Re: [digitalradio] Re: FHSS signals on 17 meters?
Hi Bonnie.. What exactly does the "bubbler" do besides conjurthe immediate vision of a Lawrence Welk intro? Howard W6IDSRichmond, IN - Original Message - From: expeditionradio To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2006 10:42 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: FHSS signals on 17 meters? It is the well known Cuban bubbler.Bonnie KQ6XA Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) SPONSORED LINKS Ham radio Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Recommendations on FAX
Are you able to put your hands on the info by chance? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: RussellHltn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 3:42 AM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Recommendations on FAX I have heard and even seen a diagram to allow this to be done. Apparently the basic fax mode is only half duplex. The circuit I saw was a basic hybrid to separate the two wire telephone line into send/receive and to sense when the local fax was sending to trigger the radio (VOX) Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] VOLUME SETTINGS
Fire away, Gridley! Would be nice to inspect both, if you please, Sir. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: DIGITALRADIO digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 1:05 PM Subject: [digitalradio] VOLUME SETTINGS FOR THOSE OF YOU USING MANY PROGRAMS THRU YOUR SOUND CARD..THIS PROGRAM SAVES YOUR SETTINGS BETWEEN PROGRAMS. VOLSET AND QUICKMIX. I CAN SEND YOU EITHER ONE IF NEEDED. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] A bit off-topic, but could use a bit of advice
I guess I'm sort of missing something in the translation here. I'm using an IC-746 here and using the computer's Sound Blaster w/stereo speakers to listen with. Audio level controlled by the speakers volume control. Works slick and sounds great. You apparently have some reason locally why you're not doing that? For me it provides super audio and easy to listen to compared to the ICOM internal speaker. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Dave Corio To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 8:03 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] A bit off-topic, but could use a bit of advice I'm trying to avoid the headphones. I have a real good pair, but like to sit with the radio on at length in case something interesting shows up. Usually have the TV on in the background, thus the need to adjust the radio downward. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: USA: No Advanced Digital HF Data Comms
Well, you're right IMHO, however, there's something more. Generally, in this country we've sacrificed personal freedoms by virtue of the DHS and the Patriot Act, yet no one has complained yet. Any interest by EMCOMM folks or anyone else who would entertain the notion of giving away something else to the DHS for any reason such as you addressed worries me greatly. We're not a commercial service nor should we even try to act like one. Digital Radio and all other forms of technology we help develop should remain within the real scope of this HOBBY. If we help EMCOMM in some fashion, super. If volunteering our services to the extent we have available, kudos to us. But leave it at that and don't sacrifice anything more of our valuable resources. We're already out of sync with the rest of the world, again IMHO for whatever that's worth. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: jgorman01 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 10:35 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: USA: No Advanced Digital HF Data Comms Your argument isn't logical. If the NGO's don't have the resources to use the frequencies they currently have assigned, where would the resources come from to allow them to use amateur service frequencies reassigned to the land fixed/mobile service? SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: USA: No Advanced Digital HF Data Comms
Generally, WE ALL are familiar with the ease in which we can work the world on the Internet. We're all pretty familiar, more or less, with text messaging on cell phones and IM with YAHOO, AOL and the like. Teens and young adults are fairly well-versed with the new technologies and wants 'n gimmies available today, that's for sure, and they expect nothing less today. As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather use the faster PSK or 100 wpm RTTY, etc when typing 'cause I do type around 78 wpm. I can fill up a type-ahead buffer fairly easily and it becomes a game with me to do so. The only thing that multi-gigibit bandwidth would provide us is the ability to transfer data in some form. I'm not sure how that would fit into daily Ham ops that do not involve data other than SSTV or DRM or one or two of the other modes. I consider SSTV and DRM simply data despite the technical definitions and hair-splitting. I know we could start a hard discussion on this involving definition of terms and I suppose anything not voice could be called data. I differentiate between PSK, etc keyboard-to-keyboard as not being data as such; it involves slow speed with intermittant, manual information transfer. I'm just saying that high speed would be useful with large blocks of data or information that is not typed manually during transmission. High speed would allow it to be sent between two or more points rapidly. ARRL broadcasts could be sent high speed for example, telemetry blocks from ISS, EMCOMM information and status reports, support requests, etc. Most operators would not have a need for high speed comms in my opinion. That said, the lack of need and maybe the assumed lack of interest would not help to promote the advancement of our hobby technically speaking. Experimentation leads to innovation and subsequent use/need development. I didn't have any use for the Internet and any of its tools for Ham Radio until I started to use/experiment with it. Restrictive and ill-conceived FCC rulings or equally ill-conceived band plans serve mostly to stifle ground- breaking technological growth and development. They can also stifle the technology now in use. I'm rambling here but from my perspective, the notion of the lack of high speed isn't the issude for newbies. Your comment about the magic of doing it without wires is quite accurate. I experience it frequently with the neighbors while talking to someone abroad, DIRECT, without Internet connection. They're simply fascinated and quite interested, both YOUNG and old..even while holding their IPOD and cell cam phone. The younger ones aren't spoiled with the technology today; they simply have it available and we as olders did not when young. It doesn't make me proud to have had to walk 20 miles through the snow to deliver a message as it were. Sometimes, there's things about the good ol' days that just aren't so nifty. I'm 62 and I wish I could have been born just a little later when I think about the advances that'll be happening to the hobby and the world's technology in general. Keeping a snail's-paced approach overall just doesn't cut it any more. IMHO of course Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Danny Douglas To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 9:37 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: USA: No Advanced Digital HF Data Comms I still dont understand why everyone seems to think we need multi gigibit bandwidth to allow people to talk to each other. I would almost bet there are less than a handfull of folk on here that type over 70 words per minute. Why do we need anything faster than that, to interested kids? SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] GRUMBLE
Yessir! I believe that http://groups.google.co.uk/group/eupskclub?hl=en-GB will work for the overall stuff. I also belong to EPC. I have EPC#058 and have found them to be a nice group of folks from what I've read. For posting messages, as a member of the mail list, you would use [EMAIL PROTECTED] Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Simon Brown To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:59 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] GRUMBLE My own eyesight dropped off a tad 2 or 3 years ago, it's very good indeed except when reading a book with small print. I'll take all this into consideration. Is there a EPC mailing list? I'm a member (1114) but that's as far as it goes. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: w6ids [EMAIL PROTECTED] H. I just think it's just a habit carried over from RTTY, since PSK is keyboard-based like RTTY. I've read some of the replies on this to you; still looks like keeping it looking like RTTY. BTW, your DM780 program is causing quite a stir amongst the EPC membership. Looks like MixW is going to fade off into the sunset, Sir.
Re: [digitalradio] WinDrm
Well, I tried the link and brought up a page which sez the account has been suspended. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: wb4mnk To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 1:02 PM Subject: [digitalradio] WinDrm I have tried this web site www.rarewares.org/files/others/melp_dll.zip but for some reason the web site will not come up. Any suggestions?
Re: [digitalradio] Announcing : Annual Digitalradio Awards 2006.
Hey, Cecil I went to the link at the end of your message. The site seems a bit sparse. I did learn of Soft Rocks a while ago, but it memory serves, it seemed like the project was sort of going into a sleepy mode. Tell me where to look for specific thingies like pricing for additional frequency bands, any goals for power out like perhaps 10 or 50 watts, development goals, software/GUI, typical ops. I saw the subdirs that incuded articles but I'm looking for what the info would be NOW. Is there a specific window through which orders can be placed, other than what's shown on the site? Where are all the units that have been sold? If they're on the air, sadly, I've never run across one. I wonder if my questions only show me to be a bit of a simple digital mushroom or something? Now, that said, if I missed something at the site I just visited, forgive me. I'm interested Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: KD5NWA To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 11:10 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Announcing : Annual Digitalradio Awards 2006. Andrew O'Brien wrote: Biggest disappointments of the year : 1. ALE . Has just not taken off in the amateur world. 2. Softrock 40. What happened to it ? The AMQRP club is all but dead, so nothing will be coming from that direction. The creator of the SoftRock40 however has not stopped, the latest is the SoftRock V6.1. Right now in beta phase is the SoftRock 6.1 RxTx transceiver that will soon go in production, it features 2 bands 80M 40M and outputs approximately one watt of power. The cost will be $32 and orders will be taken early next year. There is a Yahoo group where all things SoftRock is discussed, it the SoftRock40 group. -- Cecil KD5NWA www.qrpradio.com www.hpsdr.com Sacred Cows make the best Hamburger! Don Seglio Batuna
Re: [digitalradio] Announcing : Annual Digitalradio Awards 2006.
Thanks, Cecil, for the informative reply. I can't tell you where/how I got the impression that the project was sleepy. It has been quite some time since my first exposure to it, so the memory is a bit dull on this aspect. I must say that your message was well received here. I'll take on the related forum and join in. It should be fun to play with such a project, for sure. Just let me ask this and I'll then move forward. Is the technical support/sharing within the group similar to that found with Linux or is it less robust? I'm referring to Elmering for want of a better word. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: KD5NWA To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 6:33 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Announcing : Annual Digitalradio Awards 2006. SNIP SNIP First, that is not an official site of any kind so it does not reflect the latest and greatest available information. The official place for information is the Yahoo SoftRock40 group, that is the place where the designer of the SoftRock series discusses upcoming new items and people who use the SoftRock's discuss changes and improvements. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Announcing : Annual Digitalradio Awards 2006.
Well, I'll pass along my thanks again; I joined the softrock40 group this evening along with the forum for Quicksilver. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: KD5NWA To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 8:48 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Announcing : Annual Digitalradio Awards 2006. SNIP SNIP I'm not sure what the Linux support groups are like, although I use mostly Linux I don't belong to any group. The group is very friendly, and if you are having problems lots of people will assist you, many discuss possible mods and others chime in with their experiences. Personally it's one of the best groups that I belong to.
