[digitalradio] Re: Setting up IC7000 for digital modes ??????????

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Yeah, if you key through the data port you don't have this problem. All the 
Microham products (Digikeyer, USBIII, etc.) have this issue. However they are 
so good in every other way it's easy to overlook it.


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> Thanks, I will disconnect  the mic and see how that goes.  Using the
> Digikeyer with it here.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 7:37 PM, aa777888athotmaildotcom <
> aa777...@...> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > Andy,
> >
> > I have one. I also use a similar Microham interface, the USB III. There is
> > absolutely nothing special about setting it up. Put it in USB mode and go.
> > However the Microham products rely on the ACC connector and the downside to
> > this is that when the radio is keyed via that connector the microphone input
> > is live. I have complained to them about that to no avail. Disconnect the
> > microphone to eliminate any background noise from the shack.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com , Andy
> > obrien  wrote:
> > >
> > > A friend dropped off his IC-7000, Digikeyer, and notebook for me to
> > > configure for digital modes. I have the various digital modes
> > > software configured but when I xmit and monitor on the other radio in
> > > the shack, the tones sound very odd and the receiving waterfall shows
> > > 3Khz wide signal rather than a narrow PSK31 signal. The manual does
> > > not have a section for setting up on the digital modes. Can someone
> > > save me on the learning curve and tell me how the IC-7000 is set for
> > > digital mode transmissions ?
> > >
> > > Any K3UK
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: Setting up IC7000 for digital modes ??????????

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Andy,

I have one. I also use a similar Microham interface, the USB III. There is 
absolutely nothing special about setting it up. Put it in USB mode and go. 
However the Microham products rely on the ACC connector and the downside to 
this is that when the radio is keyed via that connector the microphone input is 
live. I have complained to them about that to no avail. Disconnect the 
microphone to eliminate any background noise from the shack.

73

Scott

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> A friend dropped off his IC-7000, Digikeyer, and notebook for me to
> configure for digital modes.  I have the various digital modes
> software configured but when I xmit and monitor on the other radio in
> the shack, the tones sound very odd and the receiving waterfall shows
> 3Khz wide signal rather than a narrow PSK31 signal.  The manual does
> not have a section for setting up on the digital modes.  Can someone
> save me on the learning curve and tell me how the IC-7000 is set for
> digital mode transmissions ?
> 
> Any K3UK
>

[digitalradio] Re: sound card manager software

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

If you use one of the Microham interfaces it comes with exactly what you want. 
It's really great stuff. You can have presets for different modes, different 
bands, different software, etc. The best part is if you operate remotely as I 
do you can, via VNC or similar, adjust your drive levels without having to run 
into the basement and twiddle knobs.


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Hal"  wrote:
>
> To The Group:
> 
> The "sound card manager software" is about all I can think to call this 
> program. It would allow you to set up different settings for each program you 
> use with your soundcard and not have to constantly change mixer settings. 
> 
> For an example, you run Echolink,click this "program" and the Echolink 
> settings come up.  You run MultiPsk and those preset settings were saved and 
> named and  your ready to run the MultiPsk program. Ect etc.
> 
> I have a new AMD/Dual Core  Desktop machine running XP Pro. 3GB ram,1GB 
> Radeon Card, 2.7 speed, 500 GB HD,multi-monitor set up.
> 
> I run DxLab suite,N1MM/Mtty,MultiPsk,Echolink and work SSB on morning chats. 
> I have a AFSK interface for my digital modes and logging.
> 
> Why, you ask? Because several weeks ago on 40 meter chat the group said you 
> have a Bad Feed back in the audio.  I was at a loss. I had been running two 
> NetVista desktops. One for digital programs, the other for SSB and Echolink. 
> It was no problem because they ran independent of one another.  Now I have a 
> Workhorse AMD Machine and it won't function the way I want it to. I learned 
> that by disconnecting the speaker line from the new AMD machine, no feedback 
> into SSB chats.I could mute the line-out, no feedback. Now I go into to set 
> up the Multipsk and I have to reset the soundcard settings.  If  I want to 
> play music on the New machine the same thing occurs. That is the problem.
> 
> It may have been on one of the other digital groups , but I can't find the 
> source for this.  A Ham suggested this and another program or two to a 
> digital group ( I am on most of them). I had it saved but took a hit on the 
> Laptop/Vista machine and had to rebuild it from scratch and cannot find the 
> replies(late last year)  that were sent. Nor can I find it by researching the 
> groups. I know, from watching this reflector that many of you run the same 
> programs I run. So I thought I would start here. A Ham will know what I need 
> and why I need it to function in a certain way.  I hope you can help.
> 
> Any help or suggested programs would be appreciated.  Thanks, 73
> 
> Hal
> WD4MDA
> Jacksonville FL
>

[digitalradio] Re: List of WINMOR-WINLINK HF servers

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

List updated in real-time is always available here:

http://www.winlink.org/RMSHFStatus

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> FYI, recent list.
> 
> AC5PW-5   7084.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EM31TI  
> AE6LA-5   7077.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  CM98TF  
> A5UHR-5 3598.9WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  JO40ID  
> K3UK-53584.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FN02HK  
> K3UK-57084.8  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FN02HK  
> K3UK-528126.5 WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FN02HK  
> K6IRF-5   7085.0  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  DM14DB  
> K7EK-53569.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  CN87TB  
> K7EK-57081.1  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  CN87TB  
> KB1OOQ-5 3570.7   WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FN42FW  
> KB1OOQ-5 10130.7  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FN42FW  
> KB1OOQ-5 14102.4  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FN42FW  
> KB5OZE-5 3586.5   WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL49WU  
> KB5OZE-5 7087.5   WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL49WU  
> KB5OZE-5 10134.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL49WU  
> KN6KB-5   7083.0  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL98PF  
> KN6KB-5   10131.5 WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL98PF  
> N1DL-514110.5 WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL96CG  
> N1DL-614110.5 WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EM74TU  
> ON0SEA10142.7 WINMOR 1600 Hz  Public  JO11PH  
> PD4U-57045.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  JO22XE  
> PD4U-514113.5 WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  JO22XE  
> UA6DX-5   10145.5 WINMOR 1600 Hz  Public  KN95NA  
> UA6DX-5   21116.5 WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  KN95NA  
> VE1YZ-5   18099.0 WINMOR 1600 Hz  Public  FN84BQ  
> VE3ONN-5 7089.5   WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EN58JK  
> VK2HL-5   7049.0  WINMOR 1600 Hz  Public  QF56PG  
> VK2JN-5   3631.5  WINMOR 1600 Hz  Public  QF56OG  
> VK2JN-6   14112.0 WINMOR 1600 Hz  Public  QF56OG  
> W1EO-57081.9  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FN42IM  
> W3QA-510136.5 WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  FM15QC  
> W5SEG-5   3584.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL19AN  
> W5SEG-5   7091.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EL19AN  
> W7BO-53571.5  WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  CN85PV  
> WB9FHP-5 3576.5   WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EM68SM  
> WB9FHP-5 7076.5   WINMOR 500 Hz   Public  EM68SM
>

[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.18) of MULTIPSK

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Skip,

I looked at your patent and could not believe my eyes. You patented a tone 
detector and a beeper. One could have argued that it covered the original 
"beeper" pager. You could have owned the entire paging market (or did you?). 
Amazing and disheartening at the same time.

It is amazing to me how patents work (or sometimes don't).

k*b*l*0*0*q


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY  wrote:
>
> Hi Patrick,
> 
> Wonder if you happen to know that I created the original (very first) 
> Weather Radio Alert in 1974, which then created the entire weather alert 
> radio industry! At that time, there was no SAME feature, so the alarm 
> went off too often when no bad weather was close by. SAME came along 
> after I retired.
> 
> The key to making the alert reliable was this patented circuit:
> 
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=8&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=4,158,148&OS=4,158,148&RS=4,158,148
>  
> 
> 
> After manufacturing and selling over 3,000,000 radios in 10 years, I 
> retired and had time for ham radio. DigiPan was the first thing I did 
> after I retired.
> 
> Your support of the weather alert feature means a lot to me! Thanks!
> 
> 73, Skip KH6TY
> 
> On 6/19/2010 4:37 AM, Patrick Lindecker wrote:
> >
> > /Pour les francophones: la version française de ce message se trouve 
> > sur mon site (http://f6cte.free.fr). Il suffit de cliquer sur le lien 
> > "_Principales modifications (courriel avertissant de la sortie de la 
> > nouvelle version)_"./
> >
> >
> > Hello to all Ham and SWL,
> >
> > The new release of *MultiPSK (4.18)* is on my Web site 
> > (http://f6cte.free.fr ). It is not yet on Earl's 
> > and Terry's WEB sites.
> >
> > **
> >
> > *The main modifications of MULTIPSK 4.18* are the following:
> >
> > *
> >
> > 1) Decoding of the NWR SAME mode
> >
> > *
> >
> > NWR (National Weather Radio) SAME (Specific Area Message Encoding) is 
> > simply a method of identifying the local area to which an alert 
> > message applies. It utilizes a digital data stream that contains the 
> > alert message with information about the type of event expected, its 
> > timing, duration, and location. The NWR SAME system is used in USA and 
> > Canada, in VHF (162.400, 162.425, 162.450, 162.475, 162.500, 162.525, 
> > 162.550 MHz).
> >
> > _
> >
> > To listen NWR SAME messages: the NWS tests the NWR and SAME alerting 
> > technology weekly. These tests normally occur on Wednesday between 10 
> > AM and Noon with some variations to accomodate local requirements.
> >
> >
> > This mode is available for licencied copies, only (otherwise, the 
> > decoding is stopped after 5 minutes).
> >
> > See specifications further on.
> >
> > *
> >
> > 2) Transmission/reception of ARQ FAE QSP (indirect) mails through a 
> > "mails Server"
> >
> > *_
> >
> > Differences between a direct mail and a QSP mail (indirect)
> >
> > _
> >
> > A mail is direct if you can transmit it directly to the final 
> > addressee: A -->B.
> >
> > If you can't transmit the mail directly because the final addressee 
> > can't be directly reached due to the link conditions, the mail can be 
> > forwarded by the connected station, which acts as a "mails Server": 
> > A-->C (mails Server)-->B.
> >
> > For this, you must use a QSP mail.
> >
> > A paper based on snapshots presents this new system:
> >
> > *
> >
> > http://f6cte.free.fr/QSP_mails_forwarding_easy_with_Multipsk_in_ALE_and_ALE400.doc
> >
> > **
> >
> > 3) New macros:
> >
> > *
> >
> > - ** permits to ask to the other Ham or to the SWL monitoring 
> > your QSO to send you a reception report by e-mail. Your address must 
> > be specified in the "WEB ADDRESS" of your personal data ("Personal" 
> > button). It will be transmitted the following command "r...@lenemail 
> > addressCRC" which is the report demand. If correctly decoded, a 
> > reception report will be transmitted to the e-mail address that you 
> > specified, through Internet.
> >
> > _
> >
> > Examples of use of this macro
> >
> > _
> >
> > 1) The main objective is to ask the other Ham with whom you are in QSO 
> > to send you a reception report by e-mail.
> >
> > 2) But it can be also done by a SWL monitoring your QSO.
> >
> > 3) This macro can be used in conjuction with a Multipsk beacon which 
> > mode can be controlled by a RS ID. For example, you can switch the 
> > beacon in BPSK31 and asks the beacon for a reception report. 
> > Afterwards, the beacon can be switched in Olivia by a new RS ID and a 
> > new reception report can be asked...
> >
> > __
> >
> > _Note:_ this macro can be used for all digital modes (except JT65), CW 
> > included.
> >
> > A paper based on snapshots presents this new system:
> >
> > *
> >
> > http://f6cte.free.fr/How_to_use_the_« RPRT@

[digitalradio] WINMOR is out of beta and fully released

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

So you always wanted to access the Winlink network and send/receive email over 
HF but didn't want to buy a $1500 modem? No problem!

