Re: [digitalradio] Re: illinoisdigitalham?
Some members of another group I am a member too felt harrassed and sent a protest. Sometimes we got too many announcements and no real news, so it became tiresome. Most mails were pdf's with large detailed images, which was quite a burden for slow modems. 73, Jose, CO2JA --- Andrew O'Brien wrote: I am guessing that it was taken down due to violation of Yahoo rules. Several people have written to me privately complaining about what they perceived as violations. I refrained from doing anything because the group was in some sense a competitor to my digitalradio group. Competition is good, so I did not want to do anything that would imply I am biased . The issues raised were related to multiple cross posting and frequent solicitations to join the Illinois group, often after they had asked for the solicitations to stop. The owner made some good contributions here but seemed to get a bit lost at times, a few times items I posted here were later re-posted as new items by this person. Since the Illinois group was activated and undertook major PR efforts, postings to this group dropped about 40%. Perhaps we will see some increased use here. Andy K3UK Owner -Digitalradio -- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, WD8ARZ wd8...@... wrote: My last one from them was: - Original Message - From: Jerry - N9LYA Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 3:18 PM Subject: [illinoisdigitalham] HARDS NEWSLETTER Not showing as a listing anymore either. Maybe a name change? 73 from Bill - WD8ARZ - Original Message - From: expeditionradio expeditionra...@... To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 8:54 PM Subject: [digitalradio] illinoisdigitalham? Anyone know what happened to illinoisdigitalham? Bonnie KQ6XA Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Yahoo! Groups Links 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
Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: [psk31] Global Emergency Network Marks Record
Hello David, I would like to ask what type of traffic is involved in the messages you mentioned (10,000 messages in Oct 2008). I was surprised because so many people use email and cell phones. Where does this volume come from? Howard K5HB From: David Struebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; digitalradio@yahoogroups.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tom Hesler [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Scott Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Russell T Hack jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Richard Krohn [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Pierre Mainville [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Norman Schklar [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; KW1U Marcia Forde [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; KC2ANN [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John W. Tipka [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John Miller N1UMJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Greg Szpunar (N2GS) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Gil Follett [EMAIL PROTECTED]; George Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Frank Van Cleef [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Frank Fallon [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Ewald, Steve, WV1X [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Earl Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Earl Leach (WX4J) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dave Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dan Ostroy [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dale Sewell [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Benson Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 8:22:53 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: [psk31] Global Emergency Network Marks Record Just for the record... My original comments were made tongue in cheek But for the record NTS Digital operates 24/7 on 80, 40, 30, 20, 17, and 15 meters... There are mutiple stations that do this, again primarily dedicated to NTS traffic... Some of the delivery points are made through packet links, the rest are by individual liasions to the traditional NTS system...For the month of October 2008, Eastern Area NTSD (and that's Eastern Area only, Central and Pacific also have their own totals) handled over 10,000 NTS messages 73 Dave WB2FTX Eastern Area Digital Coordinator- NTSD [snip] ,_._,___
Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: [psk31] Global Emergency Network Marks Record
At this point in time most of the traffic is ham to ham. like welcome to ham radio, your license is about to expire, welcome to a new ham club (group of hams) etc..Some of these are also confirmation of messages received, birthday greetings and the like... This ia a free public service sponsored by NTS and the ARRL and if fact was one of the first ham related activities... The relay in American Radio RELAY League (ARRL) refers to this aspect of the hobby. There still are the messages to the general public. In the times of communication emergencies (which is the prime reason for the existence of NTS) there are many health and welfare related messagesMany of these cannot be handled or delivered by any other means when the infrastructure supporting , the traditional phone system, cell phones and email disappears...The routine messages are a way of keeping the skills of trained operators honed or oiled if