Re: [digitalradio] Anyone For 6 Meter ROS ??

[bruce mallon]

Just what we need is spark-gap radios on 6 and 2 meters. We just got through 
fighting this a few years back. 
Since 223 is little used and it's legal whats the problem with going up there ? 
Chuck is right why is it that SS users feel they need to go on widely used 
bands ? Even if legal the chance of causing problems when 6 is open out weights 
any advantages or technology advances you might be looking to gain.
 
i have been on 223 for 35 years it's a good but little used band  give it a 
try.

--- On Tue, 8/24/10, charles standlee  wrote:


From: charles standlee 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Anyone For 6 Meter ROS ??
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, August 24, 2010, 10:50 AM


  






Keith,
 
While ROS is not legal on HF it still is not legal on 6 or 2 meters here in the 
states, it is legal on 1.25cm and above. Please see Part 97.305 it clearly 
states where spread spectrum is authorized.
 
This issue has been hashed out on numerous threads and I wouldn't want to put 
my license on the line for this software.
 73, Chuck AC5PW 






From: n4zq 
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, August 24, 2010 8:16:19 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Anyone For 6 Meter ROS ??

  

Here is a response I got from Dan Henderson, N1ND, ARRL Regulatory Information 
Manager about the legality of ROS here in the states. My question was very 
simple. Is ROS a legal mode under FCC rules and if not, what would it take to 
make it so. Here is what Dan had to say.

From: dhender...@arrl.org
To: n...@hotmail.com

Keith

ROS is a spread spectrum technique. FCC rules allow Spread Spectrum above 50 
MHz. It is not currently legal on the HF bands in the US. There has been quite 
a controversy about ROS since it was introduced. The original documentation 
from the developer clearly stated it was SS which was confirmed by the FCC. 
When the developer was notified SS was not legal in the US below 30 MHz, he 
changed his documentation then posted a forged email claiming it was from the 
FCC and that they had changed their opinion. Long story short, it uses a 
frequency hopping SS technique, regardless of what the author later claimed 
when the controversy erupted. This was verified by FCC engineers in their labs. 
Yes, it is a narrow bandwidth SS technique but it is still SS.

The FCC would have to change Part 97 in order for it to be allowed on the HF 
bands in the US. They would either have to amend the rules to allow SS on all 
amateur bands (something that would probably be strongly opposed because many 
SS techniques are far wider than this mode and would create major problems on 
the relatively small HF band allocations) or they would have to specifically 
approve it for use. That is something that they have not been inclined to do 
because they do not wish to be constantly adding individual modes as they are 
developed. They provide a broad framework in the rules for what is allowed or 
prohibited and the mode either meets those criteria or it doesn't.

73

Dan Henderson, N1ND
ARRL Regulatory Information Manager

So it is what it is and I wouldn't look forward to being able to use it on HF 
any time soon here in the good old USA. But it might be a great weak signal 
mode on 6 meters in this very late E season. Anyone up to beaconing on 50.295 
or 144.160 MHz, the frequencies suggested within the program? I'll be on 6 
myself... 

Keith N4ZQ










  

Re: [digitalradio] VHF Contesting

[bruce mallon]

I AGREE !
 
However not all contesters are a PAIN IN THE *## just the few that push others 
out of the way and interfer with daly QSO and nets ..

--- On Sat, 7/10/10, Dan Hensley  wrote:


From: Dan Hensley 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] VHF Contesting
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, July 10, 2010, 10:02 AM


  







Amateur radio is not for contesting. Amateur radio is not a sport, it is for 
communications. ..meaningful communications. Exchanging signal reports and 
series numbers or such other drivel is not what amateur radio was intended for. 

We need to start getting back to RADIO and COMMUNICATIONS, which when you put 
them together gives us the concept of actually using radio to communicate with 
each other, You contesters want to do this stupid garbage on the radio, then 
you need to petition the FCC for contest radio spectrum for which a special 
license would be issued. 

Then, you can exchange all of your meaningless non-communications related 
garbage to your heart's content. You contesters are making us all look bad. How 
about some of you actually getting outside and exercising while using radio the 
correct way? Go hang a wire through some trees and actually have something 
called a conversation. Take your HT with you on a walk and actually get to know 
your fellow local hams, attract others to amateur radio while showing them that 
we actually know how to have conversations. 

I know that the concept of actually having a conversation with people is hard 
for most of you to wrap your mind around, but you should really try it! It 
works! You can actually make a few more friends! A conversation happens when 
two people actually spend time together in a social manner while one person 
talks and the other listens, then the one who was listening responds with 
meaningful replies on an actual topic based on everyday reality. 

Friendships happen when two people actually connect. You gotta have human 
connection man! Yes, there are actually people out in the world who would like 
to know you if you just think about more than contesting and actually use some 
social skills. It works just fine when you try! 

Let's put the communications back into radio, and goodwill back into the 
amateur meaning of amateur radio, and bring back a focus on elmering so new 
hams can actually learn a technical skill instead of just having books shoved 
in their faces without any incentive to learn. 

--- On Sat, 7/10/10, KH6TY  wrote:


From: KH6TY 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] VHF Contesting
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Saturday, July 10, 2010, 1:16 PM


  

Greg,

PSK31 is a very narrow signal and unless every transceiver has a TCXO, the 
drift may be too much for the AFC to follow. PSK31 is also very subject to 
Doppler distortino. In South Caronina, we use DominoEx 8 or DominoEx4 for 2m, 
but Olivia or Contestia works even better with the mulitpath and  Doppler 
disturbances you often encounter. Contestia 64/1000 has proven to be the very 
best digital mode for UHF and VHF weak signsl and I run a daily schedule using 
that mode on 432.

The problem is that probably nobody else is on any of the digital modes on 2m 
to talk to, but you could arrange some skeds. I suggest you use Contestia 
64/1000 for the best results. Unfortunately, only fldigi currently supports 
Contestia 64/1000, so instead, try Contestia 32/1000 which DM780 and Multipsk 
both support. You will lose 3 dB in S/N, but it will still work pretty well. At 
least it will survive the QSB and Doppler disturbances on VHF.

It would be great to see more people using Contestia on 144 and 432 weak signal 
work. Contestia will copy down to the noise when SSB is no longer able to be 
understood, and, at 30 wpm, is twice as fast as Olivia. You need at least a 
1000 Hz signal bandwidth to fight the Doppler disturbances.

73, Skip KH6TY


On 7/10/2010 7:38 AM, GregCT wrote: 
  

National level. My hopes are high, but i'm not sure if the effort of lugging 
the laptop along and keeping it powered up will be worth the result.. 
Any thoughts, ideas, comments that can you can send my way are appreciated, 
both 'for' and 'against'... and Thank you in advance for all that have any 
input/help advice to contribute

73
Greg
N1KPW









  

Re: [digitalradio] VHF Contesting

[bruce mallon]

There are lots of people on PSK31 here on 6 meters  and some on 2 meters 
too ... it works for them .

--- On Sat, 7/10/10, GregCT  wrote:


From: GregCT 
Subject: [digitalradio] VHF Contesting
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, July 10, 2010, 7:38 AM


  



Hello and Good morning to all,
Just looking for a little advise and guidance here. Next weekend is the CQ WW 
VHF Contest, I'm looking forward to setting out and playing in the contest and 
I'm thinking of attempting some digital contacts along with the usual SSB to up 
the score a bit. I've been having alot of fun with PSK31 mostly on HF with a 
spattering of other modes mixed in but PSK being the most prevelant. I think I 
would most likely see some PSK activity on 6m, but don't really know what to 
expect or look for as far as modes on the 2m side of things. Would someone 
operate PSK on that band or one of the other modes? I'm running HRD with DM780. 
My personal best score in the contest was in 2006 when I earned 1st place Rover 
for the New England Division with 8142 points. Due to work and family 
commitments, I was not able to enter again until last year, which also earned 
me 1st place New England again. I'm hoping that by adding the weak signal 
digital modes to the mix that I may "Defend" my title in this year's contest 
but also beat my personal best score and possible make it into the mix of the 
competition at the National level. My hopes are high, but i'm not sure if the 
effort of lugging the laptop along and keeping it powered up will be worth the 
result.. 
Any thoughts, ideas, comments that can you can send my way are appreciated, 
both 'for' and 'against'... and Thank you in advance for all that have any 
input/help advice to contribute

73
Greg
N1KPW









  

Re: [digitalradio] Feld Hell "LEO" Sprint this Saturday 2000z - 2200z

[bruce mallon]

I forwarded this to the Leo's here at the jail I myself are a civilian not a 
cert LEO.

--- On Tue, 6/15/10, "John Becker, WØJAB"  wrote:


From: "John Becker, WØJAB" 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Feld Hell "LEO" Sprint this Saturday 2000z - 2200z
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, June 15, 2010, 8:51 AM


  



At 06:29 AM 6/15/2010, you wrote:
>LEO stands for Law Enforcement Officer. For this Sprint, if you are or were a 
>law enforcement officer in any country (police, border patrol, customs, prison 
>guard, etc...) you will indicate so in your QSO exchange with "LEO." (ex: 
>WB2HTO de N3LFC ur 599 PA FH002 LEO") Winner will have worked the most LEOs. 
>Extra bonus for contacts made on 10 meters.

I think next time it would be better to spell it out.
The AMSAT part of me say it's "low earth orbit"
when I first saw the post.

John, W0JAB, AMSAT life member









  

Re: [digitalradio] Digital Band for 6M

[bruce mallon]

I beleve about 50.300 I know there is some psk-31 around there

--- On Sat, 5/8/10, Russell Blair  wrote:


From: Russell Blair 
Subject: [digitalradio] Digital Band for 6M
To: "Digital Radio" 
Date: Saturday, May 8, 2010, 4:03 PM


  



Where does the Digital band start on 6M. ? I just put the beam back up and 
would like to get back on 6M digital..

Russell NC5O
 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. 
- Gerald Ford 

" IN GOD WE TRUST " 

Russell Blair (NC5O)
Skype-Russell. Blair
Hell Field #300
DRCC #55
30m Dig-group #693 









  

Re: [digitalradio] "evil Bonnie"..

[bruce mallon]

John 
 
i have been there too  Remember wide band digital on 6 and 2 meters ?
 
The problem with that group Of digihams is they don't care what what what they 
want will do to all the other users  after all we are legacy users a bunch 
of old phooeys who are holding back the new ham radio as they see it.
 
There are many digi  modes that are being used and the ones that will cause 
problems still have room on 223 and above not on 20 or 40 meters .

--- On Thu, 4/8/10, "John Becker, WØJAB"  wrote:


From: "John Becker, WØJAB" 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] "evil Bonnie"..
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 10:33 AM


  



I for one can tell you first hand what happens 
if for any reason you should disagree with her.









  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Anecdotes about FCC inadvertent hostility toward ham radio digital modes?

[bruce mallon]

What's the problem you have 222MHZ and up 





From: expeditionradio 
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, March 6, 2010 3:40:42 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Anecdotes about FCC inadvertent hostility toward 
ham radio digital modes?

  


Generally speaking, USA's FCC rules for ham digital technology are sadly 
antiquated, and many common digital methods could fall into gray areas of the 
rules, or "prohibited" areas of the rules depending upon how the rules are 
interpreted or how the method is described. Overly-complex and restrictive 
rules that evolved for 20th century communications methods can often lead to 
erroneous interpretations of the rules. 

If a question about 21st century digital technology is not phrased correctly, 
or if there is even the slightest misunderstanding or specification 
complication. .. that off-the-cuff interpretation in a telephone call to FCC, 
or an email request, may start a domino effect which could have far-reaching 
adverse effects upon other aspects of ham radio digital technology. 

Even well-researched recent petitions and formal proposals for rulemaking have 
backfired, and the results have been detrimental to Amateur Radio Service 
digital communications. For example, a recent proposal resulted in an FCC 
ruling that took a large and extremely valuable chunk of the 80meter band away 
from the CW/Data/RTTY sub-band (even though no one proposed it or asked for it 
to be taken away). 

One of the fundamental aspects (myths?) of the Amateur Radio Service in USA is 
that hams are 'encouraged to pursue advancement of the state of the art of 
radio' ; in actual practice, USA hams are boxed in with arbitrary and 
nonsensical "content" restrictions and obsolete technical limitations. 

Literally, USA hams are confined to a "digital technology jail"... especially 
compared to other more advanced countries of the world.

Most of the basic aspects of Radio Frequency technology were developed in the 
20th century. The real frontier of radio technology now is in the use of 
digital processing, modulation, and methods of automation or control of radio. 
And it just so happens, that this is the area of the FCC rules that severely 
lacks freedom and is most counter-productive toward pioneering USA hams.

The ham radio rules for digital methods and technology in USA have changed very 
little to accommodate 21st century technology and encourage advancement of the 
state-of-the- art... despite the fact that the very basic purpose of ham radio 
in USA includes significant emphasis on this: 

"FCC Part 97, "Amateur Radio Service, 
Subpart A--General Provisions, §97.1 Basis and purpose."
"(b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's proven ability to contribute 
to the advancement of the radio art.
(c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules which 
provide for advancing skills in both the communications and technical phases of 
the art."

Good luck.

73 Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA

.





  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL/FCC Announcement about ROS

[bruce mallon]

" But the situation where existing users of the bands suddenly have their 
activities disrupted when people start going mad with some flavour of the month 
new mode is unacceptable, and the controls the FCC exercise over amateurs in 
the USA do at least go some way to prevent this. "
 
This is why we fought wide band digital on 6 and 2 meters. The idea that a very 
small number of hams could disrupt entire bands for the mode of week was 
unacceptable.
 
One reason spark gap and modulated oscillators are illegal is because they too 
were wide band in places that had only limited space for all users.
 
You have 223 mhz and above use it.



  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Digital modes band plans.

[bruce mallon]

I don't know but they wanted 50,3-54 and 144.3-148 for 150 kHz wide digital and 
even stated BUT THE LEGACY MODE HAVE 300 KHZ for themselves .
 
Very nice of them .
 
BTW I run psk-31 and it fits right in with all other users.

--- On Sat, 2/20/10, jhaynesatalumni  wrote:


From: jhaynesatalumni 
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Digital modes band plans.
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 2:44 PM


  





--- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, bruce mallon  wrote:
>
> I remember several spredsprectum people commenting that they didn't care if 
> they obliterated legacy modes.
>  
They didn't happen to be in the BPL networking business, did they?









  

Re: [digitalradio] Digital modes band plans.

[bruce mallon]

I remember several spredsprectum people commenting that they didn't care if 
they obliterated legacy modes.
 