Get it here: http://www.winlink.org/ClientSoftware

Includes automatic download of server data (you can also get it over the air) 
and, if you follow the included directions, propagation analysis to assist in 
choosing the best server to contact.

Sadly propagation is so poor these days that some may get frustrated. It's a 
bad time to launch new modes :-(

k*b*l*0*0*q

[digitalradio] Re: Nomic vs. Signalink USB

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Also works for Winmor ARQ. Make sure the delay control is set to minimum. With 
correct drive, minimum delay pretty much works for every mode except Hell and 
maybe just a tiny bit of delay on Olivia.

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rein Couperus  wrote:
>
> Not an issue for pskmail arq, the timing supports VOX.
> 
> Rein PA0R
> 
> >As a matter of interest, are there any issues with using the SignalLink and 
> >some of the faster modes? I understand it is a VOX controlled device. Would 
> >you experience problems with it cutting off the start of the packet or 
> >alternatively not returning to receive quick enough to receive the ack?
> >
> >Julian, G4ILO
> >
> >--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Mike M [ wrote:
> >>
> >> Mike -
> >> 
> >> I have been using the USB Signalink with an FT817 and an old Kenwood TS-140
> >> for the better part of a year, and am very satisfied with its performance.
> >> It was easy to set up (you need a separate cable for each rig, and need to
> >> reconfigure some jumpers) and works very well with my Mac laptops (using
> >> fldigi).
> >> 
> >> 73,
> >> Mike, KL7MJ
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html
> >Chat, Skeds, and "Spots" all in one (resize to suit)
> >
> >Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: Congratulations!!!

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Yes, Winlink RMS stations listings and status (by clicking on the station 
listed) are available here: 

http://www.winlink.org/RMSHFStatus

The list is easy to sort by callsign and frequency by clicking on the relevant 
column headers. If it's not peer to peer it should be easy to figure out which 
RMS is involved.

If you think an RMS is involved you can contact the administrator using the 
email link at the Winlink site. They take polite, well thought out and 
documented complaints pretty seriously. Profanity laden diatribes or demands 
that all Winlink and Pactor stations should be shut down are much more likely 
to be ignored, of course :-)

k*b*l*0*0*q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "John Becker, WØJAB"  wrote:
>
> For what it's worth
> 
> As a WINLINK user I did some checking and could *only* find
> 2 (two) station within the winlink network using anything
> close to 10,147. that would be a KL7 and ON0 station using 
> a center freq of 10,147.700. and it has been days since either 
> has been  (more like weeks)   since either has been seen.
> 
> If it was Pactor it had to be a keyboard to keyboard QSO.
> I'm in *no way* saying it was not Pactor but I'am saying likelihood
> of it being a winlink stations are very low.
> 
> John, W0JAB
>

[digitalradio] Re: Digital novice needs advice!

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

What Andy said, plus hands down use your microHAM interface. It's top of the 
line!

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "obrienaj"  wrote:
>
> 
> Fred take a look at the complete DX Lab suite, it has LOTS of logging and rig 
> control capability and plays very well with Microham products.  Dave from DX 
> Lab and Joe from Microham USA work very cooperatively together.  Add Multipsk 
> to the suite and you have every digital mode you could want.
> 
> Fldigi and DM780 also work very well with Microham products .  DM780 with HRD 
> has good rotor control.  Since DX Lab, FLdigi, and HRD with DM780 are all 
> FREE you can try 'em all
> 
> Microham's device router has the ability to control two applications at the 
> same time, I find this very useful.
> 
> Andy K3UK
> 
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Fred"  wrote:
> >
> > I have 3 units in my shack for digital work. Which is considered to be the 
> > best?  
> > AEA dual port DSP-2232 or rigblaster pro or microHAM microKEYER II ?
> > 
> > What is the best software for the DSP-2232? I have the ROC Digital Desktop 
> > by CSS.  Anything better? 
> > 
> > For the microkeyer II a buddy of mine suggested the DX4WIN for logging and 
> > MMTTY for digital work.  Anything else worth looking at??
> > 
> > I also want to have computer control for my rotator(I have the interface). 
> > What's the best logging software which includes rotator control ?
> > thanks,VE3PIE Fred
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: KB1OOQ-5 back ON-LINE (Comcast comes through)

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Math humor...nooo :)

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, mikea  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 03:06:38AM -, aa777888athotmaildotcom wrote:
> 
> > Pretty good, those Comcast folks. Expensive as hell, but good. Fixed
> >in an hour and before bedtime, even :-)
> >
> > Very unusual to have an outage, actually, especially with no weather
> >in the area. In 10 years I can count them on the fingers of one hand.
> 
> So, fewer than 32, then. 
> 
> "Never trust a man who can count to 1023 on his fingers."
> 
> -- 
> Mike Andrews, W5EGO
> mi...@...
> Tired old sysadmin
>

[digitalradio] Re: Message via HF (Winmor)

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "g4ilo"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "aa777888athotmaildotcom"  
> wrote:
> > Nevertheless, if you are in an internet denied area (no wireline or 
> > commercial wireless) you can now send and receive internet email over HF 
> > and do it WITHOUT a $1000 Pactor modem.
> > 
> 
> Does that include email from non-hams and messages of a commercial nature?
> 
> Julian, G4ILO
>

For U.S. hams the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively. However the Winlink 
system does not monitor and censor messages to my knowledge. I suspect every 
once in a while people get nabbed passing commercial traffic however in this 
day and age those who are in the business of being in business have much better 
ways of passing email traffic.

I would encourage people to explore the winlink.org site to learn more about 
Winlink and how messages go between it and the internet. Also to certainly try 
Winmor if for no other reason than to learn about how it works and have a 
Winlink account setup "just in case".

[digitalradio] Re: KB1OOQ-5 back ON-LINE (Comcast comes through)

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Pretty good, those Comcast folks. Expensive as hell, but good. Fixed in an hour 
and before bedtime, even :-)

Very unusual to have an outage, actually, especially with no weather in the 
area. In 10 years I can count them on the fingers of one hand.

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, k...@... wrote:
>
> FYI 
> 
> "Comcast has bit the dust in my neck of the woods. I've taken the station 
> off-line, probably for the rest of the evening.
> 
> Sorry folks. And just when I got it running well again, too. Nothing I can do 
> about Comcast, though
> KB1OOQ "
> 
> Andy K3UK
> via winmor
>

[digitalradio] Re: Message via HF (Winmor)

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "obrienaj"  wrote:
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, k3uk@ wrote:
> >
> > Just a test message to the group vi a Winmor HF station.
> > 
> > Andy K3UK
> >
> 
> It worked !  My thanks to KB1OOQ for the 80M on-ramp.  It took 5 minutes to 
> pass the message  but hey...
> 
> Andy K3UK
> 
> *** Connected to WL2K RMS: KB1OOQ-5 @ 2010/03/26 00:32:38
> RMS WINMOR Bedford NH USA (FN42FW)
> 240 Minutes remaining
> [WL2K-2.2.1.0-B2FIHM$]
> Halifax CMS via KB1OOQ-5 >
>[RMS Express-0.5.5.0-B2F]
>; KB1OOQ-5 DE K3UK (FN02HK)
>FC EM EZ10XB1F8FPP 239 204 0
>F> A5
> FS Y
> *** Sending EZ10XB1F8FPP...
> FF
>FQ
> *** Disconnected from WL2K RMS: KB1OOQ-5 @ 2010/03/26 00:37:33
>

Very cool, Andy, sending a message to the Yahoo Group via Winmor and the 
Winlink Global HF Email System!

Just so everyone doesn't think that Winmor is dog slow, below is a section of 
my current Winmor RMS (Radio Mail Server) log file from this early evening. If 
you've got good propagation you are going to go fast. If not, well then I guess 
you are Andy :-)

2010/03/26 00:32:28 RMS WINMOR Bedford NH USA (FN42FW)
2010/03/26 00:32:29 240 Minutes remaining
2010/03/26 00:32:29 Callsign :
2010/03/26 00:32:29 K3UK
2010/03/26 00:32:29 Password :
2010/03/26 00:32:29 CMSTelnet KB1OOQ-5 3570700 21
2010/03/26 00:32:29 [WL2K-2.2.1.0-B2FIHM$]
2010/03/26 00:32:29 Halifax CMS via KB1OOQ-5 >
2010/03/26 00:33:47 [RMS Express-0.5.5.0-B2F]
2010/03/26 00:33:47 ; KB1OOQ-5 DE K3UK (FN02HK)
2010/03/26 00:34:46 FC EM EZ10XB1F8FPP 239 204 0
2010/03/26 00:34:46 F> A5
2010/03/26 00:34:47 Receiving binary data...
2010/03/26 00:34:47 FS Y
2010/03/26 00:36:46 FF
  
2010/03/26 00:41:36 RMS WINMOR Bedford NH USA (FN42FW)
2010/03/26 00:41:37 236 Minutes remaining
2010/03/26 00:41:37 Callsign :
2010/03/26 00:41:37 KC1PO
2010/03/26 00:41:37 Password :
2010/03/26 00:41:37 CMSTelnet KB1OOQ-5 3570700 21
2010/03/26 00:41:38 [WL2K-2.2.1.0-B2FIHM$]
2010/03/26 00:41:38 Perth CMS via KB1OOQ-5 >
2010/03/26 00:42:22 [RMS Express-0.5.5.0-B2F]
2010/03/26 00:42:22 ; KB1OOQ-5 DE KC1PO (FN42IH)
2010/03/26 00:42:22 FF
2010/03/26 00:42:23 FC EM HHJIRMPXSYQZ 4876 4707 0
2010/03/26 00:42:24 F> 9C
2010/03/26 00:42:35 Sending binary data...
2010/03/26 00:42:35 FS Y
2010/03/26 00:46:55 FQ

The first entry is Andy's traffic. Because of the protocol overhead even 
connections that pass no traffic take approximately 2 minutes from start to 
finish. The more you send the less the overhead affects the aggregate data 
rate. You can see the connect in the log right after Andy moved a message that 
had 4707 bytes (compressed, uncompressed it was 4876) in about 5 minutes. 
That's flirting with 1Kbyte/min over a 500Hz bandwidth HF connection INCLUDING 
overhead, i.e. not bad! That is pretty typical for a 500Hz Winmor connection 
with good propagation. With very good propagation rates can approach 
2Kbytes/min, i.e. VERY not bad for 500Hz bandwidth!