Re: [digitalradio] ALE CQ and ALE GPRS Re: SDRs Open Possibility for 18kHz Bandwidth HF Data?
Yikes, Walt! You could do some really creative CQ pictures for SSTV, not to mention DRM with that callsign and phonetcs. Barring any limations in the imagination, of course.GRIN Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Walt DuBose To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 8:13 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ALE CQ and ALE GPRS Re: SDRs Open Possibility for 18kHz Bandwidth HF Data? SNIP SNIP But I like calling CQ... CQ CQ CQ this is K5YFW Kilo Five Yankee Foxttot Whiskey K5YFW Kiss Five Young Friendly Women calling CQ 40 and standing by for any call. Over
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 14100.5 kHz USB - ALE Channel Bandwidth, IARU Beacon Guardband
Good Morning, Bonnie It would seem to me that, on the whole, the average Ham in the U.S. is not actually conversant with the content of information you've provided here. I'm implying generally in my comment. I wouldn't be surprised to find that it is probably something only very vaguely understood regarding the scope of the NCDXF/IARU Beacon Project, The ALE standards, and the IARU frequency coordination. I don't think the average Ham actually understands the basics of ALE, nor how it is intended for use, despite what you discuss in forums. I don't know how widely the information is promulgated in reality, regardless of how available the info is. Again, I know it's put forth by you in forums but how much of it reaches the general U.S. Ham population outside of those arenas is unknown to me. It would seem that there's misconceptions; I myself do not think in terms of channelization as you use it, in fact, it seems most U.S. hams resent the use of that term for whatever reason (other than the old saw about the I'll die before I give up my HF VFO posturing). Of course, those are MY words only. There are some adaptations required for daily ALE ops it seems and maybe, also, a rethink of how Ham Radio is employed and followed today by the average Ham. More's the pity, there may be technical and daily adaptations required to such a degree that the average Ham may resist it because it DOES involves change and evolution (I remember the advent of SSB vs AM back when). Of course, this is strictly IMOH and YMMV and Burma Shave to boot. I'm just commenting off the top and thought I'd post this just for grins.. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: expeditionradio To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 1:39 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: 14100.5 kHz USB - ALE Channel Bandwidth, IARU Beacon Guardband John VE5MU wrote: The logic of setting this up with an ALE frequency basically on top of the beacons is competely without merit, and based on the distorted notion that all hams possess the very latest in gear to filter out an ALE TX adjacent to the beacon frequency. Dear John, The ALE channel is not on top of the beacon channel as you suggest. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Anyone using DigiTRX (Ver 3.11) for ditigal TV?`
Hey Dave As I understand it, DigiTRX won't run on less than WIN XP.. I tried it with Win98 and failed to be able to transmit. I WAS able to receive pictures and I've been told that wasn't quite normal. Others have not been able to get Digi going on anything other than at least XP; the programs allegedly have been written for no less than that OS. Others have said that you need at least a 1 Ghz machine to make things go in Digi... I haven't seen that myself - my DigiTRX is working just fine. I only need to acquire a linear amp to get the transmit going. I run DigiTRX myself on a PIII @650 Mhz..an oldie. Personally, I like DigiTRX over the current offerings but I've never been one to follow the pack as it were. What do you mean the constellation never stabilizes? Can you pass along your settings as you have them? I noticed that Andrew sent you a message. He's pretty good with the Digi thingies. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: David Kruh To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 10:53 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Anyone using DigiTRX (Ver 3.11) for ditigal TV?` I can't use Easy Pal because I'm running Windows Me on on older Dell Laptop. I run DIGTRX and can see the ID in the waterfall but the constellation never stabilizes to see the picture. Does anyone use DIGTRX?
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Anyone using DigiTRX (Ver 3.11) for ditigal TV?`
Understood. I've sort of heard grumblings over time about it but never had first hand experience with it. Your insight into it just might be of use to. That said, you'd think that he would be able to at least be able to receive Digi transmissions butas you're pointing out, there's more to this ultimately. Wonder how WinDRM will work for him, under WinME? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Danny Douglas To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 7:17 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Anyone using DigiTRX (Ver 3.11) for ditigal TV?` Howard, you are probably gonna hear it a lot, but ME is one of the worst, if not the worst pieces of software that MS has ever turned out. Try updating that computer to something like W2000, which is should handle fine. ME isnt supported by most software packages.
Re: [digitalradio] Digital voice now
If you went LSB, wouldn't that keep General Class licensees from straying below the 40 meter cutoff frequency of 7.175? UH, I think I said that right. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: John Becker To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:48 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digital voice now Tony this is to low in the phone band for a lot of us. At 10:48 PM 3/22/2007, you wrote: All: I'm QRV digtial voice on 7176.0 USB. Any takers? It's 0400z.
Re: [digitalradio] multiple posts -
FUGGITABOUTIT.. not your fault. no reason for anyone finding their messages being repeated three, four, seven times to feel obligated to apologize. Shame on YAHOO Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Bill McLaughlin To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 7:03 PM Subject: [digitalradio] multiple posts - Posted this once and see mutiple instances of it --- believe the same thing is being observed on other Yahoo groups but apologies in any case,
Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Protocol
Hi Andy Say again what the sound card issues were that you resolved? Albeit the my answer to this question is in a website, I want to ask. are we discussing a mode used to simply monitor and document received signals and strength, etc or is this applicable to normal comm activity? For HF application, why the specific calling times and your reference to regional protocol when calling? Alan G3VLQ and I very briefly commented on this thread off line and we both are a bit in the dark, for whatever reason. What are your comments on the mode and its use? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Protocol Dave, JT65A is the submode for HF use. The same protocol is used since the software is the same. One station calls on the first minute (00,02,04,06, etc) and the other on the second (01, 03, etc). There is a convention that the most western station calls first when their is a scheduled QSO but I do not always see that followed. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Protocol
Hi Andy, I just did a Google search and found a plethora of links for the mode. I went on the link below and found it to be really a good info source, very interesting: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj/jt44.htm It still discusses 6M and up but YIKES! A single beam and 100 - 400 watts, pointed to the horizon for EME? Times have indeed changed. The only HF info/activity is appearing in this forum's threads. I'm intrigued by the implications for sure. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Protocol Dave, JT65A is the submode for HF use. The same protocol is used since the software is the same. One station calls on the first minute (00,02,04,06, etc) and the other on the second (01, 03, etc). There is a convention that the most western station calls first when their is a scheduled QSO but I do not always see that followed. If you listen , and hear a signal CQing, note their sequence (first or second minute) and set up the software to respond accordingly. If they are CQing the first minute, you will be second minute and thus would check the auto box and not have 1st TX box checked. Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Confused
Well, it's receiving by George but I'm not sure if it's consistently. However, I did read in a later message tonight where the bandwidth is such that the mode searches (s) making it easier to tune or some such thing. Anyway, caught the following in part: 003300 1 -12 8.9 291 5 # W6IDS DL3AAL J052 0 ? 0 3 It seems like I was being called. Wonder if DL3AAL is on the forum? Got his transmission here in Indiana even with him seemingly weak. That said, a bit earlier I was transmitting CQ, later to find that there's a sequence protocol for even mins or odd mins I think for this. Wonder if DL3AAL had actually heard me - otherwise, was surprised to see my call on the line. Can't seem to see how the screen is copied and then pasted into the message here. Screen Print? No, that can't be right. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Alan Tindal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: w6ids [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 9:23 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Confused Hi Howard, Yes,I feel it could be interesting but like you there isn't much info on actual setting up operating. I have manage to get the TX side working receiving something,but what it is I haven't got a clue, just row of numbers. I guess we will have to search a bit more for info.
Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Protocol
Hey Andy, Bear with me here. I am hearing signals on 14.076 but apparently not decoding all the time. Suddenly there will be the huh? from the program with RRR ? and such displayed on a particular line. BUT, never did see a callsign anywhere. Then, without warning, I see: 151100 2 -10 -1.4 32 3 # W6IDS K7UV DN31 0 10 Now, apparently I'm being called by HIM.though I had not been sending up to that point, just listening and my presence was not visible. I just clicked on TX1 and sent the li'l callup message shown there (I had double-clicked on his call to insert). Saw no reply from the station. I did see following lines ending with RO ?, another ending with OO ? and then finally 73 ? I believe I screwed up my end of things 'cause I read in one of your messages that AUTO was supposed to be on. I did not do that. When Auto is on (and TX first is UNCHECKED, the exchange sequence (general messages) take place automatically and in the right sequence, once I first start transmission with TX1? Without touching anything, I then subsequently printed CQs from EA4RH and OZ1JVX and also then EA4RH calling OZ1JVX: 153100 11 -9 4.4 -22 3 * CQ EA4RH IN80 1 0 153300 0 -17 5.3 30 7 153400 0 -17 3.4 -474 3 153500 5 -10 4.4 -22 4 * CQ EA4RH IN80 1 0 153600 0 -18 3.5 -474 1 153700 3 -12 5.2 -19 2 * OZ1JVX EA4RH IN80 1 0 153800 0 -18 1.2 -474 1 However, no comm exchange occured it seemed. I'm showing medium strength signals at one point, yet while decoding, no info is displayed for several minutes, despite the signal sending. This now raises a question about tuning. All I do is load the program and do nothing with the SpecJT waterfall window. Right now, the scale at the top reads from 0 to 1300 Speed 4. Does the program automagically lock onto a signal(s) and decode them? I began today with clicking on a weak signal around 460, the slider then jumped over to it and settled just a little offcenter to the right of the trace. Signals seem to be around from 20 to perhaps 900 all morning, but I did not see any indication that the program was trying to seek and lock on any of them per se. Are we supposed to point 'n shoot like we might for PSK? Are we supposed to have the scale slider sit right on top of a signal with the red markers equally straddling the trace to get proper print? While typing this message, here's what I've been receiving in the background. I can see the signals, some stronger than others, but no intelligence being printed: 162600 10 -2022 3 73 ? 162700 10 -2020 4 73 ? 162800 4 -2819 3 73 ? 162900 0 -16 -0.9 19 5 163000 1 -16 0.0 19 3 # 163100 0 -13 4.0 19 3 163200 0 -20 0.1 19 3 163300 0 -12 2.4 19 3 163400 1 -19 -1.9 19 3 * 163500 0 -21 -1.0 19 1 163600 0 -13 7.3 19 3 163700 0 -19 7.9 19 1 163800 0 -11 3.8 19 3 163900 0 -16 -0.2 972 1 164000 2 -11 -1.3 980 5 # 164100 0 -20 0.5 -207 25 164200 0 -18 2.1 -210 4 164300 0 -21 4.9 -210 11 164400 0 -13 0.1 -137 3 164500 0 -19 6.8 942 1 164600 0 -14 5.5 759 3 164700 0 -16 2.4 -137 3 Now, I know you're just a ROOKIEthat said, any insight you can shed for me? I'd entertain any insight from anyone else also, for that matter. I think others will be interested - there's been a few off line comments to me, expressing some intuitive difficulties as I during this learning curve. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] JT65A Protocol Dave, JT65A is the submode for HF use. The same protocol is used since the software is the same. One station calls on the first minute (00,02,04,06, etc) and the other on the second (01, 03, etc). SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Some notes on JT65-on-HF operation
I downloaded the utility yesterday. It works as advertised. The clock is right on the mark. Nice addition, just as you say. Looks like it will eliminate any problems regarding clock accuracy and JT65A. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Steinar Aanesland To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 3:27 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Some notes on JT65-on-HF operation Hi Dimension 4 is a nice little program to Always keep your clock synchronized(..)