--- On Sat, 2/20/10, Andy obrien  wrote:


From: Andy obrien 
Subject: [digitalradio] Digital modes band plans.
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 9:45 AM


  



On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:54 AM, bruce mallon  wrote:
>
>
>
> SO what you are saying is lets ctush the other modes so we can play with our 
> new toy ?
> We just went through this with wideband/spredsprec trum on 6 and 2 meters 
> .
> I dont care what mode anyone uses as long as it does not cause problems for 
> others.
> SHOW THE FCC IT WILL NOT CAUSE PROBLEMS  and go from there ...

Showing that each mode should not cause problems, is not an FCC or
IARU requirement , if by "problems" you mean that people get upset
when it is used on "their frequency". It IS a problem if people use
any mode without checking to see that the frequency is clear, but
other than that... staying within the allocated part of the band, is
all we are expected to do. It makes sense to stay clear of known
sections, like the PSK31 area, JT65A areas, RTTY DX calling area, but
ROS has as much right to be used within a ham's allocated part of the
band, as any other digital mode. Just listen first, and use it (if
legal in your country).

Andy K3UK








  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS, legal in USA?

[bruce mallon]

SO what you are saying is lets ctush the other modes so we can play with our 
new toy ?
We just went through this with wideband/spredsprectrum on 6 and 2 meters .
I dont care what mode anyone uses as long as it does not cause problems for 
others.
SHOW THE FCC IT WILL NOT CAUSE PROBLEMS  and go from there ...

--- On Sat, 2/20/10, IMR  wrote:


From: IMR 
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS, legal in USA?
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 5:10 AM


  



I find it rather amazing that 99% of the posts on ROS, and any other new data 
mode, are related to its legality in the US. How did you end up with such 
restrictive amateur licensing practices that experimentation with any new ideas 
is almost regulated away? Or worries the users that they make be flung in 
prison for transmitting them :-)

I seem to recall exactly the same arguments about PSK31 when it started. Why 
not make representations to your licensing people to relax the rather ludicrous 
(to us, anyway) restrictions on signal bandwidths versus data rates and let 
amateurs look after their own bands. Legislate-out what is really bad, not 
legislate-in just what a committee thinks is reasonable on any given date.

Modern HF data modes have to be wide if they are to withstand the ionosphere. 
Something military communications discovered decades ago. The UK, and probably 
most European, licences don't dictate modes and bandplanning, they leave that 
to amateurs themselves to police. The licence just limits frequency bands, 
power etc. to avoid problems with other users. Bandplans are not mandatory as 
far as licencing goes - although people who break them do fall-foul of the 
operating police sometimes !

Andy
www.g4jnt.com

--- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, KH6TY  wrote:
>
> Jose,
> 
> We want to be able to use the mode on HF, but it is not our decision, 
> but our FCC's decision, for whatever reasons they currently think are 
> valid. Fortunately, it may work well on VHF and HF, so I plan to find out.
> 
> 73 - Skip KH6TY
> 
> 









  

Re: [digitalradio] VHF Digital?

[bruce mallon]

We have a group on SSB here

--- On Sat, 1/2/10, "John Becker, WØJAB"  wrote:


From: "John Becker, WØJAB" 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] VHF Digital?
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, January 2, 2010, 5:53 PM


  



May be workable in a large city but for those of us
that live in the rural areas, we would be taking to our self.

At 03:39 PM 1/2/2010, you wrote:

>I'm curious to what is the reason for a lack of interest on VHF/UHF FM to do 
>anything other than talk on the local repeater.









  

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[bruce mallon]

I ONLY SEND REAL CARDS TRY ME TOO ..

--- On Wed, 12/16/09, "John Becker, WØJAB"  wrote:


From: "John Becker, WØJAB" 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, December 16, 2009, 12:08 PM


  



At 10:41 PM 12/15/2009, you wrote in part:
>No one wants to send real cards. I would have cards made, 
>but who would I send them to when i know damn well I ain't 
>gonna get a REAL card in return? 

try me!









  

Re: [digitalradio] Digital modes and old husband's tales

[bruce mallon]

LOGIC TELLS YOU . 100 watts SSB is 25 watts FM/PSK and other 100% modes 
 
Unless you like changing finals...

--- On Tue, 7/14/09, David  wrote:


From: David 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digital modes and old husband's tales
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, July 14, 2009, 6:43 AM








Hi Andy...Ill add a quote from the Instruction Manual for the Kenwood TS140S

"While 100 watt transmissions are possible when using short duration 
modes such as PACKET continued operation over a long period of time 
might cause overheating. We recommend that you reduce the transmitter 
power output to 50 watts whenever using one of these modes i.e
PACKET, AMTOR, RTTY, this is easily acomplished thry the use of the 
front panel PWR control"

on my homebrew interface i have a pot that i use to set the drive to the 
TX so that i read approx 50 watts on the Revex Power meter on the 
antenna output.
was using 65 watts one night on PSK and was told that my signal was 
drifting a bit.the internal fan didnt come on but the heatsink was 
awfully warmhave since put 2 computer p/s fans on top of the 
heatsink at it runs cooler and no drift on tx

ok thats my dimes worth hi hi

73 David VK4BDJ

Andrew O'Brien wrote:
>
>
>
> The replies to Ralph's question about audio levels appear to be sound 
> advice and certainly in keeping with what has been advised since sound 
> card digital modes burst upon the scene. I wonder how accurate it is 
> though? I have seen a few serious hams argue that "no ALC" is not 
> really the case, that some ALC can be OK. I have also seen mention 
> that the no ALC issue applies to some modes (like PSK) but not to 
> others like (JT65A). I also wonder about the half-power advice that 
> some advise. With my homebrewed interface, I could never get much 
> above 40 watts before some ALC began to show. When I switched to a 
> commerical interface with good isolation (Microkeyer by Microham) I 
> can almost always get 100 watts output without any ALC action. I have 
> not received any negative reports about my signal . If I run 100 
> watts SSB for phone contacts, why would I not want to do the same for 
> digital modes assuming the signal was "clean" ? . Yes, I would agree 
> I should not run 100 watts if communication was possible with less 
> power, but I don't think a brief PSK CQ at 100 watts is going to do 
> much more harm to my finals than a 3 minute ragchew at 50 watts, phone 
> . Right ?
>
> Comments ?
>
>
>
> -- 
> Andy K3UK
>
> 

















  

Re: [digitalradio] Sound Cards

[bruce mallon]

signallink USB 

--- On Wed, 6/17/09, lsumners  wrote:


From: lsumners 
Subject: [digitalradio] Sound Cards
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, June 17, 2009, 9:58 AM








I am looking at upgrading my Dell on board sound card. Any suggestions for 
digital radio?

















  

Re: [digitalradio] " the original digital mode ? "

[bruce mallon]

 I thought it was the original Digital mode 

--- On Mon, 6/1/09, S.J.  wrote:


From: S.J. 
Subject: [digitalradio] " . . . the other digital mode"
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, June 1, 2009, 11:15 AM













CW is an Analog Mode . . . 
 
73, 
 
Sherm KB9Q
















  

Re: [digitalradio] How do I get started with digital radio?

[bruce mallon]

AVOID FT-100 or 100D

--- On Thu, 5/28/09, kh6ty  wrote:


From: kh6ty 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] How do I get started with digital radio?
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, May 28, 2009, 7:36 AM








For about $500 you can get a secondhand IC-706MKIIG and be able to work 
SSB, CW, FM, or digital modes from 160m through UHF.

73, Skip KH6TY

















  

Re: [digitalradio] NEW 20 METER HELL CALLING FREQUENCY

[bruce mallon]

Corperation it's a wonderfull thing  Nice to see people working to prevent 
problems ... !

--- On Wed, 4/8/09, David Kruh  wrote:


From: David Kruh 
Subject: [digitalradio] NEW 20 METER HELL CALLING FREQUENCY
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2009, 7:40 AM






After much discussion, the Feld Hell club has decided to move the recommended 
20 meter calling frequency for Hell Modes to 14.063 MHz (from 14.074.) This is 
being done to avoid the growing number of digital signals at 074. With this 
move we will free up 074 for the other modes, and provide Hell operators with a 
clearer area in which to operate.

Thank you

For more information on the move and on operating Hell Modes visit 
www.feldhellclub. org

















  

Re: [digitalradio] PROPOSED RULE MAKING AND ORDER

[bruce mallon]

IT IS ABOUT TIME ..
 
I was beginning to understand some of them .
 


--- On Wed, 4/1/09, "John Becker, WØJAB"  wrote:


From: "John Becker, WØJAB" 
Subject: [digitalradio] PROPOSED RULE MAKING AND ORDER
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 10:41 PM








NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING AND ORDER
Adopted: April 1 2009
Comment Date: 60 days after publication in the Federal Register
Reply Comment Date: 75 days after publication in the Federal Register
By the Commission: Notice of Proposed Rule making

1000. A: No radio system owner, or radio system operator, or person or
persons acting on the direction, or suggestion, or supervision, of any radio
system owner, or radio system operator, may try, attempt to try, or make or
make any attempt to try, to comprehend or understand, any or all, in whole
or in part, of the herein mentioned Federal Communication Commission
Regulations, except as authorized by the Administrator or an agent appointed
by, or under the supervision of, the Administrator.

1000. B: If any radio system owner, or radio system operator, or group of
associated radio system owners or radio system operators, becomes aware of,
or realizes, or detects, or discovers, or finds, that he, or she, or they,
are, or have been beginning to, or are about to understand the Federal
Communication Commission Rules or Regulations or any of its provisions, (he)
(she) (they) must immediately, within three (3) days of such discovery or
awareness, notify, in writing, the Administrator.

1000. C: Upon receipt of any such above notice of impending comprehension,
the Administrator shall promptly cause said Federal Communication Commission
Rules and/or Regulations to be rewritten in such a form and manner as to
completely and totally eliminate any further possibility of comprehension by
any radio system owner, or radio system operator, or person or persons
acting on the direction, or suggestion, or supervision, of any radio system
owner or radio system operator.

1000. D: The Administrator may, at his or her option, require any radio
system owner, or radio system operator, or person or persons acting on the
direction, or suggestion, or supervision, of any radio system owner, or
radio system operator, who commit(s), or attempt(s) to commit, or exhibit(s)
any propensity to commit, the offense of understanding or comprehending the
Federal Communication Commission Rules and/or Regulations, or any part
thereof, to attend courses of remedial instruction in said Rules and/or
Regulations, until such time as said radio system owner, or radio system
operator, or person or persons acting on the direction, or suggestion, or
supervision, of radio system owner, or radio system operator, demonstrate
that they are no longer capable of exhibiting any comprehension or
understanding of anything.

Comment period: Persons wishing to comment upon said NPRM have until April
19, 2009 to send in comments regarding the above NPRM to the aforementioned
agency, in triple quadruplicate, typed, certified, registered, no carbons,
initialed and notarized with a photo identification authorized by the
Homeland Security Agency, including original radio system license or
licenses, medical certificate, three letters of recommendation from
employer, police chief and FBI signifying no felony or misdemeanor
convictions, poor work habits or personal disgusting habits which would
offend the Administrator, including but not limited to: smoking, drinking,
profanity, watching R rated movies, owning cable TV, non-church attendance,
voting independent, listening to rap music, joining trade associations,
speaking to attorneys, or talking snippy to anyone in Gettysburg.

Send comments to:
Administrator
Federal Communications Commission
Docket #: 24857-23.45. 3562.A5PU. (6)b
Attn: Past Due Comments
125 E SW St. NW, E, S
Big Gray Building
Third Floor, Second Door on Right
Desk 4, In-Basket 7
Near Wastebasket 99-8877
Washington, D.C. 20591
Include $29.95 for shipping and handling payable to: Administrator

















  

RE: [digitalradio] No FCC data bandwidth limit on HF Re: USA ham rules

[bruce mallon]

Dave 
 
After 40+ years most of them on 6 meters I understand 220 is not going as far 
as 14 mhz does 
 
" Moving traffic " IS NOT what 99% of hams want to do on 20 meters working DX 
IS.
And this band is filled with stations doing just that.
 
PERSONLY i'm on 20 with psk31 as is my brother and so are many others with no 
effect on DX contesters or nets  just doing our own thing ..
 
VERY WIDE anything would have real problems on a band that well used and that 
small...
I know what the contesters do to 20 when they are on and mix that and things 
would get ugly . 
 
Let reason prevail
 
Bruce
 
 
 


--- On Thu, 3/26/09, David Little  wrote:


From: David Little 
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] No FCC data bandwidth limit on HF Re: USA ham rules
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 26, 2009, 7:22 AM







I know some thought went into that reply, and that it has merit if we are only 
concerned with short-range communications.
 
However, no matter how wide, narrow, thick or thin the emission, you cannot 
expect the same range on 1 1/4m as you can on 20m - so I am not sure the 
statement has any merit in this discussion.
 
This discussion has little effect on some, who have long since vacated the 
Amateur bands for their serious use of digital signals for anything other than 
entertainment.  
 
However, for those who are limited to the Amateur Radio Service Spectrum, 
pragmatic consideration should be given to the position the regulating body is 
in when other services that may offer a tangible and beneficial service 
petition for the spectrum we enjoy.
 
Could it be used to be more of a benefit to mankind with wider bandwidth 
emissions, which can improve both accuracy and speed in moving traffic that is 
also beneficial to mankind?
 
What are the basic requirements for moving traffic?  I seem to remember Speed 
and Accuracy to be a major part of the definition.. .
 
It is all a relatively moot point... As the average age of the Amateur Radio 
Operator continues to increase, attrition will ultimately be the deciding 
factor.
 
Consequently, I appreciate the merits of 2KHz wide digital modes, which are 
used daily on NTIA spectrum - and enjoy using  the keyboard modes as a form of 
entertainment where bandwidth is limited.
 
It does boil down to a question of if we appreciate the privileges of the use 
of the spectrum afforded to us, and how we show that appreciation.
 
Many only consider it a right for their enjoyment, some look to a higher 
calling that may help preserve the spectrum for their grandchildren.
 
Wider bandwidth digital signals as a vehicle for efficient long range traffic 
handling is an unavoidable fact.  It doesn't matter how many temper tantrums 
are thrown, how many stress-related conditions are created by those who know 
how to spell "automated" and "common carrier".  
 
It is here, it will stay here, and it will be advanced to the point at any 
signal that meets the qualifications of providing 2 KHz of through put with a 
minimum guard band above and below it to prevent moving past the 3 KHz assigned 
to the channelized concept used in professional communications will be used by 
the less technical forms of transmitting that is afforded to the public.  
 
I don't much like being taxed into submission either. Neither do I like a lot 
of things that I must do in day to day life.  The frog often wishes for wings.  
 
