Re: [Flexradio] New SoftWare New Manual
I can't find a manual newer than the one for 1.8.0 - Original Message - From: Neal Campbell K3NC To: Bruce K3CMZ Cc: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 8:31 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] New SoftWare New Manual You can download it from the Flex Radio knowledgebase! 73 Neal Campbell K3NC [EMAIL PROTECTED] telnet to our DX Spotting clusters at: dxc.k3nc.com, ports 12001 and 23 Devoted to Dogs: How to be your dog's best owner Great Dog Book at www.abrohamneal.com On Jul 8, 2007, at 8:07 PM, Bruce K3CMZ wrote: Hi I just dug out my old SDR1000 to try out the new software! Is there a manual to explain all the new stuff? Thanks Bruce K3CMZ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.1/889 - Release Date: 7/6/2007 8:00 PM -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/17c4ca4b/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
Tim Ellison wrote: In actualality, the recently added enhancement #1114 submitted by Mark, NU6X really needs to be modified to request FSK mode support in PowerSDR rather than modifying the behavior of DIGIu and DIGIl modes, which is essentially correct for ASFK. I think this would satisfy all camps; those who use ASFK and those who operate RTTY and want mark to the designate the frequency of the QSO. -Tim As I read the various comments, I think I do understand the issue better than I expected to. 1. The various spotting networks seem to basically pretend that the world is run by FSK. 2. Many rigs _including the SDR_ are really AFSK. 3. Worse, the standard shifts are even less standard than I thought to begin with. 4. I now understand a bit more why software like MixW asks about AFSK versus FSK -- it affects how they operate not just sending tones somewhere, but presumably also affect how they operate the radio. Implications: 1. It must be possible to easily set up the radio so that standard expectations are taken care of -- but it is not clearly easy to do. 2. I think that since the SDR 1000 (and, I think also, the 5000) are really AFSK rigs, they should operate according to AFSK conventions. This remains a suspicion and not a certainty. 3. The real problem it seems to me probably comes from trying to operate the SDR (panadapter et. al.) as if it was an FSK rig on the one hand, because various won't go away conventions require it and then alternately having to organize the world such that it is an AFSK rig in terms of setting up RTTY software (and dealing with how _that_ software manages AFSK versus FSK). 4. This will only get worse, perhaps, when modes like PSK mature just a bit more and we get contests with them as a commonplace instead of a rarity. 5. I am more convinced than ever that the DIGU / DIGL button convention is simply wrong. It is a half solution implemented the wrong way. Screen real estate makes other conventions perhaps a bit difficult to implement, but we should find a way. What I suggest: 1. It is important to bring the SDR fully in on the gag in terms of things like mark and perhaps also space frequencies. This will allow easy and successful interoperation with 3rd party software interfacing via CAT. 2. There is a bit of a precedent here in that we already have an offset in CW mode. In CW, however, it is extremely simple because the tone offset is all that has to be set. 3. It is not clear to me _exactly_ how various 3rd party software behaves. This is a mess and, like most messes, there are probably different ways they are handled and, moreover, a lot of configurability. I use MixW exclusively, having dabbled with some of the others, mostly because MixW is also my primary logging software. However, if I was a more serious contester, I'd probably have to master MTTY because N1MM appears to require it. MixW incorporates a very fine integrated bit of code that allows you to click on a DX spot and get you right there for the DX. However, it isn't clear, in RTTY, what its conventions are and if the convention is actually FSK Mark, and yet it is set up for AFSK (as it would be for the SDR), it either gets the answer wrong or else it does some fancy footwork in terms of dealing with FSK versus AFSK shifts. A profile solution would have to understand _that_ sort of thing as well, especially as it might be two different programs involved (see N1MM). In my case, it is further complicated to get right because I have set MixW up to use DIGU so that the panadapter works better for DX pileups. That's not really normal but it lets me chase DX more readily (just as CWU is better for CW pileups). Whatever it does after all that, I'm not sure I'd want as a precedent (except to show how bad it can get). As far as the screen layout, perhaps what is needful is: 1. A checkbox called digital (which turns off the compandor et. al. when selected, the main original purpose for the buttons). 2. A drop down which has the various offset protocols (whatever they may be) preprogrammed. One for RTTY and PSK31 at least. If there is some sort of FSK / AFSK distinction (so that the click on behavior in the panadapter matches one set (FSK?) but the CAT behavior matches another (AFSK?)), we may need one for that as well, at least for certain kinds of software. The standard AFSK setup, whatever we determine that to be, should be the default with AFSK 'reverse' (equivalent to DIGU I suppose, with the offsets set right) next. Ultimately, we may need profile options to set mark or mark/space explicitly for each known mode and then have a check box _in the profile_ if the 3rd party software, one way or another, manages the AFSK/FSK differences itself or not. Perhaps they all do, but when responsibility is split between programs, it's not clear to me that all the implications are predictable. We might have to set
Re: [Flexradio] Edirol FA-66 4800 Sample Rate
If not try to find an audio downsample proram Bruce 73 groeten Peter petervn(a)hetnet.nl mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; pa0pvn(a)hetnet.nl mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; pa0pvn(a)gmail.com ; pa0pvn(a)amsat.org . Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] namens Bruce Mills - KL7JDR Verzonden: ma 9-7-2007 4:33 Aan: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: [Flexradio] Edirol FA-66 4800 Sample Rate Is there a version of the Flex Radio software that will run the Edirol at 4800 ? I need to make some 4800 recordings. 73's , Bruce KL7JDR Bruce W. Mills P.O. Box 1500 31490 Echo Lake Road Soldotna , Alaska 99669 (907)262-4373 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/0e59f0de/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Flex 5000a flexwire plug
