That might be your take but it won't happen. I have run a packet BBS on 14.098 for over 13 years. Come on down and try to get me a fine.If it's AUTO I'm not there! Rick Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:My take is that the frequencies are NOT guaranteed by the FCC Period. And if an Active
Rick Scott wrote:
My take is that the frequencies are NOT guaranteed by the FCC Period.
And if an Active QSO is in progress, and the Auto op interferes with
that QSO its called Jamming and subject to fines PERIOD.
True, although the FCC seems to have taken a hands-off approach to the
Same thing here, I'll try another download later.
Jerry WW0E
--
-- Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
There are a lot of mode titles missing. The buttons work ok but fiding
Curious, perhaps a bad downloading. Try again, if it continues, PSE
Hello
There are a lot of mode titles missing. The buttons work ok but fiding
Curious, perhaps a bad downloading. Try again, if it continues, PSE send me
a snapshot.
However, the modes can be selected from the button Mode.
73
Patrick
- Original Message -
From: Kevin O'Rorke [EMAIL
I finally retired my TS530 and purchased a TS480SAT
Has anyone tried going direct between the data port and the sound card?
any other suggestions on using the 480 on digi modes. I just got the
rig and so far am really impressed but missing my morning 20M OLIVIA
fix.
regards
John
VE5MU
I had planned to start the Digital Experimenters Net in December , after the
US holiday , Thanksgiving, was over. However , since we have 2 feet of snow
forecast , I 'll be homebound and thought I would kick start it tonight , at
short notice.
So, here is the plan.
I will give a call up
Hi Group;
Anybody using the FT-840 please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have a problem there.
73 de Omar YK1AO
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to telnet://208.15.25.196/
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
Looking for digital
Yes, mainly when another station decises to start a QSO on top of it. "Roger J. Buffington" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rick Scott wrote: My take is that the frequencies are NOT guaranteed by the FCC Period. And if an Active QSO is in progress, and the Auto op interferes with that QSO its
Hello everyone,
May I ask for some help with the log on PSK-PAL please?
I have been playing about with this on and off for days and I still
don't get it!. It's plain that I am misunderstanding the procedure,
so is there someone about who can give me step by step guidance.?
I am trying to
Title: RE: [digitalradio] 39 Tone DQPSK - ARQ Modem in PCALE with FTP - (Soundcard)
Right now in the U.S. the ONLY limit you have on a data mode operating in the parts of the HF bands that are authorized data communications. See §97.305 Authorized emission types. Also, it (the new codes)
Title: RE: [digitalradio] Re: 39 Tone DQPSK - ARQ Modem in PCALE with FTP - (Soundcard)
Dave makes several invalid assumptions...but mainly that the 16 KHz signal would not allow any other modes or like modes access to the same 16 KHz...this is an error. I would submit that a properly
The only way I could even dream of justifying a 16Khz wide signal for
emergency communication, would be its ability to be copied at incredibly
weak levels, perhaps better than a factor of 10 for PSK31 or Olivia. Invent
that, then maybe I just might be pursued.
Andy K3UK
- Original
I agree, there is absolutely no reason at all to have such a wide signal on
our bands. And yes, we must have bandwidth available for more than a few
signals at a time. After all there are hundreds of thosuands of hams
worldwide. And if such a signal actually provides channelization , thus the
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 15:14, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote:
Dave makes several invalid assumptions...but mainly that the 16 KHz signal
would not allow any other modes or like modes access to the same 16
KHz...this is an error. I would submit that a properly designed mode using
My assumption of 100% utilization was based your saying The
composite signaling rate would be 51200 bps. If you're now
saying this is a shared-channel protocol design to support 4
users, then why not instead provide a single-channel protocol
that's *only* 4 khz in width? If we think about
Andy,
Nothing heard or copied on any mode on either frequency at South St
Paul, MN on the date and times listed.
Jerry - K0HZI
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew J. O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I had planned to start the Digital Experimenters Net in December ,
after the US
I hope this doesn't come off sounding like a commercial, as it isn't
intended to be and I have no connection with the company, just thought
it might be of interest to some people. These days they don't make
laptops with real RS-232 ports. www.heartlandamerica.com seems to have
a lot of older
I know
that Walt wants an ultra wideband unconnected mode for HF emergency
communications, but it seems that all this is going to be moot assuming the ARRL
bandwidth proposal goes through. From what I have found in discussion with most
other digital hams is that almost no one supports the
I purchased one a couple of years ago cause
I needed 1) Real DOS, 2) a serial port, 3) something to stand alone for
decoding. They are a bit pricey, but they work!!
Ed Pusey
From:
digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jhaynesatalumni
Sent:
19 matches
Mail list logo
