Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Digital vs. Analog both have a place.

At 05:52 PM 7/9/2009, you wrote: >Alinco is probably the low hanging fruit. I wonder what would >happen if everyone on this list wrote Alinco HQ a nice letter >telling them they would buy Alinco radios if they implemented D-STAR >in place of their proprietary digital system? Well, if you get

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: new to the group

At 02:18 AM 7/10/2009, you wrote: >In a disaster, a basic D-STAR repeater can be just as reliable as a FM >repeater. The gateway is not required for operation. So as long as the >repeater continues to work, it provides the same capabilities that an FM >repeater would, PLUS. The PLUS is the ability

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: new to the group

At 01:50 AM 7/11/2009, you wrote: >-->First, there is literally no increased range. Do the math, look at the >required signal strength required at the receiver to reliably decode packets >and produce error free voice. Compare that value with your traditional >analog FM repeater receiver. Guess

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: I'm a bad ham, eh? No!

At 01:24 AM 7/12/2009, you wrote: > I for one have two IC-2820s and an ID-880 although there is no > D-Star activity here in Palm Beach County, Florida. Am I crazy? Am > I nuts? Do I belong in the looney bin? Certainly not. I bought my D-STAR radio before the first D-STAR repeater came on ai

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] IC-91AD vs 92AD

At 07:09 AM 7/18/2009, you wrote: >92 is a true dual band. Look at the screen. You can have one DSTAR repeater >on one band and another UHF or VHF analog repeater going on the other band >at the same time. 91 can do this as well. I own a 91 and use the dual receive facility to monitor both my FM

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Icom IC-91AD Troubleshooting

At 07:13 AM 7/18/2009, you wrote: >Hi Group! > >I've got an issue I'm hoping someone else has an answer for. > >When programming in the Your or UR Call on the IC-91AD, I can't get >the call sign to save in a memory slot, I can't save an edit on >another memory slot, nothing seems to be working ex

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: IC-91AD vs 92AD

At 06:43 PM 7/18/2009, you wrote: >I've had dual-watch mobiles (Yaesu FT8500) and handhelds (Alinco G5) >and found that I didn't use the feature that much. Gets confusing, >runs down the battery, too many controls to flip the PTT between >them, etc. If I had to get a Dstar handheld, I'd get

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: First home-made dstar G2 gateway went live today.

At 08:28 AM 7/24/2009, you wrote: >What is definately needed is a complete network, where all are connected >together, some way. I agree. I have concerns about there being one Trust server, but this is more an architectural issue. Like other networks have done, there should be a number of geo

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: First home-made dstar G2 gateway went live today.

At 05:13 PM 7/24/2009, you wrote: >And there was a request, what... a year ago?... for volunteers to form >an Architectural Committee or something similar... Advisory Board?... >I forget what it was called, but it was OBVIOUSLY designed to be a >working forum for worldwide standards... from the K5

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: First home-made dstar G2 gateway went live today.

At 02:13 AM 7/25/2009, you wrote: >Why dont you all join your your forces and start designing a next >generation trust system which has multiple instances for redundancy but >still acts like one so everybody could use it and enjoy a global D-STAR >network.. This is what needs to be looked at for

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: First home-made dstar G2 gateway went live today.

At 07:17 PM 7/29/2009, you wrote: >Your comment on the 10.X.X.X range is interesting - whilst I would >gladly sweep that away in an instance, I am concerned that there is >a use that may break. Does anyone know what was in Icom's mind when >they used that range ? I get the impression they wer

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] ICOM next year clarify your contest rules

At 04:43 AM 7/30/2009, you wrote: >Rule: "The use of the following technologies cannot be used for >contest QSO. D-PLUS DV Dongle HotSpot Digital/Analog Gateways DV Adapters" > >A station jumped me on a reflector asking me to one-touch him back >for a contest QSO. Was the reflector (i.e., dplus

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: ICOM next year clarify your contest rules

