Re: [digitalradio] Packet Operation???
Rotten Robbie wrote: > The new units I have been looking at have an optional module that is > installed in the transceiver and allow direct connection to a PC serial > port. I assume the optional modules are effectively TNCs. > > Are the TNC connectors on the back of the unit that don't have an internal > TNC merely sound input/output circuits? That's typically the case. The big advantage to have the data port vs. using the microphone jack and external speaker jack is that the audio output on the data port is a somewhat standard, fixed level. You don't have to get the volume control set "just right" for it to work. You also can leave the microphone connected if you aren't dedicating the radio to data applications. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Packet Operation???
k5myj wrote: > I have been looking at some of the newer VHF mobile tranceivers. Mine > is a 2003 variety. The next one Kenwood built has a PACKET connector > on it. > > Is this Packet interface usable as a digital mode between two > stations in simplex mode? > > My next step is to locate packet software and find out how it works. > > Bob Macklin K5MYJ Seattle, Wa. The data connector found on many VHF/UHF FM radios is for connecting an external TNC (Terminal Node Controller). The TNC interfaces your radio to a computer. On VHF a baud rate of 1200 baud is normally used. You can keyboard back and forth between two or more radios quite easily. There are programs around that make this simple but you can also just use something like Hyperterminal. TNCs vary by manufacturer. The exact commands required to connect, etc. can change somewhat. <http://www.choisser.com/packet/> has info on basic packet. It is not nearly as popular as it once was but does serve as the underlying transport mechanism for things like APRS and the VHF/UHF modes for Winlink 2000 email via RF. Tim, N9PUZ
[digitalradio] CPU Usage with FLDIGI and the Icom IC-7200
A couple of weeks ago I got around to loading the IC-7200 Windows USB driver so I could get rid of my sound card cables, etc. and get rig control features. My only comment about the USB interface is "why didn't I do this sooner!" I use the Windows version of the FLDIGI program for various sound card modes. I have a computer in the shack that has XP Pro, 2 GHz single core CPU, and 1.5 GB of RAM. When FLDIGI is running with or without the RIGCAT connection to the IC-7200 my CPU usage is 70% to 80% with just the FLDIGI app running. Without FLDIGI CPU usage hovers around 0%. No complaints about how things actually work, etc. I was just curious if others who may use FLDIGI see this same sort of CPU usage? 73, Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Dxing and long winded digital ops
When I first commented that macros were a problem I probably chose my words poorly. There is nothing wrong with macros and indeed setting them up for commonly used exchanges and information is great. From a procedural and "considerate operator" point of view I just don't think people should send brag files, long "73's" wishing everyone in the world good luck, etc. when there is a big pileup waiting to work a DX station. Keep it short and to the point so as many people as possible can work the DX. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Dxing and long winded digital ops
obrienaj wrote: > I'm all for a good digital mode rag-chew...but allow me to be the > Grinch on Boxing Day and gripe about digital ops that take FOREVER to > sign-off when working DXpeditions and the like. Today when trying to > work a needed entity , and with a fading band, I had to patiently > wait my turn while others that had got through were sending such none > sense as how many QSO's they had had in the particular digital mode > and the exact time and date they had logged the QSO. Do we really > need to know when you LOGGED the station you were JUST working? > > I did work the DX, but I can complain too, right ? You are not the first one to notice that so many digital ops seem especially "windy" when it comes to any sort of contact. Even during a normal rag chew I can't say I really care what version of OS they use, whether or not they built their own PC, etc. AS you say all this sort of stuff is tolerable in a regular QSO but really aggravating if you're waiting for a tasty DX station for an area you need. Maybe if we took away the macro function? :-) Merry Christmas and 73 to all, Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Need your help picking HF radio.
I don't know if it's the "ultimate" or not but I'm very happy with my nearly 1 year old Icom IC-7200. It is fairly compact and has IF level DSP. Probably the nicest digital mode feature though is the radio has it's own sound card circuitry. You connect from your computer to the USB port built into the radio and load the driver. After that the single USB connection carries all of the radio control commands (CIV) and the audio information to and from the rig. Leaves your computer's sound card available for other things. 73, Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
Dave Ackrill wrote: > Doing down people because they pass an exam and you do not think is as > rigorous as the one that you passed does not prove that they are less > able than you. In my opinion. > > Dave (G0DJA) I hope that the percentage of hams who look down on newcomers who passed what they view as a "lesser" test is small although they may be a rather vocal minority. In many activities it's the whiners and complainers we here from the most. For me personally I could care less when someone got their license or what vintage of test they took. My only criteria is 'did I enjoy the QSO?'. 73, Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Techs on HF digital
Dave Sparks wrote: > ... But what I don't see is that certain tests produce more > CONSIDERATE operators. Some of the worst lids are people who > seemingly paid their dues, and yet still cannot control their potty > mouth on the air, deliberately QRM others, etc. I think what Dave talks about here is a general societal problem and not limited to ham radio. Yesterday a co-worker told me he had attended his daughter's Christmas program at school the night before. He said he couldn't believe it when on several different occasions parents would walk up to the stage and talk to their kids DURING THE PERFORMANCE. There were people constantly coming and going into the auditorium while events were happening as well. Sadly, bad manners and lack of respect seem to be on the rise in our society. 73, Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
