave channel than has previously been the case generally. One cannot of course expect an asynchrone protocol to reach the same efficiency as a tight synchrone ARQ protocol (e.g. PACTOR), but for some applications a multi-user service, with very uncritical transmit/receive switching, as well as almost zero power holding up a connection when no data passing, brings a real advantage that outweighs the lower data throughput. What finally are the reasons that up to now HF-PR works so poorly, and apart from forwarding is hardly ever used? One finds a simple answer: The current modulation type for HF-PR namely uncoded 300 Bd FSK is really unsuitable for normal HF channels. The symbols are much too short even with moderate Multi-Path effect (delay spread) to work. Additionally, because no sort of error correction code is used, even short troughs or static will destroy a many seconds long Packet. Just one missing bit leads to a repeat of the whole packet. To help cure this problem, SCS has developed a new class of robust modulations types especially for Packet-Radio. As a special feature for all the variants of this Robust PR, a completely new synchronizations algorithm with catch properties that were not possible before has been realized. Frequency deviations of ±250 Hz are immediately recognized and without any loss of sensitivity compensated, and this with signals that are buried deep in the noise. Because of this it's possible to remove a tuning display. One can say with good conscience that this is Plug and Play for shortwave. The currently available Robust PR modulation types have the following properties: Bandwidth:500 Hz @ -30 dB Modulation:Pulse-Shaped OFDM (BPSK, QPSK), similar to PACTOR-III Average Throughput:200 or 600 Bit/sec Crestfaktor:3.0 or 4.2 dB Delay-Spread:up to ±8 msec is tolerated Coding:High performance convolutional code, full-frame interleaved, rate/2 or rate3/4 Digipeater and APRS Gateway DB0UAL DialModePath 3610.0 USBRPRAPRS DB0UAL 14102.0 USBRPRAPRS DB0UAL APRS Gateway XY0XYZ DialModePath 10147.3 USBRPR FSK300APXY RELAY WIDE 14103.3 LSBRPR FSK300APXY RELAY WIDE DH1TI DialModePath 10147.3 USBRPRAPRS OE3XMU-4 DialModePath 10147.3 USBRPR FSK300APRS OE3KJN DialModePath 10147.3 USBRPRAPRS ZS1AAZ DialModePath 10147.3 USBRPRAPRS Note: To use the following features you need the current Firmware for the SCS DSP-TNC: Legende: Recommendation: For transmitting position data with the Tracker/DSP TNC, we suggest always to use the frequencies as shown in the list with the respective sideband. The position data can then be transmitted either only in RPR, or in RPR and FSK alternately (%AH = 1). In both operating conditions all physical channels are then automatically set in the correct way. (In case of an alternating transmission, i.e. %AH = 1, the Tracker automatically uses %F = 2000 Hz, in order to set the correct interval of 500 Hz between RPR and FSK channels without any user intervention.) With gateways offering RPR and FSK 300 on one channel simultaneously, it is assumed that the center audio frequency of the FSK demodulator (%F-parameter) is 500 Hz higher than the center audio frequency of the RPR demodulator. The space between the center frequencies of a simultaneous FSK/RPR channel pair is always 500 Hz. Basically, gateways receiving RPR and FSK300 simultaneously can also be reached in FSK300 with the %F standard setting of the Tracker (center frequency of 1700 Hz) in LSB mode. In this case, if LSB is actually used, 3.7 kHz have to be added to the figure shown in USB dial frequency listings. In case of an LSB channel, 0.3 kHz have to be deducted from the listed frequency. Gateways shown in the list as 10147.3 kHz USB can hence be reached in LSB mode with the standard setting of the Tracker (%F = 1700 Hz, %AH = 0) on the standard dial frequency of 10151.0 kHz. Gateways listed as 14103.3 kHz LSB, can be reached in LSB with the default setting of the Tracker (%F = 1700, %AH = 0) on the standard dial frequency of 14103.0 kHz. In case of alternating RPR and FSK transmissions (%AH = 1), the frequencies shown in the list and the respective side bands have to be programmed. For example, the dial frequencies of 10151.0 kHz LSB or 14103.0 kHz USB MUST NOT be set, as neither the RPR, nor the FSK channel would be reached correctly. -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ) Its been around for a while :-) Works well too. But dontcha know?Packet is no good, its outdated, can't stream Video across
Re: [digitalradio] Robust Packet-Radio (RPR)
Rick, Well, its just another mode, to add to the pile! You get RPR with the SCS DSP Tracker, APRS is also using it and the DSP Tracker will send BOTH mode APRS frames out, that is a standard 300 baud HF Packet data frame, THEN the next one out is an RPR frame, alternating. This is so any RPR OR standard 300 baud stations or IGATEs will pick up the signals. At least in this case, SCS thought of the 300 baud HF Packet users on APRS, when they developed this TNC. The other SCS PTC models also have the RPR mode too. I think the mode is a good one, given it is a hardware based one, that can be used in a reasonable cost piece of hardware. https://www.scs-ptc.com/controller.html 73s Jack VK4JRC At 06:02 AM 1/12/2008, Rick wrote: Andy, What I don't understand is if you already have a suite of modes, Pactor, Pactor 2, and Pactor 3, then why create another mode like they did? This is not compatible with existing packet, right? So you would have to have SCS products on both ends? Then why not use Pactor modes, especially the Pactor 2 mode which is of a similar bandwidth and throughput? 