Some Amateur communicators will always fall back upon their comfort zone when 
faced with a new concept that doesn't square with what their grandfathers 
taught them.
 
Maybe we would be a better service to mankind if we specialized in finding a 
way to send smoke signals without burning organic material or creating 
greenhouse emissions.  
 
That is a fairly narrow-band emission, and it would pay tribute to times gone 
by and also not be automated or considered common carrier.  
 
See, everyone could get their wish
 
Cause and effect; what a concept...
 
David 
KD4NUE
 
 
 
 
 


-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:digitalradi o...@yahoogroups. com] 
On Behalf Of bruce mallon
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 6:45 AM
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Cc: wa4...@yahoo. com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] No FCC data bandwidth limit on HF Re: USA ham rules








Things go round and around  
 
Back 70 years ago the FCC band SPARK GAP because it was wide 
and interfered with other stations. CLEAN NARROW signals became the standard.
 
With bands like 220 MHz sitting there dead one would think wide band on 20 
meters 
would be the last thing we see. .

--- On Thu, 3/26/09, kh6ty  wrote:


From: kh6ty 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] No FCC data bandwidth limit on HF Re: USA ham rules
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Thursday, March 26, 2009, 6:00 AM




The short answer, as Steve Ford likes to say, based on the Cohen paper, is 
that the "

Re: [digitalradio] No FCC data bandwidth limit on HF Re: USA ham rules

[bruce mallon]

Things go round and around  
 
Back 70 years ago the FCC band SPARK GAP because it was wide 
and interfered with other stations. CLEAN NARROW signals became the standard.
 
With bands like 220 MHz sitting there dead one would think wide band on 20 
meters 
would be the last thing we see. .

--- On Thu, 3/26/09, kh6ty  wrote:


From: kh6ty 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] No FCC data bandwidth limit on HF Re: USA ham rules
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 26, 2009, 6:00 AM






The short answer, as Steve Ford likes to say, based on the Cohen paper, is 
that the "necessary bandwidth" appears to be "roughly" twice the frequency 
shift, although an exact calculation is obviously very complicated.

More importantly, with regards to the amateur radio service is the summary 
statement, "The necessary bandwidth is the minimum emission bandwidth 
required for an acceptable quality of service."

It has already been concluded, after many months (even years!) of debate, 
that radio amateurs are "amateurs" and not "professionals" and do not have 
either the ability or the means to measure "necessary bandwidth" of their 
signals. Their communications are casual "amateur"communicat ions and not 
"professional" communications.

If the "necessary bandwidth is the minimum emission bandwidth required for 
an acceptable quality of service" were to be codified into the radio amateur 
service regulations, it would also be necessary to also define what 
"acceptable" quality is, in particular for the radio amateur service. That 
definition will obviously be different for casual conversation, DX 
exchanges, and contest exchanges, than it is for commercial or 
quasi-commercial "messaging" services. It will probably fall somewhere 
between PSK31 and MFSK16 or WSJT bandwidths, which provide "casual" 
communications quality in exchange for the higher bit rates needed for 
sending long messages. Even narrow bandwith modes, like PSK31, can be 
utilized to reduce the error rate to zero through the use of ARQ. It is just 
that the throughput is half that of the non-ARQ use of the mode, but that is 
generally "acceptable" for casual communications. What would NOT be 
acceptable is using a 150 KHz-wide signal on a band that is only 350 KHz 
wide merely in order to achieve faster throughput for two dominating 
stations at the expense of hundreds of others. Should 150 KHz-wide signals 
start being used on 20m, for example, it would not take very long for the 
FCC regulations to be changed (or re-interpreted) to protect the "casual" 
communications use of the 20m band. To infer that using "low power" would 
make that acceptable ignores the fact that "low power" to someone distant is 
"high power" to someone close by. The BPL debacle should have made that 
clear by now.

The regulations already require that the minimum power necessary for 
communicatons be used, and if a similar requirement were made for emitted 
bandwidth, it could easily stifle innovation (at least with regard to using 
wider, or spread-spectrum modes), and not promote it. We might all then wind 
up having to be content with PSK31 plus ARQ for our casual communications!

Better not ask for something you may not want!

I agree that the regulations do not "specifically" limit bandwidth on the HF 
bands, but that does not mean this could not easily happen if there are 
enough abuses to justify it. It is true that the regulations have not kept 
up with technology, but the intent to protect casual communications is still 
there, and that intent could be codified if it becomes necessary. However, 
we may not be happy with the end result, especially considering the 
extremely minor interest in digital messaging or using digital modes other 
than PSK31, CW, and RTTY.

With the advent of satphones, cell phones, and the Internet, the relevance 
of amateur radio as anything more than a hobby activity is rapidly 
diminishing and we can expect future regulatory changes to further support 
the hobby interests rather than quasi-commercial interests in amateur radio.

73, Skip KH6TY 

















  

[digitalradio] 6M Digital Activity

[bruce mallon]

Anything below 50.200 is not wise  When open 6 will be packed with SSB up to at 
least 50.250 mhz Now here ( TAMPA ) where I'm from we use  PSK-31 and stations 
are around 50.290 usb it has not caused any problems with SSB users. Also avoid 
50.400 thats the AM hangout and you should be good to go .
 

 


  

[digitalradio] Legacy modes - was Anti-Digital Hams

[bruce mallon]

Now I feel it's a much different story. So to determine what the "standard 
operations" are, you really have to look around and look at magazines like RF 
design, Urgent Communications.

I WORK in public safety ..
 
 Our system here is ANALOG . both on the county and Jail systems .
 
We use 460 MHz at the jail  with no interest in going digital ... it has no 
advantage to us.
 
The idea should be and should always be DIGITAL as well as ANALOG should both 
be acceptable . The idea they one mode should be phased out ( spark was because 
there was no way to clean it up and it was replaced by CW ) then this will no 
longer be a hobby ...
 
I should have the right to run my LITTLE LULU as much as someone does to run a 
TS-2000 
IF it is within the FCC rules. I run everything I can from AM to PSK-31 and 
don't have a problem with anyone running anything they want.
 
One reason I read what is posted here is to get ideas of what I might want to 
get involved with ... or not  like D-Star.
 
I remember ths SSB/AM wars on 75 meters as a kid  NO LIDS NO KIDS NO SPACE 
CADETS bunch with groups determined to stop SSB at any cost one can only hope 
that we don't go back to that 
 
Enough said
Back to DX ...
 
Bruce



  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Anti-Digital Hams

[bruce mallon]

Your response above does not clarify your original post; if anything, it 
increases the ambiguity
 
NO IT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION .
 
Same old stuff its digital or the highway .
 
Have a nice day 
 
Bruce


  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Anti-Digital Hams

[bruce mallon]

EVEN the arrl is calling us LEGACY modes .. the excuse is it is used in 
industry for anolog modes.
 
Now It seems to me that if they want to matain members and digital; want to win 
people over this is not going to help ..

--- On Sat, 3/7/09, Dave Bernstein  wrote:


From: Dave Bernstein 
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Anti-Digital Hams
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 10:25 PM






>>>AA6YQ comments below

--- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, bruce mallon  wrote:

> I strongly disagree. Your post is just another variant of "everyone should 
> operate the way I do". While you are free to espouse this philosophy, we are 
> free to ignore it.
 
Hummm 
 
Then you oppose using LEGACY mode users when talking about CW and SSB ham's ?

>>>I don't know what you mean by "LEGACY mode users", and even if I did, I 
>>>still wouldn't understand your question. Please elaborate.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

















  

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Anti-Digital Hams

[bruce mallon]

I strongly disagree. Your post is just another variant of "everyone should 
operate the way I do". While you are free to espouse this philosophy, we are 
free to ignore it.
 
Hummm 
 
Then you oppose using LEGACY mode users when talking about CW and SSB ham's ?
 
 


  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Frequencies for digital modes

[bruce mallon]

"We all must keep in mind that the digital modes are in a constant
state of evolution"
 
Are you saying there is no standard ?  If so how can you set calling 
frequencies ? 
 
NOTE .
 
SSB, AM, CW and FM can be coped by 50 year old as well as 50 hour old radios.


  

Re: [digitalradio] Re:Update: Digital Modes in 2008

[bruce mallon]

I thought that was WHAT the hell LOL

--- On Mon, 6/2/08, S.J. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: S.J. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [digitalradio] Re:Update: Digital Modes in 2008
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, June 2, 2008, 11:54 AM











Hell is an Analog Mode . . . 
 
73, KB9Q, Sherm 
 














  

Re: [digitalradio] Amp for sale on Ebay

[bruce mallon]

how about 11 ? LOL 

It's only 35 miles north of me but my wife would KILL
me if I came home with THAT .

--- Robert Chudek - K0RC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I wonder if it covers the 30-meter band?
> 
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
> 
> 
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: "John Becker, WØJAB" 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 12:57 PM
>   Subject: [digitalradio] Amp for sale on Ebay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   Item #  170209454193
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Continuing evolution of HF Ham radio communications:

[bruce mallon]

MY POINT IS ..

You ( DIGITAL USERS ) call CW ( ANALOG ) stone age
..

You call those who enjoy SSB, AM, FM or just talking
on the radio the reason ham radio is dieing .

YOU ARE OUR SALVATION ! You by your digital modes will
save the bands from the invading army of other users
... then by encrypting messages make it easy for
commercial users to use the bands ...

99% of all hams use ANALOG . and are happy with
it. If you feel you have a new and better way SHOW
THEM 

However what we see is NEGATIVE comments about us
boarding on we do not have the skills to hold even a
novice license. The talk is 50% of all bands should be
digital  well go listen to the freeband they
believe they should have 10 meters and use they
argument that the HAMS are not using 10 anyway.

I have been licensed 40+ years and working in radio
most of it. Right now at a jail with 2,000 ICOM ANALOG
radios we found digital ones had NO ADVANTAGE. DIGITAL
does have a place in our hobby but so does AM and look
at what they are trying to do to it right now 
WHILE you want wider bandwidth for digital modes .

I'm right now looking is there any reason for me to go
digital at all be it Death Star or P-25 which we use
here at the Sheriff office. Can I justify like my
223.500 MHz station a $1,000 radio to talk to less
than 25 people in the Tampa area. But will sit it out
while the radio beta-max people fight it out.

You get change not by degrading but like SSB did in
the 50s by showing it is a better way even the hard
core AM users YES AM IS ALIVE ! had to admit that it
was better BUT still while AM has declined from 90% of
all HF users the modes lived side by side quite well.

Work on it .
Bruce





  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: [digitalradio] Continuing evolution of HF Ham radio communications:

[bruce mallon]

Elaine

You really know how to make Friends with comments like
" STONE AGE ".

Seems to me that the ones dragging there knuckles on
the ground are those who fail to accept the fact that
there are other things but using the ham bands for
E-MAIL 

When you start to act like others exist and they have
rights too try again 

BTW .

I DON'T DO CODE . but have a open mind for thoes
who do ...


--- "Patricia (Elaine) Gibbons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  
> Regarding the continuing vocal disagreement (and
> flame-wars)  between the 
> "live chat" operators, "Morse" operators, and the 
> "BBS/Winlink" or "ALE network" operators:
>  
> Two HF bands are discussed below as examples of
> possible ongoing 
> evolution throughout the amateur radio service's
> spectrum allocations
>

> 
>  
> There is some history that relates to the popularity
> and use of various
> non-Morse
> operations prior to year 1995,  and now .  Non-Morse
> operation in the past 
> was only live keyboard to keyboard mode until the
> innovative spirit of
> amateur 
> radio operators realized the value of ARQ modes for
> error-free message 
> handling, starting first with HF Packet forwarding. 
> 
>  
> Back "in the stone age" of amateur radio, and before
> the advent of
> "sound-card modes", 
> the prevailing location for Amtor and pactor was
> specifically between 
> 14070 and 14080, with 14080 to 14099 being for RTTY
> operations. 
>  
> Back in this "Stone age",  40 meter Amtor/pactor was
> allocated to the 
> 7070 to 7080 KHz segment, and RTTY operations from
> 7080 to 7099 KHz  
>  
> As time passed, fewer individual stations were using
> Amtor/pactor/G-tor for
> live-chat, which left primarily the pactor stations
> being used for BBS
> mailboxes
> and message forwarding ... This change in usage was
> primarily due to the  
> preference of radio amateurs to adopt less-costly
> methods of digital
> communications
> that did not require the investment of $300 or more
> for multi-mode TNC's
> of the time such as the early versions of the
> Kantronics KAM; MFJ-1278, and 
> AEA PK-232 hardware modems.  
>  
> A solution to the interference problem between ARQ
> modes and widely popular
>  "sound-card", and other types of "Live chat modes"
> using data
> communications 
> would be to migrate "live-chat" operations farther
> down the band, such as 
>  
> 7050 to 7070 , and 14050 to 14070   
>  
> Due to the elimination of Morse code as a
> requirement for an amateur radio
> license, it is likely in the future that the
> "current use" of the
> "RTTY/DATA"
> bands would be inverted in usage, i.e. Morse code
> operations would
> *primarily*
> be in a more narrowly-defined sub band, while data
> modes would exist over a
> much
> larger band segment in each amateur radio band than
> Morse operations ... 
>  
> On a legal basis, Morse operations would continue to
> have access to the 
> full allocation of each amateur radio HF band... 
>  
> This may "ruffle the feathers of the old-timers",
> however Morse code will 
> still be of major importance as a very simple and
> manual mode of
> communications
> when more robust modes are not available.. Morse
> code will also remain
> important
> in the future as a part of living history ... 
>  
> It is likely in the future that, for example, Morse
> operations may be in the
> 
> 14000 to 14050 segment, and data modes between 14050
> and 14099 
> and 14101 to 14120 KHz, while Morse operations on 40
> meters may 
> be between 7000 to 7050Khz with RTTY/data between
> 7050 and 7150KHz. 
>  
> Message forwarding operations would likely be toward
> the upper-portions of
> the 
> RTTY/DATA bands, while manual, "Live chat"
> operations would be farther down 
> in frequency with respect to the BBS/forwarding
> stations
> (whether they are Winlink or other modes yet to be
> developed) 
>  
> Flame on this idea if you wish, however robust
> "live-chat" sound-card modes,
> ARQ messaging modes, and Automatic Link
> Establishment (ALE) 
> modes will all gain increased popularity,
> acceptance, and adoption because
> of their more efficient and reliable communication
> capabilities as compared
> to 
> manual and non-keyboard modes .. 
>  
> Elaine ... 
> 
> --
> Patricia (Elaine) Gibbons
> WA6UBE / AAR9JA
> http://www.qrz.com/wa6ube 
> "Being a bush pilot does not
> mean that I care much for our President !!"
> 
> 



  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

[digitalradio] 220 sits empty

[bruce mallon]

AGAIN .