Gary wrote: > So... Here is the idea. Would you be amenable to allowing Technician > Class licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands > and do you think that would be of interest to new hams? I do not think this is a good idea. In fact if it were up for comment at the FCC I would campaign against it. Just because a current technician licensee CHOOSES to not use the privileges he/she already has is no reason to give them additional privileges. I agree there is a fair amount of effort involved in learning CW. There is however no more effort in learning to use computer generated/computer decoded CW than any of the other digital modes you propose they be allowed. They have that privilege now yet they don't use it to any great extent. Why aren't they using it if they think digital modes on HF would be so cool? I think most people who really derive satisfaction from a hobby, any hobby, do so because they learn new skills and accomplish things over time. For many of us that may be mastering CW, upgrading our license, or building a first successful kit. For others it may be their first solo RC flight, their first slot car race where they don't come in dead last or a perfect finish on the furniture they just built. Satisfaction and fulfillment are EARNED. You can't 'give' someone a sense of self-satisfaction by eliminating or relaxing all the rules. They can't buy real satisfaction by plunking down money for an HF station and paying someone to install it because they don't know how. There's a saying among long time motorcycle riders... "Twenty Thousand Dollars and a black T-Shirt doesn't make you a biker." There should be something similar for amateur radio. I am absolutely for the changes we've seen to make amateur radio more accessible. It's great that someone can test and upgrade with a VE Team instead of taking vacation to go to an FCC Field office like I did when I upgraded from Novice to Technician (I failed the 13WPM code test the first time.) I don't even mind dropping the CW requirement but only as a separate test element. I think it should still be on the test but with no more or less weight than any other mode. People who get involved in amateur radio do so for all sorts of different, valid reasons. Some are happy and fulfilled doing public service events with a VHF hand held without ever going further. Others attend a course thinking the general idea sounds interesting but they decide maybe it isn't even though they've passed their test. Others do it all and earn their Extra and try every mode imaginable over time. I think that one reason we don't have more ACTIVE hams that decide to pursue higher licenses and privileges is that we do a poor job of teaching them about ham radio. Don't get me wrong, we do a bang up job of teaching them to pass their Tech exam. How much time is actually spent "Elmering"? You know... having a club station with times for people to come by, drink a coffee or a can of pop and have one of the grey beards show them how to build a dipole or have a CW QSO across the table with code oscillators, or setup and use an HF rig with computer software to do CW, or ... Well, I imagine you see my point. Though you may not agree. I'll turn it over to someone else now. I'm sure I've written enough to have been branded a curmudgeon. 73, Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] NEWBIE OLIVIA QUESTION
Are there common places on each band to look for Olivia QSO's? Tim, N9PUZ Tony wrote: > > > Hello George, > > It's best to adjust Olivia to suit the conditions at hand. > Sensitivity goes up as you increase the number of tones... > >Mode Minimum SNR > > Olivia 500/64-19db > Olivia 500/32-17db > Olivia 500/16-14db > Olivia 500/8..-12db > Olivia 500/4..-10db > > The word-per-minute rate will become slower as the tones are increased, > but as you can see, there's a lot to be gained by going a bit slow when > signals are weak. The most common mode is 500/16. > > Hope this helps. > > Tony -K2MO > > > > BE DOING SOME READING UP ON THE 'OLIVIA MODE' I HEAR IT ON 17M > SOMEWHAT . MY QUESTION IS WHAT MODE IS USED THE MOST ? LIKE 16/500 ? OR > DO YOU CHANGE IT IT UP AND DOWN IN DIFFERENT BANDS? > > THANK YOU AC5JV,GEORGE > > > > > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Linux Here I come!
The Ubuntu "Wubi" installer offers a similar option as well. You can install it on top of Windows as you would a Windows application. Tim, N9PUZ Alan Wilson wrote: > > > For linux ham, I would recommend Linux Mint where you can install the > o/s on your computer and download and install ham apps easily. If you > want to run off a small O/S via cd or flash go with Puppy. Fldigi works > good with either...gud luck, Alan >
Re: [digitalradio] Linux Here I come!
James French wrote: > I would recommend Ubuntu 9.04 to start with. I have not downloaded it yet but I believe Ubuntu 9.10 was released this past week. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] WINMOR
The $49 is for AGW Packet Engine Pro. I believe you can run sound card packet using the freeware AGWPE software as well. Tim, N9PUZ Warren Moxley wrote: > > Tim, > > Good info. > > I really did not what to buy more hardware. I noticed that they want $49 > for the av2agw software for VHF packet. > > Warren - K5WGM > > --- On *Mon, 8/24/09, Tim N9PUZ //* wrote: > > From: Tim N9PUZ > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] WINMOR > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Date: Monday, August 24, 2009, 12:06 PM > > There 7 or so VHF/UHF Winlink Gateways that show up on the map in the > Dallas, TX area. So, even without HF you may be able to send and > receive email via VHF by connecting to one of them. The HF option is > very nice IF you have a Pactor III modem. I am looking forward to > WINMOR myself. > > Here is some info on the VHF/UHF side of things. A 1200 baud hardware > TNC is very inexpensive or some people have reported good success with > the free software/soundcard TNC from SV2AGW. > <http://www.sv2agw. com/ham/sc. htm <http://www.sv2agw.com/ham/sc.htm>> > > Map of packet stations: <http://www..winlink. org/RMSPacketPos > itions <http://www.winlink.org/RMSPacketPositions>> > > Two of those, N5BYL-10 (Plano) and KY5S-10 (Mansfield) show 9600 baud > service on 440 MHz in addition to the more common 1200 baud 145 MHz > service typically offered. > > Paclink (your user client program) can connect to the Winlink servers > via 3 methods: > > 1) A telnet connection when your Internet service is working (you do > not type at a telnet terminal, Paclink uses telnet in the background.) > > 2) A 1200/9600 baud packet radio connection if an RMS Packet gateway > is nearby and has Internet connectivity > > 3) An HF connection which presently requires a TNC/Modem capable of > Pactor I, II, or III. (Many users do not use this 3rd option.) > > The idea behind having the telnet connection is that at a given > location the user does not need to know if the Internet connection > works or not. If it is working your winlink.org emails come and go > over the wired connection. When the Internet to your location is out > your winlink.org email comes and goes via packet radio. > > If you use an HF option a licensed operator must "listen before you > transmit" to avoid QRM and a lot of ill will from other users of the > HF bands. > > Tim, N9PUZ > (N9PUZ-10 Gateway in Springfield, IL) > > Warren Moxley wrote: > > > > Andy, > > > > I Live in Dallas, TX and there are neighbors who have relatives > on the > > coast who need Ham guys to help out in times of Hurricanes or > some other > > kind of emergencies. I heard that WinLink got its claim to fame > during > > the Katrina disaster, because of this WinLink got a real boost > and has a > > large base over other HF email solutions. > > > > "via the Internet abd the Telnet client." I am using Windows XP > and do > > not have a Unix computer, but can use telnet in command mode via > DOS.. > > Have not used Unix in years even though I retired from Sun > Microsystems > > in 2004. These days all my computers are Windows XP mainly > because of > > the software I use and my XYL uses. > > > > "WINLINK is easy and you do not need HF to use it" > > Anyway, I thought the whole purpose of WinLink is to get email > access > > when you do not have internet access. If I have Internet access I > don't > > really need WinLink. So in my case I really need HF not VHF.. > This is > > what I want for emergency operations. When Power and > communications are > > down, we can use email via HF as a client. I do not have WinLink > because > > I have do not have a hardware TNC of any kind, just a HF Radio > > (ICOM-746), PC (dedicated Lenovo NetBook 3g of memory) and a Buxcom > > Rascal. I do use many of the digital modes via FLDIGIROL and > really like > > Olivia and Domino EX and FLDIGI has a email solution via psk250. > I am > > on 30m most days. I was looking for a software email solution > when ran > > into to a WinLink guy in California and he told me about WINMOR. > I don't > > think he knew it was not ready for prime time since he has a real > Pactor > > III TNC. I
Re: [digitalradio] WINMOR
There 7 or so VHF/UHF Winlink Gateways that show up on the map in the Dallas, TX area. So, even without HF you may be able to send and receive email via VHF by connecting to one of them. The HF option is very nice IF you have a Pactor III modem. I am looking forward to WINMOR myself. Here is some info on the VHF/UHF side of things. A 1200 baud hardware TNC is very inexpensive or some people have reported good success with the free software/soundcard TNC from SV2AGW. <http://www.sv2agw.com/ham/sc.htm> Map of packet stations: <http://www.winlink.org/RMSPacketPositions> Two of those, N5BYL-10 (Plano) and KY5S-10 (Mansfield) show 9600 baud service on 440 MHz in addition to the more common 1200 baud 145 MHz service typically offered. Paclink (your user client program) can connect to the Winlink servers via 3 methods: 1) A telnet connection when your Internet service is working (you do not type at a telnet terminal, Paclink uses telnet in the background.) 2) A 1200/9600 baud packet radio connection if an RMS Packet gateway is nearby and has Internet connectivity 3) An HF connection which presently requires a TNC/Modem capable of Pactor I, II, or III. (Many users do not use this 3rd option.) The idea behind having the telnet connection is that at a given location the user does not need to know if the Internet connection works or not. If it is working your winlink.org emails come and go over the wired connection. When the Internet to your location is out your winlink.org email comes and goes via packet radio. If you use an HF option a licensed operator must "listen before you transmit" to avoid QRM and a lot of ill will from other users of the HF bands. Tim, N9PUZ (N9PUZ-10 Gateway in Springfield, IL) Warren Moxley wrote: > > Andy, > > I Live in Dallas, TX and there are neighbors who have relatives on the > coast who need Ham guys to help out in times of Hurricanes or some other > kind of emergencies. I heard that WinLink got its claim to fame during > the Katrina disaster, because of this WinLink got a real boost and has a > large base over other HF email solutions. > > "via the Internet abd the Telnet client." I am using Windows XP and do > not have a Unix computer, but can use telnet in command mode via DOS.. > Have not used Unix in years even though I retired from Sun Microsystems > in 2004. These days all my computers are Windows XP mainly because of > the software I use and my XYL uses. > > "WINLINK is easy and you do not need HF to use it" > Anyway, I thought the whole purpose of WinLink is to get email access > when you do not have internet access. If I have Internet access I don't > really need WinLink. So in my case I really need HF not VHF.. This is > what I want for emergency operations. When Power and communications are > down, we can use email via HF as a client. I do not have WinLink because > I have do not have a hardware TNC of any kind, just a HF Radio > (ICOM-746), PC (dedicated Lenovo NetBook 3g of memory) and a Buxcom > Rascal. I do use many of the digital modes via FLDIGIROL and really like > Olivia and Domino EX and FLDIGI has a email solution via psk250. I am > on 30m most days. I was looking for a software email solution when ran > into to a WinLink guy in California and he told me about WINMOR. I don't > think he knew it was not ready for prime time since he has a real Pactor > III TNC. It still looks to me that your are pretty much stuck without > this piece of hardware if you really need to do WinLink via HF. It looks > to me that WinLink is great for guys at sea who can afford the hardware, > but I don't see it for hams guys on limited funds. Maybe pskmail is > better for us guys without this expensive hardware. > > I do not have WinLink and I understand I do not know all of what It can > and can not do. > > So I really don't understand your answer, Andy. Please give me some more > detail and tell me what I am missing. > > Thanks in advance, > > Warren - K5WGM > > > --- On *Mon, 8/24/09, Andrew O'Brien //* wrote: > > > From: Andrew O'Brien > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] WINMOR > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Date: Monday, August 24, 2009, 6:26 AM > > > > WINMOR is still several months from initial release. WINLINK is easy > and you do not need HF to use it, your can use it without Pactor via > VHF (Packet) or via the Internet abd the Telnet client. > > Andy K3UK > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Tim N9PUZ > wrote: > > > > > > I do not think an actual price has been mentioned but I recall the > > idea is just for the development team to partially fund som
Re: [digitalradio] WINMOR
I do not think an actual price has been mentioned but I recall the idea is just for the development team to partially fund some needed test equipment for future projects. An example mentioned a while back was "under $50" but I do not recall if that was from someone on the development team or not. With all they provide free of charge I expect that if it is not free it will be affordable for anyone who needs it. Consider that WINMOR is a sound card mode. Since you don't have to buy even a 1200 baud style TNC, that would make WINMOR worth at least the $75 you might pay for the least expensive TNC kit you can buy. Tim, N9PUZ Russell Blair wrote: > > Warren, It's my understanding that WINMOR is not going to be free > software, that going to cost something. ? do you know what the price > goig to be.? > > Russell
Re: [digitalradio] WINMOR
Warren, Our local ARES group has used HF Winlink in drills and demonstrations for several years. We do not have a P-III modem but use an older PK-232 that supports P-I. It is a bit slow but works and you can get a feel for what HF Winlink is like. We are not part of the WINMOR test program but I agree it looks promising. Here locally I run a VHF Winlink Gateway (N9PUZ-10.) The VHF side of things is obviously not as long distance as HF but it will work quite satisfactorily with a 2 Meter FM radio and a 1200 baud TNC. In our case we can make an RF email connection from anywhere in the county either directly or through an area digipeater. As it happens my home is served by an ISP other than the one that serves the city itself. This gives us a good probability that the Winlink Gateway will still have Internet access if the City's provider is out of service. Tim, N9PUZ Springfield, IL k5wgm wrote: > Hello, > > I have been talking to a ham about WinLink 2000, used for email via > HF Radio. He has a WinLink server in California. He has thousands > of emails passing through his server every day. WinLink is designed > to use the expensive hardware TNC PACTOR I,II and III. It is great > for emergency communication. Most Hams can not afford $1,100 to > $1,600 for a the PACTOR III. This is where WINMOR comes in. WINMOR > is a software solution using a soundcard connected to a HF radio > via SignalLink interface, possibly other interfaces in the future. > WINMOR could be a good solution for the client side but possibly > not the server side. It does not appear to ready for primetime but > looks very promising according to hams who are in the know. Pactor > took over 15 years to get to its current evolution and the work was > done by a very capable team of engineers. Building a software > solution via a soundcard is a big challenge. > > I would like to know any of you have experience with WINMOR and or > WinLink. I am one of those hams that does not have the funds for an > expensive TNC but would like to experiment with WINMOR. > > Warren - K5WGM > > Link: http://www.docksideradio.com/ http://www.winlink.org/WINMOR > http://www.winlink.org/node/12 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WINMOR/
Re: [digitalradio] Zapped PCs, data recovery, and Windows !
Andrew O'Brien wrote: > > After years or running PC's without issues, I have had 4 go bad in 12 > months. Two this week, 4 days apart via thunderstorms . One went today > just an hour after I had fully reinstalled ham equipment on a new PC > that arrived yesterday. The new one survived, I had unplugged it at the > sound of thunder. I powered off the older one but forgot to remove the > power cord, it got zapped. I put in a spare power supply that i had, > that lasted 5 minutes and gave up the ghost. Maybe something else was > weakened by the original zap and caused the second power supply to burn > out. Your question has been answered several times. Once the next one is up and running... 1. Use a good quality UPS so you have nice clean power going to the machine all the time. 2. Make sure any other lines such as network cables either have good surge protectors and/or are unplugged. This include sound card interfaces, serial port rig control stuff, etc. 3. Use a disk image program such as Ghost, True Image, or Terabyte's Image for Windows/Linux/DOS for backups. In the event that the disk drive fails you can be back up and running very quickly. I like to back up to an external USB drive that I normally leave unplugged from AC power and disconnected from the computer. 4. I work from home. In addition to all of the above my office computer has a RAID 1 disk array. There are two 500GB drives but the disk controller mirrors one to the other. The computer thinks there is a single drive. If one drive goes TU you can replace it, reboot, and the controller rebuilds the new drive to again be a mirror of the old one. Drives are very inexpensive these days. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Zapped PCs, data recovery, and Windows !