Finally, as Dave noted there is no RMS relay yet for Winmor. So there is no 
true, organic (radio based), mesh network, store and forward YET. For now 
Winmor is dependent on the internet to move messages between the Winmor CMS 
mail servers. Nevertheless, if you are in an internet denied area (no wireline 
or commercial wireless) you can now send and receive internet email over HF and 
do it WITHOUT a $1000 Pactor modem.

73

k*b*l*0*0*q

[digitalradio] Re: WINMOR software.

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

>From your signature line it appears that your hobby is monitoring. 
>Unfortunately there is currently no way to monitor Winmor even with the RMS 
>Express client software. RMS Express has no provisions for monitoring. Like 
>any ARQ protocol that uses extensive FEC it is very difficult to monitor in 
>any meaningful way because if you don't receive every packet of both stations 
>things go to hell in a hand basket pretty quick.

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jon-FL"  wrote:
>
> Has anyone found a place where it's possible to download the software
> without needing permissions first?
> 
> Thier Yahoo groups (the only place I know where the software resides)
> requires one to signup and then limits applicants to licensed ham ops only.
> 
> 
> -
> 
> Jon-FL  StarChat IRC Network channels   #wunclub  and   #monitor
> (2x Icom IC-R75, IC-R8500, Racal RA6790/GM, WJ-8716, Collins HF-2050,
> BCD996T, AOR ar-8200-MK3, HAL ST-8000a, M-8000, t2fd, D130NJ discone)
>

[digitalradio] Re: Understanding Virtual Audio Cable ?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Here's an example of what you can (and I did) do with VAC:

I remoted my station audio from the PC that is connected to my Signalink to my 
laptop that I carry around the house using IPSound. IPSound wants to attach to 
a sound card for input and output, just like DM780 (or Fldigi, etc.). Indeed, I 
could get it to work by attaching both IPSound and DM780 to my sound card. 
However I did not want Windows sounds going out on the radio and I wanted to be 
able to independently control the audio from the radio separately from Windows 
sounds. Enter VAC.

I created two virtual audio cables in VAC. In IPSound I assigned cable 1 to the 
radio output. In DM780 I did the same. Similar assignments were made for cable 
2 for DM780 output via IPSound. Voila, it worked! Think of the virtual cables 
as being like patch points in a patch bay.

The other cool thing is I used the Audio Repeater application that comes with 
VAC to monitor cable 1. This allowed me to independently assign a volume to the 
radio audio separately from the Windows sounds. 

If you need to keep audio connections between different audio applications 
(like IPSound and DM780, or DM780 and PowerSDR) separate from actual hardware, 
VAC works great.




--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> I understand sound cards.  For digital modes, we need to know how to
> set up audio coming in to the soud card and out of the sound card.
> When there is more than one sound card in the PC, we need to know how
> to set up digital mode applications for the desired sound card.  All
> relatively easy (except  the odd nomenclature in Windows Sound Mixer).
>  A couple of years ago , I was having coffee with a neighbour ham who
> had a new Flex 100 and he was explaining that digital mode with that
> radio was a challenge (back then) and that they had to use "Virtual
> Audio  Cable".  I remember reading something about it, briefly, and
> then forgetting about it.  There is something about the term "virtual
> audio cab;le" that causes my mind to melt, I have a hard time grasping
> what it does.  Probably the word "cable" that is throwing my brain
> off.
> 
> The other day, I  downloaded Virtual Audio Cable. I took a quick look
> , got  awfully confused, and closed the application.  I figure that
> this weekend, I will open it again and finally try to figure it out.
> Would I be far off if I guess that VAC essentially creates an audio IN
> and OUT path similar to having a second sound card?  I am not sure
> that I have any ham radio applications that require VAC, but i figure
> I better finally learn what it can do.
> 
> Andy K3UK
>

[digitalradio] Re: Super narrow filter: PSK31 with HB9DRV SDR-RADIO

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

If you are using an IC7000 this is as easy as adding a filter "slider" control 
to either HRD, DM780 or both. It's not too hard from the front panel, either. 
There are also three filter presets. I'll leave one at full bandwidth and 
another at the bandwidth of the mode I'm using. 50Hz is no problem. Watch the 
entire waterfall, pick on a signal, hit the QSY/center button, hit the filter 
button and answer. If I wasn't so lazy I'd write a macro.

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Phil Williams  wrote:
>
> Impressive.
> 
> philw de ka1gmn
> 
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Andy obrien  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > Finally! When I bought my TS-2000 a couple of years ago, I was aware
> > of one criticism for the digital operator super narrow filtering
> > in SSB was not as easy to achieve as in other rigs.It can be done via
> > a radio equivalent of standing on your head , using CW to receive and
> > USB to transmit. The steps to achieve that are not easy to automate,
> > so I have found it difficult to cope with those monster nearby PSK
> > signals that swamp the waterfall, and could be eased out if I had
> > better filtering in USB. So, tonight, I decided to see how that would
> > be addressed with my new SDR-IQ receiver and Simon Brown's preview
> > release of SDR-Radio . I was very happy to be easily able to dial in
> > narrow filters, til my heart's content. All at the stroke of a mouse
> > slider, couldn't be simpler. Simon's software is still very early in
> > development , so not yet seamlessly integrated with his DM780. Take a
> > look at this screen shot if you are interested,
> > http://www.obriensweb.com/36hz.jpg
> >
> > I highlighted items of interest in a red ellipse. I used Mixw to
> > decode the PSK31 because SDR-Radio does not do it itself. Yes, I
> > know... Mixw displays 20M, but I was actually on 80M.
> >
> > I have yet to try this when there is a monster signal nearby that
> > needs to be nulled out , but I think the results will be good.
> >
> > Andy K3UK
> >  
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: Haiti a test for emcomms

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

And it seems some have found the test to be too challenging. As reported by 
this article on QRZ forums:

http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=233290

8 hams fled the country after being attacked.
Reported by telephone as opposed to radio!
Apparently only 1 active ham in the entire country.
1 other ham accounted for (but not active?)
10 other hams unaccounted for.


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "aa777888athotmaildotcom"  
wrote:
>
> Some questions to consider:
> 
> How many hams are there on Haiti?
> How many have survived?
> Of those that survived how many are too busy fighting for theirs and others 
> lives, i.e. simply concentrating on rescue, water, shelter and food?
> Of the remainder how many have any kind of workable station (equipment, 
> power, etc.)?
> 
> I suspect we will see zero to no amateur radio traffic from Haiti, emcomm or 
> otherwise, unless someone gets on an airplane and brings it there.
> 
> Gov't, humanitarian and media agencies are and will be there with Satcom and 
> infrastructure repair capability before many or any hams get there.
> 
> It seems Twitter has already outdone any other mode of communications for the 
> masses. There is apparently some internet and wireless infrastructure left 
> standing.
> 
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Russell Blair  wrote:
> >
> > Andy, there is a learnning curve for PSKmail as well as ALE and Winmor and 
> > software for a PC, and power to run all this. but the phone nets maybe 
> > slow but all you need is a radio. 
> > hine site is all ways 20/20 to what we should have done.
> > Russell
> >  1- Whoever said nothing is impossible never tried slamming a revolving 
> > door!
> > 2- A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong 
> > enough to take everything you have. 
> > - Thomas Jefferson 
> > 
> > 
> > " IN GOD WE TRUST " 
> > 
> > 
> > Russell Blair (NC5O)
> > Skype-Russell.Blair
> > Hell Field #300
> > DRCC #55
> > 30m Dig-group #693 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > From: Andy obrien 
> > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wed, January 13, 2010 7:44:07 PM
> > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Haiti a test for emcomms
> > 
> >   
> > Yes Howard.  The HF Ale network is very active with hams standing by but I 
> > do not see any actual use of the ALE stations, so far.  PSKmail , as I 
> > mentioned earlier, appears tailor made for relaying traffic from/to Haiti 
> > .  from a ham to an ISP server.  Winmor/Winlink could also carry traffic 
> > from the island and pop in into the Internet.  The question is ... will 
> > any of these get any actual use,  or will hams on the island revert to old 
> > tested methods...  phone nets and phone patches ?
> > 
> > Andy K3UK
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:29 PM, W6IDS  wrote:
> > 
> >   
> > >Andy, is this the time when we see how effective or useful ALE and, since 
> > >you
> > >mentioned it, PSKmail are? WL2K? Haitian stations actually up and able to
> > >operate not withstanding. Are there any ALEs, WL2K, etc etc there operating
> > >in the past, involving Haiti or have had access to? Just wondering.
> > >
> > >We're all waiting for the important OUTBOUND H&W traffic (not inbound)
> > >and it will be of great interest to see how this initially plays out for 
> > >ultimate
> > >study.
> > >
> > >Howard W6IDS
> > >Richmond, IN Em79
> > >
> > >
> > >- Original Message - 
> > >From: "Andy obrien" 
> > >To: "digitalradio" 
> > >
> > >Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 5:45 PM
> > >Subject: [digitalradio] PSKmail to/from Haiti (or neighbouring countries) ?
> > >
> > >
> > >> Any use of Pskmail related to the emergency in Haiti ? Seems that is
> > >> is tailor made for such a situation. Short hops from Haiti to servers
> > >> on HF
> > >>
> > >> Andy K3UK
> > >
> > >
> >
>

[digitalradio] portable HF digital in the radio Re: Haiti a test for emcomms

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

This sounds fairly complex. Why not just use a netbook? Volume-wise it's about 
the same if not better after all the cables and "terminals" are considered and 
if you have enough power to run digital (high duty cycle) on the radio you have 
enough for the netbook.