Tim Ellison wrote: Neil, your prediction will, unfortunately probably come true. Your concern was debated before the FlexWire physical connector was selected. In the end, the decision was made to use a 9-pin d-sub connector (that is used for serial connections, but not exclusively), but orient the connector upside down from a standard serial implementation and provide a warning label to prevent incorrect usage. So the back panel is CLEARLY labeled not to connect a serial cable to the FlexWire port. Hopefully this will be a sufficient deterrent. Also, blocking the holes in the d-sub connector would work, but if you wanted to build a FlexWire device, then you have to find a special d-sub male plug that has the correct pins missing. That would be an impediment for people wanting to innovate by building FlexWire devices. -Tim This is an accident waiting to happen. PLEASE FIX THIS BEFORE IT SHIPS. Blocking an unused pin (a candidate has been suggested) would, to me, be an entirely satisfactory solution. A real user provided cable would be, by definition, custom, so physically removing a pin would be part of the fun of making it. As others have already noted, this is not a big issue. In my shack, space is at an unbelievable premium. I blind connect all the time where the connector is in the back of the unit (be it radio or computer), totally unseen, and I plug in the cable by feel or maybe with the help of a mirror. There are exceptions to this (e.g. high amperage power cables), but the fewer the better. This one is just the sort of thing I can be guaranteed to forget about in the heat of battle some fine evening at 2AM while I am trying to work DX and plug in the wrong thing. Larry Wo0Z ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
[Flexradio] VAC
I am using the SDR-1000 now for 6 month, great TRX. I want to start using the digital modes now and downloaded the VAC-software. But, allthough it seems to work, a tiny little voice keeps saying the word trial every 20 seconds. Do I have to buy the VAC software or is there a version available that can be used freely by SDR-1000 owners? If so, can anyone send me one or tell me where to get it? 73, Fred PA0PAF -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/b976d7b3/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] VAC
Here you go Fred: http://software.muzychenko.net/eng/ Jerry, WB0UZW At 05:03 AM 7/9/2007, Freek Witte wrote: I am using the SDR-1000 now for 6 month, great TRX. I want to start using the digital modes now and downloaded the VAC-software. But, allthough it seems to work, a tiny little voice keeps saying the word trial every 20 seconds. Do I have to buy the VAC software or is there a version available that can be used freely by SDR-1000 owners? If so, can anyone send me one or tell me where to get it? 73, Fred PA0PAF -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/00f22dc0/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] VAC
Freek, Yes, you have to buy VAC to get rid of the trial being sent. Phil Covington, N8VB, is working on an open-source equivalent to VAC, but there has been no time schedule announced for its completion. The last I heard, the release of Vista threw a monkey wrench into the development process. I, myself, am patiently waiting for Phil's program rather than upgrading from VAC verson 3.12 which I am currently running. 73, Ray, K9DUR -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/6dec92aa/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Feds snub open source for 'smart' radios
Excellent news! Thanks for the reply. My main concern has now been alleviated. Kind regards 73, Lowell K9LDW -- Original Message -- Received: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:04:36 AM CDT From: Gerald Youngblood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Frank Brickle' [EMAIL PROTECTED], 'Lowell White' [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: flexradio@flex-radio.biz Subject: RE: [Flexradio] Feds snub open source for 'smart' radios The good news is that amateur radio is exempted. The following is the applicable section of the rulings: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 2 [ET Docket No. 03-108; FCC 07-66] Cognitive Radio Technologies and Software Defined Radios AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. 6. In regard to MSS' request for clarification about the regulatory treatment of amateur radio equipment, the Commission did not intend to impose any new certification requirements for amateur radio equipment in the Cognitive Report and Order. External RF amplifiers that operate below 144 MHz that are marketed for use with amateur stations will continue to require certification before they can be marketed. Other amateur radio equipment, including equipment that meets the definition of a software defined radio and that has software that is designed or expected to be modified by a party other than the manufacturer, will continue to be exempt from a certification requirement. However, as the Commission noted in the Cognitive Report and Order, certain unauthorized modifications of amateur transmitters are unlawful. It may revisit the issue of the certification of amateur equipment with software modifiable features as identified above in the future if misuse of such devices results in significant interference to authorized spectrum users. Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR FlexRadio Systems Ph: 512-535-4713 Fax: 512-233-5143 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.flex-radio.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Brickle Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 7:23 PM To: Lowell White Cc: flexradio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Feds snub open source for 'smart' radios On 7/6/07, Lowell White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Feds snub open source for 'smart' radios By Anne Broache, [EMAIL PROTECTED] CNET News.com Published on ZDNet News: (http://news.zdnet.com/2001-1_22.html) July 6, 2007, 4:00 AM PT Obscurity works best when the hackers can't test their attacks, said Peter Swire, an Ohio State University law professor who has written about the tensions between closed and open approaches to computer security. For software like this, used in distributed devices, there should be no extra burden on open source. I spent a couple of hours at breakfast this morning with Peter Swire discussing these issues. It's pretty clearly understood among legal students of the subject that these rulings are based on zero evidence. In fact there's copious evidence to the contrary. What we're seeing is overwhelmingly due to heavy arm-twisting by industry, led primarily by Cisco. It's also understood that the rest of the world is unlikely to play by our rules, no more than with cryptologic technology, so it amounts to not much more than another American shot into its own foot. One has to wonder about the timing of this announcement and the finalization of GPLv3. 73 Frank AB2KT -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ attachments/20070706/83a95753/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
