Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-22 Thread John GM4SLV
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:52:37 -0500
Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 As you say, everyone is a bit different  as to where their waterfall
 pointer lies on a digital signal.  It is much better to just spot
 the actual freq where the audio signal comes out on the waterfall.
 I.E.  14.0731.  No matter who clicks on a spot like that, their
 trace comes out on the waterfall as that freq.  We dont care where
 each others dial freq is - but the location of the signal.  In your
 case its dial plus 1500 -  In mine its dial plus 1000, other will
 have similar setting according to where their sound card best passes
 a signal (sweet spot), and there is no qestion where the transmitting
 signal is found.  Double click a spot, and bang- your
 reciever/transmitter freqs are set properly, and no one has to look
 around to see where in the world the spotter found it.


I'm not sure I follow this argument...not the part about deriving RF
frequencies from dial  audio...about using DX cluster spots to auto
tune

If I click on a spot on a cluster (as above...say 14.0731) then my rig
QSYs to 14.0731...ie carrier/dial frequency. If the actula RF frequency
of the signal I want is on 140731 then I'm not going to see it, as
it'll be a zero Hz on the waterfall.

All the signals in the passband are therefore above 14.0731 (assuming
USB)...with the middle of the passband corresponding to roughly
14.0746).

If I read you right you're suggesting reporting spots with the actual
RF frequency of the TX (derived from your software adding AF frequency
to the reported RF frequency from the rig - taking into account
USB/LSB). 

This is fair enough since that's all you can know, you can't know what
combination of dial and audio was configured by the sending
station, nor the infinite combinations used by everyone else. 

My problem is that in my experience clicking a spot on a DXCluster will
put the rig's dial to that QRGyou still need to offtune down a kHz
or so to put that specific frequency into the passband...

I agree that the actual QRG should be the one reported - but AFAICT
we'll still need to do our own maths to put the required RF frequency
into the right area of baseband on the waterfall.

BTW I find most Olivia sigs in Europe around 14106.5 or 14107.5
(centre)...with 1k/32 that puts the bottom carrier @ 14106 or 14107.
I see MFSK, as already reported, around 14073 and up with very little
below the PSK31 region. Never knowingly seen Throb.

Cheers from Shetland 

John GM4SLV


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-22 Thread KV9U
If it had just been for willful interference, I would agree, but the 
undertone of not following the bandplan was pretty alarming to me.

Anyone can claim interference if you have voice modes in a CW area since 
you can not filter out a wide mode that has frequencies spread out and 
that will enter even a narrow 100 Hz passband when using a narrow mode 
like CW.

For many of us, CW in a voice area is not a problem since we just hit 
the ANF or MNF as the case may be.

73,

Rick, KV9U


Danny Douglas wrote:

The way I read this, it was not because they were on a band plan for CW, but
that they were interfering with communications that was already in use.  The
band plan was just something that gave them the ability to gig them for
one more thing.

  




Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread Danny Douglas
I have used Olivia, Throb, PSK63, Hell, MFSK all successfully on the low end 
just below the normal PSK freqs on 20 meters.  It would seem to me the best 
place on all bands, using the low end of normal PSK frqs, where people would 
notice you.  Early on, in each of those modes, that is about the only place I 
heard anyone, or saw any spots.

Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.

moderator  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  - Original Message - 
  From: Andrew J. O'Brien 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 6:38 PM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon 
frequencies


  Just to clarify my original point...

  I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes 
except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE).  

  My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to call 
CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software.  This 
would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, 
MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. 

  The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than 
trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for  potential signals.

  My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the 
amount of simultaneous QSOs in the aforementioned modes rarely exceeds 3-5 .  
When it is at the 5 level,  it is often 2-3 Olivia stations, maybe 1 MFSK16 and 
one Hell.  I will argue that MOST of the time it is less than three 
simultaneous QSOs . Sometimes NO signals at all.

  Thus, the amount of interest in the exotic digital modes  is at such a 
level that we would benefit from clustering, and our use of a calling/beacon 
frequency would not likely clutter up the portion of the band.

  If we established 4 beacon frequencies  (80,40,30, and 20M) you could easily 
monitor  the bands via scan features in  the radio .  

  Again, the idea would be just to meet on the calling frequency and move 
further up/down the band for extended conversation.  I am NOT suggesting a 
different calling frequency for each mode. 