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "sholtofish"  wrote:
>
> 
> There is the NUE-PSK device which now supports RTTY in addition to PSK31. You 
> still need a keyboard however.
> 
> In my opinion a better device is the Kantronics KAM XL or SCS PTC II. 
> 
> The Kantronics is much cheaper than the SCS and offers some features even the 
> Pactor-II/III modems don't.
> 
> A used KAM XL is a good investment because it is flash upgradable via a free 
> download on Kantronics website - no messing with expensive ROMs.
> 
> It offers (via a terminal) PSK-31, RTTY, ASCII, Pactor-1, AMTOR & G-TOR in 
> addition to it being a dual port Packet switch (up to 9K6). 
> 
> It's perfectly possible to run a "TheNet" compatible node at the same time as 
> a multiuser BBS with 480KB of non volatile storage. It is basically a 
> BBS/Node in a box that only consumes about 120mA at 12v. 
> 
> You can also link the ports to provide VHF<>HF switching. It also has a RTC 
> chip so you don't have to remember to set the date every time you boot up 
> which is important for message handling.
> 
> If you couple this with a cheap serial terminal - perhaps the Tandy WP-2 
> "wordprocessor" which provides an 80 column lcd display and can happily run 
> on a couple of AA cells for days (available on eBay for peanuts) then you 
> have a real low power system which is very usable.
> 
> You could run a traffic BBS on VHF and a Pactor-1 (or better yet G-Tor) link 
> on HF.
> 
> The PSK31 takes a little getting used to if you normally use a waterfall but 
> it is a very sensitive implementation and works very well.
> 
> I believe the SCS modems have a multiuser BBS too and of course Pactor-II and 
> Pactor-III if you can afford it but that is the real catch, these things run 
> around $1000 or more even second hand.
> 
> You can often find a KAM XL for around $250-$350 on eBay. A radio cable from 
> Buxcomm is about $25.
> 
> 73
> 
> Sholto
> K7TMG
>

[digitalradio] Re: Haiti a test for emcomms

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Some questions to consider:

How many hams are there on Haiti?
How many have survived?
Of those that survived how many are too busy fighting for theirs and others 
lives, i.e. simply concentrating on rescue, water, shelter and food?
Of the remainder how many have any kind of workable station (equipment, power, 
etc.)?

I suspect we will see zero to no amateur radio traffic from Haiti, emcomm or 
otherwise, unless someone gets on an airplane and brings it there.

Gov't, humanitarian and media agencies are and will be there with Satcom and 
infrastructure repair capability before many or any hams get there.

It seems Twitter has already outdone any other mode of communications for the 
masses. There is apparently some internet and wireless infrastructure left 
standing.


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Russell Blair  wrote:
>
> Andy, there is a learnning curve for PSKmail as well as ALE and Winmor and 
> software for a PC, and power to run all this. but the phone nets maybe slow 
> but all you need is a radio. 
> hine site is all ways 20/20 to what we should have done.
> Russell
>  1- Whoever said nothing is impossible never tried slamming a revolving door!
> 2- A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough 
> to take everything you have. 
> - Thomas Jefferson 
> 
> 
> " IN GOD WE TRUST " 
> 
> 
> Russell Blair (NC5O)
> Skype-Russell.Blair
> Hell Field #300
> DRCC #55
> 30m Dig-group #693 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Andy obrien 
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, January 13, 2010 7:44:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Haiti a test for emcomms
> 
>   
> Yes Howard.  The HF Ale network is very active with hams standing by but I 
> do not see any actual use of the ALE stations, so far.  PSKmail , as I 
> mentioned earlier, appears tailor made for relaying traffic from/to Haiti .  
> from a ham to an ISP server.  Winmor/Winlink could also carry traffic from 
> the island and pop in into the Internet.  The question is ... will any of 
> these get any actual use,  or will hams on the island revert to old tested 
> methods...  phone nets and phone patches ?
> 
> Andy K3UK
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:29 PM, W6IDS  wrote:
> 
>   
> >Andy, is this the time when we see how effective or useful ALE and, since 
> >you
> >mentioned it, PSKmail are? WL2K? Haitian stations actually up and able to
> >operate not withstanding. Are there any ALEs, WL2K, etc etc there operating
> >in the past, involving Haiti or have had access to? Just wondering.
> >
> >We're all waiting for the important OUTBOUND H&W traffic (not inbound)
> >and it will be of great interest to see how this initially plays out for 
> >ultimate
> >study.
> >
> >Howard W6IDS
> >Richmond, IN Em79
> >
> >
> >- Original Message - 
> >From: "Andy obrien" 
> >To: "digitalradio" 
> >
> >Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 5:45 PM
> >Subject: [digitalradio] PSKmail to/from Haiti (or neighbouring countries) ?
> >
> >
> >> Any use of Pskmail related to the emergency in Haiti ? Seems that is
> >> is tailor made for such a situation. Short hops from Haiti to servers
> >> on HF
> >>
> >> Andy K3UK
> >
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: what's the latest on WINMOR

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

That is correct--callsign at winlink dot org.

You have to register for an email account at winlink.

The email account is also accessible via web and telnet for maintenance.

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jhaynesatalumni"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "aa777888athotmaildotcom"  
> wrote:
> 
> > Just send to your Winlink account. That would be your callsign@ However 
> > note carefully the spam control features that are in effect at 
> > http://www.winlink.org/help. You may need to add "//WL2K" to your subject 
> > line.
> > 
> > Waiting mail is automatically transferred when you connect to a Winmor RMS 
> > server station.
> >
> 
> Thanks to Yahoo that callsign@ address got obscured, but I would
> guess it is callsign at winlink dot org.  Do I have to register with
> winlink to have that work, or does it just happen?
> 
> Jim W6JVE
>

[digitalradio] Re: what's the latest on WINMOR

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jhaynesatalumni"  wrote:
> 
> I've sent mail from radio to Internet through a couple of them.
> What do you have to do to send mail in the other direction?

Just send to your Winlink account. That would be your calls...@winlink.org. 
However note carefully the spam control features that are in effect at 
http://www.winlink.org/help. You may need to add "//WL2K" to your subject line.

Waiting mail is automatically transferred when you connect to a Winmor RMS 
server station.

[digitalradio] Re: what's the latest on WINMOR

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

There are now 4 beta RMS server stations on the air. I've transferred mail 
to/from the real world through one of them. It is all shaping up quite well. 
Now we just need a lot more RMS servers but Rick and Vic don't think the code 
is quite ready yet. It seems like there will be a good chance of having quite a 
few servers since the cost of entry is low!


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> The quick update is..
> 
> latest beta is 0.3.11.0  released this weekend.
> 
> Program is now much more stable, less Windows related crashes.
> 
> Connects are easier to establish.
> 
> Less "ping-ponging"
> 
> Thruput under noisy/weak conditions is still "so-so"
> 
> Thruput  with a good signal and well adjusted audio levels rivals that of
> Pactor II.
> 
> RMS servers now about to be activated.
> 
> Andy K3UK
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 1:57 PM, "John Becker, WØJAB"
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > Been awhile since I have seen anything.
> > But I have missed a lot since my motorcycle crash
> > back in May.
> >
> > John, W0JAB
> >
> >  
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: Nominations for 2009 Digitalradio Awards needed

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

I believe RSID is old news, 2007 if not 2006.

The recent surge in RSID use is really due to its excellent implementation in 
HRD 5.0. So from that perspective Simon should get an award for promulgating 
its use. However I will stick by my original statement that top honors this 
year should go to Rick.

[digitalradio] Re: Nominations for 2009 Digitalradio Awards needed

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

With all due respect to Patrick, all of his fantastic work and his fan club, 
this year really belongs to someone else.

I nominate for a dual award, Best New Digital Mode and Digital Innovations 
Award: WINMOR and Rick Muething!

This is perhaps the most significant advance in HF throughput, not to mention 
ARQ performance, in many years and it's FREE. For a long time a worthy 
competitor to Pactor that did not infringe on SCS intellectual property has 
been a Holy Grail. Well, it's here! Providing in excess of Pactor 2 performance 
AND at the same time it's substantially more bandwidth efficient with 500 and 
1600Hz modes. AND it has arguably THE most effective busy channel detector yet 
implemented. No other mode has the same potential to make global HF 
communications a more accessible tool for the average user and a more effective 
tool for the EMCOM community. Finally, for all you doubters, a WINMOR enabled 
RMS beta test station is already running!

Congratulations to Rick and the entire WINMOR team and I hope Andy chooses 
wisely :-)

k*b*1*o*o*q

P.S. Andy, did you get that ten bucks I sent you... ;-)

[digitalradio] Re: Getting serious about ALE for non-encomm digital hamming

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Lindecker"  wrote:
>
> Hello,
> 
> > Once an effective, simple and robust SELCAL standard is developed (again 
> > IMHO it should be a logical extension of the >existing RSID and Call ID 
> > standards) it could eventually be parlayed into a more modern and 
> > effective variant of ALE. By using
> RR for the nice SELCAL idea. I'm not sure it would be very easy if you need 
> a symetrical acknowledgment. If it is only a one way transmission without 
> any double acknowledgment it is much more easy. RS ID and CALL ID are public 
> sources. So...

One way would do it. To use an analogy, you ring the phone and the operator 
decides if he wants to pick up. With RSID, Call ID and SELCAL combined the 
called station would know he's being called, who's calling and on what mode and 
freq. Just like RSID, allow the alert to be ignored or allow the alert to cause 
the station to be put on the right mode and freq. Just like RSID the operator 
answers manually.

By the way, is there currently a mechanism for monitoring the 3KHz passband for 
a certain Call ID and only alarming on that?