At 08:04 AM 7/30/2009, you wrote: >I've read the rules several times and can't find the part >prohibiting multicast. Maybe ICOM will clarify that too. It would >be a shame for them to prohibit their own technology, but who knows. I don't believe the rules prohibit multicast, just observing wh

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] IC-91AD vs IC-92AD

At 12:08 PM 8/3/2009, you wrote: >A GPS microphone is a cool idea, but a much more cost effective and >in some ways a more practical approach is to use a standard GPS >plugged into the side data jack of the 91AD. (e.g. >

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Wouldn't It Be Nice ?

At 04:58 AM 8/9/2009, Adrian wrote: >Back on air, on D-Star, I always state ¨VK4TUX icom routing¨ during a >callsign routed call I always announce how I've placed the call if I'm not simply joining an existing QSO. Typically, I would announce something like: "Routing from VK3RWN port B". Thi

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Wouldn't It Be Nice ?

At 12:19 PM 8/10/2009, you wrote: >So what! They can't push a couple of buttons IF they want to talk back!!! > >It doesn't seem to disrupt anything in my opinion! I agree with Nate, it seems a simple solution to handling the different traffic types. If UR = CQCQCQ, then it's fair game for DPl

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Wouldn't It Be Nice ?

At 12:36 PM 8/10/2009, you wrote: >Our repeater is always linked to a reflector and we want people to >be able to call route to us, so it is NOT a good solution. Well, they WOULD be able to callsign route to you. What Nate's idea avoids is the repeater having to carry the callsign routed traf

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Wouldn't It Be Nice ?

At 12:59 PM 8/10/2009, you wrote: >Seems to be a misunderstanding somewhere along the way. The proposal is >for how -=OUTBOUND=- traffic should be handled / routed, not inbound. > >Maybe it's me that misunderstood? No, sounds like you got it right Iain. I understood Nate's idea the same way as

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Wouldn't It Be Nice ?

At 09:57 PM 8/10/2009, you wrote: >Ok, well here is the problem. The misconception that the call >routing creates a one sided conversation across a reflector. It does >not. We tested this last Saturday and all repeaters hear both side >of the conversation. That's why I don't understand why any

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Wouldn't It Be Nice ?

At 03:17 PM 8/11/2009, you wrote: >And let's not forget the "new" thing that G2 brought to us with >"multicasting". when's the last time you used that ? Nice idea in theory, but anything that requires administrator intervention is of limited use, IMHO. May be good for specific nets, but I

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] REF003 tests

At 11:39 PM 8/17/2009, you wrote: >Hi Everybody, >I'm wondering if Dplus users around the world can try some things out for me? >Can you try to link your gateway modules to REF003, on any/all >reflector modules and see if you can successfully link. >Can you also please try to Dplus link to VK5RWN

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Dayton '09 D-STAR Forum Video Now Available

At 08:25 AM 8/26/2009, you wrote: >Hi, everyone, > >ARVN's video of the D-STAR Forum and Friday Night Event at the 2009 >Dayton Hamvention is (finally) available! > >For details and ordering, go to: www.arvideonews.com I bought some of Gary's videos last year, and highly recommend them to an

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DV Dongle

At 01:23 PM 8/26/2009, you wrote: >Hi there, > > Group got another question. Can anyone tell about the DV > Dongle? There's not much on the website about the DV Dongle. Does > it work pretty well? > >thank you inadvance The Dongle works well, however, you need to know that the DV Dongle onl

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: DV Dongle

At 05:59 AM 8/27/2009, you wrote: > > The DVDongle is a device and software that allows a PC to connect > to the D-STAR network similarly to a radio. >> It's also one of the > cheapest entries into D-STAR at $199 USD. > > > > From my hotel room in a city that doesn't have any D-STAR > repeaters,

