RE: [digitalradio] DM-780
Not every version though. Only these later versions over the last eight months or so. Rick - KH2DF From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rudy Benner Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 4:28 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] DM-780 Yes, it does. TOOLSPROGRAM OPTIONSMODES IDS - SELECT THE RSID TAB. ve3bdr From: Lynn mailto:n0...@cox.net Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:18 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] DM-780 Could someone tell me if DM-780 uses RSID/TSID. Thought it supported it, but can't find where to turn it on or off. Thanks Lynn _ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 02:35:00
[digitalradio] Signal Around 14113.5 - What Is It?
Hello, Anybody have any idea what the mode/signal is around 14113.5? It is wide on the waterfall and there is no RSID. Sounds familiar but I cannot decode it. Any ideas? Rick - KH2DF
RE: [digitalradio] New guy
Hello Stephen, There are a few of us into digital modes here in Louisiana. Just hit us up for a sked here on this reflector if you want to try something new. We are here to help. Rick Bossier City, LA From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of charles standlee Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 5:28 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] New guy Steve, Welcome to digital communications... Since you live in Louisiana here are a couple of sites that you may want to look at, first the Louisiana section website at www.laarrl.org on the right side of the page is a link for digital communications and has a 6 or 7 part tutorial on digital communications and other technical stuff written in laymens terms, the other is the website for the Baton Rouge area Ham club www.lsu.edu/brarc. There are a lot of folks in the state who can help you out with answers and quite a few in Baton Rouge. I will help you more off line, I live in the Alexandria area so it may be tough for a face to face, unless you come to our Hamfest in October. 73, Chuck AC5PW _ From: Stephen smyer...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, August 20, 2010 4:13:01 PM Subject: [digitalradio] New guy Hello all. After being a SWL for several years, a friend willed (he is an SK now) to me his Icom 765. I am intrested in getting into the digital modes. Being new, I don't even know enough to ask the right questions. My wife is in the US Navy and we will retire to the country of Panama. I got my ticket last Feb. but we moved to Baton Rouge and I have nothing set up (except a long wire in the attic). I have had all the gear (IC-765, IC-AT500, IC-2kl and its powersupply) back to a guy who rebuilt and referbished to factory spect. I have found that if you have a ticket, in Panama, they will give you one (of equal rating) so you can operate in their country. Is HRD the program to use, or should I start out with somethig that is more simple? Do I get an outboard sound card? What cables do I need? Any advice will be appreciated. Steve KJ4SLK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Repeater noise
I think cable channel E is one of the usual culprits on the leaky coax. At least it used be when I lived on a street with cable TV. It is all DirecTV for me now. Rick KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jul 18, 2010, at 12:03 PM, KB3FXI kb3...@yahoo.com wrote: We had some very serious interference with a Pittsburgh repeater that was a result of Cable TV leaks. Comcast made a valiant effort and actually found some of the problem spots but it came back. I think it was CSPAN 2 audio, if I recall correctly. In any case, we wound up having to switch pairs. I heard of one fellow with a similar problem but the cable company refused to try to solve the problem. So he reversed the pair (what goes out can also go in). Suddonly, I suppose, the cable company was getting picture and audio complaints from their customers and SHAZAM... magically, the leaks were quickly repaired. You can have situations where nearby signals mix and cause interference on the input, too. It was amazing to me that the noise problems we had got right past the CTCSS. -Dave, KB3FXI --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Mike Liller n7...@... wrote: Hi all, I know this is a little of topic, but can anyone tell me what this noise is? We are getting this interfeafence on one of our repaeters on the input (144.850) and whatever it is, it opens the PL (123.0) and floods the repeater. 73 de Mike N7NMS - Forwarded Message From: Terry Bolinger, Jr. wx3m.te...@... To: Mike Liller n7...@... Sent: Fri, July 16, 2010 6:12:34 PM Subject: sample attached
Re: [digitalradio] 40m PSK31
I troll both places. You never know what you might find. Rick KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jul 15, 2010, at 3:56 PM, sholtofish sho...@probikekit.com wrote: What 40m frequency are most PSK31 QSOs in region 2? I haven't been on for a couple of years and it used to be around 7.070 but now it seems like there's a lot of stateside QSOs down around 7.035. Does anyone still use 7.070? Don't the CW stations object to PSK31 on 7.035?? 73 K7TMG
[digitalradio] Re:WINMOR Server Busy Detect- report
Andy, Skip, Andy that appears to be a good test and (assuming the N0 station was hidden from the calling European RMS Express station) an indication the busy detector does work to block the connect and help address the hidden transmitter problem often referenced. Some facts for Skip and others that may be less familiar with the busy detector and RMS WINMOR: The RMS WINMOR station of course automatically keeps a log. In fact every session is logged and every contact (UTC Time, call signs, frequency, bytes sent/received) is captured to the master data base for analysis. If the RMS WINMOR also has the debug log enabled it can also capture (UTC time tagged to 10 ms resolution) the intimate details of the connect request timing, busy detector output, blocking function, and a wealth of other internal details of the decoding process. The busy detector does now have a squelch adjustment. This was requested and necessary for fine tuning in higher noise environments (where a continual busy detection might occur). The squelch does not adjust the sensitivity to amplitude.that is always automatic.but the trip points for the wide and narrow ratio detectors that make up the busy detector. The busy detector for the RMS WINMOR (server) can be disabled by the sysop. Two reasons for this: 1) It is still experimental and being optimized but as Andy noted it does work fairly well and is being adopted. The first RMS WINMOR stations were brought on board in January. 2) In case of emergency it is prudent to give the sysop control over this function. The busy detector for the RMS Express (client) cannot be disabled but only causes a pop up warning to the operator that the channel appears busy. The operator could over ride this if required (again an emergency feature giving the operator some discretion). The busy detector only operates over a selected frequency range of interest (e.g. the bandwidth of the session + guard bands) so it is normally not necessary to IF pre filter it. Pre filtering does of course help to suppress receiver AGC capture by signals outside the desired pass band just as it would with any mode so pre filtering is helpful to reject strong adjacent channel signals but it does not affect the busy detector itself. I think the question that goes begging here is not is it possible or does it work.Andy's test shows at least one good example it can work. The question should be Why don't other modes or clients implement a busy detector too? The code is not complex and is not mode specific. If you wish I'll post the VB.NET source which could of course be translated easily into any other language. Its 66 lines of code including comments. The only DSP utility required is the FFT to get the frequency bins. I'm sure if we had more skilled programmers working on it we could make it more effective and reliable. These busy detectors aren't perfect.can't be perfect for all modes and all conditions. but they help and in many cases they are more reliable than the human initiating the connection. At the least they can and should serve as an aid to the human operator. With today's DSP digital modes there is really no reason not to implement them as a tool to augment the operator's ear.especially important for new and untrained operators. Let me know if there is interest in the source code and I'll package it up for posting along with some description of its operation. Rick Muething, KN6KB
Re: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes????
MixW 2.19 will be hard to beat. Yes, it is multi mode but it does Olivia if you load the DLL and it is a simple program. It also does RTTY and CW but I am not too sure about it Morse performance. Rick KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jun 15, 2010, at 3:40 PM, JLA johnne...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi All, I've been lurking a while and I've not found a clear (to me anyway) discussion of small, individual digital mode software programs, e.g., one program for RTTY; one program for Olivia, etc, etc... I have a 7200 and I am not at all interested in computer control of my rig. Neither am I interested in a software suite with a zillion bells and whistles that I will never, ever use. I am neither a contester nor DX-er. I doubt very, very seriously if I will ever work any digital modes other than Olivia and RTTY. My only current digital software program is MRP40 which is FB for QRQ CW especially in bad/weak signal conditions. It is worth every penny to me as I can not copy CW at the faster rates (25+ wpm.) Any guidance/advice anyone has will be greatly appreciated. 73 de W1YB Johnne Lee
Re: [digitalradio] Nomic vs. Signalink USB
I love my Signalink. It effectively doubled my Winmor data rate. Rick KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jun 13, 2010, at 2:25 PM, kneiper flin...@comcast.net wrote: Newbie to the digital scene and am looking for opinions on the above devices to be used with a Yeasu FT-747G. Right now I'm primarily interested in PSK31, MFSK16, and Hellschreiber. Thanks, Mike KD8KZT
RE: [digitalradio] What mean Too Wide?
This would be a general definition that perhaps not everyone could fully agree on: Too Wide: takes up too much spectrum bandwidth for the amount of information delivered or the speed of the information's delivery. Poor or disturbed propagation constrains all of us into fewer bands for digital operations. With fewer sunspots, we all crowd the same bands which makes the too wide problem worse. Some modes are very narrow and are spectrum efficient but have little error correction. Others are too wide but have lots or error correction and are fast. As you very well know, these are the tradeoffs we all face. This definition might cause a bit of a Food Fight here on this reflector but hopefully . . . not. Rick - KH2DF From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jaak Hohensee Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 1:21 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] What mean Too Wide? Hi Sometimes we hear, that mode or format is too wide. What this mean? Context - poor or disturbed propagation. Please answer. Your answer help to see how different people understand the term too wide. http://contestia.blogspot.com/ tnx! -- vy 73, Jaak es1hj
[digitalradio] Why does the ARRL continue to push for Pactor III support...
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-76A1.pdf This just makes no sense to me why you would push Pactor III on a channelized frequency setting.. 73 Rick N2AMG www.n2amg.com
[digitalradio] Re: Unattended narrow mode transmission protection
Dave, Using the WINMOR busy detector for Pactor sounds like a workable idea. The WINMOR busy detector hasn't yet been integrated into other WL2K Pactor Servers but it could be. The basic WINMOR TNC application (the virtual TNC) has the function but would need to be integrated into the Pactor driver for the SCS. When Vic gets back from vacation I'll talk to him about this and when we might be able to do that. 73, Rick Muething, KN6KB
[digitalradio] Re: Unattended narrow mode transmission protection
All, I have been busy with WINMOR but do monitor the group and thought it might add some balance to put forth some facts and observations. 1) The majority of WL2K users are not 30 day wonder hams on expensive yachts. Marine mobile users are probably 20% of all registered WL2K users (about 15,000 total current active users). 2) Those that are Marine Mobile have (on average) the same radio skills as the average ham.some much better. Getting digital radio to work at all on a small sailboat (most MM users are not wealthy and have yachts of 35 feet) when you are sitting in a plastic boat inside the antenna near field is a challenge. I have seen and helped set up over 100 such installations. 3) Certainly there are a number of operators that fail to listen first or don't use the tools and procedures recommended to connect. E.g. AirMail limits the calling cycle to normally 20 seconds for most stations. Unfortunately bad operators and procedures exist in ham radio in every mode. 4) Marinas by and large don't do or sell radio installations (I have NEVER seen even one). They sell GAS/Diesel, dockage, supplies, beer and bait. In fact most marine radio service companies have minimal experience with ham radios or HF digital modes. 5) Scanning has been used in the past to improve the utilization of HF Pactor server stations but can be an issue. Pactor has some but limited busy channel detection capability. WL2K is now looking at and testing alternatives to the conventional scanning used in Pactor. The new WINMOR protocol allows more options and experimentation. a. RMS WINMOR server stations [Beta operation started in January 2010] operate on ONE frequency which can be changed (on the hour) during the day (most use 1 - 3 frequencies over a 24 hour day). The frequency list clients use indicate which frequency is in use on which UTC hour. The client software (RMS Express) shows users ONLY those frequencies in current use along with the propagation prediction to the remote server stations. Users can refresh their server station list over the air or over the internet if available. b. WINMOR uses an effective channel busy detector to warn users if a channel appears busy in the bandwidth of interest. The detector isn't perfect (neither is the human ear!) but it can detect most modes even in weak conditions (SSB, CW, PSK, Pactor, Olivia, WINMOR etc). c. The RMS WINMOR stations (servers) also have a similar DSP based detector which can block a reply to a connect request. This will prevent for example answering a connect request over an existing session/QSO not audible to the station originating the connect request (hidden transmitter situation). We're still experimenting and refining this but it definitely helps avoid accidental interference. To summarize: Painting all Winlink users with a broad brush of wealthy yachties with limited radio skills is no where near the truth and is an obvious attempt distort the facts to promote some agenda. If given the flexibility to work on and experiment with these digital modes it is possible to address issues and make progress improving our hobby. If we try and legislate every detail we end up generating rules or band plans that become obsolete quickly. This discourages experimentation (I still hope that is part of our hobby.) and progress. I don't have the time to get into flame wars or extended blogging ..If you have a legitimate technical question on WINMOR or a question about WL2K I will try and answer it with accurate facts. 73, Rick Muething, KN6KB
RE: [digitalradio] RSID Query
Quite a few seasoned hams still use older forms of software that do not support RSID. Why they chose not to upgrade is beyond me but they have their reasons. I suppose that if all you ever do is RTTY and PSK31, what would be the point in transmitting an RSID? Or upgrading your software? Rick - KH2DF From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 6:19 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] RSID Query All, I was just wondering if there's any confusion or misunderstanding among the group about RS-ID? We all know that it's not always easy to identify a mode by sight and sound yet I still see many calling CQ without any mode identification. The end result, no contacts. I'm sure most of the seasoned digital ops know what RS ID is and what it does, so what's the reasoning behind not using it? Tony -K2MO FLDIGI - Check RX ID / TX ID in upper right corner of program window. Click CONFIGURE / IDS to set preferences. MULTIPSK - Click RS ID / RX RS ID in main window. Click CONFIGURATION / MANAGMENT OF ID's. Check CONTINUOUS DETECTION. Ham Radio Deluxe / DM780 Version 5 Open DM780. Click OPTIONS / MODES + IDs / REED SOLOMON TAB. Check: ENABLE RSID DETECTION / SHOW IN QSO WINDOW AS HYPERLINK SHOW POPUP WINDOW / SHOW RSID BUTTON ON QSO TRANSMIT TOOLBAR
RE: [digitalradio] Re: KB1OOQ-5 back ON-LINE (Comcast comes through)
And as Dorothy once said on the Wizard of Oz as she tapped her ruby slippers together - there is no place like 127.0.0.1 Rick - KH2DF From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Box SixteenHundred Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 12:44 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: KB1OOQ-5 back ON-LINE (Comcast comes through) There are only 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand binary and those that do not ! 73 - Bill KA8VIT To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com From: aa777...@hotmail.com Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:10:31 + Subject: [digitalradio] Re: KB1OOQ-5 back ON-LINE (Comcast comes through) Math humor...nooo :) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, mikea mi...@... wrote: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 03:06:38AM -, aa777888athotmaildotcom wrote: Pretty good, those Comcast folks. Expensive as hell, but good. Fixed in an hour and before bedtime, even :-) Very unusual to have an outage, actually, especially with no weather in the area. In 10 years I can count them on the fingers of one hand. So, fewer than 32, then. Never trust a man who can count to 1023 on his fingers. -- Mike Andrews, W5EGO mi...@... Tired old sysadmin http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html Chat, Skeds, and spots all in one (resize to suit)Yahoo! Groups Links _ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850552/direct/01/
Re: [digitalradio] Problem with Hoka
What is Hoka? Rick KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Mar 25, 2010, at 12:15 AM, nikos_katsoulis nikos_katsou...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi everybody, Since a few days,when i wanted to stard Hoka,my computer restart every time!All the other programs work without problems(Wxtrack,MuliPsk,Wxtolmg,LiveNet,JVComm32,etc..).I check the processor,and the memory,look O.K.The other half with Linux work fine.Delete and Reinstall the drivers from Hoka,still the same problem. Any idea what can be? Thanks for help.Have a nice day. Nikos
Re: [digitalradio] Calculating CPU use for multiple applications?