Re: [digitalradio] Using the SpecJT to aide in tuning
Well, all I can say is THANKS!, Andrew. Your little blurb about that Sync Tone did the trick. I was clueless about the real relationship between SpecJT and WSJT displays. I was on 7076 when a signal came up. I just clicked on what appeared to be the Sync Tone in WSJT and Voila! The slider on SpecJT suddenly moved to the signal I was seeing and topped astride it. Up until then I wasn't printing anything - after the slider moved, I printed a CQ and tried my hand at connecting with the station as shown below - it worked: 022700 4 -3 0.2 -196 3 * CQ W6SZ DM14 1 0 022800 1 -30 0.1 40 5 * 022900 6 -4 0.2 -196 3 * CQ W6SZ DM14 1 0 023100 7 -5 0.3 -196 3 * CQ W6SZ DM14 1 0 023300 5 -4 0.2 -196 3 * CQ W6SZ DM14 1 0 023500 6 -4 -0.9 -196 3 # W6IDS W6SZ DM14 OOO 1 0 023700 10 -5 -0.8 -196 3 # W6IDS W6SZ DM14 OOO 1 0 023900 9 -5 -0.8 -196 3 # W6IDS W6SZ DM14 OOO 1 0 024100 10 -16 -196 4 RO ? 024300 10 -18 -196 4 RRR ? 024500 10 -8 -196 4 73 ? 024600 5 -2842 2 73 ? 024700 9 -3 -0.8 -196 3 * TNX 1 0 Now, I have to admit I wasn't watching to see if everything lined up in WSJT as you described.I was too excited. All I did was click on that large pulse. After that contact, I found I was printing a whole bunch more than in previous days of testing: 024900 6 -4 -0.80 3 * CQ W6SZ DM14 1 0 025000 2 -14 -0.5 24 3 * HB9TLK K3UK FN02 1 0 025100 7 -2 -0.90 3 * CQ W6SZ DM14 1 0 025200 10 -1824 4 RO ? 025300 10 -14 -475 3 RRR ? 025400 10 -2025 5 RRR ? 025500 10 -10 -475 2 RRR ? 025600 10 -1925 0 73 ? 025700 10 -7 -475 4 73 ? 025800 0 -31 -1.5 -498 7 025900 4 -8 -1.9 -474 4 * K3UK HB9TLK JN47 1 0 03 0 -33 10.0 -388 41 030100 5 -13 -1.9 -474 4 * K3UK HB9TLK JN47 1 0 030200 0 -32 4.0 -719 2 030300 9 -12 -1.9 -474 4 * CQ HB9TLK JN471 0 Anyway, I broke the ice tonight. Still a bunch to put together but at least I accomplished something. That was neat! When making a contact, are we supposed to manually engage each of the TX1 - TX6 message keys in the proper sequence, or does it all happen automagically with the AUTO is ON engaged? I turned the AUTO to off during the exchanges because I noticed that I was going into transmit mode before the DECODING was done and I could see his transmission. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 8:11 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Using the SpecJT to aide in tuning I got a couple of useful tips today, played around a little and thought I would pass a long some information to fellow JT65A rookies. SNIP SNIP Enter the SPECJT. I had no clue about this display other than it looked cool. By it's self it appeared to do nothing. However if you have SPECJT and the WJST waterfall on the screen at the same time, you will notice SPECT responds to clicks on the WJTS mains screen waterfall. I am told that a good precise frequency can be achieved by sync'ing with the tones. the sync tone would be at 0, and the three red lines will be in the RO/RRR/73 positions...easy to decode even if timing off. The lowest tone is always the sync tone, even when sending the SH messages (WD4KPD David) SNIP SNIP So, it seems that our goal should be to find the sync tone, align it with the left most green line by clicking on in in the JT65A waterfall and getting the RO/OOO stuff within the three RED lines on SPECJT.
Re: [digitalradio] help prevent qrm
Initially, I was going to send this to another person, but in rereading your message, I cut 'n paste it to you. It was more appropriate. What are your thoughts regarding the position of your signal on a given frequency, perhaps 7076, or 18102? One forum member strongly recommended in a message a couple of days ago to make sure the transmitter was REALLY, REALLY close to the station being monitored. This will enable both parties to decode each other without taking up too much bandwidth. He also made the comment that he had been set up fairly narrow and missed a DX contact because he was not printing the DX, even though the DX station was calling him nearby. He wants an effort made to tune the transmitter to the sync tone position of the station you're copying. With RIT off, and my ICOM IC-746 tuned to 18102 and printing a station, won't I be right on frequency or really close to him and his sync tone position as such? In my mind, that will not happen unless by chance, it seems to me. I'm asking because I had thought that my transmit frequency would be changed much like for PSK but it apparently is not the case. So, if that is so, I wonder what the correct protocol would be to accomodate many stations on or about 14076, 18102, 7076, etc etc? AND, not take a huge amount of bandwidth in each case, a protocol that we can all agree upon and adhere to as applies to HF ops with VFO controlled equipments? Otherwise, if I'm trying to tune my ICOM so that his sync tone is zero beat or whatever, in WSJT, it'll take forever due to the very slow decode processing that occurs. H...is this software normally used with channelized radios on VHF/UHF? What if we set up specific frequencies to operate on, sort of like mini- channels; so many Hz between each one? With RIT off, maintaining USB or LSB consistently, with today's radios, wouldn't better operating practices be enjoyed along with fairly consistent success? It seems to me that the matter of the importance of the Sync Tone would be better addressed than by happenstance. Just asking newbie questions, perhaps with an air of the mushroom notwithstanding. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD To: DIGITALRADIO ; WSJT Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 9:53 PM Subject: [digitalradio] help prevent qrm 20m was a mess today, everyone planting on 076. this is not necessary ! try this... set in spectrum the jt65 DF axis option freeze the program to 0, with tol to 200 tune whichever station you wish to tune by shifting your dial to place the sync tone on 0 SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] JT65A on 18.102 MHz
I'm monitoring there now on USB. Hearing RTTY at the moment and either Packet or Pactor off on the side at 1415Z - 1430Z so far. LSB seems quiet; RTTY and the other signal BARELY discernible. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 7:49 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] JT65A on 18.102 MHz Steinar, Good Morning...I am there also. Hope to work Norway on this band. Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Introducing The Complete Bozo's Guide To HF JT65A
Hey Andy! Dave's right. Yessir, great job for the Bozo support here in Indiana. The issue of frequency adjustment needs a little more clarification for putting the transmitter on the mark. BTW, just for discussion - what would be wrong sending something like KB3MOW W6IDS OOO, KB3MOW W6IDS RRR and KB3MOW W6IDS 73 ?? Seems to me it clears up things across the board for HF and this mode. No possible chance for confusion. I've been tempted to do it. - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 9:15 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Introducing The Complete Bozo's Guide To HF JT65A --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Corio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nice job, Andy, but you never got deeper into the frequency alignment. SNIP SNIP I am decoding you at -5 DF and N5BA at -13 , I never did try to get closer to him. When there is a pile up and you are not sure whether the RO or RRR is to you or someone esle near by, check the DF when you received a line with the call sign you are working. Note the DF then, if you see an RRR or RO that is from a vastly different DF, then chances are you are getting someone else's RO/RRR and not the one you need. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] HB9TLK JT65 7076.0
Are we under the same power constraints as PSK or is full power allowed (meaning w/o linear) for JT65? - Original Message - From: KT2Q To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 10:30 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] HB9TLK JT65 7076.0 Andy, Boy, that would be something. I was running 20 watts / rotatable dipole on the tower at 75 feet. Cesco's antenna is a low G5RV with a barefoot rig. He usually runs 50 watts on digital.
Re: [digitalradio] HB9TLK JT65 7076.0
Thanks, Dave. I wasn't sure because of the PSK limitation. Can't be too careful; still learning. I'm running an ICOM IC-746 so I don't think I'll have problems. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Dave Sparks To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 9:22 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] HB9TLK JT65 7076.0 Hi Andy, I've been running at half power but I suspect that most transceivers could safely transmit at full power for a minute or less followed by at least a full minute's rest, which is the nature of the mode. 73 de AF6AS Dave SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Do we need a separate group for JT65A?