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: DV Dongle

At 07:17 AM 8/27/2009, you wrote: >As its 'GMSK' over internet protocol, maybe we have 'GOIP'?? Actually, no it's not. GMSK is the modulation that's used over RF. GMSK is not used on the Internet, it would be pointless and a waste of bandwidth. All that's needed is the D-STAR data stream with

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] A Question I don't here talked about - HT to HT

At 06:11 AM 8/29/2009, you wrote: >I have not seen this discussed. > >Say I have two IC-92AD HTs and I want to talk between them. Can I >use D-Star mode vs. FM, without going through a repeater? I assume >the answer is "yes" but I wonder if there is any special setup. I'm >referring to transm

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 05:25 AM 8/30/2009, you wrote: >So we've got a couple of options > >1. Force the FCC to make a ruling, you know, those things that >tend to make everyone equally unhappy. >2. Call if voice and live to within the voice rules. >3. Call it digital and live within the digital rul

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 11:25 AM 8/30/2009, you wrote: >I really don't see this as a U.S. problem, the modulation index is >less than 1, the low speed messaging is incidental and has been used >with other DV modes on HF for several years. Well, over here, the biggest challenges are technical, such as "Will the si

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 06:52 AM 8/31/2009, you wrote: > > Well, over here, the biggest challenges are technical, such as "Will > > the signal survive ionospheric paths?". Only one way to find > that one out. ;) > > > >Digital voice on HF will NEVER catch on because it is a strong >signal mode, and HF is the home of

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 03:08 PM 8/31/2009, you wrote: >I definitely agree with John on this one. Digital, by and large, is a >big yawn, if all we're doing with it is the same things we've done >before. > >Where it gets interesting in digital is in techniques like WSJT, which >aren't nearly fast enough for speech (wi

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 01:49 AM 9/1/2009, you wrote: >I have some experience with mobile HF - http://www.ke5c.net/mobile/ Me too, in the particular environment I'm talking about - rural and Outback Australia. >If you want reliable HF communications from say 50 to 500 miles, you >will need a frequency agile gate

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 08:27 AM 9/1/2009, you wrote: >And they used to say that CW was the most efficient communications >mode. That is, until PSK31 came around and blew it away. And other modes since have raised that bar considerably. :) >Add a little spread spectrum, ALE, propagation predictors, and a >compute

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 10:02 AM 9/1/2009, you wrote: >This was the crux of the beginning of this thread. > >One, is D-STAR legal below 29 mHz. in the US (it appears to be based >on its characteristics and the regulations) Well, remember the important secondary question... "Where?". I don't have to deal with "app

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Explain this to me (Was News on IC-9100) US Audience

At 02:20 PM 9/1/2009, you wrote: >Culturally, that's why we'll never see it in a radio built by the >Japanese. There's very little of the cultural concept you would know >as "have a go" in their world. Pretty much the opposite of this part of the world, where our ancestors had to be innovative

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Repeater Linking?

At 07:50 AM 9/5/2009, you wrote: >Hi John, > >While I appreciate you taking the time and trouble to answer my >question, It's WAY too much info for me to digest. What the question >probably should have been it this: > >If I connect to a local D-Star repeater and have WD7STRCL in UR and >anothe

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Repeater Linking?

At 10:04 AM 9/5/2009, you wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Tony Langdon" >To: > >Individual Email | Traditional > > >Hi Tony > >Thanks for that, it realy helped to >understand D-Star. No probs. One of the reasons D-STAR seems so co

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Repeater Linking?

At 01:05 AM 9/6/2009, you wrote: >So, if I have this straight, with this callsign routed network I can >call my buddy wherever he is. Let's say he's on a trip and happens >to be driving through Atlanta. > >Now, IF he talks on the Atlanta repeater so it knows he's there, >then IF I master all t

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Repeater Linking?