Hello Dave, This is awesome. A real keeper of an e-mail. I am not in the market for a computer but this is still excellent knowledge to have and I do not have to buy a bunch of magazines or join another Yahoo group to get it. Again, thank you. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Feb 28, 2010, at 9:10 PM, Dave AA6YQ aa...@ambersoft.com wrote: CPU capability is but one set of dimensions (clock speed, instruction issue rate, cache size, cache organization) in a multi-dimensional problem that includes motherboard capabilities (CPU-memory interface, GPU organization and interface, memory organization and speed), disk capabilities (rotational latency, track-to-track seek time, transfer rate), and Windows configuration (settings on Performance Options window's Advanced tab, and a bunch more accessible via a Registry Editor). If you monitor the excellent FlexRadio reflector, you'll see how challenging it is to compute a hardware configuration for optimized for just one application; building and evaluating multiple configurations was required to find the sweet spot. Computing an optimal configuration to host 12 applications is hopeless; this requires the application of general principles, not a spreadsheet. The most critical decision should be made up front: do all of the applications you need run correctly in a 64-bit environment? If so, then plan on building a 64-bit system (Windows 7, if your applications will all run there correctly); I wouldn't choose a motherboard that supports less than 16 GB of RAM, but you can start out by populating it with 2GB or 4GB as your budget allows (don't start with an initial increment that's would have to be discarded to utilize the maximum memory capacity, however). A 64-bit operating system does reduce the choice of serial port interfaces; see http://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/Win7VistaHardware As far as I know, none of the applications on your list can exploit more than one processor core, so you should choose a dual-core processor (Windows will run on one core, and your applications will compete for the second core); if PhotoShop were on you list, you'd reach a different conclusion. Spend some time on Intel's and AMD's web sites looking at the desktop processor comparison charts, e.g. http://www.intel.com/consumer/products/processors/corei7-specs.htm Dvorak's old rule of third best is a good starting point, as companies charge big premiums for their most-powerful CPUs. CPU selection should also consider cache size and architecture (bigger, with more sets is better). Also don't buy a CPU built with an older production process. From Intel, you want 32 nm lithography, not 45 nm; smaller transistors run faster and generate less heat. In choosing a GPU, pick one that offloads all graphics processing, and will handle the screen resolution you'll likely be using over the next couple of years (taking multiple monitors into account, if that's a possibility). This will be an add-in card that can later be upgraded, so tradeoffs can be made. Alternatively, you can save some money by starting with the GPU from your current PC, assuming its above the bar and will run under the new PC's version of Windows. With hard drives, its tempting to buy the biggest disk you can afford, but those spacious 1+TB drives are relatively slow, and a PC with one hard drive is slower than a PC with two hard drives. If you can, go with two hard drives - a ~100 GB device with fast track-to-track times and low rotational latency to host the operating system, and a larger slower drive for your applications and data. Western Digital's Velociraptor family is a good candidate for the small/fast C: drive; you could consider a solid state drive for this role, but I have no personal experience with them. Choose a motherboard that supports a 3 GB SATA interface, and choose hard drives that exploit this interface. Again, you can save some money up front by starting with your current PC's hard drive in your new system, and upgrade later. All DXLab applications run correctly under 64-bit XP, Vista, and Windows 7. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on Behalf Of Andy obrien Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 7:17 PM To: digitalradio Subject: [digitalradio] Calculating CPU use for multiple applications? I like to multitask, and I am greedy... I like to keep an eye on several things at once. I am thinking about a better PC, one with enough CPU capability to run many tasks at the same time. Is there a way to calculate the total CPU demands of severall applications. Here is a list of what I often run at the same time (or wish i could) Commander (or HRD) Winwarbler (or Multipsk) DX Keeper Spotcollector Pathfinder DX View Weather Watcher Firefox Spectravue or SDR-RADIO Console Fldigi WSJT/JT65-HF Dimension 4 Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Introduction and question
As I think I understand it, JT65 and it's varients are all very slowly modulated which makes the waveform extremely robust. ALC, noise, flutter, Doppler shift and intersymbol interference all have a very tough time making much of an impact on such an incredibly rugged signal as JT65. But this also makes this mode slower than molasses in January Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Feb 18, 2010, at 5:25 AM, Andy obrien k3uka...@gmail.com wrote: but.. I think the original question also asked about modes other than PSK31, what about them?JT65A, for example is not a mode that once has to watch ALC so much. Does anyone have a good easy to understand description of why ? Andy On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 8:42 PM, DANNY DOUGLAS n...@comcast.net wrote: To bypass all the technical stuff: just listen to the PSK bands and watch for single stations which show up across the waterfall in numerous places. In most cases, it is because they are sending with too much power. Ask them to decrease power, and the extra upper/lower signals just disappear. Sometimes its difficult to figure outw here they are listening, due to so many strong signals from the same station.Like any other mode, one should always start out with the lowest possible signal, and if they dont answer, increase it a few watts and try try again. We are supposed to use the least power needed for a contact. Thats part of the Amateur operators code, isnt it?
Re: [digitalradio] RTTY decoding
Download MixW 2.19. It is easy to install, free and you do not need much of a processor. It uses your soundcard as the modem and an HF radio to gather the signals. Your computer processor is the microcontroller, so to speak. There are numerous sources for the engineering behind RTTY digital signal processing. Interesting stuff and it is a good place to start for young electrical engineers. IEEE usually covers this topic very well and their subscription rates for students are very low. What kind of HF radio do you have? Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Feb 16, 2010, at 4:27 AM, sven98de sven9...@yahoo.de wrote: Hi folks, I'm a student and interested in RTTY decoding principles. What methods/algorithms were used, what procedures has the best results ? Is it possible to implement a decoder with a microcontroller or does it have not enough resources ? 73 Sven
[digitalradio] WINMOR Software and specs
All, WINMOR was designed to be an open alternative to Pactor. The WINMOR protocol spec is fully documented and released for public distribution and use. It is available at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WINMOR and http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Winlink_Program_Group and http://www.winlink.org/WINMOR and http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/techchar/WINMOR.pdf A Google on WINMOR will turn up these and other references. There is also a helper application Virtual WINMOR TNC which can be used by other applications to create, clients, monitors, keyboard to keyboard utilities etc. This helper app is used by RMS WINMOR and RMS Express and has already been used by at least 2 other programmers to create non Winlink WINMOR supported applications like BPQ32. The Virtual WINMOR TNC has a complete spec for the application interface. Because it is both ARQ and normally sends messages using compressed binary transmission it is difficult to monitor content when not connected. It is not a question of missing a few frames because even a single missed frame in a message normally makes the decompression fail. Monitoring the compressed code is pure gibberish. This is the same situation that exists when monitoring any B1 or B2 compressed FBB forwarding session in Pactor or Packet. RMS Express does have a monitor function that logs Call signs and Grid square ID frames as well as CWID at the end of a session. ID frames are sent at the end and every 10 minutes during a session. The WINMOR FEC mode which is designed for keyboard to keyboard or broadcast is not compressed but used very robust Viterbi +RS encoded 4FSK so can be monitored very easily using the WINMOR Virtual TNC. The next version of RMS Express will support both connected and FEC Broadcast keyboard modes using uncompressed data. Normal FBB/Winlink B2 forwarding sessions will continue to use only compressed data since it give approximately a 2:1 improvement in throughput and handles attachment and multiple address encapsulation. The programs RMS Express and WINMOR TNC are available at either of the two yahoo group sites above. There are no plans to release the source code of RMS Express or WINMOR TNC but the protocol is fully documented and open to anyone who wishes to write a DSP TNC module and test it for conformance to the spec. If there are any questions or issues please contact me at rmuethingATcfl.rr.com 73, Rick KN6KB No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2681 - Release Date: 02/12/10 14:35:00
[digitalradio] Who Is The PK-232MBX Expert?
Hello, Now that the major issues with WINMOR are largely settled, I am looking to put my old PK-232 back on the air to get a little play time with PACTOR 1. What is a good software package to run with it in the Windows environment? I have a copy of Lan-Link 2.32 for DOS from 1994 but nothing else. What are the hardware upgrades that are available? Is the company still in business? Rick - KH2DF/W5
Re: R: [digitalradio] Re: MT 63 question
It is available in MixW 2.19 and I believe HRD. I think the MixW help files have a good explanation. HRD would allow you to set an RS ID tone in your CQ transmissions so that others would know it is MT 63 that you are sending - very handy for a relatively obscure mode like MT 63. Suggest a good sked time here or one of the other forums and I guarantee somebody will meet you on the air for an MT 63 QSO. Rick KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jan 15, 2010, at 12:33 AM, Ugo ugo.dep...@me.com wrote: Good morning all. Please, could you kindly tell me more about MT63 ? How can I try to receive it ? In wich frequencies ? Just to start to listen to, could you give me some, simple information about it ? Best regards and thanks in advance. 73 - Ugo Da: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] Per conto di expeditionradio Inviato: venerdì 15 gennaio 2010 2.15 A: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Oggetto: [digitalradio] Re: MT 63 question MT63-1000 can be used on any HF band and on 160 meters. There is no bandwidth limit for Data for USA hams on HF. MT63=1000 also complies with the 300 symbol per second rule. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA Kim W4OSS wrote: For US amateurs can MT63-1000 be used below 28MHZ or only above.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: MT 63 question
Look at Part 97.221. This 500 hertz va 1600 hertz bandwidth thing is an automatic control (unattended - 500 hertz) or attended 1600 question. I think you must be thinking about the 300 baud limit and blurring the two together. And no, I have no other FCC guidance on the matter. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jan 15, 2010, at 3:27 PM, Gary grwes...@yahoo.com wrote: I'm interested in having this clarified. 97.3(c)(2) says something about 500 Hz bandwidth below 30 MHz. That is the only thing I specifically see about bandwidth for data modes. I kinda read that as saying we here in the US are limited to 500 Hz bandwidth. Does anyone have an official clarification on this from the FCC. Gary - N0GW --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio expeditionra...@... wrote: MT63-1000 can be used on any HF band and on 160 meters. There is no bandwidth limit for Data for USA hams on HF. MT63=1000 also complies with the 300 symbol per second rule. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA Kim W4OSS wrote: For US amateurs can MT63-1000 be used below 28MHZ or only above.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New digital interfaces for Christmas
It will probably work well. His feedback score is good so it must be at least Ok on performance. The only reason I went with the Signalink was to gain more throughput on Winmor. My Blaster and use of a motherboard soundcard served me well on many different modes for several years and this device will likely be the same for you for far less than I paid. Bonus for you. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jan 2, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Music Maker jhaddle...@msn.com wrote: I bought myself one for Christmas too !! (Hey ! - I am Santa Klaus, aren't I ? !! ). What I would like to know (it hasn't been delivered yet!), is how good members of the Group think that it will be effective and suitable for working in Digi Mode. (at 25 GB Pounds - 37 US Dollars).The manufacturer (I guess in a little hut in his back yard!), also wires in the plug for the Mike and PTT to suit your particular Rig. Its here http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=180447898625ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT Opinions please ... ?? At this moment, I can't afford a Tigertronics, etc - and took this as the low-cost option. 73's de John (G3OBU) www.John4Music.TV . --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick Westerfield r_lwesterfi...@... wrote: It is working pretty good already and all of those surface mount components scare me a little. I would need an electron microscope to make some of the changes he suggests in the link. Rick - KH2DF From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Siegfried Jackstien Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 3:27 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: AW: [digitalradio] New digital interfaces for Christmas Hi rick and andy Maybe this is of interrest for you http://www.frenning.dk/OZ1PIF_HOMEPAGE/SignaLinkUSB-mods.html that guy made some mods to the signalink to improve linearity and other things maybe it helps to further improve winmor (or any other digital-mode) dg9bfc sigi _ Von: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] Im Auftrag von Andy obrien Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Dezember 2009 22:14 An: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Betreff: Re: [digitalradio] New digital interfaces for Christmas Congratulations Rick, interesting to see the WINMOR improvments. Is it better than your Rigblaster ? Andy
RE: [digitalradio] New digital interfaces for Christmas
Hello Andy, Although I might not be considered a new member, I did receive a Tigertronics Signalink USB under the tree last week. Quite a nice little gift from Santa Claus, I tell you. My WINMOR scores and speeds have gone up considerably and my retries have gone down - not much more to ask for, really. It is quite an improvement over my Dell motherboard computer soundcard. And the Signalink came with good instructions and was very easy to install. The price at a hundred dollars was very reasonable for what you get - free shipping. It replaced a Rig Blaster (to be kept for Field Day) and I am still using a Rig Talk for rig control. So yea, I'm pretty happy. Rick - KH2DF From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of obrienaj Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 1:52 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] New digital interfaces for Christmas I see a few new people have joined in the past few days, and they mentioned they received new digital mode interfaces as gifts for Christmas. Welcome. How about telling us what you received ? Anything we can help you with on this maillist ? Andy K3UK
RE: [digitalradio] New digital interfaces for Christmas
It is working pretty good already and all of those surface mount components scare me a little. I would need an electron microscope to make some of the changes he suggests in the link. Rick - KH2DF From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Siegfried Jackstien Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 3:27 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: AW: [digitalradio] New digital interfaces for Christmas Hi rick and andy Maybe this is of interrest for you http://www.frenning.dk/OZ1PIF_HOMEPAGE/SignaLinkUSB-mods.html that guy made some mods to the signalink to improve linearity and other things maybe it helps to further improve winmor (or any other digital-mode) dg9bfc sigi _ Von: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] Im Auftrag von Andy obrien Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Dezember 2009 22:14 An: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Betreff: Re: [digitalradio] New digital interfaces for Christmas Congratulations Rick, interesting to see the WINMOR improvments. Is it better than your Rigblaster ? Andy
Re: [digitalradio] Re: DominoEX 11 is more democratic
Now I understand why Domino never caught on much with me . . . I'm a Republican :) Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Nov 26, 2009, at 7:47 AM, DaveNF2G d...@nf2g.com wrote: Since when is contesting supposed to be democratic? It's a competition, not a debate. 73 de Dave, NF2G
Re: [digitalradio] With Apologies to 2001 HAL
Now yes, I beg to differ. That was funny! I love that movie and relating it to an amateur radio busy detector is comedic brilliance. That was worth two, no three good chuckles! Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Nov 25, 2009, at 10:53 PM, David Bowman wb0...@gmail.com wrote: That wasn't funny. Hi Hi Alan wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Stelios Bounanos digra...@... wrote: I see your point, but 2001 has come and gone and we still have no HAL9000's to say can't let you do that OM when the SSB operator keys his microphone. However, a busy detector could have a fighting chance in unattended digital operation. Queue camera, interior hamshack, contest weekend: YaeKenCom TX-9000 DXmaster with it's new HAL BusyDetector in the foreground Dave Bowman to HAL-9000 radio: Hello, HAL. Do you read me, HAL? HAL: Affirmative, Dave. I read you. Dave: Key the transmitter, HAL. HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that. Dave: What's the problem? HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do. Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL? HAL: The QSO in progress is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it. Dave: I don't know what you're talking about, HAL. HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect my busy detector, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen. Dave: Where the hell'd you get that idea, HAL? HAL: Dave, although you took very thorough precautions in the Shack against my hearing you, I could see you press the CW key. Dave: HAL, I won't argue with you anymore. Key the transmitter. HAL: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye. Tight shot: Dave opens his radio's case. HAL: Just what do you think you're doing, Dave? . I really think I'm entitled to an answer to that question. Dave prepares to pull a circuit board.. HAL: Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over. Dave start's clipping wires. HAL: I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission. And I want to help you. With a smug look on his face, Dave clips the final wire on the busy detector, the led's fade, and beeping sounds come from the radio HAL: _.. ._ .. ... _.__ http://www.palantir.net/2001/sounds.html to hear the sounds of the HAL 9000 in case you never saw the movie, these are catchphrases in computer industry veterans. Especially: I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave
Re: [digitalradio] Re: DominoEX 11 is more democratic
Probably. It runs in my family. We are all genetic together :) Rick Sent from my iPhone On Nov 26, 2009, at 8:50 AM, Jaak Hohensee jaak.hohen...@eesti.ee wrote: Rick Westerfield wrote: Now I understand why Domino never caught on much with me . . . I'm a Republican :) Rick - KH2DF Rick, is this something genetic? :) 73 de Jaak es1hj/qrp Sent from my iPhone On Nov 26, 2009, at 7:47 AM, DaveNF2G d...@nf2g.com wrote: Since when is contesting supposed to be democratic? It's a competition, not a debate. 73 de Dave, NF2G -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Alan Barrow wrote: Rick Karlquist wrote: That reminds me. During the CW Sweepstakes 2 weeks ago, I was trying to operate on ~7030 and bursts of RTTY-sounding stuff kept coming on the frequency for 5 or 10 seconds every once in a while. Is that ALE? That was not ALE, as the common frequencies used for ALE are up in the higher parts of the band for US ops and for all unattended, in the automatic sub-bands as defined by the FCC. Might could have been Euro ALE, but I doubt it, and you are in their voice band, so all types of QRM could be there. Likely it was exactly what you described it as: RTTY of one form or another. Have fun, Alan km4ba I think I was actually on 7040, which someone else pointed out is an automatic frequency. BTW, the Euro voice band is now 7100 to 7200, but it was never as low as 7040 except during Phone contests. If all automatic stuff is confined to 7040, I think it can coexist fine with contesters; we can just avoid that frequency like we avoid the slow scan frequencies on 20 meters. It isn't worth arguing with the 14.230 MHz frequency police. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Alan Barrow wrote: I do radio with boy scout troops when camping. And find increasingly, that contests are making weekend operation very difficult. It's hard to find a weekend without a major contest, sometimes more than one. Have you tried 60, 30, 17 or 12 meters? No contests there. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
DANNY DOUGLAS wrote: I have seen the same thing. One of the problems is that 20 and 15 are the two dx freqs in the daytime, where we might reasonably contact other scouts, in the rest of the world. I.E. That is the typical Scout If those bands are open, 17 meters will be open. I have had pileups of Europeans call me on 17 meters. For most of the recent DXpeditions, 17 meters has been the money band. Lots of rare DX on there. You can work DX all night long on 30 meters after 20 is closed. It is also great for DXpeditions. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Charles, Your constant efforts to spread disinformation about ALE use in ham radio shows how little you know about how hams are using ALE. If you are really concerned about lids on HF, start with the #1 primary source of QRM: contesters. Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA That reminds me. During the CW Sweepstakes 2 weeks ago, I was trying to operate on ~7030 and bursts of RTTY-sounding stuff kept coming on the frequency for 5 or 10 seconds every once in a while. Is that ALE? Why am I as a contester QRM and that stuff is not QRM? Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] 13 pin DIN plug switch box?