you will, to respond in a structured fashion in an emergency or disaster without giving it a second thought... It becomes part of your operating skills. Amateur Radio -When all else fails. Individual stations operating without any infrastructure but within a structured system, on emergency power, if necessary, have always been the hallmark of ham radio. Note, that what I have been discussing is the digital aspect of NTS... Similar activites as well as traffic volume exists within the traditional NTS systems. NTS Digital is only a complementary system to traditional NTS and interfaces with it at all levels of NTS structure, from Transcontential Corps (TCC) to area, region, section and local.. Indeed the automated portion of NTS Digital would not be successfull without these links to the traditional NTS operator structure 73 Dave WB2FTX - Original Message - From: Howard Brown To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 2:19 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: [psk31] Global Emergency Network Marks Record Hello David, I would like to ask what type of traffic is involved in the messages you mentioned (10,000 messages in Oct 2008). I was surprised because so many people use email and cell phones. Where does this volume come from? Howard K5HB -- From: David Struebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; digitalradio@yahoogroups.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tom Hesler [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Scott Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Russell T Hack jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Richard Krohn [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Pierre Mainville [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Norman Schklar [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; KW1U Marcia Forde [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; KC2ANN [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John W. Tipka [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John Miller N1UMJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Greg Szpunar (N2GS) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Gil Follett [EMAIL PROTECTED]; George Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Frank Van Cleef [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Frank Fallon [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Ewald, Steve, WV1X [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Earl Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Earl Leach (WX4J) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dave Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dan Ostroy [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dale Sewell [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Benson Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 8:22:53 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: [psk31] Global Emergency Network Marks Record Just for the record... My original comments were made tongue in cheek But for the record NTS Digital operates 24/7 on 80, 40, 30, 20, 17, and 15 meters... There are mutiple stations that do this, again primarily dedicated to NTS traffic... Some of the delivery points are made through packet links, the rest are by individual liasions to the traditional NTS system...For the month of October 2008, Eastern Area NTSD (and that's Eastern Area only, Central and Pacific also have their own totals) handled over 10,000 NTS messages 73 Dave WB2FTX Eastern Area Digital Coordinator- NTSD [snip] ,_._,___ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.9/1804 - Release Date: 11/21/2008 6:24 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: Power Mask for Bandwidth Rules - USA
Ham radio is supposed to do both. One of my ham neighbors in LA checked into an 80 meter AM net almost every night with the same model rig that he used in the 1950's. 73, John KD6OZH - Original Message - From: W2XJ To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 14:25 UTC Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: Power Mask for Bandwidth Rules - USA At one time the ARRL published plans for class B modulators with no filters. What they publish will stay with the times. There is no reason higher order analog filters can not be built if required. 25 or 30 db down at 3.5 K is not unreasonable since such analog filters are 1980s state of the art. Digital filters and digital modulators are no longer black art either. Then there are the popular SDR designs where almost anything is possible. I thought the hobby was supposed to advance the art not mimic commercial art of decades past. John B. Stephensen wrote: The ARRL is publishing designs for simple phasing SSB exciters with 3-pole filters and filter-type exciters with 4-pole crystal filters so we can't count on DSP. Phasing transmitter kits have filters with at least 5-poles so they are somewhat better. These should be able to acheive 23 dB suppression 4 kHz from the carrier under any circumstances. There could be an exception for older AM transmitters or transmitters under 10W PEP. What is really needed is a rule that says 3rd order IMD must be at least 30 dB down. 73, John KD6OZH - Original Message - From: W2XJ To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 23:16 UTC Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: Power Mask for Bandwidth Rules - USA Modern filters that have been used in real equipment since the 80s can be -1 db at 3100 and down 25 db at 3.5 k with negligible overshoot and ripple