At 01:19 PM 9/6/2009, you wrote: >Obviously I was being somewhat facetious in my last post - but I >think you hit the nail on the head Tony. > >Tinkering with the technology is the fun for me and I think for a >lot of amateurs - and I think that may be a large part of the >attraction of the hobb

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Simplify Abbreviations for Alpha Tags

At 01:31 PM 9/9/2009, you wrote: >So, come up with a plan. > >By the time that you add 2 digits country, 2 digits state, 4 digits >city, 1-2 digits repeater in city identifier, 1 digit for module, >well, you ran out of display a few characters back. Yep... Well, for domestic use, I just go b

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: "One-touch" operation

At 11:41 AM 9/11/2009, you wrote: >Even if you One-Touch and set UR to something other than CQCQCQ, as >far as RPT2 points to your gateway which is linked, your audio is >heard by everyone (including JAs and everyone on a DV Dongle) on >the same link. (You may be also heard by someone on your UR

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] New poll for dstar_digital

At 10:51 AM 9/16/2009, you wrote: >Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the >dstar_digital group: > >Would you visit the group archive here on the web as often without >the pictures in the group description? The pictures reduce the >number of message headers that can be displ

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Anyone Planning for JOTA ?

At 07:28 AM 9/23/2009, you wrote: >http://www.scout.org/jota > >Maybe reflectors to make initial contact and then move off for >source routed contacts ? One contact will block a reflector until >the contact is completed where source routing will open things up >for more contacts. We had this p

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Anyone Planning for JOTA ?

At 03:20 PM 9/23/2009, you wrote: >Hi Steve, > >JOTA is very welcome to use REF005C, as per last year's >arrangements. With G1DVA's assistance, we should be able to provide >a dedicated last heard web page, just let me know if this would be useful. > >REF015A is also available for backup/overfl

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Finally, an Open G2 that runs on ICOM repeater-controller hardware.

At 06:05 AM 10/4/2009, you wrote: >Will I open-source it ? Probably not. Why ? Because the D-Star >network is so fragile, that if someone changes something in my code >that breaks the network, I will get the blame, and that will pull >any chance of future development. I can certainly unders

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Finally, an Open G2 that runs on ICOM repeater-controller hardware.

At 03:22 AM 10/5/2009, you wrote: >2. Who controls it? >"The D_STAR_Open_Source_group" I would also be asking about the guarantee of access to the download/support forum as well, without arbitrary decisions about who can enter the support forum. >3. What license is it released under? >"The D_

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Finally, an Open G2 that runs on ICOM repeater-controller hardware.

At 09:04 AM 10/6/2009, you wrote: >Ah - that would be much like the terse response I got to ask to join >the rtpDir group then ? I got booted 2 or 3 times without explanation, then the last attempt, the group was closed and I just got a rejected notice. >I was told that my access attempt was b

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DV Dongle/Operating Systems

At 09:47 AM 10/12/2009, you wrote: >Can someone tell me if the DV dongle will work with Vista64 bit or >the Apple Snow Leopard operating systems? I'm using it on Vista 64 bit, no worries. Both the Java version, and the new binary betas of DVTool work for me. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradi

[DSTAR_DIGITAL] REF023 A available for JOTA

As I advised several weeks ago, REF023 A is available for JOTA stations to use all weekend. Feel free to use it for JOTA as needed. I probably won't get to monitor too often, but if there are any problems, please feel free to drop me an email. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Beeps

At 01:00 AM 10/15/2009, you wrote: >I think you will find the bleeps are from your radio. The receiver >bleeps to notify you a DV signal has dropped, not the repeater. Try >a simplex QSO, this will confirm this for you. They are from the radio. You can turn them off in the menus (at least on

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re:callsign routing

At 12:21 AM 10/16/2009, you wrote: >I was forced to use callsign routing at first as none of the local >Sysops allowed end user linking so I had no other choice. After using it >for a while and understanding it I still prefer it to linking for short, >peer to peer, messages. Linking, however is be

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: More open source D-Star repeater progress