As a casual digital modes operator, I have been following this thread with interest. Now I might as well clutter up the bandwidth some more and add my thoughts on the subject. These are just that, thoughts. Some may be valid, some may be totally erroneous, some may be laughable, but hopefully all may be food for thought. 1. By their very nature, the SDR-1000/Flex-5000 are AFSK radios, NOT FSK radios. As I understand it, even CW is not true CW, but is in reality MCW. This fact introduces complications if we want the SDR-1000 or the Flex-5000 to act like true FSK radios. 2. The DX spots appear to assume FSK. This is probably because it is virtually impossible to make any assumptions about offsets using AFSK. The various sound-card digital programs use a waterfall-type display which allows you to see several signals at once tune to any one of them by clicking on the desired signal. Obviously, the offset is different for each signal. Therefore, it is impossible to use a standard offset from the XCVR carrier frequency. 3. All of these discussions concerning mark frequency, etc. really only apply to RTTY. In RTTY, defining the mark frequency as the carrier frequency and defining the space frequency as a frequency offset from the mark frequency by a standard amount is reasonable. The same argument could be made for packet operation, also. However, the modes like PSK-31 and its cousins are a different matter altogether. The PSK-31 signal, at idle, is two tones located at the carrier frequency +/- 15.5 Hz. There is no mark or space frequencies per se. 4. Perhaps the user prefers to tune to a signal by clicking on the signal on the PowerSDR panadapter or waterfall display. In this case, an offset must be used. The CW offset is required for receive because we cannot hear 0 Hz. A digital mode offset would be necessary for both transmit and receive. (The soundcard cannot talk or hear at 0 Hz. Also, remember the 1/f noise hump.) There could be a setup option in PowerSDR whether to use this offset or not. Also, the size of the offset could be user-selectable. If these settings were stored as part of a selectable profile, then the user could have a PSK-31 profile, a RTTY profile, a packet profile, etc. Currently, when using the PowerSDR display to tune in a signal, I guesstimate the offset click on a frequency to put the desired signal within the TX RX passbands. In my case, I normally use the sound-card digital software to tune in signals let my SDR-1000 just follow along. True, I do not (currently) have access to the DX spots using this method. However, due to the rather narrow frequency range that digital operations usually occupy, this is not generally a problem. Simon Brown's PSK-31 DM780 programs have a marvelous SuperBrowser which allows you to simultaneously monitor all of the signals within the range of the program's waterfall display tune to one simply by clicking on it. For contest operations, this may not be the most efficient, but for more casual operations, I find it more than adequate. In conclusion, I think that maybe the most optimum solution, at least from the PowerSDR developers' viewpoint, would be the suggestions found in point #4 above. 73, Ray, K9DUR -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/81dc87e1/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
[Flexradio] PA Settings
This morning I got a report of distorted audio on 17 meters. I proceded to hook up my Bird 43P to the SDR-1000 and my dummy load. What a surprise. The rig was putting out 150 watts PEP! I ran the CAL procedure. Still 150 watts. Manually reduced the gain in setup for 17 meters so rig puts out 100 watts PEP into the Bird. Clean audio once agn. It seems like the cal procedure will set the TUN wattage correctly to around 100 watts but when using the rig on SSB the output is way too high on some of the bands. It's like the ALC is not kicking in or something. I went thru and manually set the band gains to 100 watts PEP with the 43P and now all is well at least for SSB. Has anyone else experienced this? Frank WA3JBT -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/fb800367/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
At 10:57 AM 7/9/2007 -0400, you wrote: As a casual digital modes operator, I have been following this thread with interest. Now I might as well clutter up the bandwidth some more and add my thoughts on the subject. These are just that, thoughts. Some may be valid, some may be totally erroneous, some may be laughable, but hopefully all may be food for thought. 1. By their very nature, the SDR-1000/Flex-5000 are AFSK radios, NOT FSK radios. As I understand it, even CW is not true CW, but is in reality MCW. This fact introduces complications if we want the SDR-1000 or the Flex-5000 to act like true FSK radios. No disrespect, but how can you tell the difference between an FSK RTTY signal and AFSK RTTY signal, other than examining or inquiring the method used to generate the signals? As regards CW vs MCW ... MCW is (at the receiving end) a signal with a carrier and a keyed audio component; one does not need a BFO in order to hear MCW ... eg ... as when you tune in a LF beacon station you can use a radio with simple AM detection. As with FSK vs AFSK, CW generated at the RF level vs AF level is still CW indistinguishable from each other at the receiving end. In other words, CW created at the AF level IS NOT MCW. In reality what you receive determines whether an RTTY signal or CW signal is proper and legal and not the method used to create them. Now all the other stuff about how you match your signal to other signals on the air eg Mark/Space frequency in RTTY and proper offset for CW etc is a separate issue which has nothing to do with whether signals are 'proper' or not depending on how they were generated. Personally I have no difficulty contacting others in either RTTY or CW and never have the other operator making adjustments at the other end in order to receive my signal. In RTTY I am always spot on in CW I generally use a 600 hz offset most pleasant to my ear which is generally not far off from what others use. In RTTY, I click on a signal if I copy it and answer the calling station they always immediately copy me. What more can u ask for? I am sure if I told the other station I was using FSK they would have no way to know if that was true or not. Similarly in CW, when in contact with the other station If I said I was keying at the RF or AF level they would have no way of telling if that was true or not. Jim, VE3CI ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] how did you guys remove my qrm?