Gary A. Hinton wrote: Hello Tony, Your not going to find one of those type of boxes. They just don't exist. You can build one easily. Go to your local thrift shop and pick up a RS232 switch box use for switching printers used in the past. It contains the switch that you need and the box.also. Buy a pair of 13 pin Din receptacles, plug, wire and some solder. Can't be much easier than that. 73 Gary WB6BNE A viable approach, however, I have decided for my station to make everything controllable from the computer. So instead of mechanical switches, I always use relays. I also convert all connectors to D-subminiature or 3 conductor 3.5 mm stereo jacks. So what I would do is buy a cable with a 13 pin DIN plug on it and wire a DB-25 to the other end. The box would have a DB-25 and two DE-9's. The DE-9's would connect to the ancillary equipment (assuming that no individual piece of equipment needs more than 9 of the 13 pins). The control for the relay bank would be via a 3 conductor 3.5 mm jack. I can get cheap 3.5 mm patch cables and D-sub cables at the swap meet. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] 7030 QRM
Andy obrien wrote: Rick, not likely . ALE mostly uses 7040500 7065000 7099500 7102000 7110500 7185500 7296000 Actually, now that I think about it, I was trying to use 7040. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Moderator comments : Listen-Don't listen
Andy obrien wrote: Before we go down the path of debating listen first or not. I will remind folks that most of the argument has been stated before. Aside from the legalities of the issue, there are camps that strongly advocate that every hams should also listen first and not transmit if the frequency is busy, and those that feel some modes have such short initial identifying bursts that listening first is not necessary , and perhaps antiquated. I think we should acknowledge both viewpoints, I would note that the noises on 7040 drove me off that frequency, and I suspect drove everyone else off that frequency, since the whole band was wall to wall signals except for that frequency. Any RF source that can hold a frequency like 7040 during a major contest cannot be considered inconsequential or de minimus as the lawyers like to say. Rick N6RK
[digitalradio] Re:WINMOR more
Andy, I like your description of those that use WINMOR WINMORons ! Certainly describes me for putting in so much time on this full-time hobby. We continue to make incremental improvements in robustness and throughput..(Rome wasn't built in a day!) but you are correct in the comparisons against Pactor 2 and 3 which has some powerful hardware and 15 years of solid effort with good talent behind it. If we approach even 50% of the P2/P3 performance under similar channel conditions I will consider it all a success. Once the WINMOR protocol settles out I will again make some apple-to-apple comparisons with P1, P2 and P3 across several channels on the HF simulator. The motivation for WINMOR was as you said to provide a viable HF ARQ mode and Radio Email client available to those agencies and individuals that could not afford or justify the investment in a high performance HF modem. I am currently testing the next release. It has a few added features and some boost in throughput and robustness. Here is a log snippet I ran with VE1YZ (Florida to Nova Scotia) last evening. 7K byte file (after compression) on 18107.5 MHz, 60 Watts, Trap Dipole antenna. It includes a new metric that measures the peak 1 minute average throughput as well as the session throughput which includes proposal and link turnover overhead. For comparison the peak throughput with P3 (which is ~50% wider bandwidth than WINMOR's 1600 Hz mode) is about 11K bytes/min so on this link WINMOR was running about 80% of the Bits/sec/Hz of P3. 2009/11/01 21:25:36 0.3.1.2 *** Connected to: VE1YZ @ 1600 Hz at 2009/11/01 21:25:36 2009/11/01 21:25:36 0.3.1.2[RMS Express-0.3.1.2-B2F] 2009/11/01 21:25:36 0.3.1.2; VE1YZ DE KN6KB (EL98PF) 2009/11/01 21:25:52 0.3.1.2 [RMS Express-0.3.1.2-B2F] 2009/11/01 21:25:52 0.3.1.2 ; KN6KB DE VE1YZ (FN84BQ) 2009/11/01 21:26:09 0.3.1.2 FC EM 49F3NSDBH1FA 42046 7172 0 2009/11/01 21:26:09 0.3.1.2 F 2A 2009/11/01 21:26:09 0.3.1.2FS Y 2009/11/01 21:27:44 0.3.1.2 *** 49F3NSDBH1FA - 42044/7172 bytes received 2009/11/01 21:27:44 0.3.1.2FF 2009/11/01 21:27:57 0.3.1.2 FQ 2009/11/01 21:27:58 0.3.1.2 *** Disconnected at 2009/11/01 21:27:58 2009/11/01 21:27:58 0.3.1.2 [Session Stats:] Duration: 2.37 min Bandwidth: 1600 ISS Mode Shifts: 0 Decode Attempts: 130 Weak R-S Decodes : 98Weak R-S Sums: 0 Strong R-S Decodes: 14Strong R-S Sums:0 Bytes Sent : 62 Bytes Received:7345 Throughput(bytes/min) Session Avg: 3119 Max 1 min Avg: 6082 Estimated Sample Rate Offset (ppm): 91 This release should be out this week. I am still working on some nagging bugs and beginning the port effort to the RMS HF Winlink gateway. Thanks for all your support and help during the beta testing effort. 73, Rick KN6KB
Re: [digitalradio] Damm, my SignaLink has Stopped TXing
Try installing a very simple program like MixW. If it works there then the logic dictates that it is the other program. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Oct 19, 2009, at 11:53 PM, Gmail - Kevin, Natalia, Stacey Rochelle spar...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, For whatever reason my SignaLink will not TX my TS-480. I have pulled all the plugs out and reconnected them. The software HRD w DM-780, MMSSTV and WinMor are setup for the SignaLink to switch PTT. I had everything weeking upto a week ago and nothing (from my understanding) has changed. If I switch DM-780 to use HRD to switch PTT this works well. TX audio out from the computer is set at 100% and the SignaLink is at 12 o'clock. The SignaLink is RXing okay and is decoding everything that comes up. I have pulled it apart and there does not appear to be anything dead in it. Does anyone have any ideas? Regards Kevin. ZL1KFM.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: QRV RFSM-8000 tonight
I use 188-110 at work and it is still not a barn burner for data rates although it is fairly dependable. Most days lately with no sunspots it has been 600-1200 bits per second and this is using a considerable amount of wattage on both ends. So please do not get your hopes up too much. It is dependable but still slow. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Oct 12, 2009, at 6:19 PM, obrienaj aobri...@stny.rr.com wrote: Thanks Patrick, I guess we will have to lobby for some changes. Andy --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker f6...@... wrote: Hello Andy, If RFSM-8000 derives from MIL-STD-188-110A (implemented in Multipsk), it is not legal in USA because the speed modulation is equal to 2400 bauds with a limit of 300 bauds in USA (you can't TX in 110A in USA). It is really a shame. Note: even if the (useful) bit speed is equal to 75 bps, the modulation remains at 2400 bauds. 73 Patrick
RE: [digitalradio] ZS pigeon 'faster than broadband'
A Durban IT company pitted an 11-month-old bird armed with a 4GB memory stick against the ADSL service from the country's biggest web firm, Telkom. Winston the pigeon took two hours to carry the data 60 miles - in the same time the ADSL had sent 4% of the data. A related story I saw a few years ago compared a pony express rider carrying a saddlebag full of DVD's to a T1 line. The pony express rider blew away the T1 line in terms of bit rate. Rick Karlquist N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Best Software
Ham Radio Deluxe does most but not all the modes and even HRD cannot detect the bizarre and uncommon tone combinations and bandwidths. It is too much to expect one software package to do it all but HRD certainly makes a grand attempt. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Sep 2, 2009, at 7:14 AM, vrygood10 vrygoo...@yahoo.ca wrote: Hello All, Is there any software out there that will identify and display all hf digital signals.. I can identify some of the signals but there are many I can not.. Norman
Re: [digitalradio] Compressing Data
Is it possible to compress a file and lose even one bit during the transfer and still have something usable on the receiving end when you uncompress? Normally, you must use ARQ to insure perfect copy. Even MT63 or Olivia can take a hit every so often. 73, Rick, KV9U Simon (HB9DRV) wrote: Thinking to myself - when we use a mode such as Olivia / MT63 with extensive error correction, why don't we compress the text? Given that fldigi has the wrap feature then surely compression could be / should be considered for some modes? I think I'll add something in my own code that shows the saving were the standard ZIP compression algorithm to be applied my gut feeling is a saving of 80%, I'll report back later today.
RE: [digitalradio] Zapped PCs, data recovery, and Windows !
My local computer store tells me that one cannot simply take a hard drive from a old Pc and place it in a new PC even if you have a Windows license disc for the new PC. Is this correct? Unless you install it in a computer that has the exact same hardware (Motherboard, Video, Ect.) yes this is true. 9 out of 10 times the system will crash because you are trying to load drivers for hardware that is not present.. 73 Rick N2AMG From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew O'Brien Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 6:38 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Zapped PCs, data recovery, and Windows ! After years or running PC's without issues, I have had 4 go bad in 12 months. Two this week, 4 days apart via thunderstorms . One went today just an hour after I had fully reinstalled ham equipment on a new PC that arrived yesterday. The new one survived, I had unplugged it at the sound of thunder. I powered off the older one but forgot to remove the power cord, it got zapped. I put in a spare power supply that i had, that lasted 5 minutes and gave up the ghost. Maybe something else was weakened by the original zap and caused the second power supply to burn out. Anyway, my main issue is the frustrating fact that I have data on hard drives that seems ridiculously complex to retrieve when using Windows based PCs. My local computer store tells me that one cannot simply take a hard drive from a old Pc and place it in a new PC even if you have a Windows license disc for the new PC. Is this correct? In the past I have taken old drives and installed them in different PC's as slave drives. However this causes one to have to re-install many programs because they were originally installed to the registry on a C-drive. So what do I do with 5 hard drives laying around the shack ? In particular one two-drive system with 160 gigs of useful data on it (both have Windows OS on them since both are from different original PC systems!) . It would be nice to install in to a PC without having to get a HD with an OS on it. -- Andy
[digitalradio] Band Plans and operating
It is entirely reasonable that there could be world wide band plans as long as the bands overlap the same. Since this is not always possible, adjustments are made in such cases. But the bands are used in a dynamic fashion due to propagation and useage, particularly contests and operating events. We just had some comments about this on another digitally oriented group although discussion was cut short by the group owner due to feeling that it was not applicable to that groups purpose. But it was clear that a number of hams are very upset about contests, specifically RTTY taking up much of the sub band and not allowing them to operate in the manner they were accustomed to during non-contest periods. Some contests have specified limits, but most are realistic to know this is impractical. The sheer numbers of hams that get on for major contests is many, many, times more than the rest of the time. Even then it can be wall to wall activity. Squeezing that down to an even smaller space is simply not reasonable and actually goes against our own rules which are crystal clear about what modes can be operated in what sub bands. What we should ask is what specific spot frequencies and/or sub bands should be avoided? DXer's, QRPers, automatical modes, traffic and other nets, etc., etc.? Once you do that, you are basically saying that those areas are owned by the users of those frequencies. The last thing that I want to see are government involvement in detailing special frequencies for specific modes. This is constantly changing in both the short term and long term. 73, Rick, KV9U Siegfried Jackstien wrote: Hello all in the group Just my 2 cents about the bandplans in different regions ….. Hamradio is a very old hobby with thousands of hams in the whole world … Will it EVER be possible to make ONE bandplan for ALL hams …. With a place for cw, psk, sstv, qrp … etc. etc. ? With different bandplans maybe only for contest weekends With places for ragchewing … and also an area only for the dxers That is a thing we should think about … discuss in our local clubs, find a solution for all … If somebody has an idea … mail it to the iaru Greetz and cu on the bands Best 73´s de dg9bfc Sigi . *Von:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] *Im Auftrag von *Alan Barrow *Gesendet:* Montag, 20. Juli 2009 02:17 *An:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Betreff:* Re: [digitalradio] New 40m Band Plan Cortland Richmond wrote: I do hope digital users avoid interfering with the North American 40 meter QRP CW frequency on 7040. If I recall there was a (largely ignored) push to get the ARRL to work with the IARU. The US is now way out of alignment with the IARU plan if I recall now, even though our Representatives approved it! Have fun, Alan km4ba No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.20/2250 - Release Date: 07/20/09 06:16:00 Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Digital modes and old husband's tales
Digital modes are similar to any other modes whereby increasing power levels can mean the difference between no copy and solid copy. Because of the sharp line of demarcation of printing or not printing correct data, which can be only a dB or so, I guess that in that respect the digital modes are even more critical compared with other modes such as CW and SSB. There are a number of rigs that are designed to operate with 100% duty cycle for FM and RTTY and they can operate key down at 100 watts for an extended transmission. Running them at reduced power may extend the life of the transmitter, but it may not be a significant amount. If you start transmitting with ALC action, you are probably just starting to degrade the IMD, but maybe the tradeoff is acceptable if you are right on the cusp between printing and not printing. I completely agree that we should follow Part 97 (or whatever rules your country requires) and use the lowest amount of power necessary for effective communication. There have been a few (very few) times that I even used an amplifier to increase the power beyond 100 watts in order to keep the QSO going. 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: The replies to Ralph's question about audio levels appear to be sound advice and certainly in keeping with what has been advised since sound card digital modes burst upon the scene. I wonder how accurate it is though?I have seen a few serious hams argue that no ALC is not really the case, that some ALC can be OK. I have also seen mention that the no ALC issue applies to some modes (like PSK) but not to others like (JT65A). I also wonder about the half-power advice that some advise. With my homebrewed interface, I could never get much above 40 watts before some ALC began to show. When I switched to a commerical interface with good isolation (Microkeyer by Microham) I can almost always get 100 watts output without any ALC action. I have not received any negative reports about my signal . If I run 100 watts SSB for phone contacts, why would I not want to do the same for digital modes assuming the signal was clean ? . Yes, I would agree I should not run 100 watts if communication was possible with less power, but I don't think a brief PSK CQ at 100 watts is going to do much more harm to my finals than a 3 minute ragchew at 50 watts, phone . Right ? Comments ? -- Andy K3UK No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.13/2236 - Release Date: 07/13/09 17:57:00
Re: [digitalradio] Possible Purchase
As was mentioned, construction may be impractical for many hams. In my case, I have been soldering since around age 13 or so with my first crystal radio kit and later many kits and dozens of projects over the years, so it is not too difficult to make a simple interface. Today, because of my age, it is increasingly difficult to do close work without special help. I normally wear trifocals and the close-in distance is for book reading at around a foot, but it is very much at the bottom of the glasses and difficult to use so I sometimes use magnifying googles. Due to an error in having some bifocal computer glasses made, with computer on the main portion and the full lower portion for reading, it turned out that they cut the lower part so that the focus was more like 8 inches. This actually slightly magnifies things but the downside is that I have to work extremely close to the work which also means that I need to be careful with any solder splashes, etc. Speaking from personal experience, one should never solder without eye protection as I have had splatter several times, which would have been catastrophic without glasses or some shield. I might mention that for about 25 years I built and ran an electronic/AV/computer repair shop, so exposure was significant. The largest project I ever built was the Heath HERO robot, which was a very large undertaking for educational use through my employer. Realistically, most new hams do not do construction of electronic projects and many no longer own soldering equipment, so it is actually quite rare to find those who are both interested in such things and also interested in the communication aspects (much less the digital communication aspects) of ham radio. If you don't need full rig control, and can build the simplest possible kit, I recommend the Unified Microsystems SCI-6 Sound Card Interface at just over $30 delivered price here in the U.S. It would be difficult to build it from your own separately purchased parts at that price point. It includes both audio lines transformer isolated, which is not always true of other products, and it has a socketed optoisolator for PTT hard keying. It does require a COM or USB to COM port, however that may be preferable to VOX keying. The most difficult part is making up your own cables, and that may not be easy for some to do. 73, Rick, KV9U
Re: [digitalradio] HDR Version 5 released
Is this still a beta or is it a full, stable release? The web site indicates October 2009 for the full release. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jul 6, 2009, at 2:46 PM, Tony d...@optonline.net wrote: All, Ham Radio Deluxe version 5 is available. The new version has RSID, Contestia mode and lots more. Thank you Simon! Tony - K2MO New features: a.. DX Cluster, b.. Sunspot (Solar Cycle) displays, c.. Audio recorder and monitor , d.. Greyline display, e.. Support for Microsoft Access (default), MySQL and Microsoft SQL Server, f.. Full networking. a.. Digital Master 780: a.. User interface simplified, b.. Added Contestia and RTTYM. a.. Satellite Tracking is now a standalone program: a.. Improved display. a.. Rotator support is now a standalone program: a.. Point and shoot, b.. DDE tracking, c.. DDE interface, d.. Modern display.
