Rud k5rud wrote:
However, I will stand by my statements. ALE is achieving
375 bps in 2.5 kHz and 0 db. (Info from
http://hflink.com/technical/ and current Channel 0
statistics.] That is not terrifically good at just under
.15 bps per Hz. It certainly comes nowhere close to
the theory,
Bonnie,
I am going to turn your argument around and use it back at you. You need to
understand my position and goals.
I was not criticizing ALE for what it is. I do understand the ALE part. I
also appreciate that it is a running operation.
My point is that ALE is not the waveform, to be more
Consider the following statements attributed to Hollingworth and the FCC's
Cross.
Hollingsworth offered good news and bad news. The good news: Nothing is
wrong with Amateur Radio, he allowed. It is a good service that is showing
its value to the public on a daily
My only criticism is you are lumping a tool, PACTOR, into a procedure
discussion. PACTOR is a tool that has nothing to do with unattended
operation, except it is used in unattended operation.
Rud Merriam K5RUD
ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX
http://TheHamNetwork.net http://thehamnetwork.net/
I agree Rud, thanks.
On 9/23/07, Rud Merriam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My only criticism is you are lumping a tool, PACTOR, into a procedure
discussion. PACTOR is a tool that has nothing to do with unattended
operation, except it is used in unattended operation.
Rud Merriam K5RUD
Rud Merriam wrote:
My only criticism is you are lumping a tool, PACTOR, into a procedure
discussion. PACTOR is a tool that has nothing to do with unattended
operation, except it is used in unattended operation.
Which is about all it is used for. Nothing wrong with Pactor as a live
QSO
Except pactor 3 modems, in essence, choose the operating bandwidth in
an unattended fashion. Even in a keyboard to keyboard conversation,
a pactor 3 modem can vary its bandwidth based upon the signal strength
and do so without operator intervention. This means you might spend
15 minutes at 500
1808 to 1815
3577 to 3584
The entire 60M band (a good band, and we don't need it for anything else)
14.105 to 14.110
24.890 to 24 .925
Please be mindful of the fact that 80m QRP, PSK31, and PSK63 operations, as
well as W1AW code practice and bulletin transmissions have always taken place
Great list Andy
Here's a few that didn't make their list (unless there are different
names for them):
AMTOR
Clover
MT63
MFSK16
All the PSK variants (63, 125etc) - Guess it's best to say PSKnnn :-)
PactorIII
BTW, when was the last time anyone had a QSL on DTMF??? :-)
--- In
New Vwersion EasyPal
http://www.kc1cs.com/EasyPal-21-SEP-07.zip
How about TDM ??
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Sawtelle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 11:12 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: More digital modes than you can shake a stick at
Great list Andy
Here's a few that didn't make their
Rick;
please let me know where you and Sholto are using FAE ARQ, since I would like
to come amd play,too.
On the subject of ALE; in my humble opinion some operators have become too
focused on ALE, forgeting that ALE is the means to establish which stations
available, and the best frequency
Here's somthing of imterest from the Ham Radio Deluxe forum today
Originally Posted by Morseman View Post
Just came back to the computer, which I had left monitoring for
Olivia, and found this on the screen.
CQ CQ CQ de 9J2CA 9J2CA 9J2CA
CQ CQ CQ de 9J2CA 9J2CA 9J2CA --- Please K
That will
Here's what §97.7 says:
§97.7 Control operator required
When transmitting, each amateur station must have a control operator.
The control operator must be a person:
(a) For whom an amateur operator/primary station license grant
appears on the ULS consolidated licensee database, or
(b) Who
Why are non-Icom transceivers problematic?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Rick;
please let me know where you and Sholto are using FAE ARQ, since I
would like to come amd play,too.
On the subject of ALE; in my
Yes Dave, but my questions are related to what Hollingworth was saying
at Dayton. Was he implying that they don't really care about the
issue and suggesting that we all lighten up and resolve the matters
among ourselves ?