Andrew O'Brien wrote: > > > Thanks Rick. Kinda like buying a car and it being rendered > inoperative if I installed a new engine. Exactly. You would most likely have to buy the exact same make, model, and year of car for it to work. Tim, N9PUZ Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. 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:digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Fldigi Linux CD
Andrew O'Brien wrote: > Can someone point me to a free ISO burner and also a current link for a ISO > file so that I can burn a new bootable Linus FL-digi? Thanks I like the Ashampoo Burning Studio software. You can download an older version free from cnet.com. Do a search for "ashampoo free" and download the burning studio package. It burns iso images, creates images, creates data cds, copies cds, etc. Also does DVD and BlueRay formats. Don't know about an FLDIGI iso but you could download the regular program and create a CD using the above software perhaps. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Possible Purchase
If you do not have to have an external sound card the various interfaces that use your computers internal sound card are much less expensive. With some, such as the Rascal GLX you switch cables to use them with different transceivers. There are many other choices, I just happen to be familiar with that one. Tim, N9PUZ Gmail - Kevin, Natalia, Stacey & Rochelle wrote: > > Thanks Simon, > > But the big issue is the price. This one you mention is also up in the > US$200 area, which is nearly NZ$400 for us, exchange rate. > Makes me think twice before I purchase. > > I think I will get a sound interface it's just twisting my arm a little > more to finally do the bank transfer. > > Regards > Kevin., ZL1KFM > > BTW, version 7 is working great for me. Had one issue with DM780 > shutting down when going into TX mode. Might of been because the network > link was not active between it and HRD. > > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Simon (HB9DRV) <mailto:simon.br...@kns.ch> > *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Sunday, July 12, 2009 9:34 PM > *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Possible Purchase > > Look at the microHam USB Interface III - soundcard and CAT in one > package, I have one and use it with my own TS-480SAT. > > http://www.microham-usa.com/Products/USB3.html > <http://www.microham-usa.com/Products/USB3.html> > > Simon Brown, HB9DRV > www.ham-radio-deluxe.com <http://www.ham-radio-deluxe.com> > > - Original Message - > *From:* Gmail - Kevin, Natalia, Stacey & Rochelle > <mailto:spar...@gmail.com> > > I had a look at the Rigblaster Pro, but at US$299 I felt this > was a little high (I could be wrong here) Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Use the *$%#ing RS ID!
I think we're seeing first hand why a well researched, vetted description will be so useful! One suggestion for the final web repository and any papers that may be written... PLEASE PUT A DATE ON IT. I don't know how many times I've searched for information, APRS comes to mind most recently, and you find something where you have no clue when it was written or published. Comments such as "This is the latest version of XYZ and supercedes all others" are totally worthless as well. Few things are never revised. Tim, N9PUZ Sholto Fisher wrote: > It is not Olivia or MFSK16 guys. > > It's just MFSK modulation based on Reed Solomon coding. > > From Patrick's documentation: > > "Each mode corresponds to a message which is transformed in a particular > Reed-Solomon sequence. Each sequence is composed of 15 symbols (of 4 > bits), each symbol being transmitted in a MFSK modulation. There are 16 > possibilities of frequencies separated by 11025/1024=10.766 Hz, each > symbol transmission being done on only one frequency for a duration > equal to 1024/11025*1000=92.88 ms. So, the 15 symbols are transmitted in > 15*1024/11025=1,393 s." > > 73 Sholto > K7TMG > > Andy obrien wrote: >> >> >> MFSK16, not Olivia. >> >> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:16 AM, David Little> <mailto:dalite01%40bellsouth.net>> wrote: >> > >> > >> > This is not an official answer, but I will take a stab at it. >> > >> > RSID is an Olivia transmission at the beginning of each digital >> > transmission that contains the operating parameters used by the >> originating >> > >>
[digitalradio] Source for APRS Packet Code
I'm searching for example code that generates and decodes data sent to and from a KISS mode TNC to send and receive APRS compatible text messages. If anyone knows of anything publicly available I'd appreciate a pointer to the source. Thanks in advance for any help. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] FLDigi / Cygwin Question
Thank you Skip. I've been running it that way for a week or and just got around to checking--there are more programs on my machine that use the Cygwin DLL than I had thought. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't on thin ice and didn't know it! Tim, N9PUZ kh6ty wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Fldigi will look first for the one in the same folder as fldigi.exe, so > just make sure the latest is in there and keep them together. The latest > public release is 3.11.5, which you can download at > http://w1hkj.com/NBEMS/, and includes the latest cygwin1.dll. I doubt if > the other programs will look in the folder with fldigi.exe. Just leave > the folder intact and create a shortcut from fldigi.exe to the Desktop > or elsewhere and you probably already do. You can leave the other > cygwin1.dll's where they are. > > 73, Skip KH6TY > > Tim N9PUZ wrote: >> >> FLDigi uses the cygwin1.dll file in it's Windows installation. There >> is a caution in the documentation that it is bad ju ju to have >> multiple cygwin1.dll files on your computer because they may be >> different versions and not get along. The docs say the dll needs to be >> in the same directory as the executable but don't really say how to >> resolve the issue of needing more than one copy. >> >> What's the proper way to handle this? >> >> I ask because a search of drive C: shows 6 copies of cygwin1.dll for >> various applications I use. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Tim, N9PUZ >> >> >
[digitalradio] FLDigi / Cygwin Question
FLDigi uses the cygwin1.dll file in it's Windows installation. There is a caution in the documentation that it is bad ju ju to have multiple cygwin1.dll files on your computer because they may be different versions and not get along. The docs say the dll needs to be in the same directory as the executable but don't really say how to resolve the issue of needing more than one copy. What's the proper way to handle this? I ask because a search of drive C: shows 6 copies of cygwin1.dll for various applications I use. Thanks, Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Sound Cards
Tiny circuit work isn't a problem. Do you have a link to that modification? It's sort of amazing that $7.50 will get a working external sound card but obviously you've tried this and found it to work. I actually had a couple of other items to order from them as well. Spreads out the shipping. Tim, N9PUZ kh6ty wrote: > Tim, have you tried the "USB sound adapter"? The low end noise that the > standard SignaLink has is not there and you can just use VOX for PTT > switching. It is also an external soundcard. For only $7.50, you can > hardly go wrong! > > If you can handle tiny chips, there is also a PTT output that you can > bring to the outside. > > http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=HE-280B&cat=SND > > 73, Skip KH6TY > > >> >> Thank you Peter. I've been looking at external sound cards to use with >> a laptop for portable work. The internal unit in my laptop doesn't >> work all that well and my thinking was if I use a good quality >> external unit it can move to a new laptop when I upgrade some day. >> >> Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Sound Cards