[digitalradio] Re: Getting serious about ALE for non-encomm digital hamming

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:18 PM, aa777888athotmaildotcom
>  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I've gave PCALE a very good try. As implemented it suffers from several 
> > problems:
> >
> > 1. It is equipment specific and intensive. You either need an SGC tuner set 
> > up for bypass-on-receive (the only brand I am aware of that has this 
> > capability) or a special antenna that is resonant and >efficient on each 
> > band you plan to scan. You can also set up RF switching to bypass the tuner 
> > on receive but that becomes even more complex. There was a computer 
> > controlled tuner on the market >that could be controlled by MARS-ALE but 
> > MARS-ALE is not available to mere mortals and the tuner itself was buggy 
> > and is now out of production.
> 
> 
> This is not really correct with PC-ALE and a modern receiver that has
> a internal antenna tuner.  I have used PC-ALE with a TS2000 and an
> Icom 746 Pro and the tuner in both rigs memorizes settings for each
> frequency fast enough so that a match is achieved before an ALE
> transmission.  So, with my basic home brewed antennas (a 60M loop and
> a 20M ground plan vertical) I can macth 80-10M and use PC-ALE (or
> Multipsk) fully.

Andy--are you saying that the TS2000 and 746 will tune BEFORE transmit 
(assuming valid tune data for that freq is there)? If so that's really great, 
but it still speaks to my issue on requiring particular and more elaborate 
equipment to operate "real" ALE, i.e. scanning ALE (which is the whole point, 
of course!)

If they don't tune before transmit then you could be receiving into an 
unmatched antenna and thereby potentially causing significant reception 
problems.

My smart external tuner, an MFJ-993B, is almost fast enough (I have to add more 
"tune bits", which is just ONE thing that speaks to my "ALE is NOT so easy to 
set up argument" ;-) as it also tunes from memory, but it still doesn't help me 
on receive. :-(

[digitalradio] Re: Getting serious about ALE for non-encomm digital hamming

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

I've gave PCALE a very good try. As implemented it suffers from several 
problems:

1. It is equipment specific and intensive. You either need an SGC tuner set up 
for bypass-on-receive (the only brand I am aware of that has this capability) 
or a special antenna that is resonant and efficient on each band you plan to 
scan. You can also set up RF switching to bypass the tuner on receive but that 
becomes even more complex. There was a computer controlled tuner on the market 
that could be controlled by MARS-ALE but MARS-ALE is not available to mere 
mortals and the tuner itself was buggy and is now out of production.

2. The link margins necessary for the calling waveform are pretty substantial. 
Those used to the relatively robust nature of RSID or any of the other common 
digital modes will be sorely disappointed. Even Winmor, while better than ALE, 
requires substantially better conditions for success.

3. The software itself is relatively complex to setup and operate. I'm sure 
Andy will argue to the contrary :-) However IMHO it's significantly more 
involved than just firing up Fldigi and banging away at some Olivia or PSK.

4. The widely shared nature of the ham bands makes collisions inevitable given 
the automation inherent in ALE (automation that is the whole point, in fact) 
and the limitations of even the best busy channel detection algorithm. This 
issue tends to generate a lot of hate and discontent. However this ought to be 
the least worrisome issue. With an appropriate band plan (which already exists 
for PCALE) the carnage can be limited to just the ALE calling channels and 
anyone who wants to use ALE should be expected to sign up for a certain amount 
of interference and not be whining about it as long as it stays on the calling 
freq's.

In lieu of full-blown ALE consider the following idea:

I'm no software engineer and beggars can't be choosers, so forgive me for 
making the following related suggestion (Patrick already laid into me on this 
once!) Consider that RSID is great for identifying the mode and that Call ID is 
great for identifying who is calling. Both use signaling standards and 
waveforms that are very simple and robust. But what is missing is an equivalent 
SELCAL (selective calling) signaling standard using waveforms and formats 
similar to RSID and Call ID. Imagine you wanted to find somebody monitoring the 
3KHz of USB spectrum at 14070KHz dial freq. You could find a clear spot in the 
waterfall and transmit the SELCAL which contains the call sign of the station 
you wish to reach. At the receiving station the SELCAL enabled software would 
function in the same manner as that currently done for RSID, i.e. detect the 
call, display/sound a notification and provide automation for tuning and 
answering under operator control.

Once an effective, simple and robust SELCAL standard is developed (again IMHO 
it should be a logical extension of the existing RSID and Call ID standards) it 
could eventually be parlayed into a more modern and effective variant of ALE. 
By using time synchronized band scanning and transmission (similar to WSPR et 
al) probability of intercept can be substantially improved. Neither the SELCAL 
or time synchronization represent new technology and both derive from proven, 
similar implementations. So if one were to make a SELCAL on 80M, for example, 
once the spot on the waterfall was chosen by the operator (because we can't 
rely on unreliable busy-channel detection technology) the SELCAL transmission 
would occur at say for instance 10 seconds past the minute. Synchronized 
scanning would put all stations on 80M at 10-15 seconds past the minute, 40M at 
15-20 seconds, and so on.

The last piece would be to perfect busy channel detection and automate the 
selection of empty places on the waterfall, but this part of the puzzle is 
useless with SELCAL (very useful by itself) and synchronized 
scanning/transmission. And once this last part was perfected we are back to 
requiring special tuner/antenna solutions.

[digitalradio] Re: Winmor Stats - large file, v 03.3.0

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

10K is *not* a big file. But that's a GREAT rate!


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Cortland Richmond"  wrote:
>
> Sort of by accident sent a VERY large file (PDF of an ICS-123 form) today to 
> Hoby on a MARS frequency. 
> 
> The good news is the throughput.
> 
>Bandwidth: 1600   ISS Mode Shifts:   11
>Decode Attempts:   148
>Weak R-S Decodes :  90Weak R-S Sums:  2
>Strong R-S Decodes: 15Strong R-S Sums:2
>Bytes Sent :   100715 Bytes Received:5943
>Throughput(bytes/min)  Session Avg: 4836   Max 1 min Avg: 6453
>Estimated Sample Rate Offset (ppm): -190
> 
> We are in NVIS range of each other and had signals (Hoby's, anyhow) stronger 
> than the OTH radar.  The so-called peak wattmeter in the AT-3000 tuner said I 
> was hitting about 60 watts.
> 
> 
> Cortland
> KA5S
> - Original Message - 
> From: Tony 
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: 11/4/2009 4:34:21 PM 
> Subject: [digitalradio] Winmor Stats - VE3VBA>K2MO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All, 
> 
> Exchanged several text messages / file attachments on 20 meters with VE3VBA 
> today. No crashes or bugs to report with the latest version of Winmor (Vista 
> OS). 
> 
> Very good throughput with the 1600 Hz mode; signals were strong, band 
> conditions stable. 
> 
> Throughput(bytes/min)  Session Avg: 1729   Max 1 min Avg: 3564
> 
> Tony -K2MO  
> 
> ** Connect Request to VE3VBA at 2009/11/04 19:10:11
> *** Connected to: VE3VBA @ 500 Hz at 2009/11/04 19:10:17
> 
> 
> [Session Stats:]   Duration: 6.60 min
>Bandwidth: 500ISS Mode Shifts:   1
> Bytes Sent :   543Bytes Received:4537
>Throughput(bytes/min)  Session Avg: 770   Max 1 min Avg: 2130
>Estimated Sample Rate Offset (ppm): -65
> 
> [Session Stats:]   Duration: 2.62 min
>Bandwidth: 1600   ISS Mode Shifts:   1
>   Bytes Sent :   60 Bytes Received:4475
>Throughput(bytes/min)  Session Avg: 1729   Max 1 min Avg: 3564
>Estimated Sample Rate Offset (ppm): 47
>

[digitalradio] Re: FLARQ outperforms WINMOR

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Definitely apples to oranges, Andy. One doesn't even need to get into a 
discussion of speed (although I've finally tweaked things so that I reliably 
get ~1Kbyte/min on a 1.6KHz mode S9 connection with 1-5K payload).

The most important difference is that there is no promise of FLARQ being 
supported by a network of hundreds of radio mail server stations.

k*b*l*0*0*q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> Well, not an apples to apples test..  but Ron NY3J and I played for
> quite a while with FLARQ tonight on 80M and 40.  80M was was in poor
> shape with QRN and weak signals but we managed a few slow MFSK16 email
> transfers.  We then switched to 40M and I received Ron about S5, he
> was 200 miles away.  We really had NO problems transferring email and
> text files using PSK250.  I sent one big file that averaged 800 bytes
> per minute .  On Winmor I have not had more than 300 bytes  per minute
> although some  have reported 1000 bytes per minute.  My sound card was
> a $1.50 USB sound adapter.  After an hour or so, we tried PSK500 but
> were not able to get a "connect"  perhaps the band was changing.
> 
> So, while we are having fun seeing the good progress of WINMOR ...
> don't forget FLARQ.  It is simple and it works well.  My next step is
> to see if I can run both FLARQ and PSKMAIL at the same time.  While in
> the shack until about 0600 UTC, I will have my FLARQ beacon  beaconing
> every 15 minutes.  I have RS ID on , so you can switch me over if you
> need to change modes. Drop me an email on 7083 (7082 dial, plus 1000
> hz on waterfall)   When it is sleep time, I will close since we do not
> run this "unattended".
> 
> 
> 
> Andy K3UK
>

[digitalradio] Re: Why so much interest in WINMOR?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

I'm one of those rabid Winmor testers.

I have no experience at all with Pactor, etc. I have more than a bit of 
experience with sound card modes.

My reason is that I want in on the Winlink network without the expense of 
buying a hardware TNC. I have no real interest in using Winmor for peer to peer 
comm's other than to get it working good enough so the network host stations 
start running it. I would bet the same is true of most Winmor users.

k*b*l*0*0*q

[digitalradio] Re: Winmor Path Simulaitons

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony  wrote:
>
> All, 
> 
> For what it's worth, I ran Winmor "connect request" signals through Moe 
> Wheatley's path simulator. These tests are usually pretty good indicators of 
> how digital modes perform and compare over a real HF channel. 

Thanks, Tony. Very educational. I made some Winmor contacts over the weekend. 
It isn't easy. You need really good link margin and little fading to make it 
work compared to the modes that have spoiled us (MT63, Olivia, etc.)

I would be interested to know what those who have a lot of high-end packet 
experience (not me) like Pactor 3 think of Winmor. Sadly I bet anyone with a 
high-end packet TNC probably won't bother :-)

k*b*l*0*0*q

P.S. I posted a much longer review of my experiences over on the Winmor yahoo 
group.

[digitalradio] Re: QRV - ALE-400

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Listened, called, didn't hear anything.

20M is usually pretty shut down when I'm home in the evening (after 8 local).