  20 M seems like the easies band to establish a data frequency that allows 
worldwide participation.  The others are more complex due to varying regional 
bandplans.  I  will read the feedback I have received so far and suggest some 
frequencies to try this weekend.




   


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date: 12/20/2006 
3:54 PM


Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread Roger J. Buffington
Danny Douglas wrote:

  I have used Olivia, Throb, PSK63, Hell, MFSK all successfully on the
  low end just below the normal PSK freqs on 20 meters.  It would seem
  to me the best place on all bands, using the low end of normal PSK
  frqs, where people would notice you.  Early on, in each of those
  modes, that is about the only place I heard anyone, or saw any spots.

Excepting Throb (which I have never used) I seem to find most of the 
activity on the above modes just ABOVE the PSK freqs, around 14073.5 or 
so.  And of course 14076 is a popular HELL calling freq.

de Roger W6VZV



Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread Jose_Angel Amador Fundora



I have worked Olivia on 14105-14110...also MT63, not very often, indeed.

Never checked below 14070 for digitalmaybe it could be interesting.

On 40, I have found 2 watering holes: 7070-7075 and 7035-7038

I have used Olivia and Hell on 7073.

I have worked quite a few exotic DX on 7035, and would like to keep it 
that way, keeping the chatter on 7070...yesterday night there were two 
south african stations, making it a more interesting place to look around.

Jose, CO2JA

-- Original Message --
From: Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date:  Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:59:21 -0500

I have used Olivia, Throb, PSK63, Hell, MFSK all successfully on the low end 
just below the normal PSK freqs on 20 meters.  It would seem to me the best 
place on all bands, using the low end of normal PSK frqs, where people would 
notice you.  Early on, in each of those modes, that is about the only place I 
heard anyone, or saw any spots.

Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.

moderator  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  - Original Message - 
  From: Andrew J. O'Brien 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 6:38 PM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon 
 frequencies


  Just to clarify my original point...

  I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes 
 except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE).  

  My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to 
 call CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software.  
 This would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, 
 MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. 

  The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than 
 trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for  potential signals.

  My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the 
 amount of simultaneous QSOs in the aforementioned modes rarely exceeds 3-5 .  
 When it is at the 5 level,  it is often 2-3 Olivia stations, maybe 1 MFSK16 
 and one Hell.  I will argue that MOST of the time it is less than three 
 simultaneous QSOs . Sometimes NO signals at all.

  Thus, the amount of interest in the exotic digital modes  is at such a 
 level that we would benefit from clustering, and our use of a calling/beacon 
 frequency would not likely clutter up the portion of the band.

  If we established 4 beacon frequencies  (80,40,30, and 20M) you could easily 
 monitor  the bands via scan features in  the radio .  

  Again, the idea would be just to meet on the calling frequency and move 
 further up/down the band for extended conversation.  I am NOT suggesting a 
 different calling frequency for each mode. 

  20 M seems like the easies band to establish a data frequency that allows 
 worldwide participation.  The others are more complex due to varying regional 
 bandplans.  I  will read the feedback I have received so far and suggest some 
 frequencies to try this weekend.

 

 
__ __ __ __
Correo enviado por ElectroMAIL. Facultad El�ctrica. CUJAE Dominio: 
electrica.cujae.edu.cu


 
   



Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread KV9U
How about using PSK31 as the baseline and then transmit any other 
digital mode a kHz or so up from the highest PSK31 signal that is on at 
that time?

That is pretty much what I do on 80, 40, and 20.

I would very much like a spot frequency to operate on for 30 meters 
which seems grossly underutilized and is a superb digital band. I like 
10.133 for a dial frequency. It clears a high power government digital 
station by a few kHz, that is frequently on in my reception area, and I 
like anything with repeating digits:) I wonder if hams do not tend to 
operate there because they do not  have an antenna for that band?

On 10 meters, I generally put the dial at 28.120 and on 6 meters at 
50.290. I have not done much with other bands except a little bit with 
160 around 1.808, but I guess I am a bit high and probably should try 
1.805. But I love the number 1808 with my repeating my favorite number 
twice. As you can see my dial frequency selections are done with great 
scientific analysis:)

My actual transmitting frequency is going to be nominally 1500 Hz above 
my dial frequency. This will vary for each user depending upon their 
particular equipment and operating preferences, but I suspect that most 
will be around 1000 to 1500 Hz higher than their dial frequency.

Are there any hams who find that they prefer other center frequencies 
due to some reason or due to their rigs filtering requirements?