On 9/23/07, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's what
Just a reminder, now that beta versions of DM780 have many new modes,
DM780 and DX Lab Suite applications still work very nicely together
using the DXLAB-HRD bridge. I am using HRD, DM780 , Spotcollector and
DX Keeper all in sync with each other.
--
Andrew O'Brien wrote:
Yes Dave, but my questions are related to what Hollingworth was
saying at Dayton. Was he implying that they don't really care about
the issue and suggesting that we all lighten up and resolve the
matters among ourselves ?
I sure hope that is not what he meant. How
Without question, Hollingsworth would prefer that we find a way to
resolve the matter ourselves.
On the other hand, there's no way to know whether he fully
understands that unattended stations like WinLink PMBOs have no
control operator. The proponents of unattended operation claim that
the
We can resolve matters among ourselves by including busy frequency
detectors and some form of QRL detector in unattended stations. Then
the remote operator could fulfil his or her responsibilities as
control operator for the unattended station, and we could all spend
more time operating,
Folks,
[mounting soapbox] when I was young, say 45 years ago, my brothers
and I would be arguing.
One would say Dad, so and so is doing [whatever].
Dad would reply, Do you guys REALLY want me to come in there?
Look. Government toleration of ham radio is good.
Government regulation of ham radio
Hi all,
I am calling CQ in ARQ FAE mode on 10.136,5 now.
Please answer if you hear me :)
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
John,
As I was preparing an assessment of my experiences last night with
Sholto (that I published on the HFDEC group), I needed to look up the
URL for the 30 meter spotting website and noticed that Sholto was
monitoring on FAE this late morning/early afternoon. So I tuned up on
his QRQ of
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi all,
I am calling CQ in ARQ FAE mode on 10.136,5 now.
Please answer if you hear me :)
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
OK I am calling you now.
73 de SV1UY
Ham radio today is no doubt 'different' today than it was in the past.
But the past is our history.
Wasn't to many years ago that the purpose of ham radio had a listing in the
FCC rules.
Hobby wasn't the top one listed ..
73 from Bill - WD8ARZ
- Original Message -
From: Chuck
Hi Demetre,
I heard you but you was to weak.
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
Demetre SV1UY skrev:
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi all,
I am calling CQ in ARQ FAE mode on 10.136,5 now.
Please answer
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Demetre,
I heard you but you was to weak.
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
OK still calling but now on 100 Watts.
Will stop in 1 minute.
73 de SV1UY
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Demetre,
I heard you but you was to weak.
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
Had we used PACTOR 3 Steinar we would have managed to have a QSO.
73 de Demetre SV1UY
P.S. Going QRT now.
John VE5MU wrote:
Unfortunately , it would appear that little progress has
been made to make PCALE more effective, by expanding
the number of radios with which the software will work
(anything other than Icom can be a challenge)
Currently PCALE has the ability to pass single line
QSY 14.109,5. I have a better antenna for 20m
la5vna Steinar
Demetre SV1UY skrev:
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Demetre,
I heard you but you was to weak.
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
OK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
QSY 14.109,5. I have a better antenna for 20m
la5vna Steinar
OK Steinar I am there now,
But 40m is the best band for this time of the day.
SF=67 which is too low.
73 de SV1UY
Arggg, I had you Demetre, but my wife come and disturbed me :( . and now
you are gone..
[20h14m05.41s] [14 109,500] [COMMAND] [20h14m05s] [FAE NAK-01-n=16]
[20h14m06s] CQ SV1UYLA5VNA [20h14m06.11s] [CRC OK]
[20h14m13.42s] [14 109,500] [End of TX] 15 char.-01-CQ DE LA5VNA
[20h14m15.31s] [14
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Arggg, I had you Demetre, but my wife come and disturbed me :( . and now
you are gone..
[20h14m05.41s] [14 109,500] [COMMAND] [20h14m05s] [FAE NAK-01-n=16]
[20h14m06s] CQ SV1UYLA5VNA [20h14m06.11s] [CRC OK]
OK Steinar,
I can hear you but maybe I am doing something wrong with my MultiPSK.
73 de SV1UY
Hi Steinar,
Just finished calling.
One of these days we'll make it.