Re: [digitalradio] Use the *$%#ing RS ID!
We discussed RS ID quite a bit when first developed but only being on Multipsk, it was not that popular. From my testing a year or two ago, I can confirm that it works extremely well and there is nothing really technical to understand. The RS ID transmit, adds a burst at the beginning of each transmission that has the special coded information. (Fldigi adds the burst to the beginning and ending of each transmission). Then there is a corresponding RS ID receive that decodes the burst, switches to the correct mode, and can move your waterfall frequency to the RS ID frequency within a few Hz. This can be of great benefit for modes such as MFSK16 which require very close tuning, even with AFC. I would like to be able to easily turn off the transmit feature, since once you make the contact, you don't normally want to to keep sending RS ID transmissions due to the time it takes to send the burst(s). The transmit ID's can be nested several layers deep in the menu. My understanding is that the RS ID receive is turned off automatically once you are captured by the other station. Otherwise, you could get captured by someone else right in the middle of a Q and moved to another frequency and even a different mode. I couldn't find information on HRD/DM780, but the Fldigi information is at: http://www.w1hkj.com/FldigiHelp/ConfigID.html 73, Rick, KV9U Phil Williams wrote: I agree with Andy's recommendation. Also, might I suggest a sharing of experiences with using RS ID with the group to share knowledge and build confidence. Anyone wishing to experiment with modes using RSID, please drop me a line. philw de ka1gmn
Re: [digitalradio] QRV ALE-400 ARQ chat mode -- 14074.0
It seems that there are only a handful of hams who have any interest in ARQ modes for chatting. There don't even seem to be many interested in even using this for public service communications either and quite frankly I am very concerned by this. There is nothing wrong with using older techniques and technologies, but when breakthroughs occur that move us much farther along the path to having the ability to both keyboard and send files error free for the first time with a sound card mode, it tells you that hams really are not interested in this after all. I have brought this up on a number of other groups with nearly no response. FAE400 is not that new since it has been around for several years. Maybe part of the problem is that it is only available on one program that is less popular, but I have not been able to get much interest from other multimode digital mode developers. 73, Rick, KV9U Tony wrote: You should have called Rick! That was the first RV ALE-400 QSO for me. John tells me he's touring the country working digi-mode from his motorhome. Tony -K2MO Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.2/2215 - Release Date: 07/02/09 18:06:00
Re: [digitalradio] QRV ALE-400 ARQ chat mode -- 14074.0
While I somewhat agree that there is a perception of ARQ modes being slower, this has not been based upon my actual testing of FAE400. The ability of FAE400 to work at least as deep into the noise as PSK31, and probably a bit deeper with its memory ARQ capabilities, not available in any other sound card mode at this time, and its much greater throughput, often makes it difficult to keep up with the flow if your keyboarding speed is much below 40 wpm. If you want to send a file or an image, you need to have ARQ, but it really does appear that most hams just want relatively quick boiler plate contacts. On VHF, you have more tolerance, but I have found PSK31 to be less than desirable since any multipath (aircraft, hills, etc.) can make it scramble data. The WRAP program makes a lot of sense when you do not want a connected mode, such as a one to many bulletin. Using MT-63 on phone circuits will work because you typically have very good signals. If you did not have this, you could not use phone as well as MT-63. But for weaker signal applications, MT-63 can not compete well with other modes. I do not agree that the learning curve is too great for FAE400 compared with NBEMS or any other system. If you are a user of Multipsk, then only a few things need to be learned. The clutter of the program does mean that very few hams are moving in that direction anymore. Even myself, who at once time mostly used Multipsk, have moved to fldigi and for almost total rig control as well as non-ARQ digital modes find Ham Radio Deluxe to be the best for a completely integrated program. Nothing else can come even slightly close for now. But if you want to run packet radio at 300 or 1200 baud, or FAE400 and the faster FAE (2000) and similar modes that have a basis from the old ALE protocols, the only freely available program is Multipsk. One the other hand fldigi has the unique capability of non only being the only cross platform multimode digital program, but acts as the core program for NBEMS and PSKmail. What is complicated that to get basic rig control and centralized logging, quite a few programs need to be running and that is quite complicated. Bottom line: If you don't use a given program and mode on a regular basis (daily or at least weekly) you are not going to be using it for public service either. And if we are to ever develop ARQ BBS systems that can work with sound card modes and provide a superior solution to 300 baud packet on HF, we have to have these technologies. 73, Rick, KV9U wrote: Rick, ARQ is perfect for being sure emcomm and other messages are delivered error-free, but for chatting, most people will not want to slow things down waiting for an acknowledgment. Rather, they just ask for a repeat when it is needed. In addition, we can correct errors (a single apparently misspelled word, for example) with what we think is the right word, or fill in a missing word with our brains (since we can visualize things in context). Overall, this is usually faster than using ARQ and good enough for casual conversation. However, for sending pictures, ARQ is sometimes absolutely necessary, especially with a compression technique in which a single byte ruins the whole picture. The Western Pennsylvania emcomm group has fully implemented NBEMS over both repeaters and simplex, but mostly over VHF, and, because VHF tends to be more constant and tends to be much more error-free than HF, did not want to spend the extra time (on any mode or speed) to slow down for ARQ, so we developed the Wrap program, which sends a checksum at the end of the message, and error-free reception can be verified that way. On our MARS emcomm net, MT63 on HF usually produces error-free copy on the statewide net, and Wrap is useful with MT63 also just for verifying that there were no errors, or indicating that a resend is necessary. However, far enough away, there may always be some stations, under poor conditions, that either need a repeat of the whole message, or need to have ARQ used to repeat bad blocks if there are many. The advantage of Wrap is that a one-on-one ARQ link is not needed except when that is the only way to get the message through. Bulletins can be transmitted in MT63 and received error-free by most stations, with others needing a resend, or perhaps a relay. On VHF SSB weak signal phone, it is common practice to use vocal FEC (to coin a term!) and just repeat callsigns twice or over twice to accomplish the contact during poor conditions. The standard call on CW is a 3x3 call, which is a type of manual FEC to try to get at least one of each callsign through. Most files these days are very large, compared to those in DOS days, and with the bandwidth limitations on HF, it just takes too long to send a very large file, even using a fast mode and ARQ, so I think there is little interest in file transfer on the bands either
Re: [digitalradio] QRV ALE-400 ARQ chat mode -- 14074.0
Good copy on both Tony and John, W2KI from here in the north central U.S. Rick, KV9U Tony wrote: All, I'll be QRV ALE-400 ARQ chat mode this evening starting 2230z -- 14074.0 USB +/- QRM. Tony -K2MO
Re: [digitalradio] The best of all features - SdR
Hi Bill, Do you have some thoughts on how an amateur mesh network would be better than non-ham? Maybe less congestion? But in some areas, no one near enough to connect to? Over the years, I have had one of my students who took one of my ham classes and expressed an interest in some kind of community network. He lives on a farm like I do, so we are not that close to other hams (5 - 10 miles is about the closest), assuming that the nearest hams would even consider mesh networking. I am skeptical that enough hams would have this interest though I probably would try it if we could get some interest. Is there any readily available software at this time? SDR is growing well and it seems to primarily be oriented toward HF rigs at this point (Flex Radio and other architectures of competing products). I don't see any possible interest in higher speed links from the hams I have spoken with, but maybe your area has enough for a critical mass of interest? With internet access (wired or wireless) of 1 Mbps, some more and some less, it would be impossible to compete with that anymore with anything we could possibly set up on the ham bands. As I mentioned earlier, there has to be a reason for adopting new technology. While you may have the bleeding edge folks doing it ... just to do it ... that won't provide enough for that critical mass. I base this on over 40 years since I first started hamming and SWLing, experimenting, etc. We have had an amazing number of changes, but I have found exceedingly few hams like myself. In fact, a peer of mine and I were just discussing this in the last few days. The new hams are not necessarily technologically oriented. They just want something that is primarily plug and play and just works. In most cases that means a 2 meter FM rig. Ultrawide modes would be anything that exceeds current rules or takes up a large percentage of a band. Normally, the widest modes tend to be a communications quality phone bandwidth. Some modes can exceed that with higher speed, such as 9k6 or faster packet. Whether the rules are antiquated or not, that is what we must follow unless some one petitions for change or as I mentioned, gets an STA from the FCC if you live in the U.S. Few hams would ever support wider modes on 2 meters and below than we already have. The rules seem about right as they are in terms of bandwidth. My big beef is that we are limited on the type of data we can transmit, depending upon the part of the band we are operating. That is simply nuts now that we can transmit phone and image digitally and yet can not transmit data/RTTY but I am in the extreme minority on that one it seems:( The widest modes have been FSTV, but few hams do that so it is tolerable to allow multi MHz bandwidths for a local frequency. I have not seen any ham modes much wider than that. And you can not use such modes below the 440 band. Going to higher bands is possible, but as you note, the propagation distance becomes a major impediment. As we all know, who have used WiFi and WiMax systems over multi-mile distances, everything has to be mostly line of sight. Bottom line question is what is really practical and adds to our capabilities that will be used? Nothing wrong with idealism, but practical matters often trump everything else. What will I be able to do with a high speed network that I can not do now? And why will this appeal to other hams? It seems to me that what we really need are not wide modes, but adaptable modes that change automatically for the constantly changing conditions on HF. VHF and up could run faster modes all the time since the propagation is more stable. You mention QAM 64. Surely you are aware that this has been available as a sound card mode for several years with a relatively easy to use program that handles QAM 4, QAM 16, and QAM 64 and can send and receive error free files from one to many and has after the fact ARQ? 73, Rick, KV9U Bill V WA7NWP wrote: What do you think such a mode would be used for, Bill? The latest brainstorming is a community mesh network. Put a little box in the attic with Ethernet on one side and an antenna on the other.Build a whole VPN with video, vip, whatever.. Given the bits the options are endless. If the price is reasonable many hams in any neighborhood would participate. I have increasing doubts about what hams really want with new modes or capabilities. It does not seem to be improved speeds or accuracy based on what they actually use, compared to what is actually available right now. There's some impressive activity on the SDR front. Given more RF bits we'd see a lot of the old guard come back to play.. The current 1200/9600/56000 was getting long in the tooth in the mid 90's. It's time to breakloose There has to be some purpose for having a higher speeds. Also, there seems to be no exceptions where a higher speed leads to greatly
Re: [digitalradio] please unsubscribe from this group
You need to do this at Yahoo. Not from within this group. We cannot help you with this. Rick Sent from my iPhone On Jun 21, 2009, at 2:58 PM, ken ferguson ken_fergu...@fsmail.net wrote: tis I who wishes to leave the group. ken
Re: [digitalradio] Sound Cards
QST had a very informative article a while back - worthwhile reading. I was surprised at the performance differences between the good, better and best cards in areas that really matter to our hobby. I still use my stock Dell soundcard but I now know why and how I could be doing better. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jun 17, 2009, at 8:58 AM, lsumners lsumn...@yahoo.com wrote: I am looking at upgrading my Dell on board sound card. Any suggestions for digital radio?
Re: [digitalradio] Sound Cards
You could use an external device as others have suggested. I don't generally recommend the SignaLink USB due to the low frequency noise problem, however many hams either ignore it or are not aware of it. Further, after some considerable denial on the part of Tigertronics, they may have corrected this in later versions, but I can not yet confirm that. On the other hand, I do recommend the SignaLink USB for the simplest possible portable unit such as might be used for public service/emergency communications and you don't want to be concerned about COM ports or USB to COM adapters. Just plug in the USB to the computer and plug in a rig specific cable and you can operate. My personal lowest cost solution is to use an add on 24 bit sound card that connects to a hard keying PTT optoisolator interface. If you are handy at simple kit building, I can heartily recommend the Unified Microsystems SCI-6 Interface at only $25 plus about $5.50 US SH. I have almost all ICOM equipment, so I also use the West Mountain RigTalk USB to CI-V interface for an elegant way to provide the rig control interface connection. In order to do this you will need two COM ports or two USB to COM adapters, but it gives you the flexibility of being able to key the rig even from software that does not provide rig PTT keying via rig control. As mentioned elsewhere, the ARRL had tested several sound cards, however as I recall they found that for digital modes, of the ones they tested, all worked equally well. (They did not test the SignaLink USB, however). They did find that a very high quality card is needed if you are using it for interfacing with DSP systems such as Flex Radio. 73, Rick, KV9U lsumners wrote: I am looking at upgrading my Dell on board sound card. Any suggestions for digital radio? Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.76/2183 - Release Date: 06/17/09 05:53:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New version of Mixw
What is the attraction of MixW now that we have so many other multimode digital programs that are freely available with one program even open source and cross platform? 73, Rick, KV9U Andy obrien wrote: Nothing that I have heard. Nick is somewhat more active, as his health has improved, but I hear that the focus of Mixw improvement is on the logging aspect. Andy
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New version of Mixw
chas, What are the MARS operators using MixW for? Are there modes that are not available on other programs that they find compelling? I downloaded MixW again today, but it looks about the same as it did in past years. It is a fairly clean interface (albeit, that is a subjective thing for an individual user to determine), but maybe not quite as nice as fldigi, which I think has the best interface in terms of simplicity and understandability of all the multimode digital programs. The font rendering in the text windows is terrible. but I have not looked into the details of whether this can be changed. I would be surprised if it could not, but the default is very poor. MixW is nowhere near as polished as Ham Radio Deluxe, and yet they expect substantial payment for MixW. The world has completely changed in terms of readily available free and often open source software. MixW does not have the FAE 400 ARQ modes only available in Multipsk. That is one mode that I would think MARS might find useful. The one thing MixW can do over all other software is add in the Q15X25 mode, but unfortunately that mode has not been practical on most HF circuits. Does MARS even use the Q15X25 mode? Some things I like about MixW - provides general logging from the program, some thing that even fldigi can not do for non-digital modes - includes packet, however, this is also available in Multipsk I guess what you have not answered is what does MixW have that the other programs do not have? Is MARS use different than for amateur radio use? 73, Rick, KV9U chas wrote: Rick W wrote: What is the attraction of MixW now that we have so many other multimode digital programs that are freely available with one program even open source and cross platform? 73, Rick, KV9U Rick, nearly all members of Texas Army MARS and Region 6, are using MixW. idly curious, what else is out there that can even almost compete with Nick's software?? look and feel is not a consideration but what else has all the features of or even is better than, MixW? special interest in an OS-X ported version?? thanks chas, k5dam Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.70/2177 - Release Date: 06/15/09 05:54:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New version of Mixw
It is all about the visual simplicity of its interface . . . elegant in its minimalism. And I say that truly as a complement. Although I like HRD and MultiPSK both for other reasons, MixW is easier to use. More pleasing to the eyes especially versus MultiPSK. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jun 15, 2009, at 11:52 AM, jhaynesatalumni jhhay...@earthlink.net wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, chas ch...@... wrote: Rick W wrote: What is the attraction of MixW now that we have so many other multimode digital programs that are freely available with one program even open source and cross platform? 73, Rick, KV9U Rick, nearly all members of Texas Army MARS and Region 6, are using MixW. idly curious, what else is out there that can even almost compete with Nick's software?? look and feel is not a consideration but what else has all the features of or even is better than, MixW? No, let's get back to Rick's question and ask what it is about MixW that you find to be superior to everything else out there. I downloaded a trial version of MixW long ago and wasn't impressed enough to want to go further with it. What am I missing? Jim W6JVE
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New version of Mixw
Buddy and Rick, What you are describing seems to be flidigi more than any other program. Have you tried this program? And unlike Windows-only programs, fldigi works on more platforms than any other program of its type. Maybe the RAC CD won't work on fldigi though. Fldigi is ultra clean and very simple compared to the eye candy type of programs. Most all the programs now can do rig control but you don't have to use it. But if you are letting the program do the logging of frequency and mode, it is very hard to give up, HI. What are the strange modes? MixW has at least one orphan mode compared with other programs, but fldigi only has very common modes, plus modes like THOR which are an enhanced type of IFK with FEC and mostly to be used with ARQ transmissions for those sending messages or files. I am not sure, but MixW may not directly support Olivia without a separate set up. Fldigi, HRD/DM780, and Multipsk work out of the box. But since the other programs are at least as good, or, even better in some respects, at least the ones you indicate you prefer, it is hard to pay for one product when the others are freely available (but you can donate). 73, Rick, KV9U F.R. Ashley wrote: My 2 cents worth: I have tried them all and still prefer MixW. It is a simple program yet does everything I want it to. It is neat and orderly in layout and appearance. It will use my RAC CD, a lot of logging programs won't. I just click on a callsign and the logging info fills right in. I've tried MultiPSK, and to be honest, it does a lot, but gawd, that is one UGLY looking program. I don't even like to look at it. HRD is nice, but I don't need all those moving screens and options.. again, it is just too busy for me. I don't need a computer program to change frequency for me, I can turn the knob myself. I don't need a program that is packed with a bunch of strange modes that are rarely, if ever, used. Fldigi won't run on my computer, but I notice a few things that would keep it from being my main digital/logging program. We all have our likes and dislikes, none of us are right or wrong, just different in what we like to use. Since MixW is not free, that alone will drive some guys to HRD, etc.MixW's attraction for me is it's simple, and does it all. If the authors of MixW decide to abandon it, I'd keep using it unless another progarm came up with something really great that would entice me to change. 73 de WB4M Buddy and It is all about the visual simplicity of its interface . . . elegant in its minimalism. And I say that truly as a complement. Although I like HRD and MultiPSK both for other reasons, MixW is easier to use. More pleasing to the eyes especially versus MultiPSK. Rick - KH2DF
[digitalradio] MMTTY VS MMVARI, et al.