73,

Rick, KV9U


Andrew J. O'Brien wrote:

Just to clarify my original point...

I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes 
except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE).  

My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to call 
CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software.  This 
would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, 
MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. 

The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than 
trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for  potential signals.

My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the 
amount of simultaneous QSOs in the aforementioned modes rarely exceeds 3-5 .  
When it is at the 5 level,  it is often 2-3 Olivia stations, maybe 1 MFSK16 
and one Hell.  I will argue that MOST of the time it is less than three 
simultaneous QSOs . Sometimes NO signals at all.

Thus, the amount of interest in the exotic digital modes  is at such a level 
that we would benefit from clustering, and our use of a calling/beacon 
frequency would not likely clutter up the portion of the band.

If we established 4 beacon frequencies  (80,40,30, and 20M) you could easily 
monitor  the bands via scan features in  the radio .  

Again, the idea would be just to meet on the calling frequency and move 
further up/down the band for extended conversation.  I am NOT suggesting a 
different calling frequency for each mode. 

20 M seems like the easies band to establish a data frequency that allows 
worldwide participation.  The others are more complex due to varying regional 
bandplans.  I  will read the feedback I have received so far and suggest some 
frequencies to try this weekend.

 


  



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.25/593 - Release Date: 12/19/2006

  




Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread Danny Douglas
Rick  I think that you are pretty much looking at RTTY freqs, which usually
are 2 or 3 KC above the PSK signals, and upward from there.  This suggest
calling freq for other digital modes, therefore should be a bit above or
below the combination package of PSK/RTTY so as to get them out of each
others way.  As to giving your VFO (dial) freq, that is not the normal way
PSK is spotted, nor any other mode dependant on a waterfall.  As you say,
everyone is a bit different as to where their waterfall pointer lies on a
digital signal.  It is much better to just spot the actual freq where the
audio signal comes out on the waterfall. I.E.  14.0731.  No matter who
clicks on a spot like that, their trace comes out on the waterfall as that
freq.  We dont care where each others dial freq is - but the location of the
signal.  In your case its dial plus 1500 -  In mine its dial plus 1000,
other will have similar setting according to where their sound card best
passes a signal (sweet spot), and there is no qestion where the transmitting
signal is found.  Double click a spot, and bang- your reciever/transmitter
freqs are set properly, and no one has to look around to see where in the
world the spotter found it.

I am a bit perplexed about 160 meters.  It is such a wide band, with so few
signals per KHZ, I wonder why anyone wants to send SSB, for instance, down
in the low part.  We should have sub bands down there, even more than the
other bands, but dont.  Why anyone would want to send SSB on top of ongoing
CW signals is beyond me, but they do it all the time there.  Thus, I think
your suggestion for PSK at 1.808 or even lower is much too low for that
activity.  How about bringing it up to 1.850 and have cw below that and SSB
above it?  If not - why not?  Most all of us have antenna tuners these days,
and we dont run much power on PSK anyway, so it hasnt much to do with where
our antennas are cut.  I could certainly understand the mix-mash mess on
160 back when radio location signals abounded on the band, and hams in
specific areas of the states/world were forbidden to operated in portions
near those signals.  That is no longer the case and we can pretty much
transmit wherever we want on that band.  We just need some gentlemens
agreement (I.E. subbands) to protect signals from inteference from different
modes.


Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.

moderator  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message - 
From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital
calling/beacon frequencies


 How about using PSK31 as the baseline and then transmit any other
 digital mode a kHz or so up from the highest PSK31 signal that is on at
 that time?

 That is pretty much what I do on 80, 40, and 20.

 I would very much like a spot frequency to operate on for 30 meters
 which seems grossly underutilized and is a superb digital band. I like
 10.133 for a dial frequency. It clears a high power government digital
 station by a few kHz, that is frequently on in my reception area, and I
 like anything with repeating digits:) I wonder if hams do not tend to
 operate there because they do not  have an antenna for that band?

 On 10 meters, I generally put the dial at 28.120 and on 6 meters at
 50.290. I have not done much with other bands except a little bit with
 160 around 1.808, but I guess I am a bit high and probably should try
 1.805. But I love the number 1808 with my repeating my favorite number
 twice. As you can see my dial frequency selections are done with great
 scientific analysis:)

 My actual transmitting frequency is going to be nominally 1500 Hz above
 my dial frequency. This will vary for each user depending upon their
 particular equipment and operating preferences, but I suspect that most
 will be around 1000 to 1500 Hz higher than their dial frequency.