Too bad you don't have 80M. If anyone in the northeast wants to try 80M some 
evening (NVIS path) let me know. I've always wanted to try ALE400 but find the 
MultiPSK interface fairly impenetrable, i.e. if you don't mind me fumbling 
through it!! We might need to jump back and forth between ALE and some other 
mode until I get it right.

Are you guys using "non-selective QSO in ARQ FAE" mode?

Scott
k*b*l*0*0*q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony  wrote:
>
> Rich,
> 
> > Will call you on 14074 after 2120 EDST.
> > de Rich/N2JR
> 
> Just got your message @ 22:30 local. I'm in the shack...
> 
> Tony -K2MO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "rich3x" 
> To: 
> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:15 PM
> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: QRV - ALE-400
> 
> 
> > OK Tony.  Will call you on 14074 after 2120 EDST.
> >
> >  de Rich/N2JR
> >
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony  wrote:
> >>
> >> Rich,
> >>
> >> > Tony - tried link several times  nil heard.
> >> > de Rich/N2JR FM19  VA
> >>
> >> Sorry I missed you; what time did you call? Had lengthy QSO with 
> >> K7TMG/QRP
> >> and KH2DF/W5.
> >>
> >> > Maybe path too short.
> >>
> >> It is a bit short, but I can usually hear VA on 20 meters during the day;
> >> must be Sporadic-E. No antennas here for 40 / 80 meters.
> >>
> >> We'll be on 14074.0 this evening - ALE-400 ARQ 'chat mode'. Let me know 
> >> if
> >> you can join us Rich...
> >>
> >> Tony -K2MO
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: Universal Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS) ?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Google is your friend. Found this for you, but not sure if it works any good:

http://www.coaa.co.uk/shipplotter.htm

Scott

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew O'Brien"  wrote:
>
> Any public domain software that can decode it ?
> 
> On 7/29/09, aa777888athotmaildotcom  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > They are not "normal" FM transmissions. AIS uses an emission designator of
> > 16K0FD. More specifically, a 9.6kbps GMSK FM modulation using HDLC packet
> > protocols.
> >
> > Almost everything you need to know is right here:
> >
> > http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav/ais/default.htm
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com ,
> > "Andrew O'Brien"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks Dave, is it via some sort of data burst?
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM, nf2g  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > All emissions on those channels are FM.
> > > >
> > > > 73 de Dave, NF2G
> > > >
> > > > __._,
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andy
>

[digitalradio] Re: Universal Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS) ?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

They are not "normal" FM transmissions. AIS uses an emission designator of 
16K0FD. More specifically, a 9.6kbps GMSK FM modulation using HDLC packet 
protocols.

Almost everything you need to know is right here:

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav/ais/default.htm

Scott

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew O'Brien"  wrote:
>
> Thanks Dave, is it via some sort of data burst?
> 
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM, nf2g  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > All emissions on those channels are FM.
> >
> > 73 de Dave, NF2G
> >
> >  __._,
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: " Hop, skip and jump away ... powerful, ALE implementation that would outperform MIL-STD-188-141A " ?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

More precisely, step 1 is not usually a call to anybody, it is a call to either 
a single station ("call") or group of stations ("netcall"), i.e. "B THIS IS A". 
There is also any anycall ("CQ") and a special anycall (sounding).

In terms of there being a lightweight implementation I'd suggest that 
anycalls/soundings are not necessary, nor even netcalls, and perhaps not even 
desirable. But it would be nice to set up a sked with one other person and 
within a minute or so find that person on any band that is open.

Scott

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Lindecker"  wrote:
>
> Hello Andy,
> 
> My interpretation of this mail is the following:
> 
> If the heart of the ALE is the following handshaking protocol: 
> * Sounding (the Ham sends his/her call sign): THIS IS A,
> * Response of the other Ham (by sending his/her call sign): A TO B,
> * Acknowledgment of the first Ham: B TO A
> 
> I supposed that the equivalent with CALL ID (RS ID extension) would be:
> 1) CALL ID to anybody: "THIS IS A"
> 2) Response of the other Ham (by sending his/her call sign): A TO B,
> 3) Acknowledgment of the first Ham: B TO A
> 
> 2) and 3) are not possible with the present CALL ID.
> 
> 73
> Patrick
> 
> 
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Andrew O'Brien 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 2:21 PM
>   Subject: [digitalradio] " Hop, skip and jump away ... powerful, ALE 
> implementation that would outperform MIL-STD-188-141A " ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   Regarding this message below, from the RS-ID thread, can someone elaborate 
> ?   What " lightweight ALE implementation ?
> 
>   Andy K3UK 
> 
> 
> 
>   "You know what's really exciting? We are a hop, skip and jump away from a 
> powerful, lightweight ALE implementation that would probably outperform 
> MIL-STD-188-141A by a large margin.
> 
>   Right now the code scans an entire 3KHz bandwidth for RSID (or more with 
> SDR). When you add in the future, planned SELCAL feature the only things 
> missing after that are scanning and an automated response.
> 
>   It also appears possible that the software would be capable of 
> automatically choosing an empty spot on the waterfall to make the call. This 
> would allow all calls to occur simultaneously and therefore I would suggest 
> time synchronized scanning a la JT65 or WSPR in order to improve probability 
> of intercept without long or repetitive RSID transmissions. Say 4 second 
> dwell per band to allow a +/-1 second guard band on the timing (given a 2 
> second RSID transmission length). The occasional collision would be worth the 
> simplicity and reliability."
>   -- 
>   Andy
>

[digitalradio] Re: Compressing Data

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon \(HB9DRV\)"  wrote:
>
> Thinking to myself - when we use a mode such as Olivia / MT63 with extensive 
> error correction, why don't we compress the text?
> 
> Given that fldigi has the wrap feature then surely compression could be / 
> should be considered for some modes?
> 
> I think I'll add something in my own code that shows the saving were the 
> standard ZIP compression algorithm to be applied my gut feeling is a saving 
> of 80%, I'll report back later today.
> 
> Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
>

Great idea! And as you point out it's really only a good idea for modes with 
extensive error correction as a dropped character has more dire consequences 
when the data is compressed. New sub-modes, perhaps?

Best regards,

Scott

[digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Hi Patrick,

That would not be SELCAL. The land mobile radio profession in the U.S. would 
call that a form of "ANI", Automatic Number Identification, i.e. that data 
squeal you hear on the radios on the bad police reality shows that is prepended 
to each transmission.

Thanks again for all your hard work and wonderful contributions!

Scott


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Lindecker"  wrote:
>
> Hello Scott,
> 
> At the present time, there is a sort of SELCAL called Call ID (RS ID 
> extension). However there is no protocol around it. It's just some 
> information about the Ham (Call sign, Locator...) which pops up on the 
> waterfall.
> 
> More about Call ID:
> http://f6cte.free.fr/The_Call_ID_and_Prop_ID_easy_with_Multipsk.doc
> 
> >given a 2 second RSID transmission length
> 1.4 seconds precisely.
> 
> 73
> Patrick
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "aa777888athotmaildotcom" 
> To: 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 4:33 PM
> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
> 
> 
> > You know what's really exciting? We are a hop, skip and jump away from a 
> > powerful, lightweight ALE implementation that would probably outperform 
> > MIL-STD-188-141A by a large margin.
> >
> > Right now the code scans an entire 3KHz bandwidth for RSID (or more with 
> > SDR). When you add in the future, planned SELCAL feature the only things 
> > missing after that are scanning and an automated response.
> >
> > It also appears possible that the software would be capable of 
> > automatically choosing an empty spot on the waterfall to make the call. 
> > This would allow all calls to occur simultaneously and therefore I would 
> > suggest time synchronized scanning a la JT65 or WSPR in order to improve 
> > probability of intercept without long or repetitive RSID transmissions. 
> > Say 4 second dwell per band to allow a +/-1 second guard band on the 
> > timing (given a 2 second RSID transmission length). The occasional 
> > collision would be worth the simplicity and reliability.
> >
> > Thanks again, Simon!
> >
> > Scott
> > k*b*l*0*0*q
> >
> >
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon \(HB9DRV\)"  
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I think it'll take up to a year - then we'll be rocking.
> >>
> >> Also when we use SDR more there will be a big improvement.
> >>
> >> Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> >> www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
> >>   - Original Message - 
> >>   From: Tony
> >>
> >>   I think we're making progress with RSID Dave, it's just slow to catch 
> >> on. Have a look at the RSID video in the file section of this reflector.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

You know what's really exciting? We are a hop, skip and jump away from a 
powerful, lightweight ALE implementation that would probably outperform 
MIL-STD-188-141A by a large margin.

Right now the code scans an entire 3KHz bandwidth for RSID (or more with SDR). 
When you add in the future, planned SELCAL feature the only things missing 
after that are scanning and an automated response.

It also appears possible that the software would be capable of automatically 
choosing an empty spot on the waterfall to make the call. This would allow all 
calls to occur simultaneously and therefore I would suggest time synchronized 
scanning a la JT65 or WSPR in order to improve probability of intercept without 
long or repetitive RSID transmissions. Say 4 second dwell per band to allow a 
+/-1 second guard band on the timing (given a 2 second RSID transmission 
length). The occasional collision would be worth the simplicity and reliability.

Thanks again, Simon!

Scott
k*b*l*0*0*q


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon \(HB9DRV\)"  wrote:
>
> I think it'll take up to a year - then we'll be rocking.
> 
> Also when we use SDR more there will be a big improvement.
> 
> Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Tony 
> 
>   I think we're making progress with RSID Dave, it's just slow to catch on. 
> Have a look at the RSID video in the file section of this reflector.
>

[digitalradio] Re: What mode on 14.109.50

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Almost certainly ALE. Did it sound like this:

http://hflink.com/beta/ALEtest_allcall_AMDtext1.wav  ?