At 11:18 PM 10/16/2009, you wrote: >Hi Robbie > >I have a Yahoo group to distribute and support the software, which >also includes an analogue repeater controller, and eventually a full >dual-mode repeater. It's located at >. > >The current har

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Beeps

At 07:20 AM 10/17/2009, you wrote: >That is not what I read in previous discussions by folks who were >actually doing protocol-level work, but if you insist that the >headers are encapsulated inside the portion of the stream that's >covered by FEC, I can't really refute it technically. My und

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re:callsign routing

At 10:31 PM 10/16/2009, you wrote: >A few questions >I've used Callsign Routing as well as most of the other methods >available on the system. All have been both successful and at other >times not so much. >Here are the questions as well as my thoughts to date which are >subject to correcti

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] newbe ?

At 01:05 PM 10/20/2009, you wrote: >I'm new to D-Star and have not yet been able to register for gateway >use. I've asked a couple of hams in my area about registering and >was sent a link which didn't work for some reason. Because I drive >longhaul trucks for a living I'm not home long enough t

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] newbe ?

At 02:11 PM 10/20/2009, you wrote: >This is true. I'm registered to K5CTX where I used to live, but now >I use VK3RWN. Never bothered changing the registration. Yep, that would work. This is who I don't like the decentralised approach, it makes it hard for dongle users to know where to regis

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] newbe ?

At 02:24 PM 10/20/2009, you wrote: >I'm going to reply to myself as something just struck me. When I use >my new VK3 call I haven't had much luck getting outside the gateway >(although I haven't tried that much)... I'm thinking I need to >register my new call because it doesn't see me as K5EJP

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Cable for ic91 a/d

At 11:27 AM 10/21/2009, you wrote: >You can make a rs-232 to IC-91 cable, but I think a USB will be >a bit of a problem. Make the RS232-USB cable, then add a USB to serial adapter, and it should work fine. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Information request.

At 05:45 AM 10/27/2009, you wrote: >John, > >I'm not sure why you indicate that the DVDongle is an *extremely* >expensive alternative to connect to D-STAR. The DVDongle is $200USD >and should be half the price of the IC-E92D. The DVDongle does >require a terrestrial (low latency) Internet conn

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Internet Via ID-800H

At 02:26 AM 11/4/2009, you wrote: >Here's a lot of information on using D-RATS for e-mail: > >http://www.d-rats.com/documentation/4-howtos/5-internet-email/ > >Dan takes a cautious approach to e-mail in D-RATS, and it looks like >"human intervention" is required so that messages can be screened t

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Internet Via ID-800H

At 07:39 AM 11/4/2009, you wrote: >Yeah, you can tell it not to process the queue (the Outbox) >automatically (it's the default, of course). Then you can just prune >bits from there until it's clean and then process the queue manually. >It's all still quite a bit in flux at the moment, but we're

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] MB6AM: UK's First G2 Connected Simplex D-Star Node

At 10:00 AM 11/21/2009, you wrote: >MB6AM, 2m D-Star Simplex Node: Tring, Herts. > >After several weeks in testing, MB6AM went live >this afternoon, sharing the same mast as the >70cm GB3TU repeater. MB6AM is located in Tring, >North West of London and is well appointed to >provide Digital Vo

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Rookie Questions

At 02:03 PM 12/6/2009, you wrote: >I am trying to understand the features and limitations of D-STAR. I >have viewed every D-STAR video on YouTube (Especially good were >KN4AQ Gary Pearce's videos) plus I have read the articles/manuals on >the Icom site and DSTARusers.org. > >How can D-STAR radio

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: DstarUses org.