Hey Danny. You know, I don't have a problem posting my newbie/learning messages off line to whomever I am getting help from. I concur with your message but if there's ONE member who perceives the thread to be merely that of confirming contacts and not learning curves, there may be others. Besides, 'tis better to look goofy in private than expose to everyone how much of a mushroom you are. That's always safer Hmmm... the thread is kinda like BETA testing. When we've got the kinks ironed out off line, then Andy could publish an ONLINE update to the Bozo project he created. That way the forum is krispy clean. I'm going back to that...thaterOTHER mode and continue fiddlin' and wrack up the world-wide contacts with everyone. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Danny Douglas To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Do we need a separate group for JT65A? Isnt this the reason for the group? If we had a separate group for every mode, there would be dozens of sites we woudnt even be aware of, and it would drag none of us into researching the modes ourselves. If the mode gets big enough, and lasts, beyond the initial excitement of a new mode, then it is possible it does need a new group, or spotting group at least, but for now, lets leave it be.
Re: [digitalradio] Mode du Jour /Universe of users ( was ) Do we need a separate group for JT65A?
Hello Andy... The group has been an interesting read for me, regardless of the nature of threads. That said, your message seems to follow the focus on repetitive station or callsign activity. Isn't that the nature of the message which started this thread when jhaynesatalumni wrote: Or is the message volume going to die down after everybody here has worked everybody on all bands? While I agree with you wholeheardedly, the thread almost begs the question what's the purpose of the forum? Fresh callsigns for JT65A or popularity won't change the basic reason for the message segment quoted above, as I see it. The quote seems to have an issue with the message volume. If the other modes have limited numbers of users, the activity will be low but the message volume high and just as focused as for JT65A until a level of balance is reached. Yet, they do not draw the same type of observation as has just happened for JT65A. When the other experimental modes appeared, were there not very active message threads within a limited following - albeit still limited? The forum seems to be perfect for NEW modes or the adapting of a mode for another use. The JT65A level and type of message activity seems to be a perfect fit for the forum at this point in time. The activity and back 'n forth chatter is healthy and energetic. Otherwise, what's the point of the forum? If not this activity, then what else? Just musing.. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 8:01 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Mode du Jour /Universe of users ( was ) Do we need a separate group for JT65A? With regard to the question about should the JT65A talk be shifted to it's own dedicated group, Danny is correct, he pointed out that I formed this group years ago when the custom was to have a group for each mode. I wanted to discuss them all, not go to an individual group for each mode. One issue , with the less used digital modes, is the fact that after a while you are working the same people over and over again. This is true for ALE, Olivia, DominoEX, Feld Hell, PAX2, and more. PSK31, RTTY, and MFSK16 are the only ones that seem to have wide enough use to produce variety . Even RTTY in contests tends to be the same 200-300 hams. JT65A has a new crop of call signs that are not commonly seen on the other experimental digital modes but time will tell, whether this mode will become popular enough to ensure some freshness of contacts.
Re: [digitalradio] Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off
Well, Bill, I'll thank you for that. It answers a nagging question. I've seen instances where I've seen myself being called by a number of stations over time periodically.and I wasn't even keying the rig. Can you explain what is happening - I DID have Deep Search ON as I recall. Only recently did I switch it off. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Bill McLaughlin To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 7:19 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off All, Per topic, deepsearch is great for EME, a wonderful feature. But on HF is is of little value and will only lead to false decodes and stations answering you when you haven't transmitted. Decode menu, JT65, check No deep search SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off
How would one format an HF call3.txt Guess I need to take a peek at my folders and look at it. I'm assuming such a file use is possible? It's used for decision-making by the software sometimes in determining validity of callsigns or?? I'll bet it's discussed in the docs, but tell me anyway. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Bill McLaughlin To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 8:25 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off Hi John, Sure you already know this but the key was the 0 3 SNIP SNIP As I hope I made clear; deep search using call3.txt is great for EME, with known precautions. On HF it is less useful. Perhaps running -30 db S/N of HF with a dedicated HF call3.txt file it might be entertaining.food for thought. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] JT65 5mw QSO with XE2AT!
Hmmm.. there's a lesson here isn't there? When no one is looking, what do YOU do normally? Amazing, indeed. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Tony To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 8:18 PM Subject: [digitalradio] JT65 5mw QSO with XE2AT! All: Managned to work Al, XE2AT on JT65 with 5mw this evening on 20 meters. All was using a 40 meter Bazooka antenna with tuner. Turned the power down to 1mw (according to Oak Hills WM2 QRPp wattmeter) while sending 73 and Al heard me! Amazing mode...
Re: [digitalradio] WSJT recompile
Not from here, Leigh, other than to add that it seems to make sense to create a version that is more applicable to HF requirements. Nothing wrong with that at all. Thanks for the effort; should be interesting. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Leigh L Klotz, Jr. To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:15 PM Subject: [digitalradio] WSJT recompile I am working on recompiling WSJT, as I mentioned to Cesco. I have got it down to one unsatisfied link error, probably due to compiler version skew (gmttime_ in Audio.so). SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] JT65 Flatten Spectrum Option
Andy, I dunno about that. It all depends on whether or not your flattened spectra lasted for more than four hours! Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:36 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] JT65 Flatten Spectrum Option Yes, I noticed my spectra was flattened . I was hoping it would not cause my wife to leave me and...oh wait, wrong subject. Seriously, I did some Spectra testing last night and found turning it off solved the problem. Then this morning I received a message Unable to allocate a bivariate polynomial for factorization. That sounds more painful that a flattened spectra. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off
Hello Cesco... I am assuming the file is created automagically by the software. What's the purpose of the date? Should I go in and edit the file manually? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: cesco12342000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:22 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Deepsearch on JT65 HF --turn it off How would one format an HF call3.txt example from file: ZS6GPM,KG33XU,,10/02 i think format is callsign,locator,,date additional entry would be: HB9TLK,JN47HJ,,3/07
Re: [digitalradio] HF search text
Well, I'm happy to read that YOU'RE doing this. I was going to set out to try to make one for myself. S, I'll give you my stats if you don't have it: W6IDS EM79 Regards, Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: John GM4SLV [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 1:37 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] HF search text On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:35:40 -0700 WN1Z [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the person who is compiling an HF deep-search text: please post here when you do that. Hi Orrin and others, I'm adding every Call/grid square I get sent, or that I can deduce from reading messages on this list. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] ARRL wake up ......
HI Roger, I've read all the segments of the thread and I, personally, do not see any anti-U.S. rhetoric in the comments. I do see reaction to excessive authoritarian control over our hobby in this country by individuals outside the CONUS environs. Besides, us Yanks have a fair amount of country-bashing history when holding up the tenets of THIS country on more than one occasion. That said, there's one thing we all seem to have in common and that is a healthy desire for government controls (and quasi- agencies like ARRL) to get off our backs and let us experiment and grow like we used to. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 8:27 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ARRL wake up .. I said it once before, and I will say it one last time. Slurs against *any* country on this reflector or in any other amateur radio venue are absolutely contrary to the spirit of international brotherhood that has always been the hallmark of amateur radio. John, if you have personal problems, solve them. Don't bring your anti-US prejudices here. Having said that, I too am tired of the ARRL rant. de Roger W6VZV No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/778 - Release Date: 4/27/2007 1:39 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice Repeaters on HF (Re: Nearly Vacant HF Spectrum)
Hello, Howard I snipped everything out except for that quoted, because I couldn't think of a better reason than that asked in your question. So I say, YES! (even if it might not be so, but let 'em think it is). Just by that, inovation might surface in the process. If we don't use the frequencies, then it's our own fault for not holding on to them when they're taken. Sorry if I took a simplistic view but what the hey. It's only one aspect of your thread, I know. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Howard Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 9:14 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Digital Voice Repeaters on HF (Re: Nearly Vacant HF Spectrum) OK, I will ask... SNIP SNIP Is the primary purpose to use the bands so we don't lose them?
Re: [digitalradio] Here's a silly thought.
Hey, Rick.. If all but two PSK signals are normal in display and two or three signals suddenly BLOOM with little ragged edges around their skirts on either side causing them to be really wider than other signals. wouldn't that pretty much eliminate the soundcard question? I mean, if I'm showing 7 or 8 stations all sort of comparable, and then an XE and an LU1 and maybe later a KB9 appear, all showing considerable width and maybe some raspies on the signal, I wouldn't be concerned about my card here. Daily, I can sit on any band to monitor PSK and without fail there will be four or perhaps five stations during a given period who are noticeably excessive in width compared to the rest of the population on frequency. This happens all day long, regardless of the time or day. It seems to me that if it's the sound card, most all the stations are going to give the receiving station some problems, not just a couple. When I see a station that seems too hot, I'm not inclined to second-guess myself and hesitate to try to let the station know they're wide. There are a whole bunch of stations on the air that are simply not operating PSK properly. There's a whole bunch more who do not say anything at all when they come across a wide signal, even when they make contact and chat. Hmmm...with that said, YOU could then point a finger, huh? UH, am I saying that I can see a problem but another station can't, not just won't? Me thinks I'm starting to lose my momentum here. Well, since I've typed this li'l diatribe, here it is. Regards, Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 9:18 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Here's a silly thought. And to clarify ... exceeding necessary power is not the same as driving the rig beyond linearity. It is the later that causes the wide traces and multiple traces in most cases (sometimes could be due on the receiving end with some lower quality sound cards). SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Non mailbox use of pactor ?