 Are there any hams who find that they prefer other center frequencies
 due to some reason or due to their rigs filtering requirements?

 73,

 Rick, KV9U


 Andrew J. O'Brien wrote:

 Just to clarify my original point...
 
 I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital
modes except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE).
 
 My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to
call CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software.
This would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP,
MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25.
 
 The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than
trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for  potential signals.
 
 My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the
amount of simultaneous QSOs

Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread Chuck Mayfield - AA5J
It seems to me that the IARU Region 2 bandplan should at least be 
consulted as part of the subject process..
See http://www.iaru-regionii.org/Region_2_HF_Band_Plan.html.

73 de AA5J

Danny Douglas wrote:

 As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about 
 operating
 digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan. Bandplans are arbitary and 
 there is
 NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary. Now - 
 subbands
 ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks 
 changes
 in separating modes. The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur 
 Bands
 shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key,
 says of 160:
 CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE The only note of distinction in this whole
 band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause
 harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no
 protection from radiolocation operators

 Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the 
 first 10
 kc. I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart the
 ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same
 thing. That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several
 places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years
 without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else.

 As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be
 above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs. 
 Give
 a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which is
 really irritating to a CW op. Most all of the PSK I have worked (128
 countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the
 14.069-14.073 bandwidth. The other digital modes have all been around
 14.065 - 14.070. This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of
 PSK rather than just above it. I havent called CQ on the other modes, 
 above
 the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below it.
 Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals 
 at all
 on 20. I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so
 dont know how those separate out. Also have not been digitally active 
 on 80
 or 40 all that much either. Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford me
 new ones very often. The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I
 figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but so
 far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops. I just dont
 think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital 
 modes.

 Your last comment:  Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if we
 operated
  voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between voice
  transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band?
 would appear to be exactly what we should be doing. It would keep the 
 voice
 part out of the lower piece of the band and
 place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally
 legal according to the charts. I was hoping that would be what we 
 would see
 on the other bands as well, but guess that is still not to be.

 Danny Douglas N7DC
 ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
 SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
 DX 2-6 years each
 .
 QSL LOTW-buro- direct
 As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you
 use that - also pls upload to LOTW
 or hard card.

 moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 mailto:digital_modes%40yahoogroups.com

 



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date: 12/20/2006 
3:54 PM
  




Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread Danny Douglas
You would think so, but look at the band plan, and then at who is the lead
for IARU within region 2  (ARRL).  They say 1800-18930 CW, yet do not say
that on their own US Amateur Bands chart, or at least recommend it.  Phone
doesnt show up on there, until 1840-1850 DX window.

One hand doesnt know what the next is doing.

We need INTERNATIONAL band plans.  Get all three regions together in a room
and make them stay there until they get a bandplan agreement - with teeth.


Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.

moderator  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message - 
From: Chuck Mayfield - AA5J [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital
calling/beacon frequencies


 It seems to me that the IARU Region 2 bandplan should at least be
 consulted as part of the subject process..
 See http://www.iaru-regionii.org/Region_2_HF_Band_Plan.html.

 73 de AA5J

 Danny Douglas wrote:

  As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about
  operating
  digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan. Bandplans are arbitary and
  there is
  NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary. Now -
  subbands
  ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks
  changes
  in separating modes. The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur
  Bands
  shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key,
  says of 160:
  CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE The only note of distinction in this whole
  band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause
  harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no
  protection from radiolocation operators
 
  Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the
  first 10
  kc. I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart
the
  ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same
  thing. That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several
  places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years
  without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else.
 
  As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be
  above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs.
  Give
  a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which
is
  really irritating to a CW op. Most all of the PSK I have worked (128
  countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the
  14.069-14.073 bandwidth. The other digital modes have all been around
  14.065 - 14.070. This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of
  PSK rather than just above it. I havent called CQ on the other modes,
  above
  the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below
it.
  Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals
  at all
  on 20. I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so
  dont know how those separate out. Also have not been digitally active
  on 80
  or 40 all that much either. Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford
me
  new ones very often. The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I
  figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but
so
  far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops. I just
dont
  think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital
  modes.
 