NO AGENCY USES 6 METERS here in Florida I have been
active in  New York since the mid 60's and from Tampa
bay since 1973 and there has never been any emergency
nets on this band only local ones from 52 - 53 MHz. 

All emergency nets are done on 2 and up. 2 meters is
not dead either even SSB has users.

I started on AM both on 6 and 2 meters. Even back more
than 40 years ago 6 HAS ALWAYS been CW from 50.000
-50.110, SSB from 50.105 - 50.400, and AM ( YES THERE
ARE ACTIVE AM STATIONS I work them during band
openings )from 50.400- 50.450 and a space used by both
ssb and am if the band is really hot up to about
50.600. 

There is mixed digital like psk-31, rtty packet around
50.600 - 50.700  It has not changed in 40 years but
RTTY is now mostly PSK-31 they use the same spot on
the band since they don't interfere with each other.

Above that a few repeaters above 51 MHz 

NOW the only space for any mode changes is 50.7 - 51
MHz that back 40 years ago was used by remote control
IT IS DEAD no one home If you want a spot this is it
otherwise someone using the band since its inception
has to move

 ONE BAND OPENING or worse yet open during a contest
for thousands of stations to turn it into CB IT IS
ALMOST THAT BAD NOW.

If you want wide band space for any mode you need to
be working on 50.700 - 51.000 or 223-225MHz and up for
this.

I run a good station on 223-225 MHz and have been
active since the mid 70's and within 100 miles of
Tampa there are 10 users not hundreds like 50-54 MHz. 
How come no one has even proposed this for the empty
220 mhz band?

Like 10 meters we are at worst conditions right now
like 10 we have SMIRK ( 6 meter 10-10 ) has about
8,000 members many active 30 years or more.

70 cm has no users here either just a few low usage
repeaters what little ATV died 20 years ago.
70 cm again large band no users  not even P-25 or
D-Star.

If you want space you need to look there those band
need more users not 28 or 50 MHz when open they have
enough. You will find little opposition.

Bruce

--- "John B. Stephensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm not asking for 90% of the band for my own use
> and I've never played a video game. Some hams don't
> want to limit themselves to voice and typing text on
> a keyboard and neither do many of the agencies that
> hams serve during emergencies. Lower path loss is an
> advantage for every mode and having the FCC allow a
> wide maximum bandwidth doesn't force every station
> to become that wide. The 70 cm band is shared
> between stations that are 9 MHz wide (30% of the
> band) and those that are 30 Hz wide. Certainly we
> can tolerate some stations that use 5% (200 kHz) of
> the 6 meter band. One advantage of a faster transfer
> rate is that more stations can share the same
> frequency.
> 
> FYI, there is no space in the 1.25 m band plan for a
> 200 kHz wide signal but there is in the 6 m band
> plan. The 219-220 MHz band is available only for
> fixed point-to-point message forwarding and isn't
> available to hams for QSOs. 
> 
> 73,
> 
> John
> KD6OZH
> 
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: bruce mallon 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com ; R.obert Mount 
>   Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 03:16 UTC
>   Subject: [digitalradio] 220 sits empty
> 
> 
> 
>   The spectrum between 50 and 450 MHz is useful
> because
>   path losses are low FOR SSB AND CW ..
> 
>   THAT'S RIGHT FOR SSB, CW how many 200 kHz wide
>   stations can you fit on 220 or 440 ? how much more
>   path loss ? The 300 khz is a joke every time that
> has
>   been tried it has failed so nwhat you say for your
> OWN
>   use you need 90% of these bands ?
> 
>   Terrestrial wide band for what ? why do you need
> that
>   ? for what reason ? for links from the Internet to
>   play video games.
> 
>   There is no reason for any wide band below 219
> fill up
>   1.25 meters then try again 
> 
>  
>
__
>   Looking for last minute shopping deals? 
>   Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
>
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
> 
> 
>





  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[digitalradio] 220 sits empty....

[bruce mallon]

The spectrum between 50 and 450 MHz is useful because
path losses are low FOR SSB AND CW ..

THAT'S RIGHT FOR SSB, CW how many 200 kHz wide
stations can you fit on 220 or 440 ? how much more
path loss ?  The 300 khz is a joke every time that has
been tried it has failed so nwhat you say for your OWN
use you need 90% of these bands ?

Terrestrial wide band for what ? why do you need that
? for what reason ? for links from  the Internet to
play video games.

There is no reason for any wide band below 219 fill up
1.25 meters then try again 


  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Re: [digitalradio] Ham Radio ALE High Frequency Network (Re: FCC to Kill Digital Radio?)

[bruce mallon]

I cannot believe the holder of a valid ham radio
license would ever come out and say this 


FROM .

--- "John B. Stephensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

"If the rule changes are to extend beyond 29 MHz,
narrow-band segments on the VHF and UHF bands should
allow a maximum bandwidth of 8 kHz. This provides
protection for weak-signal enthusiasts.
Wide-band segments should allow 200 kHz maximum
bandwidth between 29 and 225 MHz. 

WHAT PROTECTION FOR WHO ??

EXPLAIN THIS ? WHO WOULD BE PROTECTED ?

Some digi moron who would sit on 29.600?, 50.125? or
144.200 ?

Here we go again 90% of those bands for 1% of all hams
.

Do you think anymore than the analog morons that sit
on calling frequencies and destroy them for all others
that adding digital would help weak signal work? 
Do you think 200 kHz wide signals on bands under 2 MHz
or 4 MHz wide is a good use of BAND SPACE?
Lets not go there with you will not even hear the "
RISE IN BACK GROUND NOISE" power has to go SOMEWHERE
. and if legal they could not be stopped.

How come no one has address my posting about the many
MHz of UNUSED space above 219 that you already have?

We as non digital users have right too and no where do
I see any protections for existing users only placing
non compatible mods on already well used bands while
UNUSED bands sit empty.

Bruce

Like D-Star ( DEATH-STAR )  demanding repeater pairs
here in Florida with ZERO usage of the 3 here in
tampabay how crowed is 223 and 440 MHz are you out of room?


  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

Re: [digitalradio] Questions on digital opposition

[bruce mallon]

Yep you shure had that right !

--- "Jose A. Amador" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> 
> It is amazing that the "developists" in highly
> developed places forgets 
> that the world is far from being equally developed
> and connected, with 
> high speed digital repeater networks, easily
> accessible Internet, etc, 
> etc...
> 
> Even more, that you don't have to go to Asia, Africa
> or anywhere in the 
> Third World to find it the same case...
> 
> Towers may fall...fibers may break (it happened
> recently in the US west 
> coast), etc, etc. We have had that scenario here in
> my country several 
> times this decade. In the middle of a category 5
> hurricane, only HF 
> works...who is going to keep a satellite dish
> properly aimed in such a 
> situation?
> 
> Satellites have to be substituted periodically, in
> no more than 10 years 
> periods.
> 
> How many times has the ionosphere been substituted
> since 1900 ? None, 
> that I remember.
> 
> Jose, CO2JA
> 
> ---
> 
> John Becker, WØJAB wrote:
> 
> > Sure it would but what are you going to do away
> from the 
> > big cities? I live in a rural area VHF UHF other
> then satellite
> > is useless. I have one portable radio this is used
> for Emergency 
> > Medical Services for a 3 county area as a EMT. You
> got to 
> > remember that "painfully slow HF link" may be the
> *only*
> > link that we have that is working.
> > 
> > John, W0JAB
> 
> -
> 
> > At 03:15 PM 12/26/2007, you wrote:
> >> I see the point about document transfer, but
> wouldn't higher speed modes 
> >> at higher frequencies be more efficient? For
> situations where 
> >> infrastructure is in place, wouldn't a well
> planned DSTAR network be 
> >> much more efficient? 100 kbps from a portable
> radio located almost 
> >> anywhere would seem to be a much more powerful
> tool than a painfully 
> >> slow HF link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> Participe en Universidad 2008.
> 11 al 15 de febrero del 2008.
> Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana,
> Cuba
> http://www.universidad2008.cu
> 



  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

RE: [digitalradio] Re: FCC: "Petition to Kill Digital Advancement"

[bruce mallon]

"But, it won't happen; the FCC Will take spectrum
back, long before we ever evolve to the point of
becoming better operators and having constructive
discussion for the common good."

Ham radio an't broke if the digicrats would wake up
and smell the interferance coffie and work to be just
another mode we would look at them in a whole new way ...


  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Packet Radio Frequencies

[bruce mallon]

Scott

There is some here and APRS too but not a lot



--- "Scott L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Ahhh, the old days300 baud HF packet. I remember
> when it was all
> the rage in the early 1990s. Now, VHF packet (1200
> baud) was much more
> interesting and I even had a packet BBS. That was in
> eastern PA. Now I
> live in Pittsburgh and can find no VHF packet
> activity whatsoever. To
> the O.P. - look for some packet in your area around
> 145.01, 145.03,
> 145.05, 145.07, 145.09 - that might have changed
> over the years too
> but thats where it used to be!
> 
> 73-Scott
> KN3A
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew
> O'Brien"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > FYI, here is some traffic I just copied on 14095
> > 
> > 
> > [FBB-7.00g-ABFHM$]
> > FA B G8MNY WW TECH 40474_GB7CIP 6084
> > F> 55
> > [FBB-7.00g-ABFHM$]
> > FA B G8MNY WW TECH 40474_GB7CIP 6084
> > F> 55
> > FBB-7.00g-ABFHM$]
> > FA B G8MNY WW TECH 40474_GB7CIP 6084
> > F> 55
> > 
> > It looks like BBS forwarding using the FBB
> software.
> > Andy K3UK
> > 
> > On Dec 25, 2007 2:32 PM, Andrew O'Brien
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Packet can be easily found on 30M, the APRS
> stations on 10151 use
> > > packet.  .  Try also 14095 for packet BBS
> traffic .  on HF it is 300
> > > baud packet (below 10M)
> > >
> > >
> > > Andy K3UK
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 25, 2007 1:31 PM, kaboona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello all and Merry Christmas.
> > > >
> > > >  I just recently discovered packet radio. The
> fact that it
> exists in VHF
> > > > makes it interesting to
> > > >  me. Now, I understand that it also exists in
> HF. I use two of
> the Kenwood
> > > > radios that have a
> > > >  TNC built in for this purpose and a signalink
> interface for the
> HF rig at
> > > > home. The difficulty I
> > > >  am having now is the finding of frequencies
> commonly used for
> packet. Where
> > > > can I find such
> > > >  a list if one exists? Can anyone point me in
> the right direction?
> > > >
> > > >  thanks in advance
> > > >
> > > >  Jim
> > > >
> > > >  
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andy K3UK
> > > www.obriensweb.com
> > > (QSL via N2RJ)
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Andy K3UK
> > www.obriensweb.com
> > (QSL via N2RJ)
> >
> 
> 
> 



  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

Re: [digitalradio] STOP THE BITCHING AND MOANING!!!!

[bruce mallon]

"I just move to another frequency and move on. There
are plenty channels to use out there!!. "

The problem will be you will run out of places to go.

I AGREE ! we do need to solve these problems however
as long as 1% of all hams feel they Are entitled to
50% of the bands or more its not going to happen.


  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

Re: [digitalradio] RM-11392

[bruce mallon]

"I see no reason why each band allocated to the ARS
could not be split 50/50 between Digital and Voice"

And you can show 300,000 digital users in ham radio?


  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Re: [digitalradio] RM-11392

[bruce mallon]

NO STEVE

You and the digi boys need to get it 

You have entire bands on UHF to use and they sit EMPTY
..

Your disrespect for all of those who are happy with
analog shows how little you care about the hobby. ONLY
YOUR SELF ..

IF IT Ain't DIGITAL it ain't radio 


When you can show that you have enough people who care
about digital to show usage of UHF come back and talk
to the 99% of us who don't care about you or your
modes  we really don't CARE as long as you don't
deprive all of us of OUR rights to use the bands
..






--- Steve Hajducek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Hi Bruce,
> 
>  From your reply I can see that my statement really
> it home, sorry if 
> the the hurts!
> 
> /s/ Steve, N2CKH
> 
> At 07:07 PM 12/26/2007, you wrote:
> >You really need to view RM-11392 for what it is,
> the
> >entire thrust of RM-11392 in my opinion is an
> effort
> >at protectionism ( its an old story that dates back
> >ages ) of obsolete technology and practices by
> >an attempt to limit the advancement of new
> >technologies and practices, this is just the
> opposite
> >of what the Amateur Radio Service is all about in
> my
> >opinion
> >
> >HERE WE GO AGAIN " obsolete technology and
> practices "
> >
> >If it an't digital it an't radio ..
> >
> >BUNK JUST BUNK .
> >How come you dont see all of this on 1 1/4 meters ?
> >How come you want it on HF?
> >When you fill up 219 mhz and above THEN say its
> >"protecting " obsolete technology and practices "
> >UNTILL THEN You have more than 20 mhz already to
> use
> >GO USE IT 
> 
> 



  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

Re: [digitalradio] RM-11392

[bruce mallon]

You really need to view RM-11392 for what it is, the
entire thrust of RM-11392 in my opinion is an effort
at protectionism ( its an old story that dates back
ages ) of obsolete technology and practices by 
an attempt to limit the advancement of new
technologies and practices, this is just the opposite
of what the Amateur Radio Service is all about in my
opinion

HERE WE GO AGAIN " obsolete technology and practices "

If it an't digital it an't radio ..

BUNK JUST BUNK .
How come you dont see all of this on 1 1/4 meters ?
How come you want it on HF?
When you fill up 219 mhz and above THEN say its
"protecting " obsolete technology and practices "
UNTILL THEN You have more than 20 mhz already to use
GO USE IT 


  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

RE: [digitalradio] First FCC Came for the PACTOR

[bruce mallon]

Mike 

NONE of us wants to stop any mode just see it does not
distroy things for others.


  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: [digitalradio] Re: FCC: "Petition to Kill Digital Advancement"

[bruce mallon]

your comment
"There have always been naysayers to innovation in Ham
Radio. I started many decades ago when everyone was on
AM, and SSB was just getting started. The AMers called
it "Silly Side Band" and many
claimed "They ought to outlaw those guys who sound
like ducks". 

answer .
I cannot remember except for a select few anyone
wanting to outlaw SSB. EVEN in the late 50s on 75
meters during the heyday of AM most only did not like
the SOUND of it. This was less of a problem on 6 and 2
meters in later years 

your comment 
Today there are naysayers that want to outlaw IRLP,
Echolink and I guess Winlink. Despite the naysayer
fringe, things inevitably progress in one form or
another.

answer 
Progress does not mean displacing others or
interfering to the point that they are forced to move.
NO ONE is talking about outlawing Internet or echolink
only not allowing uncontrolled stations or ones so
wide that they obliterate whole bands.
Many of us realy dont care what others run if they are
not causing problems for the rest of us.