Hey! I've got a PK-232MBX that's on line. I use it from time to time for PACTOR I keyboard-to-keyboard, FEC et al. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:40 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Non mailbox use of pactor ? How many keyboard-to-keyboard Pactor stations would you estimate are QRV, John? 73, Dave, AA6YQ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: FDMDV confusion
- Original Message - From: Steinar Aanesland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 3:33 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: FDMDV confusion Hi Dave, A quote for this document http://n1su.com/fdmdv/FDMDV_Docs_Rel_1.0_revised.pdf Tuning: Two methods of tuning are available, Manual Tune and Auto Tune. Both use the mouse pointer that changes to a “+” when moved within the display area. For Auto Tune, just left click anywhere within the display to sync your receive frequency to the TX signal. SNIP SNIP Hi Steinar, those were helpful tips for sure. I installed the program this afternoon and had immediate success with receive. I heard the following stations, starting at around 1700Z or so on 14.236: K0PFX MelSt. Louis N1FFX Gerry Sterling, MA FN42 K4RTN Jack Brooksville, FL Signals were good and I copied all three stations fine with good quality until fade caused deterioration.. Eventually, I left for some shopping after a period. Then, around 2025Z I tried again and picked up /= 5/9 +5 signals:: W7QQF ED PHoenix Calling a station but seeming to take turns with - K3DCC Jim Albuquerque, NM and neither station heard the other. WB6RPO and K3DCC sort of collided from time to time but when both weren't talking at the same time, both were clear.. After not too long a time, next heard: WB5RRR Sandy Enid, OK EM16 with a 5/9 + 10 signal and clear. around 2032Z I played around with your hints 'n kinks and saw the effects. The methods seemed to help nicely and showed me something I was not aware of. BTW, the quality of the signal audio tends to grow on you. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php View the DRCC numbers database at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies
- Original Message - From: Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2007 4:50 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Can Be Reliable in Emergencies OK Dave, You must admit that the problem you have is not Winlink, but any form of networking on HF. But you should not forgot that Ham Radio is a diverse hobby and everyone has the right to have a go with the modes they like. Otherwise everything must be banned except QSOs. SNIP And in 99% of the countries of this world the administrations do not give a damn about band segments and all this stuff. The subbands are really gentlements agreement! (no offence to gentledames of course who I admire). FCC only rules USA. Don't forget the rest of the world. The rest of the world has more radio hams than USA. Merry Christmas!!! Uh, Demetre Wow, you're sure off target with Dave by your comments. Are you saying, generally, screw the U.S. and gentlemen's agreements? There's more of you outside the Continental U.S., therefore that's where the power lies? Are you saying, generally, you'll do what you want, when you want, without regard to efforts to make life bearable on the ham bands because, as you wrote, in 99% of the countries of this world the administrations do not give a damn about band segments and all this stuff. So say your adminstrations, so say YOU and yours? Thanks for making this thread all the clearer for me, Demetre. My heart goes out to Dave. He'll never win this thread's debate. More's the pity, for us all. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
[digitalradio] Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
There have been recent comments attesting to the demise of PACTOR I. Is this true for all intent and purposes? For curiosity, who's using PACTOR I for keyboard QSO's with an outboard TNC such as the venerable PK-232 and others? If there is such activity is is hit 'n miss or quasi-scheduled? Regards, Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
- Original Message - From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 12:56 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD? Hello Howard, I use Pactor I every now and then for keyboard to keyboard. It is hit and miss for me; more a novelty than an oft-used mode. Interesting. Thanks for the reply, Bill. I asked about this twice now and yours is the first reply. I asked also on the PK232 group with no response and that surprised me a little. Well, I have my original PK but without current upgrades. I would like to put it into use but if it is seldom used by anyone, I wonder if I might just want to pitch it.I think it's a neat box and despite my liking PACTOR if there's no chance of enjoying the mode much and no one is interested it making the mode more active... I like the mode myself but then I suppose I'm old enough to want to hang on to familiars now I suppose. I'm 62 and while I like SOME of the new modes now out, I still enjoy RTTY, CW and (heavy sigh) PACTOR. H, I even like the idea of digital voice and DIGI file/pix transfers, and SSTV. Where do you operate? Is it hit 'n miss or perhaps a schedule? I have PKware installed and it's worked very well over the years. I've been told that one use of the PK is to implement the upgrades to take advantage of what is called superior filtering for PSK and RTTY and such. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
- Original Message - From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD? Elaine and I had some attempts to work each other the past few days as I heard her on the bands but we were always quite weak to each other. If we had been using Pactor modems, especially those from non SCS manufacturers, I doubt that we would have had any luck connecting. We did have a small amount of success with MFSK16 which you would think would work the best. I know that I have more trouble tuning and locking in this mode than I used to but I am not sure why. The really curious thing is that Elaine switched to RTTY which you would think would be much worse of a mode and yet we were able to do some level of success in printing. Then she switched to Hell mode and while not the most sensitive mode, was able to copy about 50% of the characters since there was severe QSB on a barely discernible signal on the waterfall or by ear. It would have been interesting to try FAE 400 though, but maybe conditions were just too poor for even that mode. I could not imagine going back to hardware boxes due to the cost and the vendor lock in issue. At one time we had G-Tor on Kantronics, Pactor on SCS, and Clover II on HAL, and the only mode that had some level of compatibility was Pactor of the three proprietary (or quasi proprietary like Pactor) modes. We all know which one survived to go one and become the most popular of the three on the ham bands? The more hams that can use a given mode, the more chance of success of that mode with additional attributes taken into consideration (sensitivity, ease of use, ability to work under difficult conditons, etc.). 73, Rick, KV9U Patricia (Elaine) Gibbons wrote: *//* */I prefer live chat via Pactor-I .. /* *//* */The problem is the decline in general usage by /* */most radio amateurs who prefer to not purchase a /* */a TNC for this mode, and instead use soundcard/* */modes .. /* *//* */Jus sayin /* *//* */Elaine /* -- Patricia (Elaine) Gibbons WA6UBE / AAR9JA http://www.qrz.com/wa6ube Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php View the DRCC numbers database at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1204 - Release Date: 12/31/2007 12:20 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
SHEESH! Apologies to All... looks like a bit of operator error is apparent with the message below. I was editing a reply and probably pushed the wrong switch as I got up to take care of a chore. Sorry for the trash being sent. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: w6ids [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 10:19 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD? - Original Message - From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD?
- Original Message - From: Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 2:28 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Is PACTOR I Actually DEAD For KBD - KBD? I was active on the TNC modes, i.e. Amtor, Pactor, RTTY for a lot of years, roughly 1989-2003 or so. Pactor was quite popular until the early 2000s, when PSK31 was introduced by Peter Martinez. This ushered in an age of narrow-frequency soundcard modes, which made ownership of a TNC unnecessary to work these new modes. HI Roger, I possted this off line nto you because it would seem that the notion of PACTOR and the PK232 is not mainstream enough to keep it in the forum. I only received three responses to my query so that makes the point. I'm sorry, but I have never understood WHY the mode got dropped just because PSK came alive. I see no reason why it can't be as fun to use as legacy RTTY. I'm probably odd man out but frankly, after some trial and error testing, I have little interest in MT63, Olivia, Throb, Feld, most of the modes in Patrick's MultiPSK, and the like. I DO like PACTOR, along with DIGI pix and file transfers, DIGI voice, SSTV, RTTY, PSK and it's variants, etc. I know that my PK232 can't work the new modes that have come along but I think so what? I remember many enjoyable contacts using my PK232 with really good copy. OK, so it might not be as fast as PSK but most hams can't type fast anyway. I type 75 wpm myself but find it not to be an advantage. The important point for me is that I had a $300 box that worked just fine and gave me some interesting operations. Yes, I do know that 'puters can do wonders with DSP and such. However, look at how many hams still use legacy PCs for their station use, yet (if stories are true) they had no compunction in trashing fully functional boxes simply because THEY chose to stop using them like sheep in a flock. That didn't happen with RTTY and it's still a relatively popular nitch mode. Heck, I could have incorporated a T/R function, etc into the PK rather than springing for a RIGblaster, for heaven's sake. DUH! It seems like Hams were too quick to chuck $300 or ?? out-of-pocket TNCs away to deliberately make them obsolete for interest's sake, not because of the box as such. That's like throwing a Collins or Drake or Hallicrafters unit in the trash just because it's not quite up to par with the expensive state-of-the-art, mostly foreign produced, whistle 'n bells toys sold today. Personally, I don't care about PTC II, myself. I can't afford the box anyway, yet I see a value for the mode. Ergo, at the least I can have a PACTOR-type ability with the PK232. It DID work before and there's no reason why that box can't provide service today. I've read where the thinking is that most hams won't bother with the PACTOR I if only because of little desire to buy an expensive outboard TNC. What about the hams who never threw away their original TNC, the one sitting in the closet per se? It takes little cost to put them back on line, yet they sit, even for lack of use for RTTY at least. Again, I do know it won't measure up to the SCS units but so what? I have a Collins KWM-2A ensemble, Drake ensemble, and an IC-746. They do not come up to the standards of the more expensive products available today but.so what? They work and they're fun to use. Besides, I don't owe any money on them either GRIN. I dunno, IMOH I just think we've misplaced some of our valuable neurons along the way due to shallow and simplistic thinking. Well, I didn't intend this to be a diatribe. I'm probably beating the subject into the ground with no possibility of success in a turnaround. Anyway, I appreciated your comments, the message was a good read. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] CQ PACTOR on 14.07750 now
Hi Demetre, Listening but nothing heard yet. Numerous signals abound the frequency but will be monitoring. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 10:09 AM Subject: [digitalradio] CQ PACTOR on 14.07750 now Hi Nick and all, Happy New Year. I am calling CQ on PACTOR right now and I will continue until 16.00 UTC. Anyone from USA interested please reply on PACTOR 1 or 2.