At 07:57 AM 12/14/2009, you wrote: >Hi Alan, > >apparently you need a DeLorean travelling at 88.8 MPH before you can >work any of the stations on that repeater - HI HI. A TARDIS should do the trick too. ;) 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Dec 2009 QST p 50

At 02:10 AM 12/20/2009, you wrote: >See Gary Pearce' ID880H Product Review - plus some heresy about >switching from AM to squawky (1950 equivalent of R2D2) SSB. 73 nu5d I've got a bit behind in reading QST lately. I'll have to check it out. :) Yep, it'll take time for people to make the trans

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Purchasing a Node Adapter

At 10:48 AM 1/20/2010, you wrote: >New non-Satoshi firmware will be available "very soon". And the Hot >Spot application already works with this new firmware and >drivers. Fred's new drivers also get around the Win7 (x64) issue >that plagues the old LibUSB drivers. Look forward to this. :)

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Purchasing a Node Adapter

At 03:53 AM 1/21/2010, you wrote: >Is there anyone else developing an adapter that is not dependant on >Satoshi's firmware? There is new firmware being developed for the node adapter/mini hotspot hardware that is not based on Satoshi's firmware. Stay tuned to the various groups. 73 de VK3JED

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Has anyone tried using the node adapter in the simplex mode as a link on ...

At 08:00 AM 1/21/2010, you wrote: > > analog connected to DSTAR!! NO THANK YOU! > >I've used a system with a very functional analog >interconnect. There's always some passionate rhetoric when this >topic comes up, a lot like node adapters. Everyone is certainly >entitled to an opinion

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: New guy

At 08:28 AM 1/21/2010, you wrote: >What many of us do is to utilize every means possible to provide >communications. There are times when atmospheric conditions make it >impossible to use HF. There are times when any repeater will go off >the air for some reason. What makes Amateur Radio reliab

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Automatic Operation - Control Point Definition

At 05:56 AM 2/10/2010, Nate Duehr wrote: >I've got the PDF somewhere... on a hard drive... somewhere... >copyrighted by ARRL so I can't post it anywhere anyway... (I >asked.) Other people have it posted on the web, and feel they'll go >ahead and risk infringement of the Copyright. :-) If it

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] 2200H vs 880

At 02:23 AM 2/14/2010, you wrote: >My current thoughts are to get the 2200 now and the digital board later >when funds are available. I'll add my voice to the chorus, and I concur with the general consensus. Of the two radios mentioned, definitely put down the extra money and go for the 880.

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] D-STAR Info Newsletter

At 02:52 PM 2/17/2010, you wrote: > >Something new has just been introduced into the >world of D-STAR. The DV Access Point Dongle, >released in January by Internet Labs, provides a >way to connect to the International D-STAR >Network. Like their current product, the DV >Dongle, the DV Access

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Random Thoughts on an Open D-STAR Architecture [Was: Home Rptr is MIA, What do I do???]

At 06:59 AM 3/10/2010, you wrote: >I have been doing a lot of thinking about a new D-STAR Architecture >(and hope to provide some more concrete material at some point), but >this discussion brings up some basic ideas that have been >percolating in my ruminations. > >Icom started from a differe

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Random Thoughts on an Open D-STAR Architecture [Was: Home Rptr is MIA, What do I do???]

At 08:26 AM 3/10/2010, you wrote: >1. Use a VPN network with multiple (failover) servers to connect to, >linked together, geographically spread out. This enables us to >create a private network on top of the internet or any other network >medium that can encapsulate the VPN. We think about us

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Random Thoughts on an Open D-STAR Architecture [Was: Home Rptr is MIA, What do I do???]

At 10:12 AM 3/10/2010, you wrote: >And indeed, back to my initial statement. It's pretty obvious how >hard it is to reach any consensus and how many different opinions that exist. > >Take a look at the more popular Amateur Radio programs, how many of >them are Open Source? Not many, but the su

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Alternative D-STAR Equipment

At 06:40 AM 3/18/2010, you wrote: >The one thing I hate is using memories to do everything. Go to a new >area and you've got to program new memories. Ever see one of Mark's , >KJ4VO, files? He has everything in there. I get confused just looking >at one. I think the way memories currently wor

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Alternative D-STAR Equipment (Was: Looking for DSTAR MAP)