Not to burst your bubble, but did you import you settings? Have you run a Level Calibration? It could just be that the new version is not calibrated and is thus showing a lower noise floor. That or the RF level is set lower by default. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of FireBrick Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 5:22 PM To: flexradio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] how did you guys remove my qrm? Two days. Fantastic I went from svn 1300 to 1315 and all my s9 urban noise is gone. Umpteen years I listened to almost s9 noise Last few days, since upgrading, the noise isn't even moving the s meter. That's a whole lot more stations I can hear... Good job...what's next? Will the SDR-5K hear even better? - Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. - Bill H. in Chicagoland webcams at http://76.16.160.118:8080 weather at http://hhweather.webhop.org ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
No disrespect, but how can you tell the difference between an FSK RTTY signal and AFSK RTTY signal, other than examining or inquiring the method used to generate the signals? As regards CW vs MCW ... MCW is (at the receiving end) a signal with a carrier and a keyed audio component; one does not need a BFO in order to hear MCW ... eg ... as when you tune in a LF beacon station you can use a radio with simple AM detection. As with FSK vs AFSK, CW generated at the RF level vs AF level is still CW indistinguishable from each other at the receiving end. In other words, CW created at the AF level IS NOT MCW. This isn't about the signal the other fellow receives and decodes. This is all about how the signal is produced on our end and how other 3rd party software integrates (or, more importantly, DOES NOT integrate) with the PowerSDR console while producing it. At our end, whether it is AFSK or FSK will, I think, turn out to matter quite a bit. More than I had previously thought, in fact. Certainly, when running my Icom 703 with Rigblaster, the distinction between AFSK and FSK is readily apparent even if no one on the other end can tell which way I'm running it. If anything, the software nature of our radio tends to disguise all this a bit more than it possible to do on other rigs. Larry Wo0Z ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
[Flexradio] By design or bug?
In the latest SVN open PowerSDR and note the RF gain setting. Lets say it 65. Change it to anything else, lets say 95. Open the setup form and then cancel it without making any changes. Note that the RF gain goes back to the original setting, in this case 65. Can someone confirm if this is by design? Or is it a bug? Edwin Marzan AB2VW _ http://newlivehotmail.com ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] By design or bug?
It is an artifact of what actually happens when you click the cancel button. All database tables in memory are scrapped and restored from the database. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of Edwin Marzan Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 2:35 PM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] By design or bug? In the latest SVN open PowerSDR and note the RF gain setting. Lets say it 65. Change it to anything else, lets say 95. Open the setup form and then cancel it without making any changes. Note that the RF gain goes back to the original setting, in this case 65. Can someone confirm if this is by design? Or is it a bug? Edwin Marzan AB2VW _ http://newlivehotmail.com ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
[Flexradio] SSB problem
I am a Newbie, so be gentle. I had SSB working a few days ago in MOX mode and it was calibrated. I hear a tone when I tune up. But now the TX meter is grayed out and I get no power out. Maybe unrelated, I get an ATU comm error. I am using ver 1.8 PowerSDR Internal ATU Delta-44 with no pre-amp Heil Pro Plus plugged into INS 3 of Delta-44 Tom, N4WBS -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/7a92398e/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
At 01:55 PM 7/9/2007 -0500, you wrote: This isn't about the signal the other fellow receives and decodes. This is all about how the signal is produced on our end and how other 3rd party software integrates (or, more importantly, DOES NOT integrate) with the PowerSDR console while producing it. At our end, whether it is AFSK or FSK will, I think, turn out to matter quite a bit. More than I had previously thought, in fact. Certainly, when running my Icom 703 with Rigblaster, the distinction between AFSK and FSK is readily apparent even if no one on the other end can tell which way I'm running it. If anything, the software nature of our radio tends to disguise all this a bit more than it possible to do on other rigs. Larry Wo0Z Hi Larry, Again, with no disrespect, I see that what you are saying is that their is an 'operator' problem when moving operation from AFSK to FSK or vs versa. I have operated RTTY for many decades and I switched from FSK to AFSK a few decades ago and I guess I have not had the opportunity to experience the problem. I think in the early days of AFSK the 'rules' of audio tone frequencies were fixed (around 2khz) and I still have any number of terminal units and modems like that (home brew and commercial) in the basement. With the advent of more powerful computers and the wonderful 'sound card' I am still amazed at how well they perform . anywhere between 300 hz and 3 or 4 khz. I don't mean to belabor the point but I am curious what the 'integration' problem is with AFSK and third party software (I use MixW for the most part ... but I have tried any number of other programs). Jim, VE3CI ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
Jim, No disrespect implied by your comments. I agree with you. When I stated that the Flex radios generate AKSK rather than FSK, I WAS referring to the method used to generate them. If the AFSK transmitter is well designed and properly adjusted, the 2 signals are indistinguishable on the air. The difference comes when you try to define the mark frequency to be the same as the carrier frequency (or, the frequency you tune your transceiver to), as is assumed by the frequencies listed in the DX spots. With an AFSK transmitter, the mark carrier frequencies can never be the same. So, if you tune your transceiver to the frequency listed in the DX spot, you will not be able to copy the signal because part of the signal will be outside of the useable passband of the receiver. An offset is necessary. That is the problem experienced by that those who try to use the DX spots to tune to a signal. Like you, when operating RTTY or PSK-31, I simply click on the desired signal using the waterfall display of my digital mode software everything works fine, but the frequency of the signal I am receiving/transmitting is NOT the frequency displayed in the PowerSDR window. As to CW vs. MCW, it seems that we disagree slightly as to the definition of MCW. What you describe is definitely MCW. However, if you hook the speaker output of a code practice oscillator (hopefully one with a pure sine wave output) to the mic input of a SSB transmitter, it is my belief that that would also fit the definition of MCW, even though there is no carrier, only the keyed audio component. This is essentially how the SDR-1000 ( I assume the Flex-5000 also) generates CW. There is no carrier being keyed on off, only an audio tone being keyed on off and being fed to the radio via the soundcard. 73, Ray, K9DUR -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/bacf30d7/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