73 de SV1UY
At 02:04 PM 9/23/2007, WD8ARZ Comcast wrote:
Ham radio today is no doubt 'different' today than it was in the past.
But the past is our history.
Wasn't to many years ago that the purpose of ham radio had a listing in the
FCC rules.
Hobby wasn't the top one listed ..
73 from Bill - WD8ARZ
More information is available about ham-friendly ALE
operation in USA.
http://hflink.com/alehamradiousa
This includes information about:
Ham-friendly ALE techniques.
ALE and FCC rules.
How sounding is used.
Selective calling in the phone bands.
Which frequencies are in use.
ALE in the automatic
Is HF emergency communication really viable?
For HF emergency communication to be taken seriously,
it must be able to make the call or send a message
without prior notice, at any time of the day or night.
That was the opening statement of the ALE presentation
at the Global Amateur Radio
See my main comment inline below...
This is likely my last response to these messages. I have better things to
do than argue with a group that is picking a fight with me over some
objective statements. Interestingly nothing said specifically refuted my
statements.
Rud Merriam K5RUD
ARES AEC
dunno. But darn near impossible to get a Kenwood running on PCALE. Have
a TS480
John
VE5MU
- Original Message -
From: Dave Bernstein
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 11:46 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ALE yes ... or no?
Why
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
dunno. But darn near impossible to get a Kenwood running on
PCALE. Have a TS480
John
VE5MU
John,
There are many ops with Kenwoods running PCALE.
Including the TS480.
In fact, they are included in
Sorry, I thought you were referring to MultiPSK, where Patrick F6CTE
and/or I might have been able to help.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
dunno. But darn near impossible to get a Kenwood running on
PCALE. Have
Hi John,
Using PC-ALE v1.062H Interim build 2 from the HFlink forum files
section ( forget build 3, it has an issue), just select radio type
KENWOOD or if you want to use RTS/CTS handshaking, KENWOOD_HS and if
your radio supports more than 4800 baud, click on Radio Port and
provide the Baud
Hi Rud,
Sorry that I could not be of help in getting you squared away with
your understanding of ALE.
/s/ Steve, N2CKH
At 07:14 PM 9/23/2007, you wrote:
See my main comment inline below...
This is likely my last response to these messages. I have better things to
do than argue with a group
Hi: i read a post about WB6REZ calling in 14074 usb. The signal was
very clear in my screen but i didnt know the setup in this frecuency.
i usually call in 14105 with 1000-32 but in 14074 with this setup i
cant read nothing.
73`s
CLAUDIO-lu2vcd
Hola Claudio,
Para informacion de moda la Olivia en las otras frecuencias:
http://hflink.com/olivia
73 Bonnie KQ6XA
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, toalje [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi: i read a post about WB6REZ calling in 14074 usb. The signal was
very clear in my screen but i didnt
and even my TS440 works well with ALE.
On 9/23/07, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
dunno. But darn near impossible to get a Kenwood running on
PCALE. Have a TS480
John
VE5MU
In addition,
97.3(a)(22) Harmful interference. Interference which endangers the
functioning of a radionavigation service or of other safety services
or seriously degrades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a
radiocommunication service operating in accordance with the Radio
Regulations.
I have let some folks in the ARRL know my thoughts but I also got the
impression they weren't interested.
Rather than concentrate on dedicated channels/sessions types of
protocols, it seems to me a multi-user/multi-session system would
better serve everyone. I know everyone cries about how slow
I had very good luck testing FAE with Sholto, KE7HPV yesterday evening.
The 8FSK125 waveform is a fairly old design. They would not be using FSK
if they were developing a new mode. From what I have been reading, the
government/commercial long term plan for the MIL-STD/FED-STD/STANAG's
will
Hi Rick,
Patricks FAE ARQ is an excellent protocol, it is the best example to
date in my opinion of a PCSMD based ARQ protocol developed for Amateur Radio.
The ALE 8FSK is not being replace by serial tone modem use for its
Sounding/LQA/Calling/Linking, believe me that is not going to happen.
51 matches
Mail list logo