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: I found the item (below) on the SCS web site. Anyone use this new class of packet ? Robust Packet-Radio (RPR) Up to now Packet-Radio over shortwave has been basically a non-starter, it has even been heavily criticized because of the low effective throughput and repeats. AX.25 is for shortwave not an ideal protocol, but with automatic FRack-setting and a small MAXFrame value the protocol should, however, function much better on a shortwave channel than has previously been the case generally. One cannot of course expect an asynchrone protocol to reach the same efficiency as a tight synchrone ARQ protocol (e.g. PACTOR), but for some applications a multi-user service, with very uncritical transmit/receive switching, as well as almost zero power holding up a connection when no data passing, brings a real advantage that outweighs the lower data throughput. What finally are the reasons that up to now HF-PR works so poorly, and apart from forwarding is hardly ever used? One finds a simple answer: The current modulation type for HF-PR namely uncoded 300 Bd FSK is really unsuitable for normal HF channels. The symbols are much too short even with moderate Multi-Path effect (delay spread) to work. Additionally, because no sort of error correction code is used, even short troughs or static will destroy a many seconds long Packet. Just one missing bit leads to a repeat of the whole packet. To help cure this problem, SCS has developed a new class of robust modulations types especially for Packet-Radio. As a special feature for all the variants of this Robust PR, a completely new synchronizations algorithm with catch properties that were not possible before has been realized. Frequency deviations of ±250 Hz are immediately recognized and without any loss of sensitivity compensated, and this with signals that are buried deep in the noise. Because of this it's possible to remove a tuning display. One can say with good conscience that this is Plug and Play for shortwave. The currently available Robust PR modulation types have the following properties: Bandwidth:500 Hz @ -30 dB Modulation:Pulse-Shaped OFDM (BPSK, QPSK), similar to PACTOR-III Average Throughput:200 or 600 Bit/sec Crestfaktor:3.0 or 4.2 dB Delay-Spread:up to ±8 msec is tolerated Coding:High performance convolutional code, full-frame interleaved, rate/2 or rate3/4
Re: [digitalradio] Oregon Governor Allocates $250,000 for Digital Communications Network
At 07:35 PM 1/9/2008, you wrote: Oregon Governor Allocates $250,000 for Digital Communications Network The State of Oregon's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) received $250,000 from Governor Ted Kulongoski's Strategic Reserve Fund to further develop and enhance a statewide Amateur Radio digital communications network, announced ARRL Oregon Section Manager Bonnie Altus, AB7ZQ. This network, the Oregon ARES Digital Network (http://ares.csepp.net/d3web/OADN.pdfOADN), http://ares.csepp.net/d3web/OADN.pdf already uses a combination of different radio equipment and spectrum segments, computers and the Internet to provide a robust backup communications system in times of disaster. With its enhancements, all Oregon counties will be able to communicate with the state OEM, she said. In December, this system proved its usefulness in the storms and floods by utilizing http://www.winlink.org/Winlink http://www.winlink.org/ stations in Lincoln and Clatsop Counties to communicate with OEM. Early in that activation, the OEM's Amateur Radio Unit found they were not able to keep up with maintaining a complete log of communications when using voice communications, but Winlink activities maintained an automatic log for them. According to Altus, the primary purpose of the OADN is to provide back-up digital communications capabilities between county Emergency Operations Centers and Oregon Emergency Management and other state agencies in Salem, in the event that normal communications systems fail in an emergency. During the December storms, Amateur Radio operators were there to help. After a visit to one of the severely affected towns, Governor Kulongoski said, I'm going to tell you who the heroes were from the very beginning of this...the ham radio operators. These people just came in and actually provided a tremendous communication link to us. Oregon's OEM said the radio operators were tireless in their efforts to keep the systems connected. When even state police had difficulty reaching some of their own troops, ham radio worked, setting up networks so emergency officials could communicate and relaying lists of supplies needed in stricken areas. Through an Intergovernmental Agreement between the individual county Emergency Mangers and Oregon's Office of Emergency Management, ARES/RACES groups in each county will be responsible for installation, maintenance and operation the network. Mlooks like enough money to buy some dedicated commercial frequencies, to move WinLink off the Ham bands :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] A weekend of NBEMS: Some questions.