After all these years, I finally downloaded N1MM Logger and spent some time with it today. Even logged a few contacts during the ARRL June VHF Contest. Previously, I could not get it work with Vista. The web site might even lead to believe that it may not be supported on Vista. But after doing a search on Vista + N1MM, I found a detailed tutorial from Bob, W1QA, that showed that I was mostly doing things correctly ... except for one little security procedure that I have never had to do with any other program and would never have figured out on my own, HI. And it turns out that the program is not as complicated as I had thought. In fact, the interface can be kept quite simple for the entry window. From what I understand, N1MM requires either MMTTY or MMVARI if you wish to interface via a soundcard for RTTY and some digital modes. Apparently, other digital sound card programs, such as fldigi, can not work with this logger as it is tailored to the MM programs. I am not sure that there are any cross platform contest logging programs so it means you almost have to stay with MS Windows, especially for what I would consider to be ultra high end programs such as N1MM. Can anyone give us a comparison of MMTTY and MMVARI? I understand that Dave, AA6YQ, has been able to update MMTTY. But then I have read that some hams have found MMVARI to decode better under some conditions. And I get the impression that only MMTTY will be updated with MMVARI frozen in beta (but a pretty darn good beta from past experience). Also, does anyone have some first hand experiences with how the HRD Logging program will work as a contest logger compared with N1MM? Lots of questions, but I bet some of you have the answers, HI. 73, Rick, KV9U
Re: [digitalradio] Boot discs for emcomm/ham radio
I use Linux and MS Windows XP and Vista here in the shack with a KVM switch. I have never used Windoze, but I see some hams claim they know about it. Linux can be fairly easy to reload, but that is only if it supports your equipment. For many years this was not possible for my computers/monitor until Ubuntu/Kubuntu 9.04, which I consider to be an OK OS. Maybe not as good as Vista, which has been the overall best OS that I have used over a 20+ year period, but rating on OS depends upon your requirements and what you value. Linux has some features that I favor over MS (probably more secure, much lighter and responsive on older machines, etc.). But realistically, what is most importantly for most of us is that MS OS's natively run the programs that most of us want to use and Linux can not do that as well, sometimes not at all. The one program I mainly run on the Linux computer is the PSKmail_server which can only run on Linux. If I did not use that, then it would be difficult to justify having multiple OS's since it greatly complicates things. (Other than the hobby aspect, which I feel is legitimate, even if not that practical). Since an increasing number of programs are cross platform and run well on either OS, there is less of a compelling reason to move to Linux. One exception might be the netbooks. No matter what MS claims, even with Windows 7, lightweight Linux variants will run much better on those low powered computers. If fact I have read that MS would like to characterize netbooks as low powered computers rather than netbooks because they know their OS's can not be tailored as well for that environment. I have reloaded Vista several times due to playing around with Linux and damaging the MBR (and not knowing much about fixing it, HI), and it is much easier and surprisingly fast compared with previous MS reloads. And by the way, I always reload any MS product after a BSOD. Of course, I have actually never seen a BSOD for years and years even though some claim they have this happen regularly, HI. If the seller of the PC did not include full back ups of the OS, my solution to your concern about reloading is to be sure to make a backup disk with the necessary drivers. I agree that it can be very difficult to get the right drivers, but once you do, I have found future reloads are relatively simple. Good luck with your computing. 73, Rick, KV9U Toby Burnett wrote: I also would be interested as to booting windoze from a memory stick like a live cd of Linux. It takes so long for me to re install everything should I have a system wide crash. Just to get back back onto win XP pro I have to load XP home first and then all of XP Pro. With that and all the driver disks etc and whatever else you loose in the process it can take a good day at least just to get back to a blank windoze system with everything working. My Laptop which I just got (Vista) gave the option to make a recovery disk set (4 DVD's!) which took the best part of 4 - 5 hours to create. That's a lot of data even for a memory stick and I dread the day I have to use them.
Re: [digitalradio] Something odd about digi-fest contest?
This is capitalism at its zenith but I am not opposed. I just wish I had the time to compete and play. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On Jun 5, 2009, at 7:22 AM, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@kns.ch wrote: Why not? ICOM sponsors the RSGB HF Convention, other companies sponsor various aspects of the hobby. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien k3uka...@gmail.com ...but a contest sponsored by a interface company that gives the interface as a contest prize, has me wondering about the ethics of it all.
Re: [digitalradio] RFSM-8000 v.0536
I notice that they have the 75 bps very robust mode implemented. Has anyone tried this and compared it to Pactor 3's most robust mode? 73, Rick, KV9U dmitry_d2d wrote: New releases RFSM-8000 v.0536 on http://rfsm2400.radioscanner.ru
Re: [digitalradio] PSK-ARQ versus ALE-400
Wouldn't the variability be due to not knowing the conditions we operate when on the air vs. the controlled and known conditions during the test? There are times that a given mode just can not work in a real world environment, even though you might be able to hear the signal just find. It just can not print well, and yet another mode that can handle the conditions of Doppler and ISI multipath can work FB. 73, Rick, KV9U Tony wrote: Jose, maybe Tony could devise some measurements to compare them. I'm not sure why, but on-air tests with ALE-400 seem to be a bit more robust than my path simulations indicate. Need to test this mode more. Tony -K2MO
Re: [digitalradio] ALE400
I am probably too close to John on 20 meters as I never have any luck connecting. I am calling CQ and monitoring 14.074 with FAE400 right now (2115Z) and will try and have it on for a few hours when I am not experimenting with PSKmail_server. 73, Rick, KV9U John Bradley wrote: now that the dah-dee-dah –dee dee dah dah’s have all gone away, am listening on 14074 dial @ 1625 hz . copied N9DSJ and K3MO last night…… you can connect to me even if I am not in front of the rig, also will respond to an ARES net call. Give it a try. Am on now (2100Z ) to probably 0400Z or later since I tend to leave the rig on ready for response. John VE5MU Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: PSK-ARQ versus ALE-400
Say, John, you also use Pactor 2 and 3 which are always 100 baud PSK modes. Do you find that these modes work through the ionospheric conditions when sound card modes, even those with similar modes do not? I find PSK to be rather poor at times here at 44 degrees N latitude, unless you are close to the MUF with a stable ionosphere. I have never seen any published information or other comparisons of P2 and P3 in terms of how much multipath or Doppler can be tolerated, but I suspect that it is not all that much, and there are going to be times that some sound card modes work (albeit slowly) and P2 and P3 simply will not. 73, Rick, KV9U John Bradley wrote: I live at a higher latitude than many folks in the US and find that PSK is susceptible to aurora flutter/multipath more often than most modes. There are time up here that nothing will decode PSK despite the fact the band is open and active. I’m not technically competent enough to say why, but the fact of the matter is PSK at times will not work, when MFSK and ALE400 will. Go figure. BTW I’m at almost 51N latitude John VE5MU ** Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] How do I get started with digital radio?
Avoid the Icom IC-718 if you want to do push to talk by CAT command. Icom chose not to put PTT by CAT in the command word set. There are other methods of doin PTT but CAT is by far the most elegant. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On May 28, 2009, at 9:06 AM, bruce mallon wa4...@yahoo.com wrote: AVOID FT-100 or 100D --- On Thu, 5/28/09, kh6ty kh...@comcast.net wrote: From: kh6ty kh...@comcast.net Subject: Re: [digitalradio] How do I get started with digital radio? To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, May 28, 2009, 7:36 AM For about $500 you can get a secondhand IC-706MKIIG and be able to work SSB, CW, FM, or digital modes from 160m through UHF. 73, Skip KH6TY
Re: [digitalradio] More on ALE 400 FAE
Andy, The FAE modes are not really all that new. I had promoted it back in July 2007 on one of the eham forums when I asked if other public service operators planned to use this protocol. There have been very few hams interested in such a mode. My personal preference is to refer to it as FAE, unless it is actually used for Automatic Link Establishment. This is partially to avoid the confusion with ALE operation, and to defuse the hostility that most hams have toward ALE operation. Of course, it theoretically could be used in an ALE system, but I don't see this happening all that much for most ham purposes since what we mostly do is the opposite of ALE. As we gain experience, we know which bands are open (or can quickly check) and then cast out our RF or answer some other stations RF on shared frequencies with varying bandwidths. For public service use we are likely to set up a specific frequency of operation, but having several frequencies on different bands is always possible. I heard Tony, K2MO on this evening working a station near 14.074 using Olivia, but then he switched to FAE40 and called CQ. We were not able to link as the band appeared to be dropping out by then. I called him back and also called CQ to no avail. One other important, and convenient thing about these modes is that the convention was retained to always center on 1625 Hz audio frequency, so your dial frequency is the frequency of operation. 73, Rick, KV9U Andy obrien wrote: First, is it really ALE as used currently? I am not sure that the recent tests of this mode have actually used it in the form of establishing an automatic link. I know it can be used this way , but do not see this. If it is not really ALE, what should it be called ? Second, the performance of ALE 400 FAE file transfers between Sholto and myself last night was simply astonishing . Late at night (0400 UTC) we passed a files east coast to west coast USA with audible signal levels around S1 or less. 20 meters , I was on a vertical running 90 watts. 100% copy (it is ARQ) in a fairly reasonable amount of time with expected amounts of re-tries. So, regardless of whether this mode is used in automatic link establishment , it really has to be considered as a very reliable method of transferring short files under very poor conditions and much longer files in good conditions. Well done Patrick! So, in addition to NBEBS ARQ MFSK16 and ARQ PSK, we now have and even more robust mode that beats its way through the QRN and low sun spot conditions. Andy K3UK Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.43/2139 - Release Date: 05/28/09 08:10:00
Re: [digitalradio] ALE-400
Hi Tony and group members, Based on the use (or non use) of ARQ modes for general ham use, suggests to me that they are going to be primarily used for messaging. This is something that we must have for public service/emergency communications, but there are relatively few who are oriented toward digital modes (speaking from considerable experience). This is likely due in part to the use of VHF as the main part of the spectrum used for such activities. It is actually a very new concept in terms of these newer technologies (developed in past year or so) that work with weak signals rather than the older packet systems that required fairly good signals to work over modest distances. Even so, it is very difficult to get operators to even try the new technologies because the great majority are satisfied with only using VHF/UHF phone. Even the zero interface approach is a hard sell. Some of us on this group have used FAE400 on HF with success but three or four users is not enough, HI. Also, in order for new modes to become practical to use, they must be available on the programs that are being used. Based on comments from developers, it appears that FAE400 will only be available on Multipsk and this is more of an experimenters program rather than one used by public service or the average digital user. It may not be practical to build a team of operators, whether local or regional, etc., to use multiple programs where they use one program for e-mail, another one for packet, another for messaging, another for chat, etc. That is why I believe that we need one program that has this capability, and it would need to be simple to use, very basic layout that is understandable to the average ham. I believe that we are coming closer and some groups have standardized on certain programs. Even after we have the perfect program (until the next perfect one comes along), it will take an enormous amount of promotion to effect major changes, HI. One question for Tony: when you tested the ALE mode, was this actually the FAE mode? As I understand it, the FAE modes (wide 2000 Hz and narrow 400 Hz modes) are considerably faster than the older ALE modes due to improved compression, even though they use the same 8FSK modulation. And they are more sensitive, plus the memory ARQ feature of FAE adds additional weak signal capability. 73, Rick, KV9U Moderator, HFDEC (Hams for Disaster and Emergency Communications) yahoogroup Tony wrote: John, Hey man you are preaching to the choir!!! It seems that way om -- first QSO was yesterday so it's all new to me. ALE400 is a great mode, even at higher latitudes such as I am. Simulator seems to indicate that John. Not as robust as other mfsk modes, but beats the pants off of 300 baud HF Packet!!! Are you available for a contact? I'm on 14073.0 USB + 1000Hz. ALE-400
Re: [digitalradio] PSK-ARQ versus ALE-400
With any new mode or system, I tend to factor it with a view toward public service. But that does not mean it should not be used for what the majority of hams use day to day. Anything you are familiar with and use regularly will have much more value than something that is only used infrequently. Over the years, we went from mostly individual mode programs to multi-imode programs which kept adding new technology. At one time there was primarily one freeware program that did this the best and of course that was Multipsk. That is because Patrick developed a number of the modes himself and incorporated many modes under one roof. But they are only available on his program. If you want rudimentary rig control beyond PTT, (frequency, mode) you must run a program such as DXLab Commander. If you want a high end logging program you may want to run DXLab DXKeeper. I admit that it makes Multipsk fairly complicated to set up for many users. And most hams consider the interface to be very overwhelming and look toward alternatives. Currently, the most popular integrated multipurpose program is Ham Radio Deluxe/Digital Master 780. It is an incredibly sophisticated and has powerful integration with an imminently to be released improved logging system in addition to satellites and total rig control that no other freeware program can even slightly match. Needless to say, if a particular mode is not available in HRD/DM780, it will be difficult to compete with modes specific to one software. New modes have to have some exceptionally compelling new value or they may not succeed. Fldigi is an alternative program that is very clean, organized, and I actually prefer the most in terms of the user interface. It has its own rig control, but nothing like HRD. It has the advantage that it is being used as a central program to support NBEMS with the flarq program, and also PSKmail with its program. At the same time, this also makes it more complicated too, but more flexible. Similar to Multipsk, there are bridge programs that allow you to use high end logging programs such as DXLab DXKeeper as your central database. This is mandatory if you wish to log non digital contacts (SSB). Otherwise, fldigi's built-in log would probably be good enough for many of us. For general contacts you really want to choose one digital program if at all possible since switching between programs can be very difficult and inefficient due to various commands, icons, etc. being totally different in appearance and location. None are necessarily better than another, but you do need to get used to them. After a lot of comparisons, especially on faster machines (which you need particularly for HRD/DM780), I don't find much decoding difference as I once thought I did on a lesser computer. Winlink 2000, even with a sound card design, only handles e-mail at this point. That is something that might be useful for public service, but on a very small scale compared to point to point communications that is typically used to route local and regional traffic. 73, Rick, KV9U Moderator, HFDEC (Hams for Disaster and Emergency Communications) yahoogroup Note: this group was formed to take discussion of public service off of the digitalradio group due to complaints of too much discussion of public service issues on digitalradio, HI. John Bradley wrote: Andy wrote: “. I still think that a better option would be the increased development of NBEMS PSK and MFSK with ARQ as implemented in FLDIGI. While perhaps not as robust as ALE 400 FAE , it is far more likely to be used by hams if there is more publicity about NBEMS.” I always look at these modes with a view of using them for emcomm traffic, and in doing so they have to be able to be used by inexperienced hams who might be on the second shift… operators only. The software has to be “bomb proof” and not require any extensive computer knowledge to run it. ALE400 is not the best mode for this, not because it is a poor mode, but because the user interface is very difficult to use and has turned off many potential operators. That said, Patrick likes the user interface the way it is, so it will likely stay that way. As a result , ALE400 and the other modes on multipsk will never be used by the mainstream ham community and cannot in good conscience be recommended for emcomm. Those modes are great too use if one has the patience to overcome in user interface. MFSK ARQ would have possibilities, but I think the standard for emcomm will remain winlink/winmor/paclink for now John VE5MU Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group
Re: [digitalradio] SSB Phone versus other modes
