[digitalradio] Re: AMTOR

[Graham]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Gerry Lawlor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi
> 
> Many years ago I had a G3PLX Mk II board which was interfaced to a 
RTTY 
> system to send and receive AMTOR.  It was basically very close to the 
> AMT-1 system without the modem.  I think I have the board still but 
in a 
> modified form and I have no data on the board at this stage.  It did 
> work extremely well for me when used with an ST6 type TU.   So too 
did 
> the KC7WW software used with the same TU.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Gerry/EI9FV
>

Must say ,amtor was about the best keyboard to  keyboard qso system I 
have used .. however .. I understand that when the multi tone (picolo)
system was introduced on the hf diplomatic links , then the links 
remained open longer over the same path as the amtor system ... from 
that I asume the multi  tone systems gave a better s/n ..


G .. 

[digitalradio] Re: AMTOR

[Gerry Lawlor]

Hi

Many years ago I had a G3PLX Mk II board which was interfaced to a RTTY 
system to send and receive AMTOR.  It was basically very close to the 
AMT-1 system without the modem.  I think I have the board still but in a 
modified form and I have no data on the board at this stage.  It did 
work extremely well for me when used with an ST6 type TU.   So too did 
the KC7WW software used with the same TU.

Regards

Gerry/EI9FV

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[F.R. Ashley]

I can work Amtor or any other linked 
mode.   But being a working stiff, I will be available after 5pm 
Eastern time.   We can set up a sked if you wish.   The 30 
meter band would be great.
 
73 Buddy
WB4M

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  John 
  Bradley 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  
  Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 5:38 
  PM
  Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor 
  anyone
  
  hey I'm still lookin for all those cable thingies 
  for my PK232MBX ...I'll be there, eventually
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
obrienaj 
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 

Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 7:39 
PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: amtor 
anyone
Any takers?Still have not got my PK232 out of the 
old box.I see TrueRTTY claims to support ARQ and implies via 
soundcard but I have to read more .Andy K3UK--- In 
digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, 
John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...> 
wrote:>> Sitting on 7,075 (dial reading 7,077.12)> 
Selcal WJAB>



No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free 
Edition.Version: 7.0.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.22/238 - Release Date: 
1/23/06





Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)







  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[John Bradley]

hey I'm still lookin for all those cable thingies 
for my PK232MBX ...I'll be there, eventually

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  obrienaj 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  
  Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 7:39 
  PM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Re: amtor 
  anyone
  Any takers?Still have not got my PK232 out of the 
  old box.I see TrueRTTY claims to support ARQ and implies via soundcard 
  but I have to read more .Andy K3UK--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, 
  John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...> 
  wrote:>> Sitting on 7,075 (dial reading 7,077.12)> Selcal 
  WJAB>
  
  

  No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free 
  Edition.Version: 7.0.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.22/238 - Release Date: 
  1/23/06





Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)










  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Ham radio
  
  
Craft hobby
  
  
Hobby and craft supply
  
  


Icom ham radio
  
  
Yaesu ham radio
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[F.R. Ashley]

> > > I am not sure what you mean by AMTOR and Pactor being curtailed by 
> > > being
> cheap modes.

I re-read my post and  see that I did not make myself clear with that 
sentence you refer to!  What I meant  was that the soundcard modes were 
either free or cheap.. sorry about that.   I have owned several TNCs and 
still have a HAL DXP38.  I still enjoy using Clover but Pactor and Amtor ARQ 
chats are quite rare now.  But I totally agree that MFSK and other soundcard 
modes can really get through the noise.