At 11:53 AM 1/7/2008, Skip wrote: Please don't hang out looking for email! If you are a served agency that assigns someone to monitor the band for traffic, or meet a sked, when normal communications are available, NBEMS is useful, but why clutter up the airwaves with email or messaging? The ham bands are primarily for amateur radio hobbiests to talk to other amateur radio hobbiests, not as a slow replacement for the Internet or text messaging. I would like to see a mailbox system, like the Packet TNCs of old, but with modern narrow band modes. The requirement to communicate with a server to pass mail is not quite what I am looking for. No, just a standalone mailbox that someone can connect to, and leave a msg or, connect to and pickup a msg. Yes, PSKmail is close, but needs the server connection. 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] A weekend of NBEMS: Some questions. now PSKmail!
Rein, I did finally get your Puppy ISO to work on my laptop, it was your latest Ham Puppy version I downloaded today , Fldigi fired up ok, with the Tigertronics SL USB interface. Question...Can PSKmail use PSK31 mode? My reason is that I only have a 10 watt ICOM 703 radio, for my portable ops. So..signals are not strong, and I have no need for higher data rates of PSK250. The reason for all this is that I am going on a motorcycle trip in South Africa, where there are not many stations, so I will probably be communicating to others outside the country, IF there are any PSKmail operators I can hear :-) My reasoning for trying to get around PSKmail was to try and avoid carrying a laptop. With the old type TNCs, you can use an AA battery powered RS232 terminal to drive them. I have one of these, works great on Packet TNCs. Also on Amtor, Pactor and PSK31 with SCS PTC-IIEx TNC http://www.ciao.co.uk/Psion_Workabout_Mx__5378172 Also the Psion 3MX too http://www.bioeddie.co.uk/models/psion-series-3mx.htm With these units, I just use the on board Comms Program. IF I use my Palm IIIx, I have the On Line comms program (now discontinued) from Mark Space in the U.S. It has macros and a few other features too. NONE of the above can use soundcard software. The good thing about them all is that they run on AA or AAA batteries :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC At 08:06 PM 1/7/2008, Rein wrote: Wrong again... * Every pskmail server has a local mailbox, so you can operate it without the internet connection. E,g, in some countries it is still forbidden to connect a radio to the internet, those are the countries which allow SSB on 30 mtrs by the way. For them the local mbox is the only solution. Just send your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Pskmail also includes file transfer client-to-client 73, Rein PA0R narrow band modes. The requirement to communicate with a server to pass mail is not quite what I am looking for. No, just a standalone mailbox that someone can connect to, and leave a msg or, connect to and pickup a msg. Yes, PSKmail is close, but needs the server connection. 73s Jack VK4JRC
[digitalradio] For the HF Packet Baggers out there :-)
The statistics say it all :-) HF Packet on APRS works fine. Have a look at today's logs. The radio only puts out 8 watts. I had good results with this setup all through 2007, so its no fluke. It was standard 300 baud HF Packet, Robust Packet was not used. http://www.radiotelemetry.net/html/radio_stuff_.html http://www.db0anf.de/app/aprs/stations/mobile-VK4JRC-15 http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?call=vk4jrc-15terra=4 http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/raw.cgi?call=VK4JRC-15 Goes to prove you don't need lotsa wotz on HF Packet, to get out :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC At 08:48 PM 1/7/2008, you wrote: Rein, I did finally get your Puppy ISO to work on my laptop, it was your latest Ham Puppy version I downloaded today , Fldigi fired up ok, with the Tigertronics SL USB interface. Question...Can PSKmail use PSK31 mode? My reason is that I only have a 10 watt ICOM 703 radio, for my portable ops. So..signals are not strong, and I have no need for higher data rates of PSK250. The reason for all this is that I am going on a motorcycle trip in South Africa, where there are not many stations, so I will probably be communicating to others outside the country, IF there are any PSKmail operators I can hear :-) My reasoning for trying to get around PSKmail was to try and avoid carrying a laptop. With the old type TNCs, you can use an AA battery powered RS232 terminal to drive them. I have one of these, works great on Packet TNCs. Also on Amtor, Pactor and PSK31 with SCS PTC-IIEx TNC http://www.ciao.co.uk/Psion_Workabout_Mx__5378172http://www.ciao.co.uk/Psion_Workabout_Mx__5378172 Also the Psion 3MX too http://www.bioeddie.co.uk/models/psion-series-3mx.htmhttp://www.bioeddie.co.uk/models/psion-series-3mx.htm With these units, I just use the on board Comms Program. IF I use my Palm IIIx, I have the On Line comms program (now discontinued) from Mark Space in the U.S. It has macros and a few other features too. NONE of the above can use soundcard software. The good thing about them all is that they run on AA or AAA batteries :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC At 08:06 PM 1/7/2008, Rein wrote: Wrong again... * Every pskmail server has a local mailbox, so you can operate it without the internet connection. E,g, in some countries it is still forbidden to connect a radio to the internet, those are the countries which allow SSB on 30 mtrs by the way. For them the local mbox is the only solution. Just send your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Pskmail also includes file transfer client-to-client 73, Rein PA0R narrow band modes. The requirement to communicate with a server to pass mail is not quite what I am looking for. No, just a standalone mailbox that someone can connect to, and leave a msg or, connect to and pickup a msg. Yes, PSKmail is close, but needs the server connection. 73s Jack VK4JRC inline: c72591.jpg
Re: [digitalradio] A weekend of NBEMS: Some questions. now PSKmail!