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
Hey Charles! Me thinks you've got a rather broad brush being used here. Someone says that PACTOR is dead..period. Another has said that PACTOR is deadand if I was smart, I'd pitch my AEA unit like everyone else. You, speaking for Packet enthusiasts, say Packet operators won't climb on board this innocent proposal because they're constantly being QRMed by PACTOR lids and for that reason, the Packet operators want nothing to do with anything that remotely touches PACTOR. That isn't fair to me, and any number of other folks who like the PACTOR I mode and are kindling a small surge of rebirth in the mode's interest. I've always followed the rules as they have, I'm sure. Individual PACTOR I operations cannot possibly be linked to BOTS, Winlink or whatever. I'm sure that Jack has been a considerate and law-abiding Ham for all his licensed life and means no ill-will towards anyone, least of all disrespect. I bet you and the others don't even know Jack and doubt you have ever been deliberately interferred with by him. I doubt he'd like to be included in any association with Winlink and the BOTS any more than I would. That message you quoted was a friendly, enthusiastic idea that came about from some ideas that have been bantered about offline amongst myself and some others who want to use our TNCs and PACTOR I again, just because. Seriously, this business about Winlink and BOTS is getting just a bit hysterical I think, to the point of irrationality. I say that simply because of your reaction and you're not alone at all. AND...it's understandable for sure. But, jeez, Charles. Aren't you being a bit harsh to the point that you're taking a swipe at everyone? That's exactly what the Packet operators don't want for themselves. I was on last night running my PK232 through its paces and getting reacquainted with it. I even made a couple of contacts with it using PACTOR I during Sunday and it was fun! Surely, you're not going to call me a lid simply because of using the PACTOR mode, alledged to being mis-used by others alledged to have a totally selfish agenda are you? Just my polite $ .02 worth. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Charles Brabham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 9:44 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way. The difference is that the Packet folks do not feel that they have a god-given right to crash other hams' QSO's. We operate according to PART97 and The Amateur's Code. - When we are not having our QSO crashed by a mindless PACTOR Lid, that is...
Re: [digitalradio] for anyone that cares
- Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 8:58 PM Subject: [digitalradio] for anyone that cares I have been calling CQ on 7077.5 P1. Hello, John. Been listening around 0223Z - I just saw your message then - not hearing you. There is some voice activity quite nearby but no indication of your P1 signal. Not sure when you started but, for what it's worth Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
[digitalradio] PACTOR I ARQ QSO
Hello to all, I had a surprise chat with NO4Y, Herman, Elizabeth City, NC at 1746Z on14.080 dial today. Nice signal into Richmond, IN and I have to say it was GREAT fun using my archaic, out-of- date, PK-232MBX and XPware software. Of course, my activity was not without blemish. While calling CQ, again on 14.080 dial, another strong PACTOR station started sending on 14.0811 dial. I was unable to copy it at all but it sounded different. In trying to tune it in, I did notice that I picked up a fragment of a CQ string from W6FSY; I don't think that strong PACTOR signal was him however. Started calling CQ again when it was quiet and found myself in the company of one of the musical multi-tone modes just above me. Fairly strong signal; never have really learned how to tell one multi-tone signal from another by ear and on the fly, sadly. I did post a PACTOR I spot on: http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ and found quite a few stations posting there, though not much from the U.S. I did see one MULTIPSK entry amongst all the SCS units and one other PK-232 listing. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
On the Spot Page and monitoring 14.078 as of 1615Z Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: vk4jrc [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 9:19 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Hi all Pactor Packet people, Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor Packet operators. See http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ Hope this will stir up some interest Thanks Sholto :-)
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
- Original Message - From: vk4jrc [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 9:19 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Hi all Pactor Packet people, Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor Packet operators. See http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ Hope this will stir up some interest Thanks Sholto :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php View the DRCC numbers database at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1207 - Release Date: 1/2/2008 11:29 AM
[digitalradio] PACTO! I CQ
Just for info, I'm on 18.085 running PACTOR I and calling CQ.pointed Westerly. I'm posted on the spotting page: http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ if anyone might be interested.in trying it Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] PACTO! I CQ
- Original Message - From: kh6ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:14 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] PACTO! I CQ Copying you FB in South Carolina, Howard, using DigiPan 2.0. Sorry - No Pactor 1 transmit capability - my PK-232 is in mothballs! Super! Thanks, Skip. Well, shucks, would have been neat to pick you up, Skip. I picked up NT3K (Ken) in Las Cruces, NM with an S9 signal both ways on 14.078 and it made for pretty well 100% copy using FEC. Had no problems at all. The contact lasted about an hour or so. He was using his MultiPSK package. No one bother us for using PACTOR, had no apparent problems with any PMBOs either. I know, I know, PACTOR I is verrry retro but what the heck - it was great fun. C'mon, Skip. I know you've got a few things on your plate, what with NBEMS and all, but take a few sometime; break out that PK and play with it. It's still viable - it's better than just leaving the electrolytics to dry up if it isn't broke. Thanks again.. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] VK4JRC Pactor Operations......
- Original Message - From: Jack Chomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 4:57 AM Subject: [digitalradio] VK4JRC Pactor Operations.. Hi all Pactorologists! I now have my band scanning function running (I think!) for Pactor connects. The controller talks to my Icom 718 to scan 10 frequencies in 5 bands, the scan delay for each frequency is 3 seconds. My tones are Mark 1600 Space 1400 with USB mode on all frequencies. SNIP SNIP Hi Jack! Are you going to continue to post operations on http://www.obriensweb.com/sked and http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ for the scanning? Perhaps your scanning of the freq list will give me a better opportunity to work you. I did connect with Demetre, SV1UY, on 20m yesterday and had a brief but nice chat. The band was a bit busy but we connected succesfully. It surprised both of us; He had wondered about the ability of PACTOR I to pull it off due to the competition of nearby signals who came and went. Overall, some contacts were made with KU2A (Nick), NT3K in NM, N1DP in ME, NO4Y in NC, WB2JEP (AL) - running MultiPSK, and VK2PN. The QSO with AL, WB2JEP lasted the better part of an hour. I'm still trying for W0JAB (John) and you, of course. I've heard no signal from you whatsoever to date, same think for W0JAB. I'm still trying and I'm sure the effort will pay off before long. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] VK4JRC Pactor Operations......
- Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 11:42 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] VK4JRC Pactor Operations.. Howard - when I call out a dial frequency for pactor such as the one I hang out on 7077.5 it's going to be LSB always. I think we have been close a number of times. Roger that! I'll make sure, John. Thanks. Yes, I bet we have been close.that's why I'm still trying. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot............
Hey, Bill, NO, John isn't alone in the experience. It happens frequently enough as to catch the attention. Is it simply because the PACTOR mode is being used? I dunno, but it does happen with enough frequency to raise the ear brows. This is especially so when the signal is quite strong. Just my $ .02 worth which will not buy you even a plain donut hole. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:16 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot Hello John, Well I have seen no others, aside from you, complaining about qrm when operating Pactor modes on the sole basis that you were using Pactor. I am sure it happens as we all get benign qrm. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] calling CQ
Hey John, Been listening, John. Didn't hear a peep from out your way. I was copying some 5s and 7s on PSK on 7.070 area, perhaps it's simply the propogation beast that's at fault. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:41 PM Subject: [digitalradio] calling CQ Calling CQ 7077.7LSB Pactor one at this time.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot............
Hi Danny, I replied up here 'cause I wasn't sure what I was going to snip out from your message, yet. Why not apply the rationale to transmitters in general? YOU can't transmit for your thrice-weekly sked because your station detects VERY nearby signals and will not transmit...until the current interferring QSO terminates? THEN, you can transmit on the sked frequency. Or, you just come up on frequency, very close to 14.236 Digi voice group or very close to 3.713 Digipix group and you're going to want to ask if the frequency is use (albeit you can aurally sense the ongoing comms nearby) - only you can't because of the Busy Guard and thus, nothing transmitted to interfere with the pix or voice transfers. O, you come up to 3.713 and want to key up to declare that the digital NOISE is crap!, and then whistle or whatever - only you can't 'cause of the Busy Guard. I can see all sorts of possibilities for the technology. Hmmm, now when the folks on 3.713 stop transmitting the digital pix and there's silence. and then you CAN transmit your anti-digital pix diatribe, you can continue to spew out explitives and NONE of the folks can transmit until you stop (because of their own Busy Guard protection). I wonder if my example is as incomprehensible as another was said to be that I wote for a different subject. Don't ask me what my point is. I was just musing over your scenario and this blossomed out of that. First the BOTS, then.. the rest of the interference. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:14 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot Jack. We on the other side see THAT as exactly the problem. Your mailbox sits there silent. Somone else gets on the freq and calls it. It comes up - and causes interference to someone else that is already using the freq (which you would have heard if you were physically sitting there operating). SNIP SNIP
[digitalradio] PACTOR I Activity
Hello Again, Had a great chat with VE1XL (Dick) in Hillsborough, New Brunswick, that lasted the better part of an hour. I copied him on this message so that I could pass along the two links below for him to use: We're posting activity on the following sites: http://www.obriensweb.com/sked http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ Dick was saying that his operation is a bit hit 'n miss so the links may help him. KU2A (Nick) picked him up after we dropped the link. He then got picked up by K3CXB (Walt) who was having his first PACTOR contact ever. He was learning with software based PACTOR I so stayed FEC I believe. I'm wondering if he was using MultiPSK since he said he did have AMTOR ARQ in the package and wanted to try the ARQ. Anyway, thought I'd pass along the moment to you. Here's a little cut 'n paste just to show 'n tell: CQ CQ CQ de W6IDS W6IDS RICHMOND, IN EM79NV CQ CQ CQ de W6IDS W6IDS RICHMOND, IN EM79NV CQ CQ CQ de W6IDS W6IDS RICHMOND, IN EM79NV CQ CQ CQ de W6IDS W6IDS RICHMOND, IN EM79NV HOWARD in RICHMOND, IN EM79NV at 01:26 UTC K W6IDS de VE1XL = hello. Not too many of us around. Name here is Dick and my QTH is Hillsborough, New Brunswick. BTU OM. W6IDS de VE1XL = VE1XL VE1XL (Dick) DE W6IDS W6IDS Dick and nice to see you on the mode. Yes, you're right. There's not a lot of PACTOR I on the air but interest is gaining more momentum lately. I think it stems from the DIGITALRADIO message forum discussions involving andi-Winlink operations, PMBO stuff, etc. Your call is anice surprise for sure. Name is Howard as youmay have noticed. Location is about 37 miles West of Dayton, OH right on the OH/IN border. I'm using a PK-232MBX that I've had since 1989 and am giving it a workout. Surprised at how much I've had to relearn for not using it much. Your rst is S8 S8 with just a little QSB but not bad. You took a little dive at 0132Z but hung in there. Software in use is the WinXP package and it has seemed to work well. BTU, let's see how you are doing... VE1XL VE1XL DE W6IDS W6IDS K K W6IDS de VE1XL = RR FB Howard and it sure is nnice nice to hear your signal and to meet you. I am a long-time Pactor operator and I manage to snag a few QSO if I listen long enough. I hope you are correct in that maybe all the comotion will stur up more interest. I do find that most of the ot digital sound card modes are very much inferour.. Spelling.. I have been doing this in Amtor since 1987 and then came Pactor in the early 1990s or so and I have been here all along. hi. I am using an SCS PTC-2e. The radio is a Ten-Tec argonaut V QRP radio to a small linear amplifier to only about 50 Watts out to a dipole. My software is called NcWinPTC by PA0NC. I am familiar with the XP Ware you are using. A good program. FB your QTH and signal port. You are S-5 to S-6 with noise on the band. but this gets through very fine. I do have Pactor 2 and 3 here also. Nost of the WinLink 2K stations use the Pactor 2. BTU before I hog it all on you, Howard. W6IDS de VE1XL = VE1XL VE1XL (Dick) DE W6IDS W6IDS Tell you what, give me your email address and I'll send you two links that PACTOR operators are posting their activity. I'm posted there now, and just noted that we're connected. SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot............