73 Buddy WB4M



>


> Many years ago, when I worked Ray (inventor of Clover I and II) when I
> had the HAL P-38 card, I found that Clover II was not very good with
> weak signals. As much as I liked the concept of Clover II, (especially
> the pseudo duplex feel),  it really could not deliver the weak signal
> performance of Olivia or MFSK16 of today, and although you would get a
> connection, and you would have some data being transferred for the
> overhead bytes, very little chat mode data would get through. Very
> frustrating considering the cost of the stuff then. The HAL P-38 board
> was defective in terms of handling Pactor I and HAL would not stand
> behind their product. Very disappointing.
>
> It was not until sound card modes came along that I had a renewed
> interest in digital operation. We still do not have a good MS Windows
> ARQ mode for sound cards, although the Linux PSKmail may have some
> utility. I expect this to change in the next few years, but I know it is
> a challenge for the few who can actually do this kind of programming.
> Clearly, pipelined ARQ is the way to go at this time for computer based
> sound card modes if you want an ARQ mode. The main issue being enough
> speed when you have good conditions, but yet the ability to throttle
> back and forth to meet the ionospheric conditions of the moment.
>
> Linked modes are wonderful for BBS type connections and for connections
> where you need to have totally accurate data transmission. They are
> perhaps not quite as useful for casual contacts and obviously not for
> net type operations.
>
> 73,
>
> Rick, KV9U
>
>
>
>
> F.R. Ashley wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > John,
>> >
>> > Is the reason for wanting to operate AMTOR just for the novelty of an
>> > old mode? I could understand using it if it was possible to do it as a
>> > sound card mode at a level comparable to hardware modems.
>>
>> Is the reason for operating  Olivia, Contesta, Domino, MT-63, etc, for
>> the
>> novelty of operating yet another new mode?
>> >
>> > When Pactor came into use in the late 1980's, AMTOR use was drastically
>> > curtailed since Pactor was a much better mode in terms of weak signal
>> > and not falsing characters. Then when the sound card modes came into 
>> > use
>> > in the late 1990's, it seemed like Pactor use was curtailed for casual
>> > contacts since the sound card modes were able to work well into the
>> > noise, similar to (and sometimes even better than) CW which made it
>> > possible to have keyboard chats even under some difficult condx.
>>
>> No, Pactor and Amtor were "curtailed" because they were either totally
>> free
>> or very cheap at the most.   I always thought the "linked modes" were
>> a lot
>> of fun, especially Clover.
>>
>> 73 have fun,
>> Buddy WB4M
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>>
>> Other areas of interest:
>>
>> The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
>> DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy
>> discussion)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>>
>> *  Visit your group "digitalradio
>>   " on the web.
>>
>> *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> 
>> 
>>
>> *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>>   Service .
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.22/238 - Release Date: 1/23/2006
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>
> Other areas of interest:
>
> The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
> DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy 
> discussion)
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> 



Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[KV9U]

OK, John,

That explains it. Sort of like folks who like to enjoy playing with 
"boatanchor" rigs.

When I was a teen, I could not afford even the average technology of the 
time and had to settle for really low end hardware back in the early 
1960's. For example, a Drake 2B receive was pretty much out of my price 
range then.

Today, while I would not really care to have the equipment in my shack,  
I admit that it can be interesting to look at them at collector's 
shacks, or even sometimes turning the knobs at a hamfest:)

73,

Rick, KV9U


John Becker wrote:

> No, because I can.
> When Peter (G3PLX)) came out with Amtor there
> was a printed circuit board one could buy to get on
> this new mode for (if I recall) around $500 USD.
> You see Rich I and others was operating Amtor
> when 99% of the hams world wide was wondering
> what that chirp chirp noise was. We had a good
> network going right from the get go since the likes
> of HB9AVK, G3RSP/MM and more had been on
> RTTY on 14,075 for a number years when Amtor
> came out.
>
> So to answer you question. I like the mode.
>



Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[John Becker]

No, because I can.
When Peter (G3PLX)) came out with Amtor there
was a printed circuit board one could buy to get on
this new mode for (if I recall) around $500 USD.
You see Rich I and others was operating Amtor
when 99% of the hams world wide was wondering
what that chirp chirp noise was. We had a good
network going right from the get go since the likes
of HB9AVK, G3RSP/MM and more had been on
RTTY on 14,075 for a number years when Amtor
came out.

So to answer you question. I like the mode.



At 09:57 PM 1/23/06, you wrote:
>John,
>
>Is the reason for wanting to operate AMTOR just for the novelty of an
>old mode? I could understand using it if it was possible to do it as a
>sound card mode at a level comparable to hardware modems.
>
>When Pactor came into use in the late 1980's, AMTOR use was drastically
>curtailed since Pactor was a much better mode in terms of weak signal
>and not falsing characters. Then when the sound card modes came into use
>in the late 1990's, it seemed like Pactor use was curtailed for casual
>contacts since the sound card modes were able to work well into the
>noise, similar to (and sometimes even better than) CW which made it
>possible to have keyboard chats even under some difficult condx.
>
>73,
>
>Rick, KV9U
>
>
>
>
>
>John Becker wrote:
>
> > No not a one.
> >
>
>
>
>Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>
>Other areas of interest:
>
>The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
>DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>




Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[KV9U]

Hi Buddy,

Although I would agree that part of the attraction of new modes is the 
novelty of operating them,  most of us try out the new modes is to see 
how well they actually perform under real world conditions and find out 
which ones we prefer for operation. Of course, this assumes there is 
someone else out there who also prefers that given mode that you can 
talk to:) We all know how simulated computer testing has compared to 
actual HF testing when you actually get the modes on the air. I have 
found that only a few modes are really all that robust (which is my main 
interest area) but others may find other preferences such as the best 
speed, ease of use, minimal latency, etc.