Quite simply, I just see better range and performance using low power radios, on narrower bands. DominoEx would be fine :-) With all this mode advancement looking for MORE speed? Why? I get the impression some people would like to stream Hi Res Video over HF :-) I have to say I really appreciate the effort that software developers put into their work, just so other Hams can enjoy their hobby more, many of the programs for no cost, or small cost. I don't want to think what you would need to pay, in the commercial world for some of these programs. 73s Jack VK4JRC At 09:02 PM 1/7/2008, you wrote: Jack, yes, pskmail will work with PSK31 as well, in fact it will work with any mode that transports the complete set of ASCII characters (I am working on incorporating RTTY as well). But you will find PSK63 almost as good as PSK31, and a bit less sensitive to frequency stability. I am sure any of the server ops will open a PSK63 channel for you if you need it. We can also run modes like DominoEx if you need it. I know what you mean with the PSION, I used a PSION 3a, and I wrote a CW contest keyer and a contest log program for it. (Does not work for the 5MX). 73, Rein Pa0R
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
At 04:57 AM 1/7/2008, Rick wrote: I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem. Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400 around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our frequency. It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time before that happened. 73, Rick, KV9U I bet that guy did not have a clue, he has a hardware box that can only use Amtor/Pactor. probably PSK31 and a couple of other modes.most of which he can't, or has never used. He has probably never been on any Internet forums or newsgroups, so he has not a clue what is going on in the digital world of Ham Radio, nor does he probably care. I would cite a lack of knowledge of modes and bandwidths etc on his part, maybe he thinks the various digital modes all have retrys and error correction..so it will just sort itself out and all modes will simply share frequencies! Yesterday, I was on 20m and I heard a stack of signals which were not Pactor (I had a Pactor sked setup) I switched to PSK31 on my hardware boxno go. I fired up HRD on my SLUSB, still no go :-( I was not sure what signals they were, to be able to try and resolve them, being just interested in what they were. Being a little tone deaf and not having an intimate knowledge of all the modes and what they sound like, did not help me. Were they MT63? PSK250? I don't know If you run Digipan, you have no hope! With the increasing number of new modes being developed, the problem will get worse :-( Add the coming of improved propagation and this will become a spectrum quagmire in which no one will be able to operate easily. We have all helped create the mess we have. A gazillion software programs, all doing their own thing some with many modes and expanding more modes, nearly daily, others that don't have so many modes. No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an identify signal menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle will get worse. IF people can identify a signal, with callsigns, they will be less inclined to interfere with it, if a operator can't resolve a signal.they probably care a lot less about any interference to it. Sadly, only soundcard software solutions can be given this signal decoder ability, hardware boxes are a different deal. You need operator digital modes knowledge too, many people do not know what all the modes sound like, I know I don't, even though I have a recording of mode sounds that someone on the group was good enough to post! Now, this is not bagging all the good people, who do software development for the benefit of Hams, for little or no cost BUT.. Someone bright enough to do it...is going to have to write that signal decoder program very soon.otherwise this whole problem will get worse. Fixing the WinLink problem is another deal altogether. 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
At 08:33 AM 1/7/2008, you wrote: Hi Dave CW id is not universally understood..i for one have a hearing problem and CW is very difficult for me to hear let alone decode...also what about those who are deaf...we do have a number of them around the world... most are now using digital modesi have worked a deaf op on PSK31 and i wouldnt have known he was deaf until he told me... today there are also many new hams who havent had to learn CW as it is no longer a requirement for a HF licence in most countries... 73 David VK4BDJ You are right David. Sorry, I forgot your aspect. 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Beacon's ?