in the 10ths of a DB. Chebyshev filters are not really the filter of choice for this, elliptic tilers with some custom tweaks are a better choice. They are in very common use in broadcasting. Today digital filter, common in current rigs, can do much better. A lesson to be learned from AM broadcast is that when emission standards were tightened, allowance in the standard was made for older rigs. That so called mask was then later used as a means to add digital carriers. There is a lot of interference created. A better approach would exempt transmitter built before a certain date but only for the AM mode. ohn B. Stephensen wrote: An emission mask must accomodate AM so I looked at the speech amplifier and modulator chapter in the 1955 Radio Amateur's Handbook. It advocates up to 25 dB of clipping and no circuit has more than a 3-pole filter. The best that can be done today is a Chebyshev filter with 1 dB ripple and a 2.5 kHz cutoff frequency providing 23 dB of attenuation at 5 kHz and 27dB of attenuation at 6.5 kHz. Filters would be worse in 1955 as modern filter design methologies hadn't been invented yet. Only the outer portions of the mask should be defined in the regulations so that old equipment can continue to be used but hams with more modern equipment can be more efficient and use a larger percentage of the channel. The ARRL proposal of 9 kHz at -23 dB might be the best than AM'ers can acheive now. 73, John KD6OZH
Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: Power Mask for Bandwidth Rules - USA
Modern filters that have been used in real equipment since the 80s can be -1 db at 3100 and down 25 db at 3.5 k with negligible overshoot and ripple in the 10ths of a DB. Chebyshev filters are not really the filter of choice for this, elliptic tilers with some custom tweaks are a better choice. They are in very common use in broadcasting. Today digital filter, common in current rigs, can do much better. A lesson to be learned from AM broadcast is that when emission standards were tightened, allowance in the standard was made for older rigs. That so called mask was then later used as a means to add digital carriers. There is a lot of interference created. A better approach would exempt transmitter built before a certain date but only for the AM mode. ohn B. Stephensen wrote: An emission mask must accomodate AM so I looked at the speech amplifier and modulator chapter in the 1955 Radio Amateur's Handbook. It advocates up to 25 dB of clipping and no circuit has more than a 3-pole filter. The best that can be done today is a Chebyshev filter with 1 dB ripple and a 2.5 kHz cutoff frequency providing 23 dB of attenuation at 5 kHz and 27dB of attenuation at 6.5 kHz. Filters would be worse in 1955 as modern filter design methologies hadn't been invented yet. Only the outer portions of the mask should be defined in the regulations so that old equipment can continue to be used but hams with more modern equipment can be more efficient and use a larger percentage of the channel. The ARRL proposal of 9 kHz at -23 dB might be the best than AM'ers can acheive now. 73, John KD6OZH
Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: Power Mask for Bandwidth Rules - USA
The ARRL is publishing designs for simple phasing SSB exciters with 3-pole filters and filter-type exciters with 4-pole crystal filters so we can't count on DSP. Phasing transmitter kits have filters with at least 5-poles so they are somewhat better. These should be able to acheive 23 dB suppression 4 kHz from the carrier under any circumstances. There could be an exception for older AM transmitters or transmitters under 10W PEP. What is really needed is a rule that says 3rd order IMD must be at least 30 dB down. 73, John KD6OZH - Original Message - From: W2XJ To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 23:16 UTC Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: [illinoisdigitalham] Re: Power Mask for Bandwidth Rules - USA Modern filters that have been used in real equipment since the 80s can be -1 db at 3100 and down 25 db at 3.5 k with negligible overshoot and ripple in the 10ths of a DB. Chebyshev filters are not really the filter of choice for this, elliptic tilers with some custom tweaks are a better choice. They are in very common use in broadcasting. Today digital filter, common in current rigs, can do much better. A lesson to be learned from AM broadcast is that when emission standards were tightened, allowance in the standard was made for older rigs. That so called mask was then later used as a means to add digital carriers. There is a lot of interference created. A better approach would exempt transmitter built before a certain date but only for the AM mode. ohn B. Stephensen wrote: An emission mask must accomodate AM so I looked at the speech amplifier and modulator chapter in the 1955 Radio Amateur's Handbook. It advocates up to 25 dB of clipping and no circuit has more than a 3-pole filter. The best that can be done today is a Chebyshev filter with 1 dB ripple and a 2.5 kHz cutoff frequency providing 23 dB of attenuation at 5 kHz and 27dB of attenuation at 6.5 kHz. Filters would be worse in 1955 as modern filter design methologies hadn't been invented yet. Only the outer portions of the mask should be defined in the regulations so that old equipment can continue to be used but hams with more modern equipment can be more efficient and use a larger percentage of the channel. The ARRL proposal of 9 kHz at -23 dB might be the best than AM'ers can acheive now. 73, John KD6OZH