At 10:11 AM 3/18/2010, you wrote: > > It is a question of the G2 network at this point, there is a lot > of politics going on about who and what can connect, but the technology > exists. > >Maybe that's what I was trying to say. :) Politics is definitely a bigger barrier than technology at this

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Alternative D-STAR Equipment

At 10:53 PM 3/18/2010, you wrote: >The ID-1 has remote capabilities via USB, the buggy software is included >with it. BTW, anyone know if they ever updated it? Can't seem to find it on >Icom's site. The IC91AD can also be remotely controlled, using the RS-91 software and the appropriate serial c

[DSTAR_DIGITAL] DV dongle QSO ham radio? (was: New poll for dstar_digital)

At 02:09 PM 3/26/2010, you wrote: >Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the >dstar_digital group: > >Three folks with amateur radio callsigns chat over the internet, >each using a dv dongle. > > o This is an example of a round table amateur radio QSO. > o This is an example

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DV dongle QSO ham radio? (was: New poll for dstar_digital)

At 07:55 PM 3/26/2010, you wrote: >However you will find most of us turn up on different devices for a >qso all the time without any thought to how that affects our qso. That's my experience. While many of us have DV Dongles, we do mix up our use of different devices. My own usage pattern is

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: DV dongle QSO ham radio?

At 07:03 PM 3/27/2010, you wrote: >Pick up your mic./Dongle/whatever and put a call out – it’s all Ham Radio. Agree 100%. Enjoy the hobby, whatever form it takes for you! :) 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: DV dongle QSO ham radio?

At 12:03 AM 3/28/2010, you wrote: >The important question to me: is Internet use good or bad for ham >radio (IRLP, Echolink, WIRES, DVDongle/DVAP, remote HF control, etc.) > >My answer is "Yes." Exactly Gary, you've pretty much covered the issues. >We do need RF capability - lots of it - just

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DV dongle QSO ham radio?

At 05:35 AM 3/28/2010, you wrote: >Here is what I feel like are "valid" dongle uses. > >1) Traveling in hotel. >2) No D-Star repeater in range at home. >3) Link to a specific reflector and not use local repeater. All of these are common uses for the dongle, though my preference would be to use a

[DSTAR_DIGITAL] Emergency comms poll.

At 03:00 AM 4/4/2010, you wrote: > o Yes, even with loss of internet connectivity, D-Star will > perform better than analog., D-Star will perform better than analog. > o Yes, but only without loss of internet connectivity, D-Star > will perform better than analog. > o No, D-Star will perfo

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Emergency comms poll.

At 07:16 AM 4/4/2010, you wrote: >Its what we do, not with what we do it that counts. I agree 100% Don. We should become well versed in as diverse a range of options as we can. Our greatest strengths are diversity (as in having a lot of communication options to choose from) and skills. 73 de

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Emergency comms poll.

At 07:52 AM 4/4/2010, you wrote: >After considerable experience on D-Star nets, both via dplus links >and Icom's multiplex facility, and in callsign routed QSO's, I am of >the distinct opinion that D-Star communciations are fairly >unreliable. Dropped streams are frequent. Folks double on each

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DSTAR communication

At 03:56 PM 4/7/2010, you wrote: >Makes since. Thanks.. WOw. have I been educated tonight. But isn't >that what this is suppose to be all about? Helping each other with >these sort of things. >I appreciate your help in how this stuff works. This makes since >because I think some of the ones ar

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DSTAR communication

At 04:18 PM 4/7/2010, you wrote: >Some repeater owners/operators over here still don't allow users to >control the links. I find it silly, but it's sometimes how they're set up. You can't tell some people. It's actually not so bad if someone's always around to push the buttons (like used to h

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DSTAR communication

At 11:47 PM 4/7/2010, you wrote: >As to hitting the repeater, as someone else mentioned, it's just RF. >VHF/UHF frequencies are notorious for moving the radio 3 inches and >going from full quieting to no signal at all. Remember, the repeater >is probably running at least 20 watts out of an ante