[Flexradio] N4HY + K5SDR defend Ham Radio at FCC
We Hams owe Bob N4HY and Gerald K5SDR a standing ovation at the next public meeting! Bob and Gerald defended Ham Radio when the FCC rules for SDR (Software Defined Radio) and CDR (Cognitive Defined Radio) were being formulated. The Federal Register stands as a testament to the power of their persuasive and well articulated arguments in front of such a demanding audience. In the message below, Bob recounts some of the encounter with the FCC. Raise your glasses and join me in a hearty toast to Bob and Gerald for their unselfish work on behalf of us all. Original Message Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:13:59 -0400 From: Robert McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] * High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List * Gerald Youngblood and I went to the F.C.C. and we gave a talk and discussed their proposed rule making. I believe you can see the impact we had throughout this document thought I don't claim we wrote any piece of it. We pleaded for them to not get in the way of a successful move of amateur radio into the almost inevitable future where larger pieces of it were done digitally with software and cognitive radios. We proved then, and we have continued to supply them and the ARRL CTO with information (ammunition) that shows amateur radio operators are doing INNOVATIVE development that is simply not being done elsewhere and much of it in SDR and CDR. One of the best papers you can find anywhere on the foundations for CDR (the mathematical tools) is in QEX and written by Frank Brickle, AB2KT! In the end, they told us that if amateur radio SDR's did not self police and provide transmit frequency protection, and removal of completely automatic scanning outside of amateur bands that we were likely to face serious certification of a type that would not be affordable. Now I know that faced with this, we could come up with open source means of authentication that would pass, but the expense would be onerous. I personally might personally be in serious trouble if I attempted to provide this. In the end, I think we are simply going to have to live with small pieces of firmware at a minimum that prevent unauthorized use of amateur SDR equipment outside of the amateur bands. Yes, we argued strongly that almost all amateur radio equipment could be easily modified to transmit out of band. I offered to bring in an unmodified transceiver and modify it in less than five minutes to show how easy it typically was. I was told that I should not volunteer to commit a crime on federal property and that they were aware of this. The F.C.C. is responding to external pressure from all sorts of quarters from the White House to commercial entities like Cisco to NTIS, and the intelligence community as well as D.O.D. The schizophrenic aspects of this are almost ludicrous. You find one D.O.D. office wanting to support you, buy yours toys, help you help them, and another wanting to kill the entire effort. It is bewildering. Given this order, which is now enforceable law since it was placed in the Federal Register, I expect more radio manufacturers to look at this order and jump into the SDR world more completely. I think that, overall, with these competing pressures, the F.C.C. struck a reasonable balance between the hysteria on the parts of some and the desires to reinvigorate amateur radio in particular but radio development in general in the U.S. One only has to visit places like the Wireless group at V.P.I. and other places to realize that S.D.R. and C.D.R. are having a major impact on the new engineers and communications scientists being trained at many universities. When Frank Brickle and I gave our S.D.R. course last fall, we had HALF of the entire senior electrical engineering class take the course and they did not know us from Adam's house cat and many were graduating, so it was a risk. That was impressive, not to mention a fantastic time. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2007/01/24/101/?nc=1 73's Bob N4HY ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] N4HY + K5SDR defend Ham Radio at FCC
Here Here, I'll second that!! Great work guys!! This is just an example of the continuing and ongoing leading edge technology by Flex-Radio!! 73... Jon W1MNK Brandon, FL USA PS Open the pod bay doors HAL... (*H*euristically programmed *AL*gorithmic computer) H A L = One before I B M *HAL http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0706937/*: I've just picked up a fault in the SDR-1000 unit. It's going to go 100% failure in 72 hours. Jon: Cut it out HAL, that's not possible. Pass the mustard. Ken N9VV wrote: We Hams owe Bob N4HY and Gerald K5SDR a standing ovation at the next public meeting! Bob and Gerald defended Ham Radio when the FCC rules for SDR (Software Defined Radio) and CDR (Cognitive Defined Radio) were being formulated. The Federal Register stands as a testament to the power of their persuasive and well articulated arguments in front of such a demanding audience. In the message below, Bob recounts some of the encounter with the FCC. Raise your glasses and join me in a hearty toast to Bob and Gerald for their unselfish work on behalf of us all. ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
IMHO it would be nice to make a good definition - mark frequency (the transmitted frequency) - space frequency (the transmitted frequency) - carrier requency (not tranmitted?? used to tune TX or RX) I understand the carrier frequency is the problem, if both sides of a connection use a different definition for the carrier frequency that gives misunderstanding (I hope mark and space are clear?? ) BTW for RTTY the carrier frequency is kind of virtual, not so for SSB where you need to reconstukt the carrier 73 groeten Peter petervn(a)hetnet.nl mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; pa0pvn(a)hetnet.nl mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; pa0pvn(a)gmail.com ; pa0pvn(a)amsat.org . Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] namens Ray Andrews Verzonden: di 10-7-2007 0:51 Aan: flexradio@flex-radio.biz; Jim Dunstan Onderwerp: Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem Jim, No disrespect implied by your comments. I agree with you. When I stated that the Flex radios generate AKSK rather than -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070710/6d46d2e4/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