Scott

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Sparks"  wrote:
>
> Is sounds like it MIGHT be an ALE sounding.  That was one of the main 20m 
> freqs, but it was eventually moved to 14.109.000.  Sound like it might be 
> someone with an older QRG file loaded.
> 
> -
> Dave - AF6AS
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "swlstation" 
> To: 
> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 12:43 PM
> Subject: [digitalradio] What mode on 14.109.50
> 
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > As a newbie i have the follwing question, what kind of signeal is 
> > transmitted on 14.109.50 Mhz ( dialfrequency ), it sounds like burst , but 
> > i can not decode them, maybe some one can give me a clue.
> >
> > The trx i am using is the FT-897 D, and software MIXW and DM780, but i 
> > don,t now what mode this is..
> >
> > KInd regards
> >
> > Ron  ( PD1ANB )
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: Need help with PSK-31 and my antenna tuner

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "doug_tara2005"  wrote:
>
> Hi,
> 
>   I'm having a little problem with my antenna tuner when transmitting PSK-31 
> above 30 watts.  I have a IC-706MKIIG with a MFJ-945E.  Both are on their own 
> powersupply and well grounded.  When I transmit PSK-31, it locks up my 
> IC-2820H (D-STAR) radio (unable to transmit DV, analog or control the radio). 
>  My IC-2820H is on a different powersupply and also grounded.  The radios and 
> tuner are about 3-4 feet apart from each other.  Additionally, I use to have 
> a KPC-9612 and it also locked up from time to time and had to do a hard 
> reset.  I didn't think anything was at fault and have sold my KPC-9612, but 
> the PSK-31/auto tuner could have also been locking it up.  Does anyone else 
> have this problem?  Can anyone give me good advise about my setup?
> 
> --73 de Doug (N1OBU)
>

It sounds like you are transmitting into a poorly matched antenna. What kind of 
antenna and feedline do you have attached to the tuner?

I have ladderline coming right into my MFJ-993B. If I tune up starting into a 
poor VSWR at anything over 20W I will lock up my CAT interface. But once I am 
tuned up 100W is no problem in any mode, although I still get a little EMI on 
the CAT that affects meters on HRD.

Scott

[digitalradio] Re: Use the *$%#ing RS ID!

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon \(HB9DRV\)"  wrote:
> 
> 3) There's something called CALL-ID where you can add your call, so I could 
> alert users that K3UK is on 20m looking for Olivia QSO's (or something like 
> that). I haven't added CALL-ID yet.
> 

Simon,

Great job on v5, of course!

How about the exact opposite, i.e. a SELCALL equivalent, with an option to 
alarm on not only your call but also a list of group calls? This would make 
individual calls and digital net setup much easier as they could be called on 
any clear spot in the audio passband. Perhaps even more importantly it would 
provide a very easy way of filtering contest traffic (stop filter or pass 
filter depending on your contest proclivities ;-)

Thanks,

Scott k*b*l*o*o*q

[digitalradio] Re: Use the *$%#ing RS ID!

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Phil Williams  wrote:
>
> My experience with RSID
> 
> I got on 30 meters, enabled the RSID feature in Fldigi, and called CQ.  I
> used Olivia with a non-standard setting of 4/250.
> 
> I was answered by K1DED in NH.  He stated that he was running HRD V5.0 and
> had enabled RSID.  HRD detected my RSID and simply asked him if he wanted to
> use that mode (Olivia 4/250).  A mouse click later, he had his first QSO
> ever with Olivia.
> 
> philw de ka1gmn
>

Almost exactly the same experience: got it running Saturday, used it on Sunday, 
MFSK16 CQ call on 30M and WHAM! Got an answer from another v5 user almost 
instantly saying it was darn weird to be so easily and automatically tuned and 
set to respond.

I used it as a matter of course in fldigi and have built it into my v5 CQ 
macros (great feature).

Scott k*b*l*0*0*q

[digitalradio] Re: Really beating the AGC issue with PSK ?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Awesome, Jens, thank you! You saved me a lot of time AND I somehow missed that 
I can define the filter bandwidth from HRD--excellent!

Scott k*b*l*o*o*q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jens Petersen  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 May 2009 00:39:28 -, you wrote:
> 
> >Buy an IC7000 ;-)
> 
> Or another newish ICOM :-)
> 
> >I run my 7000 with 150Hz filter width for PSK31 and if that's not small 
> >enough I'll put one or both manual notches into play to narrow things 
> >further.
> >
> >I can only define three filters and I have to do that at the rig, there is 
> >no provision to do it via CAT. But I can choose via CAT. They are forced to 
> >be centered at 1500Hz. I have setup 150Hz (for PSK31 and 63), 600Hz (for 
> >MFSK and Olivia) and 3KHz (for search/acquisition and MT63-1K)
> 
> Command '1A-03' will do that.
> 
> 250Hz filter is: 1A-03-04
> 3600Hz filter  : 1A-03-40,14-07-01-50,14-08-01-50 (to shift 300Hz up
> to avoid seeing 300Hz of the lower sideband).
> 
> >Right now I'm using fldigi because I need calibration capability but when 
> >the new HRD/DM780 comes out with calibration I'm looking forward to 
> >switching back so I can hopefully program some macros in DM780 to QSY to 
> >1500Hz waterfall and dump the filter from 3KHz to 150Hz with a single button 
> >press. That way I can have a "search mode" and a "QSO mode".
> 
> In DM780:
> 
> Center and narrow:
> 
> #++
> #
> #   {{RADIO-CONTROL
> #
> #   This macro only contains commands for tuning your radio.
> #   The text is not added to the input (TX) window.
> #
> #--
> 
> center-on 1500
> Set button-select 250 1//  250 = On 
> 
> 
> Wide:
> 
> #++
> #
> #   {{RADIO-CONTROL
> #
> #   This macro only contains commands for tuning your radio.
> #   The text is not added to the input (TX) window.
> #
> #--
> 
> Set button-select 3600 1//  3600 = On
> 
> ('button-select 250 1' and 'button-select 3600 1' is CAT command
> buttons defined in HRD as shown above)
> -- 
> OV1A Jens
> 
>  Good decisions come from experience. Experience comes from making bad ones
>

[digitalradio] Re: Really beating the AGC issue with PSK ?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Buy an IC7000 ;-)

I run my 7000 with 150Hz filter width for PSK31 and if that's not small enough 
I'll put one or both manual notches into play to narrow things further.

I can only define three filters and I have to do that at the rig, there is no 
provision to do it via CAT. But I can choose via CAT. They are forced to be 
centered at 1500Hz. I have setup 150Hz (for PSK31 and 63), 600Hz (for MFSK and 
Olivia) and 3KHz (for search/acquisition and MT63-1K)

Right now I'm using fldigi because I need calibration capability but when the 
new HRD/DM780 comes out with calibration I'm looking forward to switching back 
so I can hopefully program some macros in DM780 to QSY to 1500Hz waterfall and 
dump the filter from 3KHz to 150Hz with a single button press. That way I can 
have a "search mode" and a "QSO mode".

Scott k*b*l*0*0*q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien  wrote:
>
> From time to time we have had discussions here about the problem with
> PSK (and other modes) when a strong stations appears to grab the
> waterfall and wipe out all the other stations within a 2-3 Khz range.
> Because of this phenomenon, when I purchased a new rig,  I looked for
> one that could have AGC totally off (when needed) and one that can
> employ narrow DSP filtering.  I must say that I have not really solved
> this issue .  I can see a marginal difference with AGC turned off but
> strong signals still essentially desensitize other stations in the
> waterfall.  The DSP features do better and I can get rid of the
> phenomena by turning to a narrow filter.  However this does not help
> if the offending station is with 300 - 500 Hz ( a lot when dealing
> with narrow digital modes).
> 
> Does anyone have any advice on how to once and for all solve this
> issue?  My rig is a TS2000
> 
> Andy K3UK
>

[digitalradio] Re: One way propogation?

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

If everyone is running the same antenna oriented the same way then it ought to 
be reciprocal paths. However that is rarely the case and it would seem not too 
unusual that forward and reverse paths are often different, sometimes 
substantially so. I'm always amazed how many verticals I can work off my rather 
low dipole :-)

73,
Scott k*b*l*0*0*q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Vlad UA6JD  wrote:
>
> Few days ago I copy Javier ,  KH2QII/KH6 , on 14076 JT65a
> with peak -16dB (!) - he report that using 30 watts & vertical.
> I try call him with 100 watts and 6 el YAGI and he told me that no
> copy me.
> Today I am CQing on 14076 and few stations on West Coast reports that
> copy me with no less then -20dB - but on my SpectJT no any the most
> fine lines execpt one from N9DSJ with peak -10dB. I am running today
> same 6 el YAGI beaming USA over North Pole and 50 watts.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 73 Vlad UA6JD
>

[digitalradio] Re: Contestia & RTTYM

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

VERY interesting, Jaak, thank you!

Where do you feel MT63 would fall?

Thanks,

Scott
k*b*l*0*0*q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jaak Hohensee  wrote:
>
> Hi Simon and all
> 
> I made some pathsimulations with RTTYM and Contestia from viewpoint QRP 
> and contesting.
> My results show that both are dead modes. But RTTYM with UOS like Sholto 
> believe  it would be much better.
> 
> The data about 1.5dB snr or 3dB in relation with original Olivia is 
> myth. Better alternative is FEC-free DominoEX 5/11 for contesting and 
> MFSK16 for everyday use.
> The original Olivia is bulletproof but a little slow and wide.
> 
> The test results in pdf-file
> http://www.edutee.net/QuickPlace/digiqrp/Main.nsf/h_50B8373EB47C85CEC22573B20035031F/44CE2826803EF034C225759B0080DEC7/?OpenDocument
> or if the link dont open: www.edutee.net/digiqrp
> 
> 
> Jaak
> es1hj/qrp
> Simon (HB9DRV) wrote:
> >
> >
> > Is there anyone out there who uses both DM780 & MixW who could record 
> > wave files using DM780 where the wave files contain Contestia and 
> > RTTYM trasmissions? You'll need to couple the programs using something 
> > like VAC. Ideally one file per mode with a reasonable long text.
> >  
> > I need the waves files to be sure I implement Contestia and RTTYM 
> > correctly. I don't have mixW and don't use it less i get accussed of 
> > plagiarism and lawyers start hunting me (yes, it has happened before).
> >  
> > Simon HB9DRV
> > www.ham-radio-deluxe.com 
> > http://www.ham-radio-deluxe.com/>
> >  
> > www.sdr-radio.com 
> > http://www.sdr-radio.com/>
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Kirjutas ja tervitab
> Jaak Hohensee
>

[digitalradio] Re: MFSK16 Pictures - Multipsk / DM780 / Fldigi

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

This does indeed work. I have sent and received photos using fldigi with both 
fldigi and DM780 users so those programs do interoperate. fldigi has a 
proprietary high-speed picture mode as well.

While we are on the subject I have had no problem receiving photos but all 
photos I send are hopelessly slanted. I don't think I have a sound card 
calibration problem on transmit because I can work calibration sensitive modes 
like MT63-1K-long no problem (indeed four of us had a multi-way, impromptu MT63 
QSO just the other day--it was quite remarkable)

Any ideas on how to fix my slanted photos on transmit?