  Your last comment:  Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if
we
  operated
   voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between
voice
   transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band?
  would appear to be exactly what we should be doing. It would keep the
  voice
  part out of the lower piece of the band and
  place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally
  legal according to the charts. I was hoping that would be what we
  would see
  on the other bands as well, but guess that is still not to be.
 
  Danny Douglas N7DC
  ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
  SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
  DX 2-6 years each
  .
  QSL LOTW-buro- direct
  As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you
  use that - also pls upload to LOTW
  or hard card.
 
  moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  mailto:digital_modes%40yahoogroups.com
 
 
 
 
 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date:
12/20/2006 3:54 PM
 
 



 Connect to  telnet://cluster.dynalias.org a single node spotting/alert
system dedicated to digital and CW QSOs.


 Yahoo! Groups Links





 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition

Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread KV9U
Danny,


The ARRL bandplan shows Digital Modes to be 1.800 - 1.810. They also 
have an Experimental modes area at the top of the band from 1.995 - 
2.000 in the Beacon bandplan area:

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html

I came across some information this week that really upset me in 
reference to bandplans.This is not something new, as the incident 
occured in 2001. I don't know of the outcome.

If a large group such as the ARRL publishes a bandplan, the FCC can cite 
you for poor operating practices if you do not follow it and someone 
claims interference:

Band plans are voluntary in nature, Hollingsworth acknowledged in each 
of the similarly worded letters. He said the FCC depends upon voluntary 
compliance because it minimizes the necessity for the Commission to be 
called in to resolve amateur problems. Where interference results from 
band plans not being followed, Hollingsworth continued, the Commission 
expects substantial justification to be shown by the operators ignoring 
the band plans.

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/10/04/1/?nc=1

I definitely agree that very few operators use digital modes on 160, but 
in general the percentage of digital operating is much lower than even 
CW, much less phone.

73,

Rick, KV9U





Danny Douglas wrote:

As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about operating
digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan.  Bandplans are arbitary and there is
NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary.  Now - subbands
ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks changes
in separating modes.  The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur Bands
shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key,
says of 160:
CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE  The only note of distinction in this whole
band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause
harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no
protection from radiolocation operators

Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the first 10
kc.  I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart the
ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same
thing.  That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several
places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years
without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else.

As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be
above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs.  Give
a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which is
really irritating to a CW op.  Most all of the PSK I have worked (128
countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the
14.069-14.073 bandwidth.   The other digital modes have all been around
14.065 - 14.070.  This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of
PSK rather than just above it.  I havent called CQ on the other modes, above
the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below it.
Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals at all
on 20.   I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so
dont know how those separate out.  Also have not been digitally active on 80
or 40 all that much either.  Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford me
new ones very often.  The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I
figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but so
far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops.  I just dont
think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital modes.

Your last comment:   Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if we
operated
  

voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between voice
transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band?


would appear to be exactly what we should be doing.  It would keep the voice
part out of the lower piece of the band and
place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally
legal according to the charts.  I was hoping that would be what we would see
on the other bands as well, but guess that is still not to be.

  




Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-21 Thread Danny Douglas
The way I read this, it was not because they were on a band plan for CW, but
that they were interfering with communications that was already in use.  The
band plan was just something that gave them the ability to gig them for
one more thing.

Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesty I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.

moderator  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message - 
From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital
calling/beacon frequencies


 Danny,


 The ARRL bandplan shows Digital Modes to be 1.800 - 1.810. They also
 have an Experimental modes area at the top of the band from 1.995 -
 2.000 in the Beacon bandplan area:

 http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html

 I came across some information this week that really upset me in
 reference to bandplans.This is not something new, as the incident
 occured in 2001. I don't know of the outcome.

 If a large group such as the ARRL publishes a bandplan, the FCC can cite
 you for poor operating practices if you do not follow it and someone
 claims interference:

 Band plans are voluntary in nature, Hollingsworth acknowledged in each
 of the similarly worded letters. He said the FCC depends upon voluntary
 compliance because it minimizes the necessity for the Commission to be
 called in to resolve amateur problems. Where interference results from
 band plans not being followed, Hollingsworth continued, the Commission
 expects substantial justification to be shown by the operators ignoring
 the band plans.

 http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/10/04/1/?nc=1

 I definitely agree that very few operators use digital modes on 160, but
 in general the percentage of digital operating is much lower than even
 CW, much less phone.