Bruce
on 6 since 66 


  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

Re: [digitalradio] Questions on digital opposition

[bruce mallon]

--- Rud Merriam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 This is meant as a couple of constructive,
clarifying, questions for those who express strong
displeasure with Pactor.

QUESTION  
Would you decrease your opposition if Pactor III did
not expand its  bandwidth? 

ANSWER .
ANY MODE THAT INTERFERES WITH OTHERS AND DISREGARDS
THOSE ON THE FREQUENCIES has to be RESTRICTED from all
bands below 219 MHz.

QUESTION ...
Could you accept wide band digital modes if they all
operated in a fixed  bandwidth, i.e. not expanding or
contracting due to  band conditions?

ANSWER please DEFINE WIDE BAND ?

1)What got many of us fired up was a idea that 100 kHz
wide digital would be useful on 6 and 2 meters. All
that would do is raise the noise floor and destroy the
bands for weak signal users.
2)Many of us oppose any digital mode wider than
current FM on any band below 219 MHz since many of
those using these modes feel they have the right to
interfere with analog users AND HAVE SAID SO. in
the name of progress analog needs to go.

The bands are not broke and don't need digital fixing
. Now if you can come up with a plan that does not
cause a problem I'm willing to listen.

Bruce
on 6 since 66


> 
> 
> Rud Merriam K5RUD 
> ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX
> http://TheHamNetwork.net
> 
> 



  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Re: [digitalradio] First FCC Came for the PACTOR

[bruce mallon]

Bonnie ..

You forgot one .
They they wanted to put digital wide band below 219
Mhz ...



--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> First FCC Came for the PACTOR3, 
> and I did not speak out
> because I was not a PACTOR operator.
> 
> Then FCC came for RTTY, 
> and I did not speak out
> because I was not an RTTY op.
> 
> Then FCC came for the PSK,
> and I did not speak out
> because I was not a PSKer.
> 
> Then they came for me,
> and there was no one left
> to speak out for me.
>  
> [Adapted from "First They Came for the Jews" 
> by Martin Niemöller]
>  
> They may be coming for you and your favorite mode
> next.
> 
> 73 Bonnie KQ6XA
> 
> ===
> Read the FCC "Petition to Kill Digital Radio
> Technology" here:
> http://hflink.com/fcc/FCC_RM11392.pdf
> 
> File your comments against "proceeding RM-11392"
> here:
> http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
> 
> Can we get at least one hundred hams to oppose it?
> Please do your part.
> 
> .
> 
> 



  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Will You Let FCC Kill Digital Radio Technology?

[bruce mallon]

Hum . I dont see any move to kill digital.
Digital stiil can do what they want above 219 mhz and
thats where it BELONGS ...

When 219 and up is full worry about HF .

--- W2XJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

In the CW portion of our bands nothing that is more
than 500 hertz bandwidth should be allowed. Any kind
of automatic transmission should  be prohibited below
28 MHz. The petition is an attempt to prevent the 
destruction of ham radio as we know it.


  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

RE: [digitalradio] Digital Radio - Well Broadcast

[bruce mallon]

And WHY would you go digital on a car radio? How many
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of radios would have to be
replaced? The shift to the new TV format in Feb. 2009
is only going to work because so many are on CABLE



--- Barry Garratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> IBOC is a method whereby both analog and digital
> signals are transmitted on
> the same frequency.
> Additional digital subcarriers are carried on the
> normal AM or FM analog
> signal. They extend beyond the normal
> channel bandwidth though so there is an increased
> chance of adjacent channel
> interference.
>  
> I think the plan in the future is to eliminate the
> analog portion and have
> all stations strictly digital.
> 
>   _  
> 
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of "John Becker, WØJAB"
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 5:25 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digital Radio - Well
> Broadcast
> 
> 
> 
> This has been going on for over 25 years that I know
> of.
> But I don't think it was digital. AM and FM radio
> had a 
> service for the blind that was a sub carrier. Sounds
> very 
> close to it.
> 
> At 06:29 PM 11/12/2007, you wrote:
> >In the U.S. the FCC has approved a system called
> IBOC (In-Band On Channel)
> to add digitial audio to existing AM and FM
> stations. In broadcast radio,
> there isn't the luxury of unused channels that allow
> every station to have
> one analog and one digital transmitter. I haven't
> seen any terrestrial
> digital radio receivers in stores yet.
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 



  

Be a better sports nut!  Let your teams follow you 
with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ

Re: [digitalradio] 10-Meter Digital Contest: 1100Z-1700Z, Nov 4: RTTY, Amtor, Clover, PSK31, Pactor

[bruce mallon]

what will be the frequency for PSK-31 ?

--- David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Andy...what frequency is used on 10m...its a big
> band hi hi
> 
> David VK4BDJ
> 
> 
> Andrew O'Brien wrote:
> >
> > This might be worth a try. 10M was open at these
> times last weekend.
> > I woldl hazard a guess that they will also allow
> other digital modes
> > like Olivia, DominoEX, MFSK16.
> >
> > Info courtesy of Bruce Horn's website...
> >
> > (c) 1998-2005 Bruce Horn, WA7BNM, All Rights
> Reserved
> >
> > DARC 10-Meter Digital Contest: 1100Z-1700Z, Nov 4
> > Mode: RTTY, Amtor, Clover, PSK31, Pactor
> > Bands: 10m Only
> > Classes: Single Op
> > SWL
> > Exchange: RST + Serial No.
> > QSO Points: 1 point per QSO
> > Multipliers: Each WAE/DCXX area
> > Each W/VE call area
> > Score Calculation: Total score = total QSO points
> x total mults
> > Submit logs by: December 4, 2007
> > E-mail logs to: df5bx[at]darc[dot]de
> > Mail logs to: Werner Ludwig, DF5BX
> > P.O. Box 1270
> > 49110 Georgsmarienhuette
> > Germany
> > Find rules at: 
> >
>
http://www.darc.de/referate/ukw-funksport/sonder/tei-digi.htm
> 
> >
>

> >
> > -- 
> > Andy K3UK
> > www.obriensweb.com
> > (QSL via N2RJ)
> >
> >  
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] QSO or QRM? ...or Contest?

[bruce mallon]

--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The recent RTTY contest leads one to ponder: 
> "Why don't we see much backlash against contests?"
> 
> By orders of magnitude, contests create more QRM 
> than any other cause on ham radio. They commonly 
> render multiple ham bands nearly unusable for 
> normal communications, for several days at a time.

Bonnie I AGREE !

The problem is with contests they are not limited to a
small part of any band so they TAKE OVER.
They sit on known calling or net frequency's jamming
them for hours or even DAYS at a time. AND are very
quick to tell others that they HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE
THERE.

Its not limited to HF or any mode .

On 50.125 MHz on 6 meters one of them Here in Florida
will send CW for a while or until he feels he has run
off the SSB users then switches to SSB to work the dx
now that he has cleared the frequency off  He does
the same on 2 SSB.

Bruce

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Need to Expand the HF Auto Band Segments

[bruce mallon]

--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

"Please detail all the HF frequencies and modes 
your people will be manually monitoring 24/7. 
(This will make big news in the ham community)"

27.185 AM here in Tampabay ...

This is the only active non SSB frequency here ..


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

RE: [digitalradio] Pactor and Seasonally Affected Disorder (SAD)

[bruce mallon]

THAT WAS GOOD ! LOL


--- r_lwesterfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> This is excellent . . . just what this group needs .
> . . and I deeply and
> truly mean that . . .sheesh . . . 
> 
>  
> 
> Rick - KH2DF
> 
>  
> 
>   _  
> 
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Bradley
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 8:41 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor and Seasonally
> Affected Disorder (SAD)
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> New Discovery from the Bolivian Journal of Medicine
> 
>  
> 
> Physcians in Bolivia have recently released a paper
> on the destructive
> effects of pactor tones 
> 
> On the middle-aged radio amateur population.
> 
>  
> 
> The pulse frequency of pactor 3 appears to cause
> anxiety and obsessive
> behavior among middle aged males exposed to these
> frequencies while engaged
> in their hobbies. The pulse noise appears to have a
> cumulative effect on the
> observed subjects, increasing anxiety and fear
> through each exposure. In
> extreme cases the obsession is all consuming, and
> the fear of robotic pactor
> operations has become the focus of these individuals
> to the exclusion of all
> other aspects of a broad based hobby.
> 
>  
> 
> Scientists have observed that these obsessions
> appear to peak at the spring
> and fall equinox. There is also some speculation
> that the lower the
> latitude, the more obsessive the individuals become.
> As the syndrome
> progresses,
> 
> The affected individuals increasingly become less
> able to form rational
> thoughts . As the anxiety deepens ,the individuals
> affected look for
> software cures which would curtail or eliminate
> pactor pulse when a
> frequency is used for other purposes.
> 
>  
> 
> As the anxiety increases many individuals become
> focused on WINLINK, an
> organization which uses pactor tones to move data
> from radio amateurs around
> the world. While the use of WINLINK is considerably
> down from 20 years ago,
> it is still responsible for the majority of pactor
> pulse cases the
> scientists have observed.
> 
>  
> 
> Scientist have also found that there is a readily
> available cure. They
> recommend turning off any email service for a week,
> and , at the same time
> using OLIVIA to communicate on the radio amateur
> bands. The soothing tones
> of Olivia, especially 1000/32 tones has been know to
> cure the most anxious
> of operators, especially when scotch or rum is
> consumed at the same time.
> 
>  
> 
> While this is not a cure, the obsessive behavior
> should be in remission for
> several months after the one week cure.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> John
> 
> VE5MU
> 
>  
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

OK John  

You have had your say NOW MINE.

ONE LAST TIME .

I just sent out in MAY 2007 110 QSL cards all worked
on ssb between 50.110 and 50.350 and at 50.400 was a
group of AM boys. this time I had to pass on
working them. 6 IS used  if you want a dead band
you need to save 10 meters it just as dead here too.

IF your band plan was 53 - 54 MHz why did you ask for
50.3 - 54 and the legacy modes could have 50.0 -50.3 ?

IF you had asked for spots between 50.7 - 51 FEW would
have found a problem with it your mode has VERY SMALL
NUMBERS and that spot is almost unused nation wide.

On 2 meters again 144.300 - 148.000 for 100 kHz wide
no breaks for any other mode 1,000's of repeaters and
few of you but again if it's LEGAL you would have the
right to be ANYWHERE in that range and run as much
power as you need over that 100 khz wide range. 

NO ONE believes you or any other can run high ERP's
and not cause problems and if it became legal proving
interference would be next to impossible.
You have 219 mhz I'm on 223 since the mid 70's and
there is NO ONE using that band open or not. You have
lots of room already there. 

Why not UHF 420 and up is yours too lots of room very
few users.

  
WE HAVE BEEN OVER THIS again and again 

This is why wideband ANYTHING below the 220 band will
not go over well with other users.

I just bought a new digiboard ( SIGNALINK ) and right
now I'm debugging it for guess what .. 6 and 2 
METER DIGITAL. HERE IN TAMPABAY ( PODUNK USA ) we have
many active on HF/VHF on psk-31 APRS and a number of
other modes.
I am not a CAVEMAN and work in the radio field so
CHANGE I'm use to ... in fact our radios at work
are being changed out right now to NARROW modes a FCC
requirement.

The problem for the ARRL is that many of us DO NOT
TRUST the them this goes back to the 60's when they
came up with incentive licensing many older hams never
rejoined the league SO here we are 40 years later and
WE are the older hams and many again can't TRUST the
league.. 


Bruce




  

Shape Yahoo! in your own image.  Join our Network Research Panel today!   
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 

Re: [digitalradio] The Necessity of Regulating the Ham Bands by Bandwidth by Rich Moseson, W2VU at Dayton Hamvention

[bruce mallon]

Very good information lots of info in a digital for
dummy's format  INTERFERENCE with others ( NON
DIGITAL  USERS ) is the gripe from our view point and
he did cover that too.

NOTE they avoid what many of us oppose WIDE BAND
DIGITAL on bands under 219 mhz. No one has a problem
with 3 KHZ wide ANYTHING .. on any band.

Bruce


--- Mark Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The Necessity of Regulating the Ham Bands by
> Bandwidth by Rich Moseson, W2VU at Dayton Hamvention
> 
> 
>
http://www.therainreport.com/rainreport_archive/rainreport-9-6-2007.mp3
> 
> 
>
>

> Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet
> in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC



   

Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the 
tools to get online.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: A Beginner's Look at Ham Radio's Digital Future with Jeff Reinhart, AA6JR

[bruce mallon]

that very few support 
> this. Under current rules, DV can be used in any
> analog voice area, 
> because it is voice. So can image/SSTV/FAX. But
> unfortunately not text 
> digital. This means that we can not coordinate with
> voice as the SSTV 
> hams do, when we want to experiment with a text
> digital mode, even a 
> wide text digital mode.
> 
> The two ways I look at it are:
> 
> -Leave things alone since they may be worse off for
> digital users with 
> new regulations.
> 
> -Go for the changes and then lobby our Division
> Directors to get the 
> ARRL to accept some mixed mode/content areas,
> especially for emergency 
> use which is my main interest area.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
> 
> 
> bruce mallon wrote:
> > BONNY YOU CANNOT AND YOU KNOW IT .GET OFF IT
> OR
> > WHY WOULD THEY BE TRING TO CHANGE THE RULES 
> >
> > YOU ARE 1%OF ALL HAMS AND IT'S YOU AND THOES LIKE
> YOU
> > THAT GIVE DIGITAL A BAD NAME  You cannot even
> draw
> > people to the bands you have BUT you want more
> bands ?
> >
> > Note HER others running digital SHE is the reason
> the
> > wideband digital bunch is being watched ..
> >
> > THEY DON'T CARE WHO THEY HURT IT;S THEIR BANDS TO
> > DISTROY THEY WANT ALL BANDS  Just ask them
> 
> >
> >   
> 



   

Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. 
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469

Re: [digitalradio] Re: A Beginner's Look at Ham Radio's Digital Future with Jeff Reinhart, AA6JR

[bruce mallon]

BONNY YOU CANNOT AND YOU KNOW IT .GET OFF IT OR
WHY WOULD THEY BE TRING TO CHANGE THE RULES 

YOU ARE 1%OF ALL HAMS AND IT'S YOU AND THOES LIKE YOU
THAT GIVE DIGITAL A BAD NAME  You cannot even draw
people to the bands you have BUT you want more bands ?