Peter Frenning [OZ1PIF] wrote: > > Tim N9PUZ skrev: >> How old are these units that have been modified to work properly? >> >> Tim, N9PUZ >> > Less than a year, the newest was bought just a month ago. Unfortunately > Tigertronics don't mark their products with Serial Numbers or production > date, so you have no way of knowing for sure. The newest units have had > the 33uF substitution, but nothing else. > > -- > Vy 73 de OZ1PIF/5Q2M, Peter Thank you Peter. I've been looking at external sound cards to use with a laptop for portable work. The internal unit in my laptop doesn't work all that well and my thinking was if I use a good quality external unit it can move to a new laptop when I upgrade some day. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Sound Cards
How old are these units that have been modified to work properly? Tim, N9PUZ Phil Barnett wrote: > > > On 06/17/2009 05:17 PM, Peter Frenning [OZ1PIF] wrote: >> Rick W skrev: >>> You could use an external device as others have suggested. I don't >>> generally recommend the SignaLink USB due to the low frequency noise >>> problem, however many hams either ignore it or are not aware of it. >>> Further, after some considerable denial on the part of Tigertronics, >>> they may have corrected this in later versions, but I can not yet >>> confirm that. >>> >>> On the other hand, I do recommend the SignaLink USB for the simplest >>> possible portable unit such as might be used for public >>> service/emergency communications and you don't want to be concerned >>> about COM ports or USB to COM adapters. Just plug in the USB to the >>> computer and plug in a rig specific cable and you can operate. >>> >>> >> If you really like the simplicity of the SignaLink USB ( I do), you >> can fix it's various problems, see Here: >> >> http://www.frenning.dk/OZ1PIF_HOMEPAGE/SignaLinkUSB-mods.html > > I did these mods on my SignalLink USB. > > It made a huge difference, just like the article said it would. > > Since I stole the transformers out of old 8 bit modems and I had a > little toroid to wind up the inductor the total cost was about $2.50. I > repainted the outside shell at the same time and the Hammertone dark > grey paint cost more than the parts. I hated the putty color.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Time to start a PSK qrp freq?
I also find that using a combination of narrow filters and passband tuning helps dig out the weak ones in the presence of strong stations. I've been using an IC-7200 for the past few months. It's Twin Passband Tuning feature of the DSP lets you electronically narrow the IF passband. Very useful once you get the hang of using it. In general I don't see the problem with trying to establish a "QRP Watering Hole" for PSK31 but I think it might be better to stick with a base frequency such as 14.070 MHz but maybe encourage people to stick to QRP levels in a certain audio frequency range. When the propagation is good 30 meters is a great QRP band too. At least here in the US you avoid having to compete with the really high power stations. 73, Tim, N9PUZ kh6ty wrote: > Frank, often the loss of a weak signal in the presence of a strong one > is due to AGC capture by the strong station, which reduces the gain you > need for the weak one. Try using passband tuning or IF shift to reduce > the presence of the strong station in the passband so the AGC will not > be affected by it so much. > > If you see the waterfall suddenly grow more dim when a strong station > comes one, then you can suspect that the strong station has caused the > AGC to reduce gain. > > On our PSK-20 QRP design (Smallwonderlabs.com), we do not use any AGC > but have a wide dynamic range detector and there is never any loss of a > weak signal when a strong one comes on, even right adjacent to the weak > signal. I wish the transceiver manufacturers would start designing > receivers that can dispense with AGC on digital modes without > overloading the IF chain. > > 73, Skip KH6TY
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New version of Mixw
jhaynesatalumni wrote: > No, let's get back to Rick's question and ask what it is about > MixW that you find to be superior to everything else out there. > I downloaded a trial version of MixW long ago and wasn't impressed > enough to want to go further with it. What am I missing? I can't speak for anyone else but I still use and like MIXW. Why? Because I'm just comfortable using it, not because it's necessarily better. When I first tried a digital mode other than RTTY I used Digipan. I liked it so I purchased MIXW. Since then I've tried others and they work just fine, they just aren't what's burned into my head. I think it's pretty common for people to stick with a tool that we first get comfortable with unless it really has some deficiency. If I were selecting a program for the first time now I imagine HRD would be my personal choice. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] backup
Ken Hucksoll wrote: >...I have only done backup's never have had to > restore... So, how do you know it works? Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Boot discs for emcomm/ham radio
Toby Burnett wrote: > > What size do these image programs make the image? Do they really work > in the event of total system failure? It is a rather old PC here also > and I think doing anything like this is going to cripple it. Sorry to > high jack the thread but seems a good topic for all of us. The image is compressed by default but essentially holds all of the information on the original disk drive plus some info it needs about the backup, etc. You can opt for no compression (faster) or more compression (saves space, slower) but I have only used the default compression option. Earlier this week at work I made an image of a 40GB drive that had about 30GB used. The image size on the file server is 17GB. It took around an hour to create the image. In general the disk images are good for restoring broken or infected hard drives. When you change motherboards or go to an entire new system the image you've saved is not set up to work with different motherboard chip sets, network interfaces, video, etc. I have not tried it but would be surprised if it worked. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Boot discs for emcomm/ham radio
Products such as Image for Windows/Image for Linux will let you create an image of your disk on CD/DVD/Network Drive. If your drive crashes or just gets really trashed with a virus you can do a "bare metal restore" to a new drive. No reinstallation needed for Windows, Linux, or any of your applications. <http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/index.htm> The software is not free but it is reasonably priced. Especially when compared to sitting and feeding install disks to a PC and rebooting it many times is the option. I have relegated an old PC to being a file server for our two computers. 500GB, 750GB, and even 1 TeraByte drives are pretty cheap these days. There isn't really a good reason to not have disk images and backups of anything that's worth much of your time. Tim, N9PUZ Toby Burnett wrote: > > I also would be interested as to booting windoze from a memory stick > like a live cd of Linux. > > It takes so long for me to re install everything should I have a system > wide crash. Just to get back back onto win XP pro I have to load XP > home first and then all of XP Pro. With that and all the driver disks > etc and whatever else you loose in the process it can take a good day at > least just to get back to a blank windoze system with everything > working. My Laptop which I just got (Vista) gave the option to make a > recovery disk set (4 DVD's!) which took the best part of 4 - 5 hours > to create. That's a lot of data even for a memory stick and I dread the > day I have to use them. >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: illinoisdigital group