At 07:47 AM 1/6/2008, you wrote: Right here - As I have pointed out, a number of ham activities that are claimed to be for the purposes of propagation, especially PropNet and the HFLinkNet appear to be illegal operations if they are being run automatically. It is stretching the rules rather thin but you could probably transmit test transmissions as the FCC says, on any frequency authorized to the control operator for brief periods for experimental purposes. Should that not read appear to be illegal operations if they are being run unattended I think we all know that you *CAN'T* run a unattended station. John So..you can't leave your APRS turned on, when your leave your car to go into a shop, or parked in your driveway?? You can't leave your digipeater function turned on in your TNC, in case someone uses it for a link, or even leave you Packet Station turned on, in case someone connects to its mailbox, while you are outside, mowing the lawn :-) You can't put up a dedicated digipeater anywhere, even for test purposeswithout being in attendance? WHAT rock has the ARRL been sleeping under, not to move with the times and petition the FCC? OR have I got this all wrong... 73s Jack VK4JRC (In a country where auto and unattended is allowed)
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
At 12:44 AM 1/5/2008, you wrote: Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way. The difference is that the Packet folks do not feel that they have a god-given right to crash other hams' QSO's. We operate according to PART97 and The Amateur's Code. - When we are not having our QSO crashed by a mindless PACTOR Lid, that is... Stop by at WinLink-Watch to see the pics. - http://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htmhttp://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htm 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL [EMAIL PROTECTED] - So, you are saying ALL Pactor operators crash the Packet guys? I thought the problem was with WinLink PMBO's on Pactor 3? I don't think too many individual people would have licenced Pactor 3, I certainly have not, and don't need to. Since part of this idea is to announce our Pactor/Packet skeds via Sholto's Andy's spot pages, it may revive things a little, is there anything wrong with that? Those looking for contacts, have places to help them coordinate skeds. Oh yes, how about trying 600 baud Robust Packet ;-) Pactor may be deadbut whats wrong with trying to get it going? Like, Ham Radio IS a hobby? Why not all enjoy it for what it is, with what ever mode we want to use. :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor3
At 09:01 AM 1/5/2008, Sholto wrote: Hi Simon, I was wondering if you had thought about including Patrick's Reed Solomon detection feature in DM780? I realize DM780 doesn't have all the modes MultiPSK has, and DM780 has Throb-X 4 baud which MultiPSK doesn't - but if you just had the recognition part for the modes in common I think it would help a lot of beginners to the digi modes understand what they are seeing/hearing. 73 Sholto KE7HPV. - Original Message - From: Simon Brown mailto:simon.brown%40kns.ch[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.comdigitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 6:56 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor3 Can anyone point me at a page or reference to programmers / other hams not being allowed to add Pactor 3 to their software? This is a serious request, part of an attempt to remove Pactor 3 from our bands on the basis of it being a 'closed system'. Simon Brown, HB9DRV Maybe an add on module to a program that is a decoder, for signal mode identification purposes only. Remove Pactor 3? Whilst it maybe a good idea, I see another WinLink skirmish coming.;-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Beacon's ?
At 10:56 AM 1/5/2008, you wrote: My Question, is a beacon a beacon if is maned, or does it have to be unmaned to be a beacon. For me my beacon has not be on the air without being here at the PC. So do we scrip the testing or find a spot up on 10m. Russell NC5O = IN GOD WE TRUST ! = Russell Blair NC5O Skype-Russell Blair Hell Field #300 DRCC #55 Some software has an Auto CQ. As far as I am concerned, I use that function while I am in attendance of my station location, that is the room where my equipment is. I would call it a CQ beacon, as soon as I leave the room, whilst it is still running. But what would I know? I ain't a lawyer :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Licensing of Pactor modes
At 11:35 AM 1/5/2008, Dave wrote: I would argue that the fuel for this is the irresponsible use of Pactor III by Winlink in unattended PMBOs without the ability to detect whether or not the frequency is locally clear not some inherent flaw or suboptimal characterics. In attended operation, Pactor III is a bit challenging in that one must ensure that ones modem does not dynamically expand its bandwidth to exploit improved conditions unless the full bandwidth is clear of other QSOs. But as long as operators fulfill their responsibilities, Pactor III should not be any more problematic than any other digital mode. 73, Dave, AA6YQ Its not hard to stop the SCS Modem from using Pactor 3. You just set MYLevel parameter to 2, modem will then only operate Pactor 1 or 2. Pactor 3 is locked out. Problem is SCS have the default set for use of Pactor 3 comms if desired, which works for the first 20 connects, after that you buy the licence from SCS and its coded to the modem serial number, where I believe originally it was coded to your callsign. 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