Note HER others running digital SHE is the reason the
wideband digital bunch is being watched ..

THEY DON'T CARE WHO THEY HURT IT;S THEIR BANDS TO
DISTROY THEY WANT ALL BANDS  Just ask them 

--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> What's the problem, Bruce? 
> Under current FCC rules, we can run 100kHz bandwidth
> data on most HF
> bands if we want to.
> 
> Bonnie KQ6XA
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, bruce mallon
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > If the ARRL wants to start another fire storm push
> > that 100 khz wide on 6 and 2 meters stuff again
>  
> 
> 



   

Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/

Re: [digitalradio] Re: A Beginner's Look at Ham Radio's Digital Future with Jeff Reinhart, AA6JR

[bruce mallon]

If the ARRL wants to start another fire storm push
that 100 khz wide on 6 and 2 meters stuff again 

There is lots of unused space starting at 219mhz I
have been on 220 since 1974 and it sits empty EVEN on
FM there are only 7 stations in tampabay.

DIGITAL would be a asset to us if they can fill 1.25
meters ...


--- "John B. Stephensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> PC-based modems have allowed room for
> experimentation. The limitation is that most radios
> only provide a 2.5 kHz wide bandpass for the modem
> to use. They should allow software to use the widest
> bandpass available: 12 kHz on HF, 20 kHz on VHF (100
> kHz if FCC rules are changed) and at least 1 MHz on
> UHF.
> 
> 73,
> 
> John
> KD6OZH
> 
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Steve 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 15:02 UTC
>   Subject: [digitalradio] Re: A Beginner's Look at
> Ham Radio's Digital Future with Jeff Reinhart, AA6JR
> 
> 
>   --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>   > Where he is on target is the need to develop
> standards. If each digital 
>   > protocol can not communicate with other similar
> digital modes, then it 
>   > will be hard not to have separate islands of
> activity.
>   > 
>   > I appreciated his comment that during
> emergencies, simple works best.
> 
>   I agree, standards are big issue. No one wants to
> buy a new expensive
>   radio, to only see it not compatible with another
> manufactures
>   competing product.
> 
>   D-Star fortunately seems to have this, at least an
> open protocol. I
>   do with there was more user end flexibility with
> selection of codec's
>   and such. That would allow easier integration,
> even more so if the
>   codec and bitrate, was able to be established
> dynamically.
> 
>   I guess my beef is they didn't allow much user end
> room for
>   experimentation. I don't just want to press the
> PTT and talk, I'd
>   like to be able see what else I can do with it.
> But short of major
>   surgery and some PIC knowledge for most that will
> never happen.
> 
> 
> 
>



  

Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel 
and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 

Re: [digitalradio] A Beginner's Look at Ham Radio's Digital Future with Jeff Reinhart, AA6JR

[bruce mallon]

INTERESTING Mark good link..It did explane about
digital's place clearly and well.

SADLY it dosn't cover the ( here we go again ) report
on regulation by bandwidth. Hard to beleve that is
still around ...


--- Mark Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> A Beginner's Look at Ham Radio's Digital Future with
> Jeff Reinhart, AA6JR
> 
>
http://www.therainreport.com/rainreport_archive/rainreport-8-30-2007.mp3
> 
> 
>
>

> Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's 
> Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. 
> http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/222



   

Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/

Re: [digitalradio] TARA "Grid Dip" Saturday, August 4, 2007

[bruce mallon]

BETTER CHECK THIS 

--- Tony Heatwole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> TARA's "Grid Dip PSK-RTTY" contest is Saturday,
> August 5, 2006,
> 
> from 00:00 UTC to 23:59 UTC. See:
> 
>  
> 
> http://www.n2ty.org/seasons/tara_grid_rules.html
> 
>  
> 
> for the full contest information. I hope that you
> can join us!
> 
>  
> 
> 73, de Tony Heatwole, N3FX
> 
>  
> 
> 



   

Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the 
tools to get online.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting 

RE: [digitalradio] Announcing the 2007 International Message QRP Relay Race... August 11: Need teams.

[bruce mallon]

WHAT A QRP CONTEST THAT BANDS CW ?? AM I READING
THIS RIGHT ??

 
--- "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> > Any authorized "band" may be used.
> > CW , SSB- Voice, FM-Voice, AM-Voice, modes  are
> NOT permitted
> > modes.(WinDRM IS permitted).
> 
> This is interesting.  Various digital proponents
> have
> tirelessly pointed out how "inefficient" these
> "obsolete"
> modes are.  Why not let them compete too and let the
> best mode win?
> 
> Rick N6RK
> 
> 
> 



  

Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Very confused

[bruce mallon]

he only "OUT OF BANDERS " we hear here is on 28.085
AM.

--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Considering the number of true "Outbanders" on 10
> metres, 
> this hardly seems like more than a minor infraction
> :)
> 
> Bonnie KQ6XA
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon Brown"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > OK, complaint withdrawn, call the FCC
> inspectorate. Mind you, maybe
> 'someone' should have explained this to them?
> > 
> > I've been licenced now for 33 years and still make
> mistakes :-)
> > 
> > Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> >   - Original Message - 
> >   From: Robert Chudek 
> > 
> > 
> >   Sorry... I should have spelled out Pennsylvania
> [PA]. In the US
> 28.300 is the low limit for 10m phone, so when using
> LSB, they're out
> of the band. Not that it will draw much attention on
> 10m right now,
> but I hope they don't try that on 20m!
> >
> 
> 
> 



   

Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's 
Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. 
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/222

Re: [digitalradio] Very confused

[bruce mallon]

LSB ILLEGAL ON 10 meters ? Or they just out of band ?

--- Robert Chudek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Sorry... I should have spelled out Pennsylvania
> [PA]. In the US 28.300 is the low limit for 10m
> phone, so when using LSB, they're out of the band.
> Not that it will draw much attention on 10m right
> now, but I hope they don't try that on 20m!
> 
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
> 
> 
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Simon Brown 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:53 PM
>   Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Very confused
> 
> 
> 
>   10m LSB is legal in many if not all European
> countries.
> 
>   Simon Brown, HB9DRV
> - Original Message - 
> From: Robert Chudek 
> 
> 
> I just heard a QSO on 28.300 on LSB between two
> PA stations. It must be new operators not having
> developed their skills yet.
> 
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
> 
>



   

Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware 
protection.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php

Re: [digitalradio] The Signalink and psk-31

[bruce mallon]

nice try on both our parts but they are still butting
heads . ill e-mail you later
Bruce


  

Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz

Re: [digitalradio] What is ALE?

[bruce mallon]

Ok it's useless ot me but thanks for the link...


   

Got a little couch potato? 
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz
 

Re: [digitalradio] A.L.E., VHS and Betamax

[bruce mallon]

--- Walt DuBose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

There's nothing wrong with the current ALE...I'm
just dreaming and thinking what  could happen in the
future.

OK what is ALE ? somewhere i got lost  ???


   

Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware 
protection.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

Whats wrong with it? 

Spam problems ?

--- "Leigh L Klotz, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Careful with the free version...
>
http://www.theregister.com/2007/06/05/microsoft_mvp_threats/
> Leigh/WA5ZNU


 

Bored stiff? Loosen up... 
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
http://games.yahoo.com/games/front

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 6 meters digital

[bruce mallon]

JOE As of now its a dead issue

BUT ... To Answer YOUR comment To allow a group to
come in ant TAKE 90% of a band for their own use is
INSANE.

Bonnie fails to say ... They already are allowed on
...

219 - 220 mhz but how many digital users using wide
band?
420 - 450 mhz same 

MOST are on microwave they use internet links  and the
only number I have found on a digital web site showed
less that 100 people with this wideband mode NATION
WIDE.

The top 2 mhz of 6 are like 2 meters FM users there
ARE nets and repeaters up there  no one has asked
them a thing 

EVEN IF they got this what is 100 users going to do to
save 3.7 mhz of a band? I work this band every time im
home right now there are thousands of people on SSB
world wide  and AM and digital users too.
SO they will be squeezed into the bottom 300 khz 100
khz of it is CW only ?

Remember it would have been the same for 2 meters too.

It seems dead and lets hope it stays that way.

Bruce




   

Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. 
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 6 meters digital

[bruce mallon]

I work for the Sheriff office radio shop and we got
RID of all low band in the 1970s 
Thoes who were here 35 years ago tell me SKIP KILLED
our officers radios and when the band was open they
resorted to using THE PHONE 
NO AGENCY IN CENTRAL FL is on low band anymore even
the highway patrol has moved off of it.

This place is  PODUNK USA  to most so our department
should be on CB but its not. I take care of 2100
radios on 460 MHz and the other shop does the same on
2,000 radios on 800 MHz trunking.

I have not seen anything in any APSO books showing a
intrest in going back to Low band.

With 54-216 mhz being up for sale there will bew lots
of space for use in the south west far more that 4
megs we have now.

Bruce


--- Walt DuBose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> bruce mallon wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Bonnie
> > 
> > NO ONE IS AFTER 6 METERS
> 
> Seriously...you think not?  Open it to
> commercial/industrial/law enforcement 
> under shat is it Part 90? and see how fast and how
> many Motorola sells 100 watt 
> radios to businesses and law enforcement.
> 
> Perhaps not in NYC...but in the SW portion of the
> U.S., VHF low-band is prime 
> frequencies where repeaters and many tall towers
> don't exist.
> 
> Walt/K5YFW
> 
> > 
> > 100 khz wide is now legal abovee 219 so you have
> lots
> > of room. You have never been on 6 or you have a
> junk
> > station since this is the bottom of the cycle and
> 10
> > is not open either so lets take it too lets
> not
> > forget 15, 12 and CB on one on them either
> > 
> > EVEN if you got 6 how would you save it with your
> 12
> > stations ?  and kick off thousands of others
> to do
> > it.
> > 
> > GET REAL . 6 is not going anywhere.
> > 
> >  _ _ _
> _ _ _
> > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in
> alternative vehicles. 
> > Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
> > http://autos. yahoo.com/ green_center/ 
> > <http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/>
> > 
> > 
> 
> 



 

Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 6 meters digital

[bruce mallon]

ITS NOT what is going on is the government has radar
on that band and HAMS are not supposed to interfere
with it. They have a problem with that radar. NOW if
70cm goes away it will go back to the GOVERNMENT.

SAME OLD LIES .. no one is out to get it and the
government has 1st dibs anyway.

If 70 cm is in danger and digital already is allowed
on 70 cm WHY is bonnie transmitting on that band and
asking others to join her ?

Here in TAMPABAY we have a few sparely used repeaters 
no one on SSB i have worked 2 by calling them up no TV
and few on digital on the 70 CM band. And McDill AFB
right in the center with lots of radars you would
think we would have a problem  . No rumors here
. none ..

I listen on 12 meters and in the last year I have
heard NO ONE ZERO maby we need to work on saving it
too .. Same on 10 less on 10 than 6.

Bruce
On 6 since 1966


Your comment.

--- Rhett Isley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Bonnie,
> 
 Why and how is the 70cm band going away in the
greater San Francisco area of California?
> 
> 73.
> Rhett KB4HG
> 



 

Now that's room service!  Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097

Re: [digitalradio] Re: 6 meters digital

[bruce mallon]

Bonnie

NO ONE IS AFTER 6 METERS

100 khz wide is now legal abovee 219 so you have lots
of room. You have never been on 6 or you have a junk
station since this is the bottom of the cycle and 10
is not open either so lets take it too lets not
forget 15, 12 and CB on one on them either

EVEN if you got 6 how would you save it with your 12
stations ?  and kick off thousands of others to do
it.

GET REAL . 6 is not going anywhere.




  

Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the 
Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ 

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

OK John  

You have had your say NOW MINE no rebuttals please..

ONE LAST TIME .

1st when did I EVER state I was a lawyer? As for ill
informed how may receive stations did your 24/7/365
experiment use to show the lack of interference from
your proposed mode ?

ANSWER ONLY ONE and he was part time under CLOSED BAND
CONDITIONS . With that kind of data using 15
meters at night is a LOCAL BAND with no DX .

A radical change for a band should have input from
more than one guy in his car and this is what you sent
the ARRL is this not fair enough?

I just sent out in MAY 2007 110 QSL cards all worked
on ssb between 50.110 and 50.350 and at 50.400 was a
group of AM boys. this time I had to pass on
working them. 6 IS used  if you want a dead band
you need to save 10 meters it just as dead here too.

IF your band plan was 53 - 54 MHz why did you ask for
50.3 - 54 and the legacy modes could have 50.0 -50.3 ?

IF you had asked for spots between 50.7 - 51 FEW would
have found a problem with it your mode has VERY SMALL
NUMBERS and that spot is almost unused nation wide.

On 2 meters again 144.300 - 148.000 for 100 kHz wide
no breaks for any other mode 1,000's of repeaters and
few of you but again if it's LEGAL you would have the
right to be ANYWHERE in that range and run as much
power as you need over that 100 khz wide range. 

NO ONE believes you or any other can run high ERP's
and not cause problems and if it became legal proving
interference would be next to impossible.
You have 219 mhz I'm on 223 since the mid 70's and
there is NO ONE using that band open or not. You have
lots of room already there. 

Why not UHF 420 and up is yours too lots of room very
few users.

  
WE HAVE BEEN OVER THIS again and again 

This is why wideband ANYTHING below the 220 band will
not go over well with other users.

I just bought a new digiboard ( SIGNALINK ) and right
now I'm debugging it for guess what .. 6 and 2 
METER DIGITAL. HERE IN TAMPABAY ( PODUNK USA ) we have
many active on HF/VHF on psk-31 APRS and a number of
other modes.
I am not a CAVEMAN and work in the radio field so
CHANGE I'm use to ... in fact our radios at work
are being changed out right now to NARROW modes a FCC
requirement.

The problem for the ARRL is that many of us DO NOT
TRUST the them this goes back to the 60's when they
came up with incentive licensing many older hams never
rejoined the league SO here we are 40 years later and
WE are the older hams and many again can't TRUST the
league.. 

Now let me talk to others without comments.

Bruce




   

Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play 
Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

Roger all he cares about is making 6 meters into a
DIGIVIDEO band for his elete 1%




 

Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate 
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

59.3 to 54.000 is 90% and if it was used by 17
stations is't usless to all others ...

IM DONE 



--- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> You better work on your math, Bruce!
> 
> A 100 kHz channel in 4 MHz is only 2.5%
> 
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on
> New Digi Protocols
> Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 08:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> NO you better get real 1% of all hams do not need
> 90%
> of a band  ANY BAND .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

> 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
> with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news
> 
> 
> 



 

Be a PS3 game guru.
Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.
http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

NO you better get real 1% of all hams do not need 90%
of a band  ANY BAND .