Chuck Mayfield wrote: > I only wish Yahoo would find another sponser for the group. > What happened to all the good information in the files section? > What happened to all the good information in the posts? > Who actually owns the posts by group members? > Are we all to be punished? I know nothing about this specific case but own and moderate several groups so I know a little about Yahoo in general. The worst thing for any Yahoo group is to have one single owner. If that owner's email begins bouncing or the owner gets banned from Yahoo the group ends up in limbo until it is deleted for inactivity. It's my understanding that Yahoo will not turn it over to anyone else, even someone who was a moderator, but not an owner, of the group. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] illinoisdigital group
Just a note here to anyone who is the owner of any Yahoo Group. NEVER have just a single owner email address. At a minimum use a second email address of your own from a different domain and make that person an owner too. If there is only one owner and that address bounces for some reason you can end up in "yahoo hell" trying to get things running again. Tim, N9PUZ Rick W wrote: > I was able to contact Mark, WB9QZB, and he indicated that his yahoo > e-mail account and the group were disabled by Yahoo with no notice or > explanation. > > It is very difficult to even contact Yahoo customer service, which is > offshore, but he is working through corporate in California to attempt > to get the group restored. > > 73, > > Rick, KV9U
Re: [digitalradio] Suggestions for cheap Packet 2m rig
Sholto Fisher wrote: > Hi All, > > Can anyone recommend a brand/model of an older cheap 2m rig which is > simple to hook up to a TNC for VHF packet only. I don't really want to > buy a new rig just for this use so am looking at older "workhorses". > Power needs to be around 35W but would prefer a rig that can do a low > power setting too. > > Tnx es 73. > > Sholto > KE7HPV I recently bought a Kenwood TM-231 for about $50. A plus for using it for digital like Packet is its 8-pin microphone connector includes a fixed level audio output so it is very easy and neat to interface to a TNC. I've used mine with both a Kantronics KPC-3+ and a Coastal Chipworks TNC-X. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: RTTY: Some "new ones" I mopped up this weekend
John Becker wrote: > After almost 50 years as a ham, I just got on RTTY within the last > month. I decided to get in the contest over the weekend to get a little > experience operating RTTY in pileup situations. > > Before the contest I had worked 16 countries on RTTY. At the end of the > contest I had 75. I made 167 contest QSOs on 40, 20 and 15. What a blast! > > 73, > > John, K9MM What software and/or hardware did you use? I've used both MMTTY and MixW. It seems much easier to tune with MixW since you can "see" much more of the band and any signals present. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Fast ARQ Hardware
This is a sidebar to the current discussion but I've always been surprised at the amount of mechanical T/R switching that goes on in modern transceivers vs. a "no moving parts" approach. Tim, N9PUZ Howard Brown wrote: > You are an engineer so you know that there is a finite limit to the > number of times a rig can switch until the switching devices fail.
Re: [digitalradio] New digital mode interface due for release 25/08/08
I purchased an Icom CIV adapter from them a year or so ago. The construction and parts were very good quality, it works as advertised, and arrived quickly in the US from the UK. The interface you mention looks very interesting. Tim, N9PUZ Andrew O'Brien wrote: > FYI. > > > http://www.g4zlp.co.uk/unified/DM_AudioPRO_complete.shtml ... > > Anyone familiar with this company? > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: USB soundcard for use with laptop
expeditionradio wrote: >> VK3ZFS Frank wrote: >> a USB sound card looking for low noise and wide >> dynamic range. >> looking at lowest cost as possible. > > Hi Frank, > > When you find it, please let us know, be cause > I'm also looking for "USB Sound Device Nirvana" :) > > It would seem that the two requirements of: > 1. lowest cost possible > 2. low noise and wide dynamic range > > ...are somewhat in opposition. With most things... - Inexpensive - Fast - Reliable Pick any two. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Keeping connected and tools in the toolbox
Rick W. wrote: > Couple questions/thoughts on your comments, Jeff, > > One of my main concerns about the local design of Winlink 2000 was that > all stations would lose their connectivity to each other as well as the > internet since the developer wanted to keep the Telpac (Telnet internet > to Packet RF) connection very simple. > > If two or more stations are connected to a Telpac (or RMSpacket) now, > can you continue to communicate with each other if you lose the internet > connection when using Paclink MP? Or is it still the older design? In the new series of RMS programs there is a "RMS Relay" Program that is not released yet. It provides for local email when no Internet connection is available at the RMS Packet or RMS Pactor gateways. Again, there is more information straight from the WDT on the website. The Roadmap document provides a summary overview. www.winlink.org Tim N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Mail Clients for Emcomm
Andrew O'Brien wrote: > This raises the issue of mail clients for emergency communication > systems. I recall that a few years ago, the desire was to make > sending emergency traffic as simple as sending an email. Applications > incorporated Outlook Express templates within the program. I know it > is not really difficult to set up things like Outlook Express but am I > the only one that thinks having to set up mail servers represents a > step that will confuse the casual operator that suddenly finds > themselves having to figure out how to send an emergency message? > > Andy K3UK The time to think about setting up and using any emergency communications tool for the first time is NOT when you need to send a message. I'd imagine that if a person doesn't know how to set up their client software to work with Packlink MP or whatever it's a good bet that they don't know how to configure the other parts of the software, where their TNC cable is, they don't know how to operate the TNC, where the radio cable is, don't know what frequency to use, and any number of other things that no one else did for them. I think there is a point where people have to step up and actually invest a little time and effort in learning how things work so they can set them up, use the tools effectively, and do basic troubleshooting when the messages can't be sent or received. The fact that the situation requires emergency communication of some sort pretty much implies traditional types of tech support, automatic updates and bug fixes, etc. will not be available or will be real slow in coming. The trouble with so much spoon feeding in our society is so many people come to depend on some unidentified "them" to make their lives easy and care free. Guess what, "we" are the Emcomm people. There is no "them" to save us just because we were too lazy to learn, practice and be prepared as best we know how. 73, Tim (the sometimes curmudgeon) N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Winlink: Latest in Emcomm?