 73,

 Rick, KV9U





 Danny Douglas wrote:

 As to the 160 meter band, I was taken aback by your comment about
operating
 digital outside of 1800- 1810 bandplan.  Bandplans are arbitary and there
is
 NO force of law in them as far as I know- and are voluntary.  Now -
subbands
 ARE of course the mandantory rules and are the subject of last weeks
changes
 in separating modes.  The chart, put out just last week, of US Amateur
Bands
 shows the 160 band with NO partition at all, and indeed over in the Key,
 says of 160:
 CW,RTTY,DATA, PHONE, IMAGE  The only note of distinction in this whole
 band comments that amateurs operating from 1900-2000 khz must not cause
 harmful inteference to the radiolocation service and are afforded no
 protection from radiolocation operators
 
 Where did you get the information that digital MUST stay within the first
10
 kc.  I would say there must be something wrong with that, or the chart
the
 ARRL has supplied is incorrect, but I have other charts showing the same
 thing.  That would be interesting, as I have been using PSK in several
 places on the band, but never below about 1.840, for a couple of years
 without any squwak from the FCC, or anyone else.
 
 As to 20 meters, you are correct that the majority of RTTY appears to be
 above 14080, but I have heard it as low as 14.074 on non-contest QSOs.
Give
 a contest and people go wild and you hear RTTY as low as 14.010, which is
 really irritating to a CW op.  Most all of the PSK I have worked (128
 countries to date) have been on 20 meters, and all of it within the
 14.069-14.073 bandwidth.   The other digital modes have all been around
 14.065 - 14.070.  This is the reason I was recommending the lower side of
 PSK rather than just above it.  I havent called CQ on the other modes,
above
 the PSK area, but typically when I have answered others they are below
it.
 Right now, with such poor conditions I am hearing no digital signals at
all
 on 20.   I have worked few digital stations (other than RTTY) on 15-10 so
 dont know how those separate out.  Also have not been digitally active on
80
 or 40 all that much either.  Mostly, I look for DX and those dont afford
me
 new ones very often.  The 160 meter band is an exception there, as I
 figure that new ones should be easier on PSK than SSB or even CW- but
so
 far that has not been the case, for really long distance ops.  I just
dont
 think enough people are using the band with PSK or other new digital
modes.
 
 Your last comment:   Perhaps it would not incur the wrath of the FCC if
we
 operated
 
 
 voice and then also transmitted data and fax and image in between voice
 transmissions, but do it in the voice/image part of the band?
 
 
 would appear to be exactly what we should be doing.  It would keep the
voice
 part out of the lower piece of the band and
 place both it and the images together - and as per my above - is totally
 legal according to the charts.  I was hoping that would be what we would
see
 on the other bands

[digitalradio] Clarification : Establishing digital calling/beacon frequencies

2006-12-20 Thread Andrew J. O'Brien
Just to clarify my original point...

I'm looking to establish a suggested calling frequency for ALL digital modes 
except CW, PSK31, RTTY, SSTV , PACTOR , and ALE(data ALE).  

My suggestion is that members of this list utilize a common frequency to call 
CQ and/or use attended beacon features within their digital software.  This 
would be for Olivia, Dominio EX, Throb, PSK63/125 , , MT63 ,Hell CHIP, 
MFSK16/8, PAX/PAX2 , THROB, experimental AX25. 

The idea is simply to make it easier to find stations to work rather than 
trawling the bands in 300-500 Hz ranges looking for  potential signals.

My experience suggest that even on good propagation days, say on 20M, the 
amount of simultaneous QSOs in the aforementioned modes rarely exceeds 3-5 .  
When it is at the 5 level,  it is often 2-3 Olivia stations, maybe 1 MFSK16 and 
one Hell.  I will argue that MOST of the time it is less than three 
simultaneous QSOs . Sometimes NO signals at all.

Thus, the amount of interest in the exotic digital modes  is at such a level 
that we would benefit from clustering, and our use of a calling/beacon 
frequency would not likely clutter up the portion of the band.

If we established 4 beacon frequencies  (80,40,30, and 20M) you could easily 
monitor  the bands via scan features in  the radio .  

Again, the idea would be just to meet on the calling frequency and move 
further up/down the band for extended conversation.  I am NOT suggesting a 
different calling frequency for each mode. 

20 M seems like the easies band to establish a data frequency that allows 
worldwide participation.  The others are more complex due to varying regional 
bandplans.  I  will read the feedback I have received so far and suggest some 
frequencies to try this weekend.