 

8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time 
with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news

Re: [digitalradio] Re: FCC's Riley & Cross Clarify

[bruce mallon]

HU well looks like all stations must have a common
RECEIVE mode of how can they ?



--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > kd4e wrote: 
> > It is now a closed issue at the FCC - *every*
> station
> > *must* prevent QRM of other stations.  Period.  No
> exceptions. 
> 
> I guess that's the end of DX contesting in USA?
> 
> Bonnie KQ6XA
> 
> 



 

Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

--- Skip Teller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Bruce, the center frequency of my skeleton-slot
> design is 144.2 MHz, as it is specifically intended
> for SSB operation. 

INTERESTING  I could not remember the name it's
been too long but the antenna worked as good as
stacked 7 elm cushcrafts back in the DAYS OF 2 METER
AM. MY use of them and the one station here in
tampabat shows this array is very good as you describe
in a semi directinal net antenna use with a wide lobe
which requires less turning.

YOUR COMMENT...
Email, cell phone, telephone, and SMS are so
> pervasive today, I don't see as great a need for
> message relay by radio like we used to do, but hams
> can provide a message bridge to a person outside the
> disaster zone when nobody else can.

NOW thoes who are pushing digital need to remember
many of us USE digital where we find it is a good
choice. THE BIG PROBLEM WAS THE 100KHZ wide stuff.

It dosn't take a moon rocket designer to know what
would have happened when 6 and 2 are open and if we
are talking NARROW band digital and the ARRL keeps its
meeting open it will go much better the next time.

bruce


   

Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for 
today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

I was wondering what the center frequency was and the
band width THAT'S WHY I ASKED IF IT WAS USABLE ON SSB.

I had 7 over 7 skeleton-slot beams made in England in
the late 1960 and I'm WELL aware of that array.

As for BIG WHEELS had them too a stacked pair and have
given thought to building another pair IF I don't
stack 2 more KU4AB's the ones i have now show a fairly
even pattern maby that's from stacking them.

It's interesting you went with the skeleton-slot
antenna we have a guy on our Tampa bay SSB net using
one with VERY good results.

Thanks Skip i'll be looking to see how you are using
the very good skeketon-slot antenna !

Bruce

--- Skip KH6TY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
>   First, let me say thanks to all who were
> interested enough in the protocol issue to offer
> suggestions
> 
>   >Usable on SSB ... ?? I have worked New York
> state from tampabay on USB with stacked ku4ab
> squailos.
> 
>   I am not sure I understand Bruce's puzzlement. The
> subject antenna is derived from the
> horizontally-polarized "skeketon-slot" antenna of
> the early 50's, and is usable for SSB because it is
> horizontally polarized, which is the convention for
> CW and SSB weak signal activity on 2m.
> 
>   Even a simple dipole can work long distances
> during E-skip or tropo conditions, but our task is
> to provide sufficient antenna gain for reliable
> flatland communications over 100 miles without
> having to rely on propagation as an assist. I also
> have stacked KU4AB square loops, which I started out
> with on 2m, but this antenna outperforms those by a
> significant margin of almost 5 db. In actual tests
> over 150 miles between my 13B2 to a single KU4AB
> loop mounted on a mobile truck compared to the
> skeleton-slot antenna mounted on the same truck, SSB
> signals that were not understandable on the KU4AB
> loop were 100% copiable on the skeleton-slot antenna
> on the same vehicle at the same height (no
> enhancement present).
> 
>   In addition, if you make careful tests of the
> KU4AB loop, you will probably find that the pattern
> is not very omnidirectional, but has deep nulls and
> one of the nulls on mine measured almost 6 dB.
> Therefore, a bi-directional antenna like the
> skeleton-slot is statistically almost as
> "omnidirectional" as the KU4AB square loop. The "big
> wheel" would probably be a better choice than
> stacked KU4AB loops, and is used on many
> horizontally polarized beacons, but I have not
> actually tested one. My tests are made using a 2m
> beacon located at 30 feet, 8 airmiles away. My
> antenna design is just a simpler, and cheaper ($25),
> way to make a "skeleton-slot" antenna.
> 
>   If you are interested, check out this excellent
> article on the skeleton-slot antenna:
>
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/D.Jefferies/antennexarticles/qloop.htm
> 


   

Got a little couch potato? 
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz
 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Comments to ARRL on New Digi Protocols

[bruce mallon]

--- Skip KH6TY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 "There will be a QST constructions article in coming
months for a horizontally- polarized 2m antenna that
equals the performance of a 5-element beam,"

Usable on SSB ... ??

I have worked New York state from tampabay on USB 
with stacked ku4ab squailos.

Bruce


   

Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! 
FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/

Re: [digitalradio] Re: The Signalink and psk-31

[bruce mallon]

--- alazia2003 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 "You will only get my SignaLink USB 
by prying it from my cold dead fingers!"

You have THAT right.

I'm going to build a small machine just for the card I
removed the sound blaster for the test and all
problems went away but i need it to run everything
else in this shack and Internet.

It teamed up with the TS-2000 should make a good pair
on 6 and 2 this next year right now i can switch from
the FT-100 to the IC-706 to the TS-2000 on either band
with ONE switch and run all 3 if i need to at the same
time.

now if the sunspots would only get going.

Bruce


   

Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware 
protection.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Here's a silly thought

[bruce mallon]

--- Danny Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Give it up Erik.  Money talks, and talks louder than
> anyone else.  Some PSK  operators are no different
that the guys on 80 meters, talking across town, using
linears so they can drown out everyone else on
the band.  

Danny .

I have lived in Florida for more that 35 years. Could
you tell me where  " Podunk city Fl " is ?

This question comes up on a regular bases and we here
have seen SEMINOLE Fl described as a PODUNK or worse
yet as god's new waiting room  a title St.
Petersburg had for decades.

Hu I wonder if PODUNK Fl has its own grid square ?

Bruce
SEMINOLE Fl.
Grid square EL-87


   

Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. 
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469

Re: [digitalradio] The Signalink and psk-31

[bruce mallon]

Ill give it a shot ..

--- Dave Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Bruce,
> 
> One thing to do, if you are using a varient of MS
> Windows is to set the
> default soundcard back to the soundblaster. For XP
> go into the 'Classic'
> Control Panel and select "Sound and Audio Devices",
> then go to the 'Audio'
> tab. Make sure your soundblaster is selected as the
> default device.
> 
> When you go into the digital software (I use
> MultiPSK, DigiPan and DM780)
> select the USB Soundcard as the interface to use. By
> default it will use the
> soundblaster since that's what the previous step
> told it to do.
> 
> I think that Windows defaults to the 'new' USB
> soundcard because it is usually
> a set of headphones, speakers or a fancy external
> 5.1 soundcard.
> 
> Hope that helps. I've got the SL-USB working on XP
> and Windows 2000 so far and
> going to try Linux this weekend. If you still have
> problems with it please
> email me direct if you like, or come back to the
> list for extra suggestions.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Dave.
> -- 
> David Ingram (VK4TDI)
> Real email: dave at ingramtech dot com
> Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
> http://www.ingramtech.com/
> MGRS: 56J MQ 991583Grid Square: QG62lm
> 
> bruce mallon wrote:
> > Well after more than  2 months the little box has
> > arrived.
> > It hooked up to my TS-2000 without a problem and
> works
> > like a champ  EXCEPT .
> > 
> > For some reason it and my SOUND BLASTER card don't
> > like each other and you have to configure the
> computer
> > for the SL-USB or the sound blaster card  a
> > bummer.
> 
> 



   

Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/

[digitalradio] The Signalink and psk-31

[bruce mallon]

Well after more than  2 months the little box has
arrived.
It hooked up to my TS-2000 without a problem and works
like a champ  EXCEPT .

For some reason it and my SOUND BLASTER card don't
like each other and you have to configure the computer
for the SL-USB or the sound blaster card  a
bummer.

Now not knowing poop about digital and being at best a
novice at PSK this box is GREAT ! and in 5 min I
worked my first PSK contact on 14.070 . he was
willing to put up with my slow typing and lack of
knowledge and motor skills using DIGIPAN.

I'm looking forward to using it in some 6 and 2 meter
week signal work using NARROW bandwidth digital modes.

If someone is looking for a $99 route to getting on
digital this is the way to go  conflict problems
included.

One neat little box .

And a excuse to build a computer for digital modes
only .. LOL.

Bruce


   
Got
 a little couch potato? 
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz
 

Re: [digitalradio] HFLINK Comments to ARRL on Development of New HF Digital Comm Protocols

[bruce mallon]

OK so what we have here is a failure to communicate ?



--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Please click here to read the HFLINK recommendation
> comments:
> http://www.hflink.com/arrl/
> 
> Background
> On 22 Feb 2007, the ARRL announced that it seeks
> comments from
> amateurs concerning development of an open-source,
> non-proprietary,
> data communications protocol suitable for use by
> radio amateurs over
> HF fading paths.
> 
> ARRL's announcement was discussed at length in the
> HFLINK Forum 
> and via private correspondence.
> 
> On 15 May 2007, HFLINK respectfully submitted
> comments in response 
> to ARRL's announcement.
> 
> Read on the web:
> http://www.hflink.com/arrl/
> 
> Regards,
> Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA
> HFLINK Founder
> 
> 



   
Building
 a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to 
get online.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting 

Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice Repeaters on HF

[bruce mallon]

Then DO IT and let the FCC rule .

Just remember for your long distance digipeaters to
work the band must be open .
unless your going to use ECHOLINK and if so whats the
point ?


--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Like many kinds of interesting digital
> communications, it seems that
> this sort of digital repeater falls into the gray
> area of FCC rules.
> The "retransmit" rules may preclude it. Welcome to
> Technology Jail.
> Nothing should stop an operator in another country
> from setting one
> up, it it could be used by US operators. 
> 
> Bonnie KQ6XA
> 
> 
> 
> > This type of single channel HF digital voice
> repeater is perfectly OK
> > under USA's present FCC rules, and the rules of
> most other countries.  
> > 
> > Bonnie KQ6XA
> > 
> > > > Digital Voice repeaters, using single-channel
> > > > near-real-time 
> > > > interleaved multiplexed OFDM, could work in a
> 5kHz
> > > > bandwidth.
> >
> 
> 
> 



   
Pinpoint
 customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/

Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice Repeaters on HF (Re: Nearly Vacant HF Spectrum)

[bruce mallon]

Now I'm not a big 12 meter guy but from what i
remember it gets packed when open. On 10 meters 29.000
- 29.200 has classic AM,  29.2 - 29.5 used to have
some satellite users ...

IF you could show under OPEN band conditions it might
work you might have something HOWEVER E-Skip can come
and go without warning.


   
Get
 the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware 
protection.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php

Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice Repeaters on HF (Re: Nearly Vacant HF Spectrum)

[bruce mallon]

AND if this is true why are they not legal now?

--- expeditionradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> > Would you like to show us those frequency's? 
> > And would you like to show them when the MUF gets
> that
> > high. 
> 
> Hi Bruce,
> 
> Digital Voice repeaters, using single-channel
> near-real-time 
> interleaved multiplexed OFDM, could work in a 5kHz
> bandwidth. This is
> a viable bandwidth for a single channel DV voice
> repeater in any HF
> amateur radio band, regardless of propagation. 
> 
> Take a look at the nearly vacant HF amateur radio
> spectrum, 24
> hours/day, regardless of our position in the solar
> cycle:
> 
> 21385-21450 kHz nearly vacant 24/7/350 
> 24890-24990 kHz nearly vacant 24/7/365 
> 28550-29500 kHz nearly vacant 24/7/350 
> 
> Other areas of HF amateur radio spectrum are nearly
> vacant at
> different times of day or night, relative to our
> position in the solar
> cycle. 
> 
> During at least 4 years at the bottom of every 11
> year solar cycle,
> some HF amateur radio bands are nearly vacant at
> various times 
>  of day or night. 
> 
> Examples of nearly vacant HF ham bands:
> 
> 1800-2000 kHz 2hr after sunrise to 2hr before sunset
> 3500-4000 kHz 5hr after sunrise to 3hr before sunset
> 14000-14350 kHz 5hr after sunset to 1hr before
> sunrise
> 18000-18168 kHz 4hr after sunset to sunrise 
> 21000-21450 kHz 4hr after sunset to sunrise 
> 24890-24990 kHz 3hr after sunset to sunrise 
> 28000-29500 kHz 3hr after sunset to sunrise 
> 
> 73 Bonnie KQ6XA
> 
> 



   
Yahoo!
 oneSearch: Finally, mobile search 
that gives answers, not web links. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC

Re: [digitalradio] HF Digital Voice repeaters Re: WinDRM Digital Voice

[bruce mallon]

 
> 
> Currently, there are vast areas of HF spectrum that
> currently have absolutely zero ham radio signals. We
don't need to use very narrow bandwidth signals when
these conditions exist.
> 
> It is "good amateur radio practice" to develop
> digital voice modes, at any bandwidth, and to
explore the possiblities of new techniques. 
> 
> One of the techniques we should be exploring is the
> use of single-channel time multi-plexed digital
voice repeaters on HF.
> 
> Bonnie KQ6XA
> 


BONNIE

Would you like to show us those frequency's? 
And would you like to show them when the MUF gets that
high.

Remember that DEAD 6 meter band ?
Last Wednesdays I worked 87 stations on SSB alone and
I'm here in Florida guys in the Midwest worked
hundred's.

And sunspots are near ZERO




   
Take
 the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, 
photos & more. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC

Re: [digitalradio] JT65a on 6m?

[bruce mallon]

50.250

--- Dave Sparks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Is anyone using JT65a on 6 meters (or higher) for
> terrestrial (non-EME) Work? If so, what is the best
> frequency to try?
> 
> --
> Dave
> AF6AS
> 
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

D-Star 5 users in orlando  so far .
Our jail is alone on 400 mhz everything here is 800
and up  except for ham.
When I worked for SPPD they like the county are on 800
trunking non digital and no intrest in going digital
even now now.

TAMPABAY is over 4,000,000 and pinellas county alone
is 1,400,000  not a back woods town  there is
ZERO in lowband vhf and no intrest in it and little
intrest in HIGH band either. UHF is lightly populated
with small companys.