Jim, Do you ever use DX cluster or spot log software. While chasing DX or during a RTTY contest the logging/contest software automatically sets the rigs freq. When I broadcast a spot, the software will automatically capture the rigs freq. By long established convention this is the MARK freq NOT the carrier freq. When a RTTY spot is announced at 14.085 it is assumed to be a mark freq of 14.085 which would be a LSB carrier at 14.087125. This really has nothing to do wither you are using AFSK or FSK. The Cat command will send a RTTY mode and VFO freq of 14.085000. This works just find on 99% of the modern rigs because they understand that while in RTTY mode, the freq is the MARK freq. If I set a schedule with a fellow RTTY operator for 14.085, he knows to look for my MARK freq at 14.085. On my Orion II, IC7800, FTdx9000D, 756 PROII IC-775DSP, TS-870, etc I will tune the display to read 14.085000, NOT 14.087125 as I would have to on the SDR-1000. I could fool PowerSDR by setting the XIT and RIT to 2125 and then set the displayed freq to 14.085 just like all the other rigs but I now loose this trick because RIT is cleared on Click Tuning now. The only reason that AFSK/FSK is entering into this discussion, is when one operates RTTY in USB/LSB mode. Most serious RTTY operators will use the RTTY mode because it establishes the proper bandpass for the filters. If one uses the USB/LSB mode for RTTY and then manually or automatically broadcast a DX spot, the freq is usually off by 2125 unless he is polite enough to manually adjust it. The Third party software packages that are being referred to are NOT necessarily the RTTY decoding software, but the logging/Contesting software. Some software packages may have options to correct for this issue. Unless I have missed it, Logic 8 does NOT. It's unfortunate that this convention got established. It has caused a lot of confusion. 73's Mark NU6X Sedona,AZ Hi Larry, Again, with no disrespect, I see that what you are saying is that their is an 'operator' problem when moving operation from AFSK to FSK or vs versa. I have operated RTTY for many decades and I switched from FSK to AFSK a few decades ago and I guess I have not had the opportunity to experience the problem. I think in the early days of AFSK the 'rules' of audio tone frequencies were fixed (around 2khz) and I still have any number of terminal units and modems like that (home brew and commercial) in the basement. With the advent of more powerful computers and the wonderful 'sound card' I am still amazed at how well they perform . anywhere between 300 hz and 3 or 4 khz. I don't mean to belabor the point but I am curious what the 'integration' problem is with AFSK and third party software (I use MixW for the most part ... but I have tried any number of other programs). Jim, VE3CI ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
[Flexradio] poormans UCB
I have 2 for sale...make offer sjk ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
Tim, I some how missed this message until now. I agree FSK support with the corresponding Freq display is a good solution. I'm just worried that FSK support is a much bigger effort. Since FSK is being offered my almost all the competition, it makes good sense to add it to PowerSDR as well. I will modify my enhancement #1114. I'm glad to see this issue has gotten the discussion it has over the last few days. I think many have a much better understanding of the problem. I know Flex has a lot on their plate right now so I will patiently wait. Taking delivery of a new 5000 will be far more exciting. 73's Mark NU6X Sedona, AZ -Original Message- From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 8:58 PM To: flexradio@flex-radio.biz Cc: Mark Mumaw Subject: RE: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem In actualality, the recently added enhancement #1114 submitted by Mark, NU6X really needs to be modified to request FSK mode support in PowerSDR rather than modifying the behavior of DIGIu and DIGIl modes, which is essentially correct for ASFK. I think this would satisfy all camps; those who use ASFK and those who operate RTTY and want mark to the designate the frequency of the QSO. -Tim ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] [SPAM] Re: RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
this is exactly what I've been saying. I don't CARE if it's FSK or AFSK But every contesting program I've usedjust as Mark said, expects a cluster spot to be the Mark Frequency. Many recent logging computer programs take this into account and apply the 2125 offset. Many recent casual rtty computer programs take this into account. and PowerSDR is a computer program and as such, it's frequency display, should conform to the norm. Which is in this case is...if the rig is sending rtty (afsk), then it should apply the offset to the frequency so that if I spot that 70 station on rtty to the cluster Everyone will qsy (jump on the cluster spot) to were they can both hear and work the station. This issue is not FSK vs. AFSK, just that I know where to tune you and you know where to listen for me. Sure would hat to explain to a shack visitor why I have to enable RIT/XIT to 2125 so that I can find/work or spot a station on my fancy super smart software radio. On 7/9/2007 6:43:43 PM, Mark Mumaw ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Jim, Do you ever use DX cluster or spot log software. While chasing DX or during a RTTY contest the logging/contest software automatically sets the rigs freq. When I broadcast a spot, the software will automatically capture the rigs freq. By long established convention this is the MARK freq NOT the carrier freq. When a RTTY spot is announced at 14.085 it is assumed to be a mark freq of 14.085 which would be a LSB carrier at 14.087125. This really has nothing to do wither you are using AFSK or FSK. The Cat command will send a RTTY mode and VFO freq of 14.085000. This works just find on 99% of the modern rigs because they understand that while in RTTY mode, the freq is the MARK freq. If I set a schedule with a fellow RTTY operator for 14.085, he knows to look for my MARK freq at 14.085. On my Orion II, IC7800, FTdx9000D, 756 PROII IC-775DSP, TS-870, etc I will tune the display to read 14.085000, NOT 14.087125 as I would have to on the SDR-1000. I could fool PowerSDR by setting the XIT and RIT to 2125 and then set the displayed freq to 14.085 just like all the other rigs but I now loose this trick because RIT is cleared on Click Tuning now. The only reason th ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] New SoftWare New Manual
Hi All Thanks for the input I got ! Looks like I will wait for the New Manual after the release of the Flex5000. Any way I found out the Old SDR1000 stills wants to work! It is back in storage for now. I wonder now : Where are the Flex2000 3000 and 4000 ? Did I miss something? Thanks Again and 73 Bruce K3CMZ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