At 11:45 AM 1/5/2008, Howard wrote: Hey Charles! Me thinks you've got a rather broad brush being used here. Someone says that PACTOR is dead..period. Another has said that PACTOR is deadand if I was smart, I'd pitch my AEA unit like everyone else. You, speaking for Packet enthusiasts, say Packet operators won't climb on board this innocent proposal because they're constantly being QRMed by PACTOR lids and for that reason, the Packet operators want nothing to do with anything that remotely touches PACTOR. That isn't fair to me, and any number of other folks who like the PACTOR I mode and are kindling a small surge of rebirth in the mode's interest. I've always followed the rules as they have, I'm sure. Individual PACTOR I operations cannot possibly be linked to BOTS, Winlink or whatever. I'm sure that Jack has been a considerate and law-abiding Ham for all his licensed life and means no ill-will towards anyone, least of all disrespect. I bet you and the others don't even know Jack and doubt you have ever been deliberately interferred with by him. I doubt he'd like to be included in any association with Winlink and the BOTS any more than I would. That message you quoted was a friendly, enthusiastic idea that came about from some ideas that have been bantered about offline amongst myself and some others who want to use our TNCs and PACTOR I again, just because. Seriously, this business about Winlink and BOTS is getting just a bit hysterical I think, to the point of irrationality. I say that simply because of your reaction and you're not alone at all. AND...it's understandable for sure. But, jeez, Charles. Aren't you being a bit harsh to the point that you're taking a swipe at everyone? That's exactly what the Packet operators don't want for themselves. I was on last night running my PK232 through its paces and getting reacquainted with it. I even made a couple of contacts with it using PACTOR I during Sunday and it was fun! Surely, you're not going to call me a lid simply because of using the PACTOR mode, alledged to being mis-used by others alledged to have a totally selfish agenda are you? Just my polite $ .02 worth. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN All modes have their good and bad features, AND operators! I am sure most Hams respect their resource and its use, needing to share with others. There will always be some who through ignorance or having a bad hair day, will crash someone's QSO. Just like someone driving the highway crashes your lane, wile jibbering on a cell phone, reading the paper, doing their hair, emailing on their Blackberry etc. The responsibility for decent operating rests with the operator, themselves. Relying on the FCC, TUV,ACMA and other regulatory organisations to solve problems in our hobby, does not often provide the results we would like. These regulators are sick of us.believe me. The money they get from Ham licencing? We are a liability to them. Having said that, its really up to the like of the ARRL, RSGB, WIA and other organisations in the World to play more of a part in the hobby regulating itself and promoting good band plans that reflect harmonious operating in the hobby. The Pactor 3 problem? There are many other considerations too, ALE, Propnet, APRS and the list goes on growing.. Many of the these modes use a form of beacons for their operations. They are all entitled to some consideration in trying to work within band plans, some of which maybe need changing? The major part of these problems is the political agendas that seem to always screwup the potential of anything good, that can benefit the majority of people, when there is a decision making process going on. Yep, thats life as a Human Being on this Earth :-) You all may think, OK what goes here? I have been on this board all of 5 minutes, so people are thinking.what's my agenda? You're right, I DO have an agenda, its carrying out experiments/operation on HF 300 baud Packet, HF Robust 200/600 baud Packet, compared to Amtor, Pactor 1 II along with some PSK31 etc. Now you want to know WHY? OK, MY other hobby is motorcycles, specifically off road ones and the remote places I ride them. I am trying to integrate my Ham hobby, with riding in remote places. My best option for digital modes is a TNC based system. An SCS PTC-IIex, with Icom 703, Buddipole antenna, RS232 AA battery powered dumb terminal OR Psion 3mx palmtop allows me to operate motorcycle portable on Amtor, Pactor, Packet, PSK31, CW. Its a compact, portable station which allows me to also run a mailbox on the motorcycle, while mobile or portable. Carrying a laptop is not something I want to do...that leaves all the sound card modes out. Having just bought a bike for my expeditions in South Africa, for riding there and to surrounding countries, and playing Ham Radio, its gonna be a whole lot of fun! 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] 6000 Users of ALE Channel ZERO in 2007
At 09:43 PM 1/3/2008, you wrote: 6000 Users of ALE Channel ZERO in 2007 The ALE Channel ZERO website went on the air in August 2007, with reception reporting of ham radio ALE activity worldwide and a chat room for ALE operators. Its sure would be good to have a page like Channel Zero...setup for Pactor Packet ;-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
RE: [digitalradio] Dead HF Packet Group??