Of all the digital modes I have ever worked, AMTOR seemed like about the 
worst. But it was a breakthrough product at the time considering it was 
the first amateur ARQ mode. It did have the requirement of relatively 
expensive hardware, very significant TX/RX switching at several times 
per second which many rigs at the time had difficulty with, falsing of 
characters when signals deteriorated even though it is an ARQ mode, and 
inability to handle weak signals.

Pactor (Pactor I) was better assuming that you had the hardware, since 
it had slower switching speeds for the ARQ operation, was very good 
about preventing false characters from getting through, and seemed to 
work better into weaker signals.

I am not sure what you mean by AMTOR and Pactor being curtailed by being 
cheap modes. The really low cost modes these days are the sound card 
modes since they do not require a lot of extra hardware other than an 
interface. My stuff is all homebrew. I finally built an ICOM CI-V 
interface last week and it works quite well for controlling the rig. 
Everything came out of the junk box and was built "dead bug" style, so 
nothing fancy.

Many years ago, when I worked Ray (inventor of Clover I and II) when I 
had the HAL P-38 card, I found that Clover II was not very good with 
weak signals. As much as I liked the concept of Clover II, (especially 
the pseudo duplex feel),  it really could not deliver the weak signal 
performance of Olivia or MFSK16 of today, and although you would get a 
connection, and you would have some data being transferred for the 
overhead bytes, very little chat mode data would get through. Very 
frustrating considering the cost of the stuff then. The HAL P-38 board 
was defective in terms of handling Pactor I and HAL would not stand 
behind their product. Very disappointing.

It was not until sound card modes came along that I had a renewed 
interest in digital operation. We still do not have a good MS Windows 
ARQ mode for sound cards, although the Linux PSKmail may have some 
utility. I expect this to change in the next few years, but I know it is 
a challenge for the few who can actually do this kind of programming. 
Clearly, pipelined ARQ is the way to go at this time for computer based 
sound card modes if you want an ARQ mode. The main issue being enough 
speed when you have good conditions, but yet the ability to throttle 
back and forth to meet the ionospheric conditions of the moment.

Linked modes are wonderful for BBS type connections and for connections 
where you need to have totally accurate data transmission. They are 
perhaps not quite as useful for casual contacts and obviously not for 
net type operations.

73,

Rick, KV9U




F.R. Ashley wrote:

>
>
> > John,
> >
> > Is the reason for wanting to operate AMTOR just for the novelty of an
> > old mode? I could understand using it if it was possible to do it as a
> > sound card mode at a level comparable to hardware modems.
>
> Is the reason for operating  Olivia, Contesta, Domino, MT-63, etc, for 
> the
> novelty of operating yet another new mode?
> >
> > When Pactor came into use in the late 1980's, AMTOR use was drastically
> > curtailed since Pactor was a much better mode in terms of weak signal
> > and not falsing characters. Then when the sound card modes came into use
> > in the late 1990's, it seemed like Pactor use was curtailed for casual
> > contacts since the sound card modes were able to work well into the
> > noise, similar to (and sometimes even better than) CW which made it
> > possible to have keyboard chats even under some difficult condx.
>
> No, Pactor and Amtor were "curtailed" because they were either totally 
> free
> or very cheap at the most.   I always thought the "linked modes" were 
> a lot
> of fun, especially Clover.
>
> 73 have fun,
> Buddy WB4M
>
>
>
>
>
> Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>
> Other areas of interest:
>
> The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
> DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy 
> discussion)
>
>
>
>
> 
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> *  Visit your group "digitalradio
>   " on the

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[F.R. Ashley]

> John,
>
> Is the reason for wanting to operate AMTOR just for the novelty of an
> old mode? I could understand using it if it was possible to do it as a
> sound card mode at a level comparable to hardware modems.