Well, s? I thought that might have been the case but then,
I could have been wrong...so I cashed in my $ .02 worthGRIN
In fact, it happened today...talked with VE1XL (Dick) in Canada
using PACTOR I and near the end of the contact, I could hear a
('scuse me but) PMBO or at least a station sounding like one
right close to use and fairly strong. Gave Dick some competition
for sure. It was surprising because I had been listening for about
15 mins on 3.5880 with no activity noted at all. Then, after talking
with Dick for the better part of an hour, voila! There's this PACTOR
station suddenly making its presence known.
I did post a cut 'n paste of the chat just for show 'n tell and give
a little push for PACTOR I activity - it still works, of course. It was
fun today.
Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN
- Original Message -
From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 7:55 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: I, am a Pactor Robot
Hello Howard,
I was actually agreeing with John; sorry to all if it was poorly
worded. When operating Pactor (and in the past using Amtor), I too
have been interfered with and when I queried the other stations they
said something to the effect that, I thought you were a bot.
Obviously no excuse.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Redefining SSTV operations
HI Leigh. That makes sense, but it would require Patrick to work with the GUI and he's not willing to do that, according to past comments. I think that would start a domino effect in the layout to remove clutter and I don't think he wants to get involved in that. Pity. Great program and innovative otherwise. I'd finally buy my license for it if he'd work on that GUI...heavy sigh. Sorry, Pat. It's just a li'l issue with me. I suspect most everyone else has easily adapted to the layout. Leigh just flicked my switch with his observation. No disrespect intended. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 2:17 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Redefining SSTV operations Patrick, Yes, but MultiPSK and DRM780 and fldigi and other programs already support MFSK and other modes. My point is that few know about MFSK picture mode, even though it is implemented in many programs, because it is accessible only when in MFSK mode and is hard to find. So, I propose simply making it more easily accessible, for example, by making it available on a main menu, or even as its own mode. In reality, it would simply be MFSK and would start with the Open File dialog box for image types, and in the case of MultiPSK and PocketDigi, it would send the RSID for MFSK. Leigh/WA5ZNU
Re: [digitalradio] SSTV MP73 Mode
- Original Message - From: Russell Blair [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:56 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] SSTV MP73 Mode Howard, I down loaded MMSSTV 1.11G and you said you added MP73 to MMSSTV is there some thing I need to add for Narrow Band to work in MMSSTV ?. Russell NC5O/qrp HEHyepsure did and I am amazed that I never even gave the ability to do that a second thought in the past. Unless I've misunderstood the feedback recently, I simply right-clicked on one of mode keys. When that's done, a slew of different mode-types suddenly appears in a list and it's a bit lng per se. Scan the list and you'll see MP73 and AS FAR AS I KNOW, click on that item and the mode you right-clicked on will be changed to MP73. I picked the Commodore button and changed it to MP73 mode. It appears to work - I saw the change when I tested it on 10.132 in the wee hours this morning. I just need some feedback on what the testing status is for the mode and how we might coordinate it so we're not all squinting into the horizon looking for a trail of smoke somewhere. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN
Re: [digitalradio] SSTV MP73 Mode
OH! OK, so we're doing that on the site as well. Super. I'll peek on the page often then for PACTOR I and MP73 as well. Now if conditions will just bless us for a period of time. Have you been able to actually see it function in the field? Comments? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] SSTV MP73 Mode Howard, I am just doing some testing of the MP73-N etc modes on 30m. I didn't know they existed until Jens, OV1A mentioned them. I post my spots on http://www.projectsandparts.com/30m/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Redefining SSTV operations
Hey Patrick! NOOO.it's cluttered..really. You fall back onto that old song of yours about not being a specialist, which I take in this context to mean talented enough, to work with the GUI. I don't believe that for a minute, my good man. Working the GUI may not be one of your more interesting chores and you may not have a clue as to an improved layout, but don't tell me you don't have the talent to handle it. I don't have the talent for it I think. I've been on this planet 60-plus years now; I can tell when someone is blowing smoke in my directionwell, usually...uh...most of the time. Best Regards, Sir Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 4:16 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Redefining SSTV operations Hello Howard, SNIP SNIP But I understand that you think it is cluttered. It is simply complex (as digital modes are not always very simple). However I'm not a specialist of programs and GUI. Anyway we have the chance to have a big diversity of excellent programs, so... 73 Patrick
Re: [digitalradio] sitting on 7077.5
Hey, John. Been on freq but not hearing PACTOR I. Called a few times. Did hear weak CW on occasion and one or two newer modes. I've heard you and I think I'm hearing you now at 0426Z but unable to print. Signals come and go momentarily on top of you (i.e. CW, Spanish sigs, a PSK31, but unable to print. Continuing to monitor. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:35 PM Subject: [digitalradio] sitting on 7077.5 Looking for P1 connect and Roger.
Re: [digitalradio] sitting on 7077.5
Hi John At 0442Z the WD8DHF PMBO in Harker Hts, TX just started transmitting with an S9 signal. It is sending a Solar Flux Index accompanied by a cautionary request for users to LISTEN first before transmitting or losing privileges. I can hear a PACTOR signal underneath but obviously, cannot copy. I'm hearing now three total PACTOR signals. Still listening Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:35 PM Subject: [digitalradio] sitting on 7077.5 Looking for P1 connect and Roger.
Re: [digitalradio] Introducing the K3UK Quick and Dirty Guide to Narrow-Band SSTV
Quick and dirty guide? Hmmmnice work pal. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: DIGITALRADIO digitalradio@yahoogroups.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:09 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Introducing the K3UK Quick and Dirty Guide to Narrow-Band SSTV SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] sitting on 7077.5
Hi Roger, Well, it appears so. I must admit, I never actually paid much attention to the matter as such. I simply worked around it not making the connection to what has become a volatile subject. I never paid attention to PMBOs, I just operated as conditions allowed. Since I began to play with PACTOR I more and MFSK, outside of the normal PSK31 arena, the matter of the unattended operations of what I've learned to be PMBOs became verry apparent. I never really knew where PMBOs were set up and still don't; I do know where a few are now and yes, I've been stepped on which is how I learned the locations for those that I AM aware of. Same thing happened on 30 meters recently with PACTOR I and narrow band SSTV testing. Surprise! There's a couple of PMBOs and PACKET operations there that I didn't know were alive, on or near frequencies frequently mentioned for use in the forum. I had checked the freqs for activity. After waiting, began the CQ and after perhaps 10 minutes, I found myself covered with a strong signal almost on top or very nearby . I don't go to the freqs anymore. - Original Message - From: Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:04 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] sitting on 7077.5 w6ids wrote: Hi John At 0442Z the WD8DHF PMBO in Harker Hts, TX just started transmitting with an S9 signal. It is sending a Solar Flux Index accompanied by a cautionary request for users to LISTEN first before transmitting or losing privileges. Your post seems to indicate that the station that initiated the S-9 signal either did not listen, or could not hear, the other signals on the frequency. This is the inherent problem when there is no one listening *at the location of the transmitter.* de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Redefining SSTV operations
Hi Patrick.. I would really like to hear what that sounds like I know someone who speaks French. I'll pass it by her. Best Regards, Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:17 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Redefining SSTV operations Hello Howard, SNIP SNIP Now you think sincerely that it is cluttered. Nice! As we say Les goûts et les couleurs ne se discutent pas which means It is useless to discuss tastes and colours.
Re: [digitalradio] Anyone need a $6.50 soundcard ?