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DSTAR communication

At 06:38 AM 4/8/2010, you wrote: >James KD0AJZ wrote: "My problem is that D-Star is not all that far >from me but I cannot talk on it while I am at my home. However I can >walk yes, walk less than a block and talk all day on it." > >Sounds like a problem I've had with a nearby repeater. That

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Linking vs. Source Routing

At 08:40 AM 4/8/2010, you wrote: >I may be asking a question that has already been answered. What is >the difference between Linking (UR: KJ4MMCCL) and Source Routing >(UR: /KJ4OXTC)? This is something I have yet to figure out. Linking uses the DPlus addon. It behaves (in concept) like IRLP and

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] DSTAR communication

At 01:55 PM 4/8/2010, you wrote: >I don't know if this coordination problem is only in the USA. Here, >it seems some regions are finding solutions and others aren't. As >a fan of DStar, and knowing that some regions have slowly and >diplomatically refarmed portions of 2 meters, then taken a

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Linking vs. Source Routing

At 05:59 AM 4/9/2010, you wrote: >This is more a sign of really poor integration of the regular >features vs. the add-on features, than anything. If the two were >"aware" of each other in any way, a message could be sent back to >the user who is "barging" in saying the remote system is linked

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Linking vs. Source Routing

> >I don't think so, I fully agree with Ed, I have >seen many user´s drop off dstar, due to callsign routing technique not >satisfying their desire to listen in on a qso first before joining in. Good point. Hams love listening. It's part and parcel of the hobby, whether people like it or not

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Cqing??

At 12:27 AM 4/19/2010, you wrote: >Announce before linking on the local system what you are going to >do, then wait for about 3 minutes I would say, if a QSO is in >progress, some systems can take time to actually relay remote >traffic and some don't until another new user keys up there first.

RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Repeater stack

At 12:34 AM 4/21/2010, you wrote: >what is the lightning like in your area? >If it is anything like it is here in Florida... go with a commercial grade >antenna... otherwise your putting up a toothpick maker If on a site where any weather extremes are possible - wind, snow, ice, lightning,

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: ARRL Field Day Rules - 145.67 simplex

>Actually, our only dual-mode P25 repeater around here went by the >wayside, because the digital users got tired of the non-CTCSS >understanding analog users keying up in analog in the middle of a >QSO to ask "What's wrong with the repeater?!"... That's the problem I see with dual mode. Dua

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: ARRL Field Day Rules - 145.67 simplex

At 03:30 PM 4/21/2010, you wrote: >WOW- I sure poked an ant bed here, didn't I > >My point is DSTAR can operate SIMPLEX, as that is what I thought the >point was for field day. Now assuming we're talking about SIMPLEX, >one could SHARE a SIMPLEX frequency with all the other hams out there. N

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: ARRL Field Day Rules - 145.67 simplex

At 08:06 PM 4/21/2010, you wrote: >Morning Tony > >That was MY point keep d-star and digital OFF the standard simplex >frequencies. >NOW we all know that can be a problem SO Why not get the ARRL >to hold a vote of WHICH frequencies are most used by FM ? Well, D-STAR needs to go somewhere,

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] D-Star commercial radios

At 07:12 AM 5/6/2010, you wrote: >e_l_green KI6WBX wrote: "Which brings up the question of why 144/440 >is all that's commercially available for D-STAR use, given the crowding... " > >I've read that since Japan amateurs don't have access to the 220 mHz >band, Japanese radio manufacturers are le

Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: I Want To Know???

At 12:38 AM 5/9/2010, you wrote: >" My experience with D-Star repeaters is they give me a bit more >range than analog FM " > >Not the norm . ANALOG has more range It depends. I have witnessed many examples of D-STAR performing well on RF paths where FM would have been marginal at beast.

<    1   2   3   >