Is the reason for operating  Olivia, Contesta, Domino, MT-63, etc, for the 
novelty of operating yet another new mode?
>
> When Pactor came into use in the late 1980's, AMTOR use was drastically
> curtailed since Pactor was a much better mode in terms of weak signal
> and not falsing characters. Then when the sound card modes came into use
> in the late 1990's, it seemed like Pactor use was curtailed for casual
> contacts since the sound card modes were able to work well into the
> noise, similar to (and sometimes even better than) CW which made it
> possible to have keyboard chats even under some difficult condx.

No, Pactor and Amtor were "curtailed" because they were either totally free 
or very cheap at the most.   I always thought the "linked modes" were a lot 
of fun, especially Clover.

73 have fun,
Buddy WB4M

 



Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[KV9U]

John,

Is the reason for wanting to operate AMTOR just for the novelty of an 
old mode? I could understand using it if it was possible to do it as a 
sound card mode at a level comparable to hardware modems.

When Pactor came into use in the late 1980's, AMTOR use was drastically 
curtailed since Pactor was a much better mode in terms of weak signal 
and not falsing characters. Then when the sound card modes came into use 
in the late 1990's, it seemed like Pactor use was curtailed for casual 
contacts since the sound card modes were able to work well into the 
noise, similar to (and sometimes even better than) CW which made it 
possible to have keyboard chats even under some difficult condx.

73,

Rick, KV9U





John Becker wrote:

> No not a one.
>



Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[digitalradio] Re: Amtor anyone. (N0TOP)

[John Becker]

THIS MESSAGE IS BEING SENT TO THE
LIST BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING:
-
This is an automatic reply to your email message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This email address is protected by PeoplePC spaminator. Your email message 
has been redirected a "Suspect Email" folder for [EMAIL PROTECTED] In 
order for your mes sage to be moved to this recipient's Inbox, he or she 
must add your email addres s to a list of allowed senders.

Click the link below to request that [EMAIL PROTECTED] add you to this list.

https 
://webmail.peoplepc.com/wam/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&id=1f1f594L23PGoTG0
-




Sure would love to try this weekend.
Keep me posted. May Andy can be on
by then also.

John, W0JAB


At 08:21 PM 1/23/06, you wrote:
>  Hello John, Name hr is John Verser de N0TOP.
>I own a PK-232 and I'll try to have it hooked up this weekend if your
>still around... I loved the chirping Hi Hi...
>  I remember when Amtor went out of style, then it was pactor.
>Thats out of style too... Well 73s fer now and to see you this weekend.
>  John de N0TOP (NTOP}




Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[John Becker]

No not a one.


At 07:39 PM 1/23/06, you wrote:
>Any takers?
>
>Still have not got my PK232 out of the old box.
>
>I see TrueRTTY claims to support ARQ and implies via soundcard but I
>have to read more .
>
>
>Andy K3UK
>
>--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Sitting on 7,075 (dial reading 7,077.12)
> > Selcal WJAB
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>
>Other areas of interest:
>
>The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
>DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>




Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[obrienaj]

-

TrueTTY v2.50
TrueTTY — Version history | Downloads and Registration

A program for amateur radio digital communications via a sound card. 
Supported modes are RTTY (Baudot code), ASCII (7 or 8 bits), PSK31 
(BPSK and QPSK), BPSK63, AMTOR-FEC (SITOR-B, NAVTEX), MultiFSK-16. 
HF-PACKET and UHF-PACKET (AX25) are supported in KISS-TNC emulation 
mode. SELFEC SITOR, AMTOR-ARQ (SITOR-A) and DTMF-code decoding is 
also possible. No additional hardware is required. You only need a 
transceiver and computer (Pentium-100 or better) with a sound card. 
A simple circuit for PTT-control can be used. It is fast and 
convenient to use with many macros for transmitting. Can integrate 
with AALog logger.

Platform: Windows 9x/NT/2000/XP

-- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "obrienaj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Any takers?
> 
> Still have not got my PK232 out of the old box.
> 
> I see TrueRTTY claims to support ARQ and implies via soundcard but 
I 
> have to read more .
> 
> 
> Andy K3UK
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> >
> > Sitting on 7,075 (dial reading 7,077.12)
> > Selcal WJAB
> >
>






Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[digitalradio] Re: amtor anyone

[obrienaj]

Any takers?

Still have not got my PK232 out of the old box.

I see TrueRTTY claims to support ARQ and implies via soundcard but I 
have to read more .


Andy K3UK

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sitting on 7,075 (dial reading 7,077.12)
> Selcal WJAB
>






Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/