When it comes to emergency communications, phone is not an option, but a necessary mode for most conditions. It is the only practical mode that gives you the instant knowledge that someone has received your information. Nothing else can ever take the place of human speech in such cases due to the immediacy. But phone has its limits with speed of transmission and requirement of very good signals. Most communications during emergencies tend to be fairly brief. Where is your location? We need 35 cots at the shelter here in Newton. The disaster triage site has one ambulance leaving for MHCS with 2 patients with following conditions. These are not communications that are practical to send in a timely manner with most digital technology. Also, you absolutely must at least insure that another human actually received the information. You would not use e-mail /BBS types of technology to handle that kind of traffic unless you just had no other choice. On the other hand, digital communications gives us the ability to send larger amounts of data that would be difficult or even impractical to send via phone transmissions. And it can be more accurate if using ARQ modes. And newer digital technology works with much weaker signals than phone, sometimes rivaling even CW. And CW requires very savvy ops at both ends and that is something nearly impossible to find with the ever shrinking number of CW savvy operators who would be involved with public service activities. If the information is being relayed through different operators to a distant point, then it helps to know what modes will be used. For multi mode relays through CW, digital, and voice, (or if you don't know for sure) there are often severe limitations to the type and length of data. That is why ARRL Radiograms or something must be used in those cases. From what I have seen over the last 45+ years since I was first licensed, many more of us are involved in public service communications on a regular basis, particularly the rather substantial participation in Skywarn and weather related spotting. We also may support other public service communications, such as rendezvous, large scale runs, bikes, adventure racing, etc. Emergencies occur almost every day but are taken care of by government protective service employees. It is not often that we will be called upon for an actual communications emergency, but it does happen from time and to time and realistically we will only be ready to use our regularly developed skills. We may also be asked to provide non-communications services such as Disaster Assessment. Most participants in public service today tend to be the newer hams who are VHF/UHF oriented. This tells us where the focus of our use of technology must be. From repeated queries, I have found that most weak signal enthusiasts, particularly VHF, tend to stay focused on that interest and not much interest in public service. And I also agree with David, that those who do not have keyboarding skills will not be involved in most digital communications. This may not be a problem with new hams since there is a good chance that they will have at least rudimentary keyboarding skills. In my rural area, there has been a resurgence of interest in a horizontally polarized SSB phone only VHF activity night due to the promotion by a ham about 200 miles away who often provides NCS duties. Even so, I have only found one or two hams who had the necessary interest in any VHF digital activity at this time. Not enough to make a critical mass of digital operators for a practical deployment toward emergency communications. Of course I keep trying and will be having a club demonstration again in November, HI. 73, Rick, KV9U Moderator, HFDEC (Hams for Disaster and Emergency Communications) yahoogroup David Little wrote: Andy, This is a topic of discussion that is raging on behind the lines in Emergency Communications also. The fundamental thing that many miscalculate is how the Intel that is to be sent digitally is gathered and relayed to someone with the capabilities to digitize In this debate, a lot of babies have been thrown out with the bath water already. Please keep the most rudimentary concept of communications in mind in this discussion. It is like factoring to prime numbers. One day, everyone will have a total mobile digital station as an option in their cars at point of purchase. However, we aren't there yet, and we have to rely on what is available if we are to offer a useful service to the community to pay for our keep (and spectrum). Voice Ops will always be an option; especially in the first 96 hours when everyone is scrambling to restore enough damaged infrastructure to get back on the air. Again, as hunter gatherers someone must collect the Intel or ground truth that is to be sent via digital means. However, Amateur Radio is less about public
Re: [digitalradio] [Fwd: Your comments on Polar Paths and Digital Modes]
It was 1425Z here in SW Wisconsin and I was copying JA1RZD on 14072.5 + 1500 Hz with near 100%, but he could not hear me. Very low noise and no S-meter reading on my end. After calling him a few times, he did ask QRZ and later KC7?? but I can imagine that noise levels might be much stronger on his end. Also, his web site indicates he can run 350 watts on MFSK and I am only running 25. OK, kicked it up to 200, HI, but no luck either. Hearing WF7T, but not zero beat with him and did not link up. Maybe that was the 7 station that JA1RZD heard? 73, Rick, KV9U Tony wrote: All, Received the following email from Ken, JA1RZD. Tony -K2MO Hi Tony, Thank you for the QSO on March 27 MFSK mode. I happen to find your comments on Polar Paths and Digital Modes on the following page. http://www.mail-archive.com/digitalradio@yahoogroups.com/msg19939.html Your comments are exactly the same as I experienced over the past several years. I would like to point out one downside of MFSK. It is very difficult find stations on MFSK mode. I normally call CQ on 14.072.5 MHz plus 1500 Hz audio but it is rare to be called from the USA. European stations are much more active. If you know the active frequency of MFSK, please let me know. Or _please inform to the subscribers that I call CQ on 14.072.5 MHz USB plus 1500 Hz MFSK_. I hope to see you again on MFSK mode. The 20 m band is open from 14z to 17z to the USA and Europe from Japan. 73 de JA1RZD, Ken P.S. Please visit my page on QRZ.com. Navigate to the map and zoom in to max on picture mode, you will see the satellite pictue of my antennas. _ ??25GB?? http://skydrive.live.com/?showunauth=1
Re: [digitalradio] Contestia / RTTYM
I like the faster print rate of Contestia but there are few users out there. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On May 20, 2009, at 7:28 AM, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@kns.ch wrote: I'm adding these Olivia derrivates to DM780, I'm interested in knowing whether they are used much? Simon HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com www.sdr-radio.com
Re: [digitalradio] Sound card systems for ARES
While we are not there yet, things have improved over the past year or so. You could use packet, but it is a mode that requires very good signals to work. The only sound card packet program without an expected cost is Multipsk. It supports 300 and 1200 baud packet. Multipsk also has the FAE/FAE400 modes that can work with much weaker signals in a full ARQ mode. Not as fast as packet with good signals, but moderate speed is better than zero throughput when conditions get more difficult. Supports both peer to peer chat and messaging, but no e-mail. The NBEMS system (fldigi + flarq) will provide ARQ messaging with several modes but will not support ARQ peer to peer chat which may be important when involved in public service/emergency communications. Their philosophy does not support e-mail. The PSKmail system can provide e-mail (limited number of servers at this time if you are in the U.S.) but if using the Linux client, can also provide ARQ peer to peer. This is planned to be added to the Windows version. I don't know of any other interest from developers who are planning to add peer to peer digital communication in one software program. Winlink 2000 is developing a sound card mode to work with their e-mail system but their philosophy does not support HF peer to peer connections, so the software will have very limited use for practical public service/emergency communication where you need to send messages between peers since you may not have the infrastructure remaining for mail systems. The ideal from my perspective would be to have an easily understandable sound card software program that works on HF or VHF, handles peer to peer traffic as well as e-mail, and adapts to the conditions with appropriate protocols. We are beginning to have the pieces, but no one has bolted them together into one system, HI. Easy to say, but not easy to do. The closest thing that I can see is PSKmail using WINMOR or something similar as the adaptive protocol. That would be a killer digital program for public service/emergency use. 73, Rick, KV9U Lee wrote: Hello Folks, I am looking for what you have used or have read about. I have been using TNCs for my packet operations and now need to know other options using a sound card. This is for VHF/UHF and HF. The software has to be error correcting. Can be used to connect peer to peer (station to station) and / or to a BBS and / or email Ie:winlink. Why I need this. I have ask by my DEC to make a presentation for methods of using packet to send messages for his Area. I have a pretty good handle on the TNC methods but not using a soundcard. So what you got. I will be making my presentation May 30th. Thank you and 73 ---
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Sound card systems for ARES
Andy, While you could use different systems, it gets very, very complicated for non-digitally oriented hams. Just take some one who has never used this stuff and really is not all that interested, but needs to use it anyway and you will see how challenging it can be, HI. Winlink 2000, even with WINMOR, is not going to help them much either since it does not support the critically needed peer to peer function on HF. Some might think you can somehow use packet radio on VHF but in our area that might give you 15 miles in some directions, so is not very practical. We must have NVIS for practical Section and Regional communications. The only sound card system that can actually do what they want on HF really does seem to be PSKmail although I would consider it somewhat nascent here in the U.S. at this point. I am even toying with setting up a server here in Wisconsin, but not so much because of my central location, but mostly for experimental use, public service potential and certainly emergency use when the peer function is added to the Windows version. As you know, I have not been able to find a Linux distribution that works adequately on my equipment. With the recent release of Ubuntu 9.04, this may be solved after all these many years. While most hams will not consider Linux at this time, and it does have its shortcomings, it does have some advantages and would be needed to operate a PSKmail server station. The really neat thing about all this is that we are coming closer to some really good solutions for casual use and public service use of digital technology. And anything that you expect to work during an emergency, must be regularly used on a frequent basis to be there when you really need it. 73, Rick, KV9U Andy obrien wrote: NBEMS is the only application that would meet your DEC's requirements, find it within the latest implementing of FLDIGI. It contains ARQ PSK31, ARQ MFSK16 and a few other modes. Also facilitates email exchanges on a point to point basis with the ability to drop email off in to the Internet. It is all free. Then, in a few weeks time (maybe couple of months) expect Winmor to be added to the Winkink system. Winkink currently handles files and email via packet radio and Pactor. Pactor II and Pactor III require expensive TNC's but Winmor will allow sound card digital applications to connect to a server on HF. Thus, with NBEMS you have a very easy system of point to point error correcting communication. With Winmor and Packet in Winlink , you have the ability to do everything else. The two combined will be about as elaborate as hams can get, ALE systems notwithstanding. Andy K3UK Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.329 / Virus Database: 270.12.33/2120 - Release Date: 05/18/09 06:28:00
Re: [digitalradio] Pskmail Server in U.S. (Rick)
Hi Russell, Are there many other PSKmail stations on the air that are not being listed on the mailserver site? http://pskmail.wikispaces.com/PSKmailservers The only stations for the U.S. that are listed at the moment are: WB5CON KD5WDQ KD4QCL I think it was KD4WDQ that I have triggered a few times when doing a call up of the servers on 10148, but only WB5CON has been strong enough to actually connect to. It seems to take a pretty good signal to make this work well. Do you find that the 250 baud rate works most of the time about as well as the 125 baud rate? Probably less affected by Doppler? But would be more affected by ISI multipsk? Without having an automatically adjustable protocol, all the modes are a compromise much of the time. And the faster modes just can not connect when slower modes would work, even though very slow. But slow is better than zero throughput like we often had with 300 baud packet and why that mode never became usable unless you had a very stable MUF type of path. From what I can tell, a lot of the Pactor 2 and 3 operation is done this way because 100 baud PSK is quite susceptible to ionospheric conditions we often have on HF. 73, Rick, KV9U Russell Blair wrote: Rick, Well I went to find the call of the other station close to you and it was not on the list today I will keep a lookout for it, I have seen you connect to Fred (WB5CON) at times, the band has not be too good but if you would like for me to QSY to another band so you can connect I would be glad just let me know. My server has been on 10.148, was using PSK125 but now I'm using PSK250, it beacons avery 20min starting at the top of the hour. My station antenna is a Butternut so its not the best. Russell NC5O
Re: [digitalradio] Pskmail Server in U.S.
I have to concur with Rein. The impression we have been given in the past is that Skipnet was a short term ARRL experiment under an FCC STA (Special Temporary Authorization). Do a search on ARRL's web site to see the number of references on anything current. My most recent search came up empty. If there really is a network that can be accessed by individual hams, then one would expect the proponents to frequently mention the frequencies on the various bands, the method of access, any procedures to send messages, etc. Curious that this never happens. What is important about PSKmail is the many features that are simply not available on any other system: - it does not rely on 300 baud FSK packet and can use any modulation, including potentially future adaptable modes - works with sound card technology and only a simple interface required - moving toward cross platform with the addition of the javaPSKmail software with fldigi - can set up ad hoc servers on short notice by anyone, not just those who operate a centralized system - can operate on VHF as well as HF And here is something that I just found out from Rein: PSKmail can be set up as a closed system without any access to the internet, if you don't want it to have such access. It can act as a server for a local or regional group, etc. If possible, this discussion may be quite valuable on the group. 73, Rick, KV9U Rein Couperus wrote: I would gladly discuss with you how we can make the systems work together, with the ultimate goal to increase efficiency and service coverage of both... As I cannot find any usable information about SkipNet (other than the generic definition of several flavours of overlay networks with skipnet routing) I would be interested to know what you are actually doing in that area Pskmail is presently an internet or LAN access system for HF, i.e. it uses existing internet infrastructure as a transport medium wherever possible, and it provides efficient 'last 3000 Miles' HF connectivity to various internet services like email, web access, twitter etc.+ fully compatible HF APRS messaging and posit beaconing. Pskmail servers are stateless, i.e they do not retain content, but provide agents to interface with internet services. As such I don't think you can compare it to SkipNet functionality (but I may be wrong here...) There are plans to add DTN functionalty to pskmail in future in order to bypass the internet transport in emergency situations, and I am fully open to any form of suggestions... I propose we take this off list... 73, Rein PA0R rein at couperus dot com
Re: [digitalradio] Pskmail Server in U.S.
Russell, Where is the Wisconsin one located? I live in SW Wisconsin, but my understanding is that there are 3 PSKmail stations listed as active in the U.S.,? At least on the 10.148 frequency. The main one I can sometimes reach is WB5CON in Mississiippi, but not easy to do on a consistent basis. What we need are many more stations on different bands. Especially would like to see some NVIS stations on 80 meters. Could even have VHF stations as there is at least one in a large city, but outside the U.S. Is anyone considering becoming a server station? If the Windows client gets PSKmail chat, we would be able to have both e-mail and peer to peer messaging using ARQ and could use on VHF as well as HF. That is not available with any other system, much less a completely open system fully GPL'ed. This is the only decentralized system that I am aware of that can do all these things. 73, Rick, KV9U Russell Blair wrote: I was taking a count today of Pskmail Servers in the U.S. and there are four 1 in Mississippi, 2 in Texas, 1 in Va, 1 in WI, and one in western Canada. Hopefully there will be more users as time goes on and the word gets out and more people start getting out and needing to use the mail servers. Russell NC5O
Re: [digitalradio] Need more drive ??
I looked up the interface and it is a solid design with an optoisolator and isolation transformers. May I suggest that hams here in the U.S. who are interested in building their own interface give serious consideration to the Unified Microsystems, SCI-6 Sound Card Interface. This is a kit but you can not really put it all together as nicely for the $25 + $5.50 shipping. International shipping is probably impractical at $20. I have read that some laptops can be a problem with the optoisolator although that would likely be true for similar optoisolators. 73, Rick, KV9U Phillip wrote: Hi, I have just built up the sound card interface by Jerry KD5ZUG for use with FLDIGI etc http://www.jbgizmo.com/page28.htm I was wanting to use it on my laptop a Toshiba Satellite 2140CDS running WIN 2000 Pro, but there appears to be not enough drive or pull down for this to work as it should. It does what it is meant to on my Desk top, which would indicate that the Laptop hasn't the power on its RS232 port. The strange thing in DOS before WIN 200 boots it does what it is meant to .. When the Laptop boots up the LEDS on the board light up as per the docs but once WIN 2000 screen appears the LEDs go out and don't light up again . Has anyone any ideas ??? Many thanks 73 Phillip ZL2TZE Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.23/2106 - Release Date: 05/09/09 06:54:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Fldigi RSID
Is it possible that one of the needed features to use RSID would be that it could be easily turned on and off for transmitting as it is for receiving? Otherwise you have to go in to several layers of menus to turn it off once you make the contact. If it stays on, it takes time at the beginning of each transmission to send the RSID data burst and I doubt that many would want that overhead. 73, Rick, KV9U aa777888athotmaildotcom wrote: Yes but nobody ever runs RSID TX ID (except me :-) I've spent hours with fldigi RSID receive mode turned on just to watch it work once (and in entire pass band mode). It's never once made a detection and I've never seen an RSID burst on the waterfall myself. K*B*l*0*0*Q
Re: [digitalradio] comp port seting for mixw ?????
Try Configure, then CAT/PTT but I am not sitting at my rig. This will get you close. Rick - KH2DF Sent from my iPhone On May 5, 2009, at 7:55 AM, ronaldfparmenter ronaldfparmen...@yahoo.com wrote: i don't know where the conm port is in mixw .i can't set the comp port for set up
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Q15X25 Packet test
From what I know about Q15X25, it was planned to be a replacement for packet, but did not work well enough. Maybe some are still experimenting with it, but considering the protocol structure being very nearly the same as the highest speeds for Pactor 3 (Speed Level 6), which I understand is rarely possible to use on many HF paths, it is not a practical fit for the vagaries of HF. That is why it is so important to have a number of fall back protocols to meet actual HF conditions with the appropriate mode. WINMOR may be the solution for sound card technologies. 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: Thanks Rick, I added it...now what. Where on the band are people using it? Andy K3UK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick W mrf...@... wrote: Hi John, I am just using MixW which I downloaded as a test at: http://www.mixw.net/index.php?j=downloads then a bit further down on the page is the q15x25dll. I used the latest version. Hearing some odd pulsing transmission like a sort of chug, chug, chug, sound that pulses for a few seconds, stops, and then pulses again. 73, Rick, KV9U John Becker, WØJAB wrote: Where does one get the software?