H, methinks the solution is just a few lines of code away. Perhaps make the DIGI U and/or DIGI L be able to be toggled between DIGI and RTTY (right click???), provide the 2125 offset as the default (but be configurable). All in all it seems like a 'low hanging fruit' feature enhancement that is both low risk and won't greatly impact the 5000's and/or the implementation of the new architecture. Once that's done we can then redeploy these bulldozers for making other ant hills into other mountains :) Since this IS an SDR afterall there will still be plenty more ant hills to be 'worked over' ;).. Duane N9DG Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Flex 5000a flexwire plug
One of the pins will be blocked to prevent you from plugging in a RS-232 port. We chose DB-9 because they are easy to find and easy to hand wire. Have you ever tried to hand wire one of those DIN connectors on the back of most radios? I have. Gerald Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR FlexRadio Systems Ph: 512-535-4713 Fax: 512-233-5143 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.flex-radio.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neal Campbell Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 10:17 AM To: FlexRadio List Subject: [Flexradio] Flex 5000a flexwire plug I can already predict a lot of people will be plugging serial port cables into the db 9 female port on the 5000a. Do you need all 9 signals on the port? If not, why not put a stop in one of the holes so an OEM male db9 will not fit? I assume that we will be buying devices that include the cable and they can just snip off whatever signal you block on the plug. Otherwise, will there be any damage if we accidently connect a computer to the flex wire port? If you have engineered it so there wil be no damage, then the need for enforced vigilance decreases dramatically. 73 Neal -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/ attachments/20070708/41021474/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] N4HY + K5SDR defend Ham Radio at FCC
Let me add that TAPR was very helpful to FlexRadio in the early days when the SDR-1000 was still experimental. Many of our first customers were TAPR members as well. Thanks TAPR! Gerald Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR FlexRadio Systems Ph: 512-535-4713 Fax: 512-233-5143 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.flex-radio.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Ackermann N8UR Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 6:20 PM To: Ken N9VV Cc: Flex-radio Reflector Subject: Re: [Flexradio] N4HY + K5SDR defend Ham Radio at FCC I don't want to take *anything* away from what Bob and Gerald did on this subject -- they were clearly strong voices for The Right Thing, but I'd like the record to show that TAPR was also a voice in this effort. TAPR was the only ham organization to file comments on the original Cognitive Radio NPRM that challenged the FCC's proposals to limit fast DAC chips and require hardware locks on ham SDR gear. While AMSAT and ARRL both filed comments, neither of them addressed those points. We made the argument that these restrictions would not only limit experimentation, but they would also be unenforceable in practice. The net result would be an unnecessary reduction in our ability to advance the state of the radio art. I'm not a big horn-tooter, but TAPR has been focusing on SDR for a long time now, and we'd like to think we've done some good :-). 73, John Ken N9VV said the following on 07/09/2007 06:55 PM: We Hams owe Bob N4HY and Gerald K5SDR a standing ovation at the next public meeting! Bob and Gerald defended Ham Radio when the FCC rules for SDR (Software Defined Radio) and CDR (Cognitive Defined Radio) were being formulated. The Federal Register stands as a testament to the power of their persuasive and well articulated arguments in front of such a demanding audience. In the message below, Bob recounts some of the encounter with the FCC. Raise your glasses and join me in a hearty toast to Bob and Gerald for their unselfish work on behalf of us all. Original Message Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:13:59 -0400 From: Robert McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] * High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List * Gerald Youngblood and I went to the F.C.C. and we gave a talk and discussed their proposed rule making. I believe you can see the impact we had throughout this document thought I don't claim we wrote any piece of it. We pleaded for them to not get in the way of a successful move of amateur radio into the almost inevitable future where larger pieces of it were done digitally with software and cognitive radios. We proved then, and we have continued to supply them and the ARRL CTO with information (ammunition) that shows amateur radio operators are doing INNOVATIVE development that is simply not being done elsewhere and much of it in SDR and CDR. One of the best papers you can find anywhere on the foundations for CDR (the mathematical tools) is in QEX and written by Frank Brickle, AB2KT! In the end, they told us that if amateur radio SDR's did not self police and provide transmit frequency protection, and removal of completely automatic scanning outside of amateur bands that we were likely to face serious certification of a type that would not be affordable. Now I know that faced with this, we could come up with open source means of authentication that would pass, but the expense would be onerous. I personally might personally be in serious trouble if I attempted to provide this. In the end, I think we are simply going to have to live with small pieces of firmware at a minimum that prevent unauthorized use of amateur SDR equipment outside of the amateur bands. Yes, we argued strongly that almost all amateur radio equipment could be easily modified to transmit out of band. I offered to bring in an unmodified transceiver and modify it in less than five minutes to show how easy it typically was. I was told that I should not volunteer to commit a crime on federal property and that they were aware of this. The F.C.C. is responding to external pressure from all sorts of quarters from the White House to commercial entities like Cisco to NTIS, and the intelligence community as well as D.O.D. The schizophrenic aspects of this are almost ludicrous. You find one D.O.D. office wanting to support you, buy yours toys, help you help them, and another wanting to kill the entire effort. It is bewildering. Given this order, which is now enforceable law since it was placed in the Federal Register, I expect more radio manufacturers to look at this order and jump into the SDR world more completely. I think that, overall, with these competing pressures, the F.C.C. struck a
Re: [Flexradio] Flex 5000a flexwire plug