Andrew O'Brien wrote: > Aside from PACTOR, NBEMS and ALE, which has seemed to be moderately > active , what is the latest in emergency communication protocols ? I > did manage to use AIRMAIL a few years ago, just to see if it could > work. I vaguely recall something recently that said they have revised > some aspects of Winlink and eliminated Telpac, is that correct? If > so, what did they replace it with? > > Andy K3UK Telpac software which is used to run a VHF/UHF Winlink 2000 Gateway has been replaced with updated software called RMS Packet. Telpac systems will continue to work but I don't believe the software will receive any further updates. There is a similar new application called RMS Pactor to control the HF access. There was an announcement back in April 2008 on the Winlink mailing lists and you can read more of the details on their web site: <http://www.winlink.org/> Tim N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] What happened to the TNC?
w8oaj wrote: > So I have my dedicated computer for packet but now I need a TNC. Does > anyone have any ideas about building a TNC using modern > parts/technology? A couple of months ago I purchased a Byonics TT4 kit. I've been really pleased with it. I don't know if that dinosaur you bought has any software that will talk to a KISS mode TNC though. Tim N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] PSK31...but I know that already...
Rick W. wrote: > By the way, I have also tried to get new hams with Technician class > licenses to consider operating CW (even if computer generated/decoded) > on 80/40/15 and even digital on 10 meters, with absolutely no luck at > all... > Same thing with them not buying multi-mode/multiband rigs. Good points all. I always encourage the multi-mode rigs if their finances allow it. Not only can they do more with their Technician license but it lets them receive and experience so much more of what Amateur Radio has to offer. I think this is one of the best ways to encourage upgrades. Tim N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Dayton FCC Forum
Rick W. wrote: > But was he really saying that getting weather maps and general e-mail > use was included with buying and selling stocks and these uses are a > prohibited communications? Or was he saying that the first two uses were > OK and only the stock activity was not legal? In my mind 3 words we've all heard answer this question: "without pecuniary interest". Tim N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Best line of the day
"Any fool can know, the point is to understand." (Albert Einstein) Tim, N9PUZ Andrew O'Brien wrote: > Copied on 40M PSK today > > " I am having a hard time copying even though your signal is 599 , not > decoding every thing". > > Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: another non- contest on a no contest band
John Becker, WØJAB wrote: > Sorry all > that was meant to go direct. Some of us "lurkers" appreciate that it did not. Tim, N9PUZ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Narrow SSTV contact
There are a few of us experimenting with MP73-N on 10.132 MHz (USB). There is no set schedule as yet but some additional information can be found at: <http://www.30meterdigital.org/> 73 de Tim, N9PUZ cesco12342000 wrote: >> Question: what other modes are there in MMSSTV that will work in >> the narrow 500 Hz bandwidth? > > I think its limited to > mp73-n, mp-110-n, mp140-n and the > mc110-n, mc140-n, mc180-n modes. > > Unluckily i have never found a station qrv in those modes...
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
I began using MultiPSK a few months ago when Sholto was looking for help with some propagation monitoring on 30 meters. He has a program that works in conjunction with MultiPSK to automatically post spots on <http://www.projectsandparts.com/30m/>. Prior to trying and registering MultiPSK I had almost always used a registered copy of MixW. The performance of MultiPSK in the modes I've tried is very good. I especially like the panoramic reception as it makes it easy to "copy the mail" while I'm in the shack reading or working on other projects. The user interface for MultiPSK is very busy/cluttered in my opinion. An alternative I think might work well would be a tabbed system where each mode had its own tab and you only saw controls and displays for the mode you had selected. I think this might also make new additions easier because you would add a new tab vs. deciding where to squeeze in the new mode/button/slider. My suspicion is that people new to MultiPSK may be put off because of the learning curve. There is a LOT there to figure out for a new user that has not been with it as it has evolved. Couple that with a person's natural tendency to be comfortable with the old program they used no matter what new modes and features it doesn't have and you have a powerful tool that some people will just not put forth the effort to learn. That's not a bad thing, it's just a choice they make. Remember, it's a hobby. Hobbies are supposed to be enjoyable! 73, Tim, N9PUZ Tooner wrote: > I understand the specifications, as also found in Sholto's excellent > post of "Here's a rundown...". What I haven't seen a reply that > answers the original question of "Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might > like offer why they use it?". If it's the unique modes it offers, > what modes have you successfully used? If it's the layout, what do > you like about it compared to others? > 73. Frank K2NCC