Bruce

--- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Bruce,
> 
> Yes!  From a strictly commercial perspective our 440
> MHz band is extremely
> attractive territory.  Many advantages there,
> especially in urban areas.  
> Our 1.2 GHz
> band is a little like that in built up metro areas
> too, i.e., it gets 
> through where 2M
> can't, etc. It is a miracle that more companies
> haven't tried to muscle it 
> away from us.
> 
> We have a D* system here in Dallas, but I don't know
> how busy it is.  I have 
> an
> Icom 2200 with D* capability.  I will have to check
> it out this weekend and
> report back.
> 
> John
> 
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL 
> wake up ..)
> Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 03:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> John 
> 
> WELL  someone has to do it ( LOL )
> 
> I work on 460 MHz radios all day and love the band
> It
> has good range and is adapt for getting through in
> city's better than bands like 6 or 2 meters. We have
> 2100 ICOM radios here now and 5 repeaters ... 3 at
> the
> jail.
> 
> One day Ill get back to building a replacement for
> the
> ANA 6 meter repeater and ill have it linked to 440
> ...
> 
> BTY D-Star has flopped here except for cost  I don't
> have a clue why  they work OK but no one is
> interested in them ORLANDO FL AES has the nearest
> system so much for buying one  Ill stick with
> the
> new sound card digimoder.
> 
> Bruce
> 
> 
> --- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>  > Bruce,
>  >
>  > That is excellent!  Sounds as if you are really
>  > HOLDING DOWN THE
>  > FORT for the 6M and 2M bands (and 1.25M and 10M
> FM
>  > too!) in your area.
>  >
>  > That's really good to see.
>  >
>  > I do the same thing for 70cm...in a much smaller
>  > way.  I continuously
>  > monitor the National Simplex Calling Frequency on
>  > 70cm (446.00 FM Simplex).
>  > I live near the freeway (I-96) and get what I
> term
>  > the "occassional
>  > traveling QSO".  I.e., first I will hear one
> mobile
>  > station talking to
>  > another,
>  > and when I hear the second, I may join-in for a
>  > three-way QSO...
>  > Then they are lost in reverse order as they both
>  > drive out of range.
>  >
>  > Talk about lonely (except around Dayton time)...I
>  > usually fall out of my
>  > chair when the squelch breaks!  (HI)
>  >
>  > John
>  >
>  > Original Message Follows
>  > From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No
> Bandwidth
>  > Limit (was Re: ARRL
>  > wake up ..)
>  > Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 11:32:34 -0700 (PDT)
>  >
>  > I'm trying to keep the bands populated  It
> gets
>  > lonely on 432 SSB ..LOL 
>  >
>  >
>  > --- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  >  > Bruce,
>  >  >
>  >  > That's impressive!  Good for you...
>  >  >
>  >  > John
>  >  >
>  >  > Original Message Follows
>  >  > From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  >  > Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  >  > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  >  > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No
>  > Bandwidth
>  >  > Limit (was Re: ARRL
>  >  > wake up ..)
>  >  > Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
>  >  >
>  >  > John 
>  >  >
>  >  > I average 5 hours a day  split between 6
>  > meter
>  >  > SSB/FM, 2 meter ssb/FM and have running in the
>  > shack
>  >  > 223 FM, 17 meter SSB, 10 FM and room to run 2
>  > more
>  >  > as
>  >  > needed.. inc psk-31.
>  >  >
>  >  > 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

John 

WELL  someone has to do it ( LOL )

I work on 460 MHz radios all day and love the band It
has good range and is adapt for getting through in
city's better than bands like 6 or 2 meters. We have
2100 ICOM radios here now and 5 repeaters ... 3 at the
jail.

One day Ill get back to building a replacement for the
ANA 6 meter repeater and ill have it linked to 440 ...

BTY D-Star has flopped here except for cost  I don't
have a clue why  they work OK but no one is
interested in them ORLANDO FL AES has the nearest
system so much for buying one  Ill stick with the
new sound card digimoder.

Bruce


--- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Bruce,
> 
> That is excellent!  Sounds as if you are really
> HOLDING DOWN THE
> FORT for the 6M and 2M bands (and 1.25M and 10M FM
> too!) in your area.
> 
> That's really good to see.
> 
> I do the same thing for 70cm...in a much smaller
> way.  I continuously
> monitor the National Simplex Calling Frequency on
> 70cm (446.00 FM Simplex).
> I live near the freeway (I-96) and get what I term
> the "occassional
> traveling QSO".  I.e., first I will hear one mobile
> station talking to 
> another,
> and when I hear the second, I may join-in for a
> three-way QSO...
> Then they are lost in reverse order as they both
> drive out of range.
> 
> Talk about lonely (except around Dayton time)...I
> usually fall out of my
> chair when the squelch breaks!  (HI)
> 
> John
> 
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL 
> wake up ..)
> Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 11:32:34 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> I'm trying to keep the bands populated  It gets
> lonely on 432 SSB ..LOL 
> 
> 
> --- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>  > Bruce,
>  >
>  > That's impressive!  Good for you...
>  >
>  > John
>  >
>  > Original Message Follows
>  > From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No
> Bandwidth
>  > Limit (was Re: ARRL
>  > wake up ..)
>  > Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
>  >
>  > John 
>  >
>  > I average 5 hours a day  split between 6
> meter
>  > SSB/FM, 2 meter ssb/FM and have running in the
> shack
>  > 223 FM, 17 meter SSB, 10 FM and room to run 2
> more
>  > as
>  > needed.. inc psk-31.
>  >
>  > I have separate antennas for 6 SSB/FM, 2 SSB/FM,
>  > 440,
>  > 17, 10 SSB/FM and 80-10meters and can run up to 6
>  > bands / modes at the same time.
>  >
>  > NORNALY I will have radios going on 50.125,
> 50.020 (
>  > or 52.525 ), 144.200 ( 210 ) 147.550, 223.500 and
>  > 29.600 with my ft-840 free to be used on any HF
>  > band.
>  >
>  > With my new sound link box it will free up the
>  > FT-100D
>  > for 6 SSB and FM ... the old box is on the FT-100
>  > which allows me to run it on 6 psk-31 when its on
> or
>  > 14.070.
>  >
>  > Give a listen one day you might hear me ...
> on
>  > just about any mode..
>  >
>  > --- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  >  > Bruce,
>  >  >
>  >  > We call it LISTEN FIRST before transmitting...
>  >  >
>  >  > You really need to get on the air more, OM! 
> (HI)
>  >  > And stop wasting your time on this
> reflector...
>  >  >
>  >  > John
>  >  >
>  >  > Original Message Follows
>  >  > From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  >  > Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  >  > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  >  > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No
>  > Bandwidth
>  >  > Limit (was Re: ARRL
>  >  > wake up ..)
>  >  > Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 04:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
>  >  >
>  >  > then how do you expect to know if you are
>  >  > interfering
>  >  > with someone if they cant id you ?
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >
> __
>  >  > Do You Yahoo!?
>  >  > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
>  >  > protection around
>  >  > http://mail.yahoo.com
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
> __
>  > Do You Yahoo!?
>  > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
>  > protection around
>  > http://mail.yahoo.com
>  >
>  >
>  >
> 
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

I'm trying to keep the bands populated  It gets
lonely on 432 SSB ..LOL 


--- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Bruce,
> 
> That's impressive!  Good for you...
> 
> John
> 
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL 
> wake up ..)
> Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> John 
> 
> I average 5 hours a day  split between 6 meter
> SSB/FM, 2 meter ssb/FM and have running in the shack
> 223 FM, 17 meter SSB, 10 FM and room to run 2 more
> as
> needed.. inc psk-31.
> 
> I have separate antennas for 6 SSB/FM, 2 SSB/FM,
> 440,
> 17, 10 SSB/FM and 80-10meters and can run up to 6
> bands / modes at the same time.
> 
> NORNALY I will have radios going on 50.125, 50.020 (
> or 52.525 ), 144.200 ( 210 ) 147.550, 223.500 and
> 29.600 with my ft-840 free to be used on any HF
> band.
> 
> With my new sound link box it will free up the
> FT-100D
> for 6 SSB and FM ... the old box is on the FT-100
> which allows me to run it on 6 psk-31 when its on or
> 14.070.
> 
> Give a listen one day you might hear me ... on
> just about any mode..
> 
> --- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>  > Bruce,
>  >
>  > We call it LISTEN FIRST before transmitting...
>  >
>  > You really need to get on the air more, OM!  (HI)
>  > And stop wasting your time on this reflector...
>  >
>  > John
>  >
>  > Original Message Follows
>  > From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>  > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No
> Bandwidth
>  > Limit (was Re: ARRL
>  > wake up ..)
>  > Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 04:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
>  >
>  > then how do you expect to know if you are
>  > interfering
>  > with someone if they cant id you ?
>  >
>  >
> __
>  > Do You Yahoo!?
>  > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
>  > protection around
>  > http://mail.yahoo.com
>  >
>  >
>  >
> 
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

John 

I average 5 hours a day  split between 6 meter
SSB/FM, 2 meter ssb/FM and have running in the shack
223 FM, 17 meter SSB, 10 FM and room to run 2 more as
needed.. inc psk-31.

I have separate antennas for 6 SSB/FM, 2 SSB/FM, 440,
17, 10 SSB/FM and 80-10meters and can run up to 6
bands / modes at the same time.

NORNALY I will have radios going on 50.125, 50.020 (
or 52.525 ), 144.200 ( 210 ) 147.550, 223.500 and
29.600 with my ft-840 free to be used on any HF band.

With my new sound link box it will free up the FT-100D
for 6 SSB and FM ... the old box is on the FT-100
which allows me to run it on 6 psk-31 when its on or
14.070.

Give a listen one day you might hear me ... on
just about any mode..

--- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Bruce,
> 
> We call it LISTEN FIRST before transmitting...
> 
> You really need to get on the air more, OM!  (HI)
> And stop wasting your time on this reflector...
> 
> John
> 
> Original Message Follows
> From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL 
> wake up ..)
> Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 04:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> then how do you expect to know if you are
> interfering
> with someone if they cant id you ?
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

then how do you expect to know if you are interfering
with someone if they cant id you ?

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

Go for it but make shore all of you ID in CW so your
calles can be noted by the stations who will complain
...


--- bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I think this is a good idea Bonnie.
> 
> Get on 20 meters with a few hundered of your wide
> band
> digital users on field day and demand they not
> interfere with your group ...
> 
> It will make for a interesting test case.
> 
> your comment 
> I will be happy to provide a examples of how the
> > rules allow very wideband data bandwidth on HF, if
> you like.
> > 
> >   73---Bonnie KQ6XA
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

above 200 mhz thats a real problem ...


--- Dave Sparks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Interesting dilemma. We love uncrowded bands but if
> they're too uncrowded they might be considered
> under-utilized and be in danger of being taken away
> from us.
> 
> Dave
> AF6AS
> 
> -Original Message-
> 
> From:  bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subj:  Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth
> Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ..)
> Date:  Wed May 2, 2007 7:05 am
> Size:  1K
> To:  digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> 
> I think this is a good idea Bonnie.
> 
> Get on 20 meters with a few hundered of your wide
> band
> digital users on field day and demand they not
> interfere with your group ...
> 
> It will make for a interesting test case.
> 
> your comment 
> I will be happy to provide a examples of how the
> > rules allow very wideband data bandwidth on HF, if
> you like.
> > 
> >   73---Bonnie KQ6XA
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 
> 
> Announce your digital presence via our Interactive
> Sked Page at
> http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- message truncated ---
> 
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digi Voice: No Bandwidth Limit (was Re: ARRL wake up ......)

[bruce mallon]

I think this is a good idea Bonnie.

Get on 20 meters with a few hundered of your wide band
digital users on field day and demand they not
interfere with your group ...

It will make for a interesting test case.

your comment 
I will be happy to provide a examples of how the
> rules allow very wideband data bandwidth on HF, if
you like.
> 
>   73---Bonnie KQ6XA
> 
> 
> 
>


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] ARRL wake up ......

[bruce mallon]

--- Bill Vodall WA7NWP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 
 No one wants to crush the older modes -- but they
 can't block moving > to new modes and that's what's
happening now.

Explane ? What modes are blocking who ? on 145.900 ?

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] ARRL wake up ......

[bruce mallon]

John 

1) I work in 2 way radio and have for 40+ years Here
at the S.O. ( JAIL ) we are still analog UHF.

2) I'm on the air almost every day on a number of
bands and modes  and got my start on 2 meter AM
40+ years ago using converted WW2 aircraft radios.

3) I own digital radio equipment and have ordered a
new soundlink module to allow me to work some more. I
have asked questions of forum member on and off forum
about some modes being used on my band of interest 6
meters other than psk-31 which i already run.

4) I cannot speak for others upset at the ARRL but as
a 40 year member and 30 as a life member I do have a
right to speak for myself.

NO ONE wants to hamper experimenting but at the same
time no one should want to crush other older modes ...
MYSELF I have tinkered with anything that caught my
fancy 
Sadly NO ONE beleves that somehow our fearless leaders
in Newinton are not up to something And the ARRL came
over as tring to do just that with 90% of 2 major
bands being opened for 1% of all hams.

Now back to radio .. 

Bruce
On 6 since 66




--- John Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Roger:
> 
> I'm far from being anti US...  but I have
> absolutely no patience for those folks who seldom
> get on the air ,


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] ARRL wake up ......

[bruce mallon]

John Im seting up for scatter ... so many of us do run
digital .

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [digitalradio] Digest Number 3456

[bruce mallon]

EXACTLY MY PROBLEM WITH THE ARRL .. 

( and the 6 meter give away )

NO PROTECTION FOR EXISTING STATIONS OR MODES .


--- Skip Teller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


"but there was nothing I could find in RM-11306 that
made it impossible to  use a new technology ,1500 watt
signal, modulated at 90% over the entire 100 Khz,
perhaps carrying some type of ATV information, that
would wipe out all repeaters in an entire city in a
range of 100 kHz. All I saw in RM-11306 was 100 kHz
-wide signals allowed as specified in the table."
> > 
> 73, Skip
> KH6TY
> 

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[digitalradio] Wideband on 6

[bruce mallon]

" My dream was / is an ADV 100 kHz channel up around
53 MHz where we could  have ADV QSOs over 50 -100
miles without investing a fortune in antennas.

 There are very few 6M FM repeaters in my area and the
local coordinators are happy to keep a few channels
uncoordinated for our ADV use."
 
John - K8OCL

INTERESTING

Ok why did your group want 50.3 - 54 ? or was this a
ARRL idea 

Also back last year I remember posting that the only
place that wideband ( 100 khz ) would even have a
chance was above 53 mhz . Remember your " local "
coordinator if he was going to do it right would have
to find that UNUSED 100 khz space and see others held
it open for just your AdV use or you would find
repeaters SOMEPLACE when the band opened.

My old 6 meter repeater WR4ANA ( 52.55 / 53.55 ) largo
was on from 1976 - 1980 and we had check ins from all
over north america with 40 foot high antennas
and 50 watts tx to the duplexer... 30 years ago.

Bruce

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com