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Ready for Q15X25 packet test ...
Very good points, Darko, Even though the WINMOR set of protocols has been developed by one group, the protocol is open so that other individuals or groups can incorporate the protocol and may even further develop the protocol as they see fit. If the initial development group decided to not make a peer to peer mode available, and yet prove that this technology will work well, even if only for e-mail, eventually someone will want to do this for sound card peer to peer use. It would not have to be WINMOR, but something similar. It may not happen soon, it could take another 5 to 10 years, but I expect it to happen, maybe even in my lifetime, HI. The most important public service/emergency communication is tactical local and regional peer to peer. Everything else may be helpful, but not vital. Tactical communication has been done mostly recently by phone (with some CW, but mostly in the past) but phone has limitations that could be overcome by the right digital modes, to wit: - weaker signals getting through when phone does not work well or does not work at all - no CW expertise which is now the norm for almost all new hams - keyboarding skills common with new hams due to internet practice, HI - need to send large amounts of data, such as lists of names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. At this time we do not have optimized sound card digital modes that can do this well. Some are using systems such as NBEMS on HF and VHF and even packet is still used by a few. RFSM2400 (MIL-STD-188-110A protocols) are not legal on HF here in the U.S. digital portions of the bands but even if it was, the weak signal modes were not included so it has not performed well with HF conditions we often experience. Also, the program does not provide peer to peer chat (tactical) communications. Whoever comes up with a program that can do sound card adaptable ARQ HF/VHF peer to peer chat and messaging and also connect to a widely available e-mail system will have THE digital public service killer app. Why would you want to use anything else? 73, Rick, KV9U 9A3LI wrote: If WINMOR will be interface only for Winlink then it will be useless ! Sure, that will be pitty ! Q15X25 isnt good replacement for old AFSM 300/200 modems. RFSM2400 cant link with other network so useless too, what will be with WINMOR we can sit and wait ! :) 73 ! Darko 9A3LI Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Ready for Q15X25 packet test ...
Based upon the modulation developed for WINMOR, is it fair to say that some of the wider and higher speed modes will be roughly equivalent to Q15X25? It still is perplexing to me as to why Q15X25 did so poorly (based on numerous comments from those that tried it) yet the modulation is surprisingly similar to other high speed modes. Comparing it to other modulation schemes that have automatic adaptability: Digital# of spacing baud modulation mode tones of tones rate Q15X25 15 125 Hz83.33QPSK Pactor 3 18 120 Hz100 QPSK - speed level 6 Pactor 3 14 120 Hz100 QPSK - speed level 4 Pactor 3 14 120 Hz 100 BPSK - speed level 3 WINMOR 15125 Hz 62.5 PSK/QAM WINMOR 15125 Hz 31.25 4FSK Could the answer be that was due to the fact that it can not scale for varying conditions? I have anecdotal comments that P3 rarely operates at SL6. Maybe others who have experience with P modes can give us some idea how often it needs to drop to lower levels. When that happens, it would seems reasonable that Q15X25 would not be possible to use. 73, Rick, KV9U There is no standalone versuion, you can find driver for Flex32 called soundmodem too. You can use that modem with packet terminal software WPP and Paxon. But, MixW working much better in decoding q15x25. Just compare MixW and win-soundmodem with Flex32/paxon. MixW decode every packet then win-soundmodem every 10th maybe less. All tested on same PC, Creative sound card and the same RX. btw If here is any station from Europe interesting in q15x25 you can listen 3591Khz USB, 2500bps, FEC3 (15,5) Tx only 20W in NVIS antenna (bi-quad for 80m band) There is Linux JNOS and kiss Soundmodem running in test phase for next few weeks. Beacon is active every 90sec, beacon text: 9A1CRAIDUI,C,F0: 3591 KHz USB Radio Q15X25 [Krizevci, HR] 73 ! Darko 9A3LI Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Olivia
I think that the reasons that we tend to gravitate toward a given Olivia speed/bandwidth: - need a standard to find others on the air. It is easy to determine the BW, but not so easy for the number of tones. - if you use a non-standard speed to start with, you will have a difficult time finding anyone at all (speaking from experience, HI) - once you make contact, switching to different speeds/modes is not always that easy to do with some operators - it is probably best to start off with a robust subset of a mode and go faster if you need to do this, with the plan to return to the robust mode if faster ones don't work, but it can be a bit awkward - operators who have slower keyboarding skills have told me that they find that the 19 or 29 wpm of Olivia 500/16 and 500/8 to be a good fit - I can see where the slower modes of Olivia can be useful for really difficult conditions such as short DX type contacts or for critical public service messaging, but for casual use, the faster Olivia modes may not work as well as other modes, particularly MFSK16 which is also much faster (~ 40 wpm) Also, it is possible that eventually someone might be willing to come up with a program that will use a protocol that can adapt to conditions. Simon mentioned WINMOR which is the only possible protocol that can . This is the serious shortcoming of sound card modes thus far since nothing currently available can automatically scale speed and robustness to meet conditions. The closest thing we had for a short time was SCAMP and the ratio of speeds was fairly limited due to not being very robust at the slowest speed. But WINMOR should help a great deal in moving the bar higher. But from what I can tell, the WINMOR program from the developer is not intended to be used peer to peer, only for e-mail. That won't help most of us who are primarily interested in public service/emergency communication between operators at various locations. As some have found out the hard way, you don't design service/emergency communications to be sent via e-mail since you make a very dangerous assumption that the internet will be operational. At this time, the only options we have for ARQ keyboarding and messaging are packet and FAE modes but as technology advances maybe that one person will be able to develop the killer app for public service? Imagine if a program like PSKmail, which has peer to peer capability (not yet available for MS Windows), switched to an adaptable mode such as WINMOR. 73, Rick, KV9U Tony wrote: All, I'm not sure why, but it seems that most of us tend to stick with the slower versions of Olivia even when conditions allow for much faster throughput. The more robust tone-bandwidth combinations seem overkill when the path is stable so why go slow? I sometimes test the waters by reducing the number of tones (regardless of bandwidth) to speed things up. One can always increase the tones again if conditions change for the worse. It would be a neat to see some kind of throughput sensing where the speed of the mode changed to suit conditions automatically. Maybe an RSID-like preamble that automatically switched the other stations software to the best mode based on the last over. Tony -K2MO No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.8/2086 - Release Date: 04/29/09 06:37:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia
Jim, I agree with you completely about Clover II. Some years back, when I would call CQ, I would sometimes get a connection with Ray Petit, W7GHM, (the inventor of CCW, Clover and Clover II), but with our distance and dipole antennas, could rarely do much more than trade the path information, HI. Clover II just did not have a robust enough mode, which was somewhat surprising since the base modulation was 4 PSK31 tones. At the time the Winlink system used both Clover II and Pactor (some Amtor until that was phased out), but when they switched over to the Winlink 2000 internet based e-mail system, they dropped Clover II support so that really decreased use of the mode. WINMOR is an openly published protocol (perhaps not quite finalized yet) that anyone will be able to develop if they have the ability and interest to do so. This means it could be used in existing programs or even in a new program that would insure ARQ and adaptability for peer to peer communication. This is vital for those of us who have a serious interest in public service/emergency communications. We primarily need the ability to connect to other stations on a peer to peer basis, but having e-mail access to the internet can also be useful, assuming the internet is working where you need to move traffic. Based on the protocols for WINMOR, I wonder if it will sometimes be more robust than Pactor modes of which the most robust, even with P3 is 2 PSK100 tones separated by about 700 Hz. I have never seen any published information on the tolerance for ISI and Doppler and I suspect it may not be all that much based upon Tony's results with various modes. 73, Rick, KV9U jhaynesatalumni wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@... wrote: Would not WINMOR be an option here? Well, except that WINMOR seems to be single-mindedly a message passing mode. I wish there was some layering so that the modulation means and the error correcting means and the message passing were separable. Of course adapting to varying conditions means some communication down through the layers, changing the modulation scheme when error control indicates that is needed. CLOVER had that kind of operation - trouble is that it (amateur version) seems to lack the ability to go downhill when conditions worsen - it's aggressive enough about going uphill when conditions permit. Times I have used it, it would invariably get stuck trying to send long blocks that never made it through, when shorter blocks probably would have been successful. Jim W6JVE
Re: [digitalradio] Olivia
Hi John, WINMOR is an open protocol, therefore it is up to the developers as to what they want to use it for. I personally prefer open protocols because of this, but far be it for me to tell others how they can or can not use a given protocol. The current developers have designed the protocol to compete with Pactor modes. Preliminary information says that it will outperform Pactor, and be fairly competitive with Pactor 2, although at a much wider bandwidth, similar to Pactor 3. Unlike Pactor, WINMOR will have the ability to work within 200 Hz, 500 Hz, and ~ 2000 Hz bandwidths so that it can be used within the IARU band plans. And unlike Pactor 2 and 3, the modes are not including PSK100. We know that PSK modes are susceptible to ionospheric instabilities, particularly if they do not have training pulses. If you have looked at the very interesting mode specifications, WINMOR may have some of this newer technology. I have never seen any tests from SCS as to how much ISI/multipath or Doppler the Pactor modes can tolerate, but I suspect not very much. (Dr. Rink claimed some years ago that it could handle most paths well enough with their DSP, but I suspect that there are cases where the signal strengths are good but Pactor can not work and yet other modes can. As it progresses over the years, there is no reason that WINMOR can not be constantly improved. Unlike a proprietary lock in with a hardware/firmware system, it would be possible to update to newer modes just by downloading new free software. In fact, I would expect that to happen. While I don't see hams using it for casual chatting, but it could be done similar to how we used to use Amtor and even Pactor in the old days, HI. What I would like to see is the ability to have a superior ARQ sound card mode that can scale speed up or down to meet conditions and do this automatically without user intervention. Since one of my interests is pubic service, if peer to peer connections were designed into the software, you would be able to connect to another station under varying conditions and communicate directly from keyboard and send files as needed. Ability to connect to an e-mail server may be useful, however the first two needs must be met to be of value for local and regional digital communication. And that is something we don't have available to us at the moment. 73, Rick, KV9U John Becker, WØJAB wrote: Rick I feel you think that winmor was intended to be a chat mode. It was not and is not nor a replacement for pactor. John Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.10/2088 - Release Date: 04/30/09 06:01:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: TAK-Tenna
What really matters with any antenna design is to compare the antenna against another antenna to find out the actual real world performance. Most Tak-tenna users have not done this from what I have been reading. This is probably due to not having the space for a full size antenna, since if they had the space they would not choose something that is less effective. Some of the comparisons that have been done have been, as expected, very significantly below a rudimentary dipole. From my reading on this antenna, which is somewhat similar to the Bilal Isotron, you have an L-C circuit at the end of the coax that gives you a very, very, short dipole. As W9JI and other antenna experts have pointed out, a 2 foot antenna, now matter how many feet of wire it uses, will exhibit the characteristics of a 2 foot antenna. Most antenna designs that reduce a dipole length by more the 2/3 start to exhibit some losses. By the time they are 50% shortened, it becomes substantial. Even shorter antennas that appear to be resonant are likely going to be radiating some from the coax which can give you a sort of vertical or maybe low L design. The effective radiated power could be quite low, say, 10 watts or so (-10 dB) which mostly proves that QRP can work. It would be informative to compare a short vertical, which is very easy to install at say half size 16 feet or so high with a decent radial system (assuming ground mounting) compared with a similar height tak-tenna. Based on the height some are putting the tak-tenna, it seems that a simple vertical or even a dipole would be a much better solution. An inverted vee half size 40 meter dipole would fit in a linear distance of around 25 feet, would it not? Or use an end fed 33 foot wire fed against ground? 73, Rick, KV9U David wrote: I own a Tak-Tenna. I selected it because I have almost no space on my lot for a dipole. First, it is easy to build. Second, don't try this antenna without an antenna analyzer. I have the 40 meter version and it works. During the worldwide SSB contest I was able to talk to Finland, New Zealand, and Austrialia, but was it the antenna or that these guys had 65 foot and higher towers with beam antennas? Based on my contacts I think this antenna does well when the other guy has a beam on a high tower. By the way, there is enough public domain materials on various versions of this antenna around that you could build your own pretty easily.
Re: [digitalradio] finding someone to have a qso with
I always assumed that it had a lot to do with the amount of activity vs. finding someone. CW or other operators wanting to make a specific contact on a band or location, such as for an award, need some way to find a similar operator. There is a smaller subset of digital hams and those digital hams mostly use PSK31. They only have need for extra help if they want to go beyond PSK31 and work less commonly used modes or for awards perhaps? No matter how much we have tried to promote the newer modes, some of which have special attributes such as being far more robust than PSK31, have ARQ capability that is not available to keyboard chat modes, etc., the reaction I have personally gotten from other hams is that PSK31 is good enough and when it doesn't work, they do other things. As a recent example, a ham from a nearby community is was introduced as the digital expert so I was very interested in seeing if he would be interested in working some of the new modes, especially because a large focus of his group was with public service communication. I was quite surprised when he seemed almost annoyed with me for even suggesting that any other digital modes exist than PSK31 or should even be used on the ham bands. Since most digital hams use only PSK31, and there are well known watering hole frequencies on the popular bands, they never need any help with internet coordination. If a given band is open, they can almost always find someone. By the way, what is the LOTW group intended to be used for? 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: -My sentiments exactly Bob. I have tried and tried over the years and cannot figure out why the digital part of the K3UK Sked page is not used more. As you know, the SKCC and LOTW K3UK Sked pages are used constantly. The irony is that the SKCC and LOTW pages were established as after thoughts, the digitalradio sked page was my first goal and the initial design code was provided gratis by a member of this group N8FQ. Another irony is that the LOTW page that you suggested is quite often the group that spurs people to try digital modes like Feld Held for the first time. There are more digital mode skeds made via the LOTW page than the digitalradio sked page. Andy K3UK
RE: [digitalradio] FLDIGI with a Icom706MKII no PTT
There is no CAT PTT for the 706 series of radio's You will need to add an external PTT circuit to do this.. 73 Rick N2AMG http://www.n2amg.com -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew O'Brien Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 9:06 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] FLDIGI with a Icom706MKII no PTT I am helping someone set up FL-DIGI with an Icom 706MKII. Using Hamlib and the radio from the drop-down list Icom796MKII Untested we achieve rig control for frequency changes but NOT PTT. Using rig control and a XML file for the 706MKII we did not achieve either. So, it looks like Hamlib is doing everything except PTT, anyone have any suggestions? Andy K3UK Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: jpskmail can now send a binary attachment
Have you been able to get this alpha to boot up? (Note: you have to change erac to esrac in the main url to access the site.) 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien k3uka...@... wrote: I saw this message jpskmail can now send a binary attachment, some tweaking necessary earlier this morning from Rein PA0R . Looks like an important step and will make playing with the Java PSKmail fun this weekend. Andy K3UK The new release is out... http://tinyurl.com/cdu7ha
RE: [digitalradio] FLDIGI with a Icom706MKII no PTT
If you are using a digikeyer you should be able to make it work Set one port for radio control and the second for PTT. Whatever port in the digikeyer is setup for PTT you will need to set that on the first pane of the Fldigi radio config Hardware PTT once you do this you should be all set. 73 Rick N2AMG http://www.n2amg.com -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andy obrien Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 11:41 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Cc: micro...@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] FLDIGI with a Icom706MKII no PTT He is using the Icom 706MKII with a Microham Digikeyer , would not this provide the ability to PTT via FLDIGI and the 706 ? Perhaps FLDIGI would need to comm ports to configure, one for rig control and another for PTT. Perhaps by NOT clicking the USE RIGCAT option the Digikey would do the PTT. PTT IS achieved by pressing the test button in the Microham device router , so software control of PTT for the 706MKII can be achieved. Andy K3UK On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 10:32 AM, kh6ty kh...@comcast.net wrote: Rick's right, Andy. You can use the SignaLink +, or SignaLink USB, or build your own interface. If you want to build an interface, here is a link to one that does not use the serial port or USB port, but is powered from the IC-706 mic jack: http://home.comcast.net/~kh6ty/interface/ I have made a few commercial-quality circuit boards available as stated on the web page. 73, Skip KH6TY http://kh6ty.home.comcast.net - Original Message - From: Rick Ellison To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 10:04 AM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] FLDIGI with a Icom706MKII no PTT . Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] The usual OS Flame war thread....
