Andy and the group, what do you use for call sign lookup? I am a paid
subscriber to Buckmaster HamCall, it works well with the mixW, but looks like
this doesnt work well with HRD.. Several posts on this, and some in a To-Do
list on the HRD site.
I printed the manuals (where i work-many pages)
Hard to tell if you are trying to ask a question, or make a statement. In
either case though, your post indicates a lack of understanding that I may be
able to relieve.
Unattended operation has been codified into PART97 for close to thirty years
now, and was done in response to the emergence
Nice post and well worded, Charles!
Warren - K5WGM
--- On Tue, 10/27/09, Charles Brabham n5...@uspacket.org wrote:
From: Charles Brabham n5...@uspacket.org
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Why would anyone
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 8:55 AM
GM Charles,
I recently noticed your signature line, then tried to look into hamradionet.
When I go to the url it redirects me to the forum. When I browse the forum I
find some info about what the new network IS NOT but nothing about what it IS.
Can you direct me to the description of what
I agree with Charles, mostly. I have mixed feelings about the whole wide
versus narrow issue. While I tend to gravitate towards the narrow modes,
I have to admit to sympathizing with those on this list who express
frustration that they cannot experiment with some of the wider modes because
Pat I used QRZ.COM for all my needs. I have used it with both HRD and DXKeeper
and both work well.
Andy K3UK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Pat Turner k3pb_...@... wrote:
Andy and the group, what do you use for call sign lookup?�I am a paid
subscriber to�Buckmaster HamCall, it
All,
Ed, WA6RZW has posted a friendly invitation for his fellow hams to use his HF
packet mailbox on 14105.5 LSB. See below.
*** CONNECTED With Station WA6RZW-1
[KAM-XL-1.0-HM$]
101920 BYTES AVAILABLE IN 25 BLOCKS
THERE ARE 2 MESSAGES NUMBERED 58-59
MAILBOX EMPTY - FILL IT UP!
Tony -K2MO
- Original Message -
From: Andy obrien
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Why would anyone
I agree with Charles, mostly. I have mixed feelings about the whole
wide versus narrow issue. While I tend to
Tony, what is the center frequency in Multipsk for packet?
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony d...@... wrote:
All,
Ed, WA6RZW has posted a friendly invitation for his fellow hams to use his HF
packet mailbox on 14105.5 LSB. See below.
*** CONNECTED With Station WA6RZW-1
but Dave, ...how would we define get the job done. I might feel I need to
transfer my message at 9600 baud on HF but others might argue I should be
patient and accept a 300 baud transfer.
Andy
What we really need
is a rule that says you should use the minimum bandwidth needed to get
OH Wonderful! Some idiot would come up with something 50 or 100 kc wide, and
then be legal to wipe out dozens if not hundreds o QSOs. There MUST be rules,
because there is always going to be someone who will push the envelope with so
called advances which ignore the rights and wishes of
I'm not sure who suggested 50-100 khz. of B/W... But if someone can take up 6
Khz of B/W just to transmit a human voice, why not something similar for
digital modes?
I'm not saying you SHOULD, or that it would be PRACTICAL, but if we're setting
limits ...
--
Dave Sparks
AF6AS
-
- Original Message -
From: obrienaj k3uka...@gmail.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 7:01 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Fast/Wide Slow/Narrow
but Dave, ...how would we define get the job done. I might feel I need
to transfer my message at 9600 baud
13 matches
Mail list logo