At 12:20 PM 1/2/2008, you wrote: AX.25 Packet is (IMHO) useless as an HF mode.. ICK!! -- Patricia (Elaine) Gibbons WA6UBE / AAR9JA http://www.qrz.com/wa6ubehttp://www.qrz.com/wa6ube Mmmm, its a good mode :-) HF Packet is my only link to a BBS, over 1300 kilometres away, I can log on fine, each day on 40 metres, so.HF Packet works fine! I might add, have you tried the newer Robust Packet mode at 200 baud, which under reasonable conditions can run to 600 baud? Whilst I like sound card modes too, there is nothing like a self contained TNC that does not need a fancy PC and software to drive it 8-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Frequency accurracy tolerance tnc? main problem for HF-APRS shortwave ?
from K3UK's HF-APRS YahooGroup. -- Forwarded message -- From: oe3mzc mailto:oe3mzc%40oevsv.at[EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Dec 18, 2007 4:22 AM Subject: [HF-APRS] Frequency accurracy tolerance tnc? main problem for HF-APRS shortwave ? To: mailto:HF-APRS%40yahoogroups.com[EMAIL PROTECTED] many tncs for 300baud FSk packet radio used for APRS on hf only decode within a very narrow frequency window of abt. +-30Hz. (KAM, MixW, AGWPE, PK232,SCS PTC-2,TNC-2 etc..) This is very difficult to adjust and represents the main reason for failure in decoding hf-aprs signals. To my knowledge there is only one hardware that could cope with frequency drift in a much better way: a DSP-TNC from SCS see: http://www.scs-ptc.com/datasheets/scs_datasheet_tracker_english.pdfhttp://www.scs-ptc.com/datasheets/scs_datasheet_tracker_english.pdf This DSP modem can simultaneously decode multiple signals in a bandwith of up to plus/minus 400Hz around an adjustable center frequency, e.g. all signals with a 800Hz bandpass will be decoded. When connected in AX25 to two stations at same time, the tnc will even adjust its own transmitted qrgs according to the two partners and their individual offset automatically. The most helpful feature however is the frequency readout. the comand ESC %M enter will display a Mheard list with offset frequencies. This can be used to for tuning. example from 30m APRS channel in Europe: * %m * DIRECTLY RECEIVED HF-PR STATIONS: WIDE3 -15 Hz, DM5LW +25 Hz, OE3MZC-9 -25 Hz, OE3XMU -25 Hz DF5WXF-2 +25 Hz, F4CKT +25 Hz, F6KPH-4 +18 Hz, DF4FO -25 Hz DF4FO-3 -25 Hz, SR3NWY -25 Hz, DB0CHV +0 Hz, SL5ZL -25 Hz F5ZQC-4 +25 Hz, WIDE5 -25 Hz, G0JXN-10 -3 Hz, RA3IM -6 Hz F5LEB +0 Hz, TRACE3 +0 Hz, F6KCF-10 +0 Hz, TRACE2 +0 Hz EA6XQ -6 Hz, EA6XQ-5 +25 Hz, RELAY -6 Hz, UA1WCF -28 Hz HB9CGH-4 +0 Hz, UA1WCF-2 -25 Hz, WIDE7 +25 Hz, F5KCN-3 +25 Hz WIDE2 +0 Hz, G7EOB-7 +0 Hz, G0IQK-10 -25 Hz, MB7UJ +0 Hz * AA1XD -25 Hz, W1JMC -50 Hz *OZ4DX -43 Hz, W1ON -6 Hz, EA6AFM +0 Hz, OK2PEN -28 Hz, EC2A-1 +25 Hz, EB2EMZ-8 +25 Hz, 73 de Mike, OE3MZC I use this very same TNC to transmit my 30 metre HF APRS signals via an Icom 703, from my motorcycle mobile. Have found no trouble for Igates to receive my signals and most of them are using older TNCs. The real good part of this TNC is it can transmit in SCS Robust Packet mode, which is better than ordinary 300 baud HF Packet. The other things with this TNC are, it only has a USB interface, which limits connectivity for many Packet programs. There is NO on board mailbox either, like TNCs of old. I have been looking for software that has inbuilt Mail box facilities that works with the USB of this TNC. As Mike points out in his post, the freq tracking of this TNC is awesome and its a good product, just needs a few design changes to make it more appealing ;-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
At 05:28 PM 31/12/2007,Roger wrote: I was active on the TNC modes, i.e. Amtor, Pactor, RTTY for a lot of years, roughly 1989-2003 or so. Pactor was quite popular until the early 2000s, when PSK31 was introduced by Peter Martinez. This ushered in an age of narrow-frequency soundcard modes, which made ownership of a TNC unnecessary to work these new modes. This was a good thing because prior to this only a limited number of hams bothered with the digital modes (indeed most hams did not know what Amtor and Pactor were) due to the cost of the TNC, which was several hundred dollars. When this happened I owned the top-of-the-line TNC at that time, the SCS PTC-II. Before that I had owned a PK232 (a good unit for what it was), and for a brief time, the Kantronics Kam Plus (not a good unit). Within a year after the debut of PSK31, Pactor K-to-K activity dropped to almost nil. Oh, for a while you could scare up a contact now and then, but it was hard going. At some point I threw in the towel, my PTC-II went into the junk drawer, and not long ago I sold it to a boater. Since the early 2000s period, I don't think I have heard a Pactor FEC