Gerald, Are pins 2, 3, or 5 all used on the flexwire DB-9 connector? If one of those are not used, then I would suggest blocking one of those 3 pins. At my previous place of employment, we used DB-9 connectors with crimp-on pins and only populated the housing with the pins we actually used, usually only pins 2, 3, 5. Since all 3 of these pins are always used for an RS-232 serial cable, blocking one of them is the only sure-fire way of ensuring that a serial cable is not plugged into the flexwire connector. 73, Ray, K9DUR -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/attachments/20070709/90fbc8d3/attachment.html ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
I don't mean to belabor the point but I am curious what the 'integration' problem is with AFSK and third party software (I use MixW for the most part ... but I have tried any number of other programs). Jim, VE3CI The issue is who knows or (worse) think they know what about what. On MixW, I believe it possible to program the offsets of mark and space both on the setup display and casually by clicking on the _MixW Waterfall_. Earlier postings suggests that it was once commonplace to have the mark offset from the carrier different than true FSK. As far as I can make out, this can happen a variety of ways on MixW (my rig is in transit from Flex as I just had the latest ECOs put on so I can't test it now). As I recall, however, there is no problem whatever in having MixW programmed to any old offset or any old shift for that matter (let's pretend it is alway at 170 to avoid _that_ discussion). For various reasons peculiar to MixW, I always set mark offset at 400 Hz so that some quirks that _it_ has carried through two or three versions enable me to more readily switch between CW and RTTY (by no coincidence, I use q 400 Hz offset for CW). For contesting, I'd want different behavior, but day-by-day, this is definitely what MixW forces on me. This seems to mess up the integrated DX spot support for RTTY (CW is fine), but I seem to find the DX OK for my purposes and, in any case, it's the lesser evil. But, if the SDR click-to-VFO support was in on the gag in a meaningful way, I could get useful results whether FSK was emulated properly or not. This is the sort of thing that concerns me. There is the software itself to consider and then there is how individuals might use it on top of that because of things not even related to RTTY proper. Separately from that, your RTTY software may or may not have its own support for RTTY DX Summit spots. My MixW does and perhaps the offset plays into that and perhaps it doesn't. I'll have to investigate that when the rig comes back. Maybe it adjusts itself for the FSK _convention_ and maybe it doesn't. If it does not, fixing the SDR software will fix nothing for those users, because the software itself is ignorant of the convention. Or, maybe the software only works when AFSK is set up to use the regular FSK offset. Or, maybe something else. As I said, I can't check it out right now. My recollection is that I usually have to manually change the frequency by 100 Hz on my DX Summit clicks on MixW. Or something. It doesn't work immediately with the offset (and the reversal) I use. And, separately from this, there's contesting software like N1MM which doesn't do RTTY on its own, but depends on yet another 3rd party program like MTTY to do the RTTY part on its behalf. That means that N1MM does the DX Summit part and MTTY presumably is set up in a way that enables it to work. I have no idea how those two collude to work with DX Summit, but they no doubt do so based on some expectations of how MTTY sets up an AFSK rig. And, that is no doubt based on CAT commands of various sorts to dumb rigs that think they are operating LSB or USB. Sure, once it is working, we can probably forget all about this (though the way MixW uses its own waterfall leaves me a bit doubtful, because it seems to permanently reprogram its Mark offset if you use it). But, as I read everyone's postings, I get a strong flavor that I am not the only one doing unexpected things with the freedom that AFSK brings to the table in terms of setup of the _mark_ offset. If so, fixing how the SDR console code works may help some users and be unsatisfactory to others. It may be satisfactory for some programs and not others even in the default mode. Because, to make the click tuning and other things work, the SDR console has to know what offset the 3rd party code is using so that it can account for the difference, if any, between what the 3rd party code _thinks_ it is controlling and what SDR is trying to help it with. That is, if the 3rd party code currently is using some other value for mark offset from the carrier than FSK, then SDR has to be let in on the gag somehow for the click tuning and maybe the filtering. If, for instance, the AFSK offset is 600 Hz, then the 3rd party code, if it supports DX summit itself, has to deal with setting (eventually) the rigs' base frequency (the carrier) to a value that is the difference between FSK mark and the current AFSK mark. I don't see how this can be avoided. From what I know of MixW, the shift need not and is not very fixed, either, depending on the features you use. Do I know this is a big problem? No, not quite yet, though I have seen enough in everyone's various postings to be mighty suspicious. RTTY and PSK31 are clearly at odds for sure. What I do suggest is that we lay all this out for at least several of the popular programs (including how folks use and abuse them) before we run off and request our hard working coders to code
Re: [Flexradio] RIT cleared on click tuning- RTTY problem
At 10:48 PM 7/9/2007 -0500, you wrote: Do I know this is a big problem? No, not quite yet, though I have seen enough in everyone's various postings to be mighty suspicious. RTTY and PSK31 are clearly at odds for sure. What I do suggest is that we lay all this out for at least several of the popular programs (including how folks use and abuse them) before we run off and request our hard working coders to code something up. We need to know ahead of time whether there really is a universal solution or at least universal enough for people willing to behave a certain way so that most software packages end up doing the right thing vis a vis PowerSDR without a lot of fuss. If this turns out to be for contesters only, that would be OK, but at this moment, I'm hardly reassured that we can even achieve that, especially if MixW isn't the only program that has its own waterfall and click-to-VFO tuning in AFSK. Larry Wo0Z Hi Larry, I think you have been very eloquent laying out the problems vis-a-vis programming a solution; there are different conventions and standards, different uses and users, many and different third party programs and probably no simple solution that would readily satisfy many, most, let alone all operators. I have enjoyed listening to the problems and thinking about solutions. Jim, VE3CI ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