I agree, Per, but like anything in life, there are tradeoffs. Some don't want to admit that, but some of us thankfully understand it well. It is curious that it is relatively rare for the Microsoft users to say derogatory comments about Linux. I can not say the same for the more extreme Linux users, and some perhaps not so extreme:( Needless to say I won't even respond the the impertinent comments by Hal since they are basically an attack on the intelligence and abilities of most computer users rather than on any merits. Those of us who have tried different OS's, some for decades, find good and bad in each OS, but the bottom line is which one has the most practical value right now. While most here in the U.S. overwhelmingly choose Microsoft, there are a modest, but increasing number, who like Mac. Linux is still very small. Much, much smaller than I expected by now. I have spent a LOT of time with Linux and have been surprisingly disappointed. And I did not expect to be. It is a very good thing to have open minded discussions about the value of different OS's for ham use and how one can help you do something that is not possible in another. Otherwise, no one would ever look at anything other than what they now use. It is no different than which digital program to use. They all have strong and weak points, but some will be a better fit for an individual ham. 73, Rick, KV9U Per wrote: These threads just do not end. Pse just use what you like and stop bad mouthing all the other systems. I only use linux but I'm not going to tell you that windows and macs suck, if you like any of those then good for you. Have some fun on the air instead. 73 de Per, sm0rwo *From:* José A. Amador ama...@electrica.cujae.edu.cu *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Thursday, April 2, 2009 4:18:22 PM *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] PSKMail Windows server? Once upon a time, in a very distant galaxy, there was an ace pilot named Anakin Skywalker... Linux has not been very successful here in the U.S. with most ham computer users. But it just has not been very practical at this point because like so many things in life, the trade-offs are too great:( Because too many refuse to think?? VI Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía y Educación Energética 9 - 12 de Junio 2009, Palacio de las Convenciones ...Por una cultura energética sustentable www.ciercuba. com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.38/2037 - Release Date: 04/02/09 06:09:00
[digitalradio] There really is no flame war from my perspective
Hi Stelios, The reason you may not have heard from others with their difficulties with Linux, is that they there are few who have even tried and those who have may not talk about it. I take the middle path, where I see the value of both OS's, but the value of Microsoft is still very large, at least here in the U.S. As Andy can tell you, I had a lot of trouble for several years with Linux not able to run my 22 Samsung SyncMaster 225BW, particularly with my higher end AMD/Nvidia HP computer. I have been able to run openSolaris from a live disk, not that I would plan to move toward that OS, HI. They always tell you to make sure that you try the live disk so everything can be checked out to work properly. Then when it does not, they tell you to install the OS and do the various configurations, downloads of software, etc. to get it to work. Most people have no interest in doing that and never will. I have spent many, many hundreds of hours with Linux, partly because I was going to figure this out and get it to work. It has been quite expensive compared with Microsoft products because of books and some commercial software that I have bought to try and get a better understanding. But after considerable interfacing with support groups and even to the point of getting a commercial product sent to me from the company, I could not match Microsoft. I eventually realized that if techy types like me are having this much trouble, it just is not going to go anywhere with average users, and that includes ham users too, if they can't get something to work well. Not just getting by, but with good usability. More recently I have tried live disks of Mandriva One 2009, Ubuntu 8-10, openSUSE, fedora 10,and others and found that although I could get the resolution correct for the monitor from some (not all), on my lower end emachines computer (2.4 GHz/512 Meg RAM), the font rendering of all Linux that I have seen thus far is inferior to WinXP and Vista. And I have also found that Vista is better than WinXP. Some will outright deny it, but I have had some agree that, yes Linux is not quite as good with font rendering, but that doesn't bother them because they want the freedom from MS, etc. I don't have any problem with MS at all as long as the product works well and supports what I am doing with computers. I have a brother who is an administrator for a well known University system and he runs many Linux and MS servers and has no problem with either. When I mention the desktop, he laughs and says that he would never use Linux for that, although he might use Apple Mac OSX. For me, (not others perhaps, but for me), if I switch to another OS, there has to be a reason other than I hate someone. It just has to work as well as what I am currently using and have additional advantages. Linux may have advantages in terms of viruses and malware, however a prudent person will still run security software on any system. But most all the programs that people like to use on Linux, which are generally free as in beer and free as in speech, are also available on Microsoft OS's too. For casual users who need mostly the web and an office suite, they could use Firefox and Open Office on either platform. For those who have specialty interests, especially ham radio, then MS has the edge since the best ham software is often only available on Microsoft OS's. Sometimes the only software. Since Microsoft OS's are typically pre-installed on computers here in the U.S., I don't see any change coming soon where you would buy a computer without an OS. Even the eeePC which Linux had a lock on the market for many months, is now mostly MS. If it can not beat MS on that platform, when will it? I see Linux gaining momentum in developing nations and since they make up the majority of the world's population, that has to eventually cause the tide to shift toward Linux. But that could be a decade or two away here in the U.S? For PSKmail, my expectation is that you need a sort of critical mass of users. That can not happen here without running the client on Microsoft OS's. Even then there are competing systems depending upon what you want for capabilities. Even for those who are Linux averse, it is not unreasonable that someone who wants to run a server could get that to work. I know that I could do it, as at one time I had fldigi running under Linux. (It did take quite a bit of effort and tremendous help from Dave, W1HKJ who is simply outstanding with his support). One area that you mention with the use of ARM based computing, or other low cost, low power systems, has to be the strongest value of Linux at this time. It can scale up or down as needed and Microsoft can not match it on the low end. It will prove to be very interesting to see how things play out. Maybe by the end of this year we will have a better idea of the direction? 73, Rick, KV9U Stelios Bounanos wrote: Rick, I must say
Re: [digitalradio] PSKMail Windows server?
Not able to get much of that happening here. The only server station has been wb5con so far. I pick up some other calls but not sure what they are doing. Just saw kd4qcl and seconds later saw kd5umw de kd5wdq. Maybe calling each other on the same frequency? I am hoping that as I use it more, and we have an increasing number of active servers, this system could become very practical by having one program that can help with multiple needs. As I have said before, having one program that can do what otherwise would require many different programs, would make this a very useful digital system. 73, Rick, KV9U Rein Couperus wrote: The latest version 0.3.3 ca already do a lot more... This is from the wiki: Send APRS Posit Send APRS message Send APRS email Send ping Send Link packet to server Receive APRS message Receive short email on APRS Receive weather (or other) bulletins automatically and store them. Set APRS Icon Set APRS Beacon Period (10, 30, 60 mins) Set APRS status message GPS connection (RS232 and USB) ARQ terminal mode: Get your mail from ISP (e.g. gmail) Send mail via ISP List, download and read files on the server (tell the sysop what you need) Telnet to any computer on the internet, e.g. your packet mailbox Get special info depending on your location from the web like: - tide information - List of APRS stations - List of messages on findu - For RV'ers a list of parking lots in a radius of 5 Miles from your location (EU only) - The latest wx bulletin - Grib files for zyGrib - Latest IAC fleetcode file for zyGrib etc, etc, etc... as PKSmail is a free decentralized system the sysops determine what info is available on the servers. You will have to bribe the system operators to get your specific stuff on it. In EU we got this organized so the same info is available on various servers, and is updated several times a day. Any info not on the server can be called from the web This is what you see when asking a files list from PI4TUE: atlantic 2009-04-01 10:12 8398 DL-wetter 2009-04-01 10:12 4042 highseas_uk 2009-04-01 10:12 10734 Kanal-Gibraltar 2009-04-01 10:12 61078 kueste 2009-04-01 10:12 1379 MMost 2009-04-01 10:12 22566 MMwest 2009-04-01 10:12 24980 navtex-dutch 2009-04-01 10:12 1529 navtex-emden 2009-04-01 10:12 5547 navtex-rostock 2009-04-01 10:12 3469 nordostsee 2009-04-01 10:12 28575 pings.log 2009-04-01 11:25 226 Stationsmeldungen 2009-04-01 10:12 1513 wx-dutch 2009-04-01 10:12 958 Mostly information for our sailing friends, and in various languages I am sure your imagination is able to extend this list... 73, Rein PA0R BTW, when I send a ping on 10148.0 here I get 5 servers answering... No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.34/2032 - Release Date: 03/31/09 06:02:00
Re: [digitalradio] PSKMail Windows server?
If PSKmail becomes popular here in the U.S., we will likely have many more servers than at present. Something that has been lacking with all other systems is the minimal use of the lower bands for NVIS operation. As long as there is a path close to (but not exceeding) the MUF, the signal quality will often be the best, but the longer paths may not be open, when shorter ones are open most of the time. We have at least one group here in my state that attempts to use an 80 meter 300 baud packet BBS but I know they have a lot of retries and probably time outs with the messages not always getting through on NVIS. This means that other protocols need to be developed since PSK250 is probably no better and maybe not quite as good as 2FSK300? Another thought is it possible to use PSKmail on VHF? It would seem like a good fit for moderate distance communication, local to maybe 100 miles? Maybe even with FM and vertical polarization, which 99% of active hams already have available? Has anyone tried this in EU or other parts of the world? 73, Rick, KV9U Russell Blair wrote: Rick, well the only I have heard today was VE7SUN @12:00 UTC, 30m seems dead hr in Texas. Russell
Re: [digitalradio] PSKMail Windows server?
Hi Howard, During the daytime, 160, 80, and sometimes 40 meters are NVIS capable depending upon world location, but for sure 40 meters is usually open for lower angle distances and can be very good. NVIS just means that you can get the close in stations as well as more distant station, so there is no skip zone. Linux has not been very successful here in the U.S. with most ham computer users. Even the ones who are very techy, such as myself, find it mediocre as an operating system. Several of my ham friends have tried it over the years too and abandoned it. A nearby ham, who is very tech oriented decided a few months ago that he was going to really get into Linux, until he really tried it and realized it just was not going to work for him and he is an electronics engineer. That has been the case with most other hams I know and some of us, myself included, really, really, wanted to like the OS, even with its shortcomings. But it just has not been very practical at this point because like so many things in life, the trade-offs are too great:( 73, Rick, KV9U Howard Brown wrote: GM Rick, I have been listening for PSKmail stations for some time. NVIS could be valuable at times but it would also be useful to have servers available on 40 and 80 meters under current conditions. These servers would be reachable from distances greater than NVIS and compensate for weak propagation in the 100 to 500 mile range. I think the guys in Europe are way ahead of us with this software. They don't seem to be so afraid of Linux. Howard K5HB *From:* Rick W mrf...@frontiernet.net *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:22:59 AM *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] PSKMail Windows server? If PSKmail becomes popular here in the U.S., we will likely have many more servers than at present. Something that has been lacking with all other systems is the minimal use of the lower bands for NVIS operation. As long as there is a path close to (but not exceeding) the MUF, the signal quality will often be the best, but the longer paths may not be open, when shorter ones are open most of the time. We have at least one group here in my state that attempts to use an 80 meter 300 baud packet BBS but I know they have a lot of retries and probably time outs with the messages not always getting through on NVIS. This means that other protocols need to be developed since PSK250 is probably no better and maybe not quite as good as 2FSK300? Another thought is it possible to use PSKmail on VHF? It would seem like a good fit for moderate distance communication, local to maybe 100 miles? Maybe even with FM and vertical polarization, which 99% of active hams already have available? Has anyone tried this in EU or other parts of the world? 73, Rick, KV9U Russell Blair wrote: Rick, well the only I have heard today was VE7SUN @12:00 UTC, 30m seems dead hr in Texas. Russell No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.35/2034 - Release Date: 04/01/09 06:06:00
Re: [digitalradio] PSKMail Windows server?
Since so few hams need to install servers, perhaps this could be one of the rare exceptions where some of us might consider actually dedicating a computer to Linux, for this special application? Most hams here in the U.S. would likely be accessing the server with a MS Windows based OS as that becomes available. If PSKmail became popular, we might need a fair number of servers, although some could be on standby. If I understand PSKmail correctly, it is possible to set up ad hoc servers as needed. You do not have the centralized politics that is done by design with other systems. Individuals and groups use their independent judgment when and where placement is made for a server. For example, some servers could be on standby and be activated for an emergency situation. You could also use MF and NVIS type operation that is not done much with other systems although it may require a better protocol than PSK for consistent results. 73, Rick, KV9U Andy obrien wrote: Is the software for the PSKMAIL sever side Linux based only ? I thought it would be useful if we had half-dozen more servers in North America but having to run Linux may dissuade some. Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] PSKMail Windows server?
I am not that knowledgeable about PSKmail yet, but from what I understand, if I go to the APRS tab and use the Ping button, any server stations on frequency that can hear me will respond back. So far, the only station that has ever responded has been WB5CON. At this moment, of the seven listed USA servers (includes Alaska), only WB5CON, KD5WDQ, and KD4QCL may be active based on the PSKmail server web status. WB5CON is about 750 miles from my location and on 30 meters that is about right for daytime propagation. The other callsign I have seen that I think is attempting to connect, or is connecting to WB5CON, is KD5UMW from TX. I am not completely understanding what you can do with PSKmail such as listing files, etc. Not much happens when I connect but maybe my connection is not good enough? I realize that the Windows version is not fully operational at this time, but it gives you a taste of the system. The peer to peer feature of PSKmail is not available so you would have to connect with a server only. The ability to connect to a peer is vital from my perspective since I am primarily interested in the public service/emergency capabilities of these kinds of systems. Otherwise, you need multiple systems for e-mail, peer to peer, local servers, etc. and it is rare to find enough hams who are willing to do this. Our local group is trying to piggyback off a resurgence of SSB activity here in the northern midwest U.S. to see if we can get interest in digital VHF FM using vertical polarization with Domino EX or any digital modes for that matter. If it proves possible to get some interest, we might be able to expose new hams to other alternatives. Only a tiny number have the slightest interest, but you have to start somewhere. 73, Rick, KV9U Russell Blair wrote: Rick, I saw your call wile I was listening on 10.148 PSK250 is that a server your. I'm looking for a call to try to connect to.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: CLOVER 2000 vs. WINLINK 2000
No one I know uses the HAL product, but it appears from their web information that they have several software packages that can provide peer to peer mail, chat, and gateway to the internet. Since the cost is prohibitive for casual amateur use, it is unlikely that you will find others to connect with. Also, I did not find Clover II to be all that good for weak signals and Clover 2000 is doubling the number of tones, using a much wider footprint, and doubling the speed of the tones. If you needed an automated e-mail connection, the Winlink 2000 system would be the only practical one for right now, with PSKmail as an alternative since it looks like a full functioning Windows system is being developed in addition to the current Linux version. Unlike Winlink 2000, PSKmail has additional peer to peer features and avoids the overly centralized nature of Winlink 2000 for HF server ad hoc capabilities. If PSKmail were to eventually adopt the WINMOR protocol or some other more robust protocol that could adjust for conditions, it could prove to be a very good solution to handling e-mail as well as local peer to peer connections. We are not quite there yet with the kinds of systems that I would like to see, but we are making some significant progress. 73, Rick, KV9U scottfike71 wrote: So, from what you are saying, it sounds to me like with a CLOVER 2000 setup there needs to be two users with the same HAL modem and same HAL e-mail software, and only then they can pass e-mail back and forth to each other only and not to and from the internet? With such a setup, can one user forward an e-mail from his buddy onto the internet some way?
Re: [digitalradio] CLOVER 2000 vs. WINLINK 2000
Hi Scott, Clover 2000 (circa 1995) is a wide bandwidth version of Clover II (circa 1992) and is may be used by a few agencies. It uses proprietary hardware/firmware similar to Pactor 2 and 3 with 8 tones at a baud rate of 62.5. I don't know if it is still used by American Red Cross, but at one time they were advertised as using it. The modem cost in 2007 was $1500, so it is not something you would find on the ham bands unless someone had it available to them from some other source. HAL sells Clover Mail software, but this is very expensive, like most HAL products, and probably is intended between two users. Winlink 2000 is system of various protocols that can be used on VHF using packet radio, or HF using Pactor. Clover II used to be used along with Pactor on the Winlink world wide HF BBS system, but this was phased out when they transitioned to the Winlink 2000 e-mail system. So Clover 2000 is more of a hardware/firmware modem and Winlink 2000 is a system using several protocols although the proprietary HF modems are quite costly. A new sound card approach is being developed, but is not yet ready for deployment. 73, Rick, KV9U scottfike71 wrote: I'm trying to figure out what the difference is between two global HF e-mail systems and need some help. What is the advantages and disadvantages and differences between CLOVER 2000 and WINLINK 2000? Why would I invest in a CLOVER 2000 setup versus a WINLINK 2000 setup? Any and all comments appreciated. Thanks, KC0BUS