signal one single time, which indicates that no one is calling CQ for Pactor contacts any more, and thus whatever Pactor you hear is mailbox robot activity, or, less likely, people calling each other on schedule. I have gotten a couple of private emails this weekend, including one from a European ham, which emails confirm that Pactor is now dead other than for mailbox use both in North America and in Europe. Your PK232 is quite obsolete because it cannot even do Pactor II, and cannot be modified to do so. If you do what most people did, you will pitch it. Other than Pactor 1, your computer sound card or higher-end units such as the Navigator or the Signal-Link units will do far more than any TNC will do if you are simply interested in ordinary amateur radio contacts, i.e. QSOs. de Roger W6VZV I still use a TNC for PSK31, IF I want to run a minimalist station, without a laptop ;-) The SCS PTC-IIex has PSK31 built in that allows me to use a hand held battery powered dumb terminal on it, or my Psion 3MX palmtop on AA batteries. In addition, this TNC runs HF Packet, Robust Packet (200 600Baud) VHF/UHF 1200 baud Packet, PACTOR-II, PACTOR-I, AMTOR, NAVTEX, AMTEX, RTTY, CW, SSTV, FAX , APRS Has a mailbox too, not super user friendly like the TNCs of old. Its performance with DSP bits inside means it works well. The only downside is the cost.. I have yet to do a side by side comparison with my Tigertronics SignaLink USB PSK31 Deluxe, but I am happy with the TNC solution. 73s Jack VK4JRC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats!!!
At 09:13 PM 29/12/2007, Rodger wrote: Demetre SV1UY wrote: Quite the contrary, many american hams own a PTC-II modem, also there are more PACTOR PMBOs in USA than the rest of the World right now my friend. To paraphrase Bill Clinton, it depends on one's use of the word many. In fact, a vanishingly small percentage of either American or European digital operators ever bought SCS modems, due to their high cost. That was the problem -- it was very difficult to have a Pactor2 Keyboard-to-Keyboard (KtoK) QSO because so few ops had an SCS modem--and SCS modems were the ONLY TNCs that could support Pactor 2. For reasons I am not conversant with, no other manufacturer was ever able to license Pactor from SCS. Some tried to reverse-engineer Pactor, with some success with Pactor 1, but no success of which I am aware with Pactor 2. (The HAL attempts to implement P-Mode were a failure, it appeared to me.) This further diminished Pactor's popularity to the point where KtoK use of Pactor is as extinct as the Dodo bird in North America at least. I cannot speak for Europe because propagation being what it is these days I can rarely hear or work Europe. When you tell me that Pactor is more common in Europe, I cannot contradict you for this reason. If true, a logical explanation is the fact that SCS is based in Europe and Pactor originated there. Or am I wrong, Demetre? It became impossible to convince anyone (other than mailbox operators) to get an SCS TNC once the sound card modes appeared on the scene, more or less invented by Peter Martinez, one of ham radio's Greats. Since probably all hams had access to a computer, the need for a $500+ TNC vanished since hams had access to a plethora of digital modes merely by interfacing one's radio to the computer. Once I switched over from Pactor to the sound card modes, I discovered that all of my old Pactor buddies had done the same, and Pactor was simply dead except for mailboxes. There may be a lot of American MBOs, as you say. This illustrates the need for all of us to support Mark's fine petition -- to get control of this legion of unattended source of QRM for the benefit and betterment of our hobby and the advancement of the radio art. Despite my support for Mark's fine petition, I suspect that the mailboxes will fade away pretty soon anyway, as boaters and RVers get access to the internet through satellite and Wi Fi rather than the horribly inefficient Winlink system. Heck, you can get internet access via Wi Fi in coffeeshops and Starbucks these days. They are adding Wi Fi capability to boat harbors here in California. This trend will likely spell the end to Winlink. And Pactor. de Roger W6VZV I am trying to set up my HF Packet PBBS system to operate mobile/portable on a motorcycle. I figure that IF I operate in the right band allocation, I should be sharing with like mode stations, which means there should be no major problems. Yes, its an automated system that has been around for years...so, what is the problem now? Have the bands been swamped with Packet stations operating outside the suggested freq ranges? I meanI guess I should not worry too much, as the FCC can't make rules for me...:-) 73 Jack VK4JRC