Thanks,

K*B*l*0*0*Q

>
>
> In Fldigi, right-click in the text window and select "send image".
>
> -Joe, N8FQ
>
> On Fri, 08 May 2009 23:30:42 -0400
> Tony  wrote:
>
> > Andy,
> >
> > I haven't found the way to send MFSK16 images with Fldigi or DM780. I'm 
> > sure both programs are capable, it's just a matter of finding the right 
> > buttons ; )
> >
> > Tony -K2MO

[digitalradio] Re: Fldigi RSID

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

That's a good idea, Rick. I would like to see that as well. Split the RSID 
button up at the top of fldigi into two buttons: TX RSID and RX RSID. It would 
be nice to have an enable button for Video ID up there as well. I use Video ID 
of mode for CQ a lot. Typically I leave TX RSID turned on but leave the 
configuration window open to the ID tab so that I can turn off Video ID when 
someone answers my CQ.

K*B*l*0*0*Q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick W  wrote:
>
> Is it possible that one of the needed features to use RSID would be that 
> it could be easily turned on and off for transmitting as it is for 
> receiving? Otherwise you have to go in to several layers of menus to 
> turn it off once you make the contact. If it stays on, it takes time at 
> the beginning of each transmission to send the RSID data burst and I 
> doubt that many would want that overhead.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
> 
> 
> 
> aa777888athotmaildotcom wrote:
> > Yes but nobody ever runs RSID TX ID (except me :-)
> >
> > I've spent hours with fldigi RSID receive mode turned on just to watch it 
> > work once (and in entire pass band mode). It's never once made a detection 
> > and I've never seen an RSID burst on the waterfall myself.
> >
> > K*B*l*0*0*Q
> >
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: Fldigi RSID

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Yes but nobody ever runs RSID TX ID (except me :-)

I've spent hours with fldigi RSID receive mode turned on just to watch it work 
once (and in entire pass band mode). It's never once made a detection and I've 
never seen an RSID burst on the waterfall myself.

K*B*l*0*0*Q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony  wrote:
>
> All,
> 
> The RSID feature in Fldigi seems to work very well. It can be setup to 
> search the entire pass band for incoming RSID's. Just remember to click the 
> RSID button in the upper right-hand corner to activate it. The green light 
> means it's armed and ready for RSID reception.
> 
> Fldigi will automatically switch to the mode that corresponds to the RSID 
> being sent. For example: if the Tx station transmits CQ in MFSK32 mode with 
> RSID, your software will automatically change to that mode providing you 
> have the RSID activated and ready.
> 
> Very useful during Mode Madness Hour!
> 
> Both Multipsk and Fldigi have this feature.
> 
> Tony -K2MO
>

[digitalradio] Re: Remote control

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Rick,

This is exactly what I do. Difficulty varies from completely trivial to 
impossible depending on how comfortable with computers you are :-)

Hardware and installation requirements:

1. CAT interface for your Icom. I use a Rigtalk.
2. Computer near your Icom. Any 1GHz Windows machine will do. The computer must 
be attached to your home LAN, of course. Put it on a fixed IP address so it 
never changes. For most home wireless routers this means give it an address in 
the .10 to .99 range.
3. Computer-sound interface for your Icom. I use a Signalink USB but for just 
listening you can get as low-tech as putting the PC microphone next to the Icom 
speaker.

The number of commercial products and homebrew plans for hardware interfacing 
can be bewildering. If this is true for you I recommend starting very simple, 
i.e. Rigtalk and PC microphone (receive only) and then building from there.

Control software and installation requirements:

1. Open the HRD documentation on your laptop and keep it handy. Follow the 
excellent directions therein for each step. 5 minutes.
2. Install HRD on the PC next to the Icom. Get it running locally with the CAT 
interface and radio. Should take all of 5 minutes. Use CAT PTT.
3. Within HRD install the HRD server service on the PC. Another 5 or 10 minutes.
4. Install HRD on your laptop. Configure it to attach to your HRD server on the 
radio PC. Again use CAT PTT. 5 more minutes.

Once step 4 is done you are thinking "Man, this is really cool!" and can't wait 
to remote the sound. This is a bit more difficult because the documentation and 
stability of the sound software is not as good as HRD.

5. Install either IPSound (http://xoomer.virgilio.it/ham-radio-manuals/) or 
Skype on both computers and get it running in both places. I used IPSound 
because it is very lightweight but it is very poorly documented. Get sound 
moving between the PCs.

You may have to do a little trial and error hacking here, especially with sound 
levels. That is the nice thing about something like a Signalink or a 
Rigblaster: just put all the PC volume controls at max. then set the level with 
the interface once at the radio and be done with it. I put IPSound in the 
startup folder on the radio "server" for convenience.

6. Start enjoying listening. Since the sound is moving to/from your laptop just 
install any digital mode software on the laptop and use it there.

Once you get that far report back and we can chat about other subtleties such 
as calibration in a remotely operated setup.

Keep us posted on your progress. With the radios you have I bet you have 
everything you need in your shack already :-)

K*B*l*0*0*Q


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick W  wrote:
>
> Years ago, I used to have a very light and small SW receiver (but of 
> rather low quality) that I had next to my bed and I could listen to SW 
> or ham communications. Today my equipment is much heavier and bigger and 
> the lightest I could come up with is to "borrow" one of my wife's ICOM 
> IC-7000 rigs.
> 
> Is there a simple way to interface one of my ICOM rigs (756 Pro II and 
> III or 746 Pro) in such a way to at least tune the rig and listen to 
> audio using my home wireless router system? Of course it would be cool 
> to do more, such as talk on a mike or send digital data, but the main 
> thing would be to at least control the volume and tuning and hear the audio.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
>

[digitalradio] Re: HRD 5.0

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Simon,

That would be excellent. It would fit right in on the Tools menu. The way you 
and the team have integrated so many useful things into the Tools menu like the 
virtual serial port, server service, etc. along with setup automation makes it 
extraordinarily easy to accomplish some rather sophisticated configurations. If 
it loaded as a service so much the better.

In the short term just a simple pipe like IPSound will do since VAC solves 
routing problems that some may have. IPSound is not the most stable thing in 
the universe and has serious latency problems at 48KHz so an alternative would 
be a good thing and if integrated as part of the HRD remote operation 
capability a very good thing.

In the far future one thing to consider for VOX keyed interface users (e.g. 
Signalink) in a remote configuration is that the output of the remote interface 
needs to go to both DM780 and Microsoft Sound Mapper preferably with separately 
adjustable levels while the output of DM780 needs to go right back to the 
remote interface input. Otherwise if the output of DM780 goes to the Mapper 
first and Mapper output is copied to the remote inteface the interface output 
feeds back to the interface input and Bad Things Happen.

Willing beta tester right here ;-)

Thanks,

K*B*l*0*0*Q

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon \(HB9DRV\)"  wrote:
>
> OK,
> 
> One thing I want to write while on holiday (!) is a simple soundcard 
> server - this way DM780 (and other programs) can select the soundcard used 
> on the remote server, adjust volume levels and get the data.
> 
> It'll be a TCP stream, no compression, nothing. Myself I use 16 bit 
> resolution so when I sample at 8 kHz the data will be 16 KB/s which is not a 
> big load on a network. There will also be some header info so the actual 
> rate will be a little more than 16 KB/s.
> 
> In fact I'll allow you to use whatever sample rate you want, myself I stick 
> with 8 kHz at the moment.
> 
> I'll probably make the source available - it'll be a Windows app.
> 
> Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "aa777888athotmaildotcom" 
> >
> > I am very much looking forward to this release. I tend to push the 
> > software to the limit in many ways and try hard not to whine when I push 
> > it over its limit!
> >
>

[digitalradio] Re: HRD 5.0

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

Simon,

Thank you very much for taking the time to respond. The ham radio developer 
community is an amazingly accessible group of people.

I am very much looking forward to this release. I tend to push the software to 
the limit in many ways and try hard not to whine when I push it over its limit!

Thanks again,

K*B*l*0*0*Q

P.S. FWIW this is my setup: IC7000/Signalink USB/Rigtalk attached to a 1GHZ 
tower running HRD server and IPSound. On the laptop I actually operate from 
IPSound to Virtual Audio Cable to fldigi (soon to be DM780 v5, I'm certain :-) 
and HRD. I've got fldigi hooked into HRD via the 3rd party serial port and 
virtual serial cable functions. VAC was invaluable for breaking the audio 
feedback loop that causes the VOX operated Signalink from keying although I 
could have disabled that and just used CAT PTT. Mostly Olivia, PSK, MFSK16 and, 
if I find the occasional intrepid soul, MT63.

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon \(HB9DRV\)"  wrote:
>
> Hi,
> 
> Off the top of my head:
> 
> 1) Smoother UI - less cluttered,
> 2) Soundcard calibration - not yet implemented for all modes but will be in 
> the first public beta, this really is needed for wider modes such as MT63 
> and 2k Olivia.
> 3) Improved waterfall with a zoom feature, I find that I need this for 
> tuning in some modes...
> 4) Seamless operation of the whole HRD 5.0 suite on an Intel Atom 1.6GHz - 
> already running very nicely with my ASUS EEE PC 1000H.
> 5) Remote soundcard support using TCP.
> 6) And part of HRD 5.0 is a new and *much* better logbook.
> 7) as and when I get time more SSTV and better SSTV weak signal 
> synchronisation.
> 8) Dual (Triple ?) waterfall / soundcard support.
> 
> Public betas at the end of June, already available for the HRD test team. 
> I'm on schedule and bopping along nicely.
> 
> And then late in 2009 - DM780 integration with my own SDR console.
> 
> Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "aa777888athotmaildotcom" >
> 
> > So what do we have to look forward to in the HRD 5.0 version of DM780?
>

[digitalradio] HRD 5.0

[aa777888athotmaildotcom]

This is obviously meant for Simon (Hi Simon!):

So what do we have to look forward to in the HRD 5.0 version of DM780?
RX and TX sound card calibration for all modes, I hope! This is the major 
missing element that drives me to fldigi as my setup requires a calibration in 
order to be successful on such modes as MFSK and MT63.

I have also come to like the waterfall in fldigi better (smoother looking and 
with zoom) but that is a small point. If a calibration feature gave me the 
performance I need in DM780 I'd go back to it in a heartbeat. I miss the eQSL 
and HRD integration terribly.

Thanks,

K*B*l*0*0*Q