HI Andy.. Yes, please. Count me in. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 8:41 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Anyone need a $6.50 soundcard ? I am about to order a USB external sound adapter for US$6.50. The shipping however is $8.00 , more than the product itself ! So, perhaps I should order several of them and just mail them to others than want one. They apparently weigh 4oz, sticking one in the US mail should cost a couple of dollars, not 8.00 (a guess) I have seen a couple of well known hams use these for digital modes. Anyone else want one ? Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] Tracking update: Cheap soundcard order
Hopefully, you got my response. If so, thank you in advance. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 11:39 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Tracking update: Cheap soundcard order SNIP SNIP I have all 6 spoken for and 2-3 late arriving requests. When they arrive, I will re-notify the people that first identified an interest . If anyone backs out, I will offer to the others that requested. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Multiple Digital Modes: Time to get rid of most ?
HI... For a newbie you're being just a tad bit too judgemental in wielding such a broad brush. I've been licensed over 50 years and can assure you that there's much more to this hobby than simple robotic contact exchanges for a post card in MANY Oldsters thinking. That said, too many exotic modes is an opinion that has as much value as your broad brush statement chastizing Hams who have nurtured this hobby long before you came along. Have fun with this stuff. You've surely got a lot better equipment and modes and technology available than in times past, that's for sure. But, to be well-rounded in the hobby, you should remember there's more to it than just tinkering, testing, technical exploration, and such. There's the human aspect. Hams are Ambassadors-Without- Portfolio; always have been. It comes with the territory and tradition. Those stations who just want your info exahange are not just oldsters but rather, of all ages and nationalities. If you don't explore this, you'll be no different than an Engineer who lacks studies in the Humanities and the Arts. Quite shallow and socially limited. OH...BTW, welcome. You've got some exciting stuff in store for you, if you keep an open mind and let yourself explore. However, perhaps you'll find 50 years passing by before you know it and find yourself being confronted by a newbie then who's telling YOU that you're out of date. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Laurent Laborde [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 6:56 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Multiple Digital Modes: Time to get rid of most ? I'm a begginer, licenced this year. I do not think that we have too many mode. And the massive usage of psk31 is not a beginer problem. It's the opposite. We have too many old ham that just want a contact and a QSL. And they use the most commonly used mode, psk31. I have absolutly no interest in contact and QSL. Well, no interest, but i need a contact to test the mode, talk about it, improve the transmission if needed. And not just sharing macro-QSO. The only times i was able to really test, experiment, on air was with exotic mode. Anytime i tried to chat (technical) in psk31 i got the usual k thx bye macro. But never had this problem using Feld Hell. The problem is between chair and keyboard, nothing else. -- SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Cheap USB Soundcards : Update
Nice effort there, Andy. I still want one and appreciate your attention to the small stuff. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 6:49 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Cheap USB Soundcards : Update I am going to return the cheap $6.50 sound cards and replace them with Part #: HE-280B Warranty: 1 Year The new ones have a better driver and will costs $7.50 . The old ones work just fine but the XP driver does not support volume adjustments via the Sound Card Mixer on received audio, several hams have assured me that the ones I just ordered have C Media drivers. When they arrive, I will notify those who said they wanted one . Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] mftty
Hello, Do we know if the application will run on a VISTA 64 OS? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: dg9bfc siegfried.jackst...@freenet.de To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 4:56 PM Subject: [digitalradio] mftty download of mftty works again http://www.polar-electric.com/MFTT/index.html greetz
Re: [digitalradio] QRV MFTTY 14068
Hey! When I get that puppy running, why will I take a look at it? H, kind of a dumb way to ask. Uh, will it flic my bic?, blow me away, or perhaps shiver me timbers? Doubt it will float my boat. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien k3uka...@gmail.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 11:05 AM Subject: [digitalradio] QRV MFTTY 14068 I am inside all day getting ready for my 15 year old's birthday party ! While around, I have the rig on 14068 USB with MFTTY active. Andy K3UK
Re: [digitalradio] MFTTY on 80m
Hey, Steinar! Tried to bring up MFTTY but encountered a problem. I get this flag: Run Time Error '429': ActiveX component can't create object. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Steinar Aanesland saa...@broadpark.no To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 11:35 AM Subject: [digitalradio] MFTTY on 80m Hi all, I am monitoring dial 3588 USB (1000Hz) now
Re: [digitalradio] MFTTY on 80m
Forgot to mention, if it matters, that I'm running VISTA. Howard W6IDS - Original Message - From: W6IDS w6...@verizon.net To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:46 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] MFTTY on 80m Hey, Steinar! Tried to bring up MFTTY but encountered a problem. I get this flag: Run Time Error '429': ActiveX component can't create object. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Steinar Aanesland saa...@broadpark.no To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 11:35 AM Subject: [digitalradio] MFTTY on 80m Hi all, I am monitoring dial 3588 USB (1000Hz) now Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY on 80m
Yessir, the new version works now. I've found I cannot PTT through the COM1 - it looks like I'll be using the VOX option instead (which does work). I am still going through this material and trying to get a handle on my learning curve. I am not quite sure what to do next other than look for a MFTTY signal to copy. While I can key the transmitter VOX and can hear my tones, I don't know if my transmit status is fully operational. I see that I do not have access to audio controls like I would have with Windows XP. So, I manually turned up my mike gain to get reasonable RF output. It's not quite clear to me just how I would get city, name, etc into the program for use in a MACRO like you have set up in the program. Where does the word PILOT fit into all of this, that I've seen in the CQ button, etc? Still plugging along here... thanks for the help thus far! Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Norbert Pieper polar_elect...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 10:35 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY on 80m Hello Howard, The issue is solved: Cause of Problem: the file c:\Window\system32\dx8vb.dll is not registered. Solution: Download and install new version of MFTT it will fix the Problem automatically. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY on 80m
Many thanks, Seigfried. I'll digest this and when I get home from work, I'll begin to seriously play with the program. I do recall the info regarding the pilot, however, after successfully finding myself with the program installed now, I did not make the connection mentally at first since it's new for me. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Siegfried Jackstien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 8:37 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY on 80m dear howard the pilot is a macro that sends a pilot-tone and the beginning of your transmitted text it is explained on the homepage how this work but i will try to explain it the other sees the pilottone on his waterfall SNIP SNIP
[digitalradio] OH, so close and yet............
VOILA! Before I knew what was happening, I found myself suddenly printing a CQ on MFTTY from WB4MWD on 3591 around 0200Z. He had an S4 or so signal here in Richmond, IN. Only problem was that he was competing with an RTTY signal who suddenly appeared on frequency AND...AND...there was this PACTOR MBO that was a little off frequency giving him competition as well. Surprising thing...TO ME...was that I was printing his CQ while being pretty well covered by the RTTY station. That surprised me. I didn't answer 'cause I was fumbling trying to reply and then the XYL had a problem, then...then... Well, suffice it to say I at least did break the ice for receiving. Now for the transmit. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79
Re: [digitalradio] MFTTY 3.0.143 is out
Hey, Steiner I have it installed. Before I did anything else, I modified the Pilot CQ to add my callsign and Grid Locator (EM79). When I selected the Pilot CQ (I'm using the SEND button now) I found four tone beeps transmissions being transmitted. When I pressed the SEND button, I transmitted the CQ sequence but with no PILOT Tones. My Pilot CQ is: PilotCQ CQ CQ DE W6IDS W6IDS EM79 PilotCQ CQ ..etc etc etc HmmmI'm not totally clear on what's happening or if I accidentally did something wrong in modifying the Pilot CQ. Can you clarify your sentence abut the Pilot Tone below also? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Steinar Aanesland saa...@broadpark.no To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 5:08 PM Subject: [digitalradio] MFTTY 3.0.143 is out MFTT 3.0.143 # Pilot Tone will be inserted automatically after a transmission pause of equivalent 4 words time # Thin grey line added to spectrum display, indicating the center frequency of Rx-Band-Pass-Filter # Double click on Rx . Hz will copy the Tx freq. # Double click on Tx . Hz will copy the Rx freq. # Tool Tip Text added to UI elements SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] MFTTY 3.0.143 is out
No problem, Steinar. I'm just working my way along my learning curve here. I just noticed that I get the Pilot tones when I have the Send Immediately box checked. Then, when I select the Pilot CQ, the tones are sent at the beginning of each line as typed in the box. If i select Send By Enter Key or if I UNCHECK BOTH selections, the SEND button appears and in any case, NO Pilot tones are sent. They're sent ONLY when the Send Immediately box is checked. I should think that the tones should be sent anytime the CQ is sent or perhaps when text otherwise is being sent and I insert Pilot somewhere inside any typed text. However, that isn't the case. The only time the Pilot tone is sent is at the beginning of a line where I place Pilot. It cannot be inserted anywhere else, so that seems to make it difficult to increase the number of Pilot tones as recommended in the information I read. Unless, of course, the Pilot tones are only used during a CQ sequence, then all of this is moot. The only issue then is being able to transmit Pilot tones in instances involving using SEND button or Send By Enter Key which doesn't happen now. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Steinar Aanesland saa...@broadpark.no To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 1:24 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] MFTTY 3.0.143 is out Hi Richmond I have not tested this last version yet. I will give it a try when I am back from work. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY Tuning information
It seems to be an interesting piece of software, Norbert. I was susrprised at how I was able to copy my first CQ from WB4MWD while that station was basically covered by a PACTOR MBO. I don't know if that was a fluke or not but will be curious to see if it can be replicated in the future. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Norbert Pieper polar_elect...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 6:54 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY Tuning information Hi Steinar, no problem just click options and enter new Tx Center Frequency ( in the upper right corner ) click apply. MFTT can handle any Tx Frequency from near zero up to near half of TX sample rate of soundcard. BR Norbert SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY 3.0.143 is out
I understand, Norbert, now. Hthe information I read leads me to believe (and it's stated as such) that the greater frequency of Pilot tones provides an aid to tuning. IMHO, it seems to me that the pause time that you stated is a bit too long to provide benefit. I don't know where I'd pause for an equivalent of 20 characters. Right now, I am seeing a Pilot tone only at the beginning of the CQ in which I included my callsign, City/State and Locator. I think it could be inserted by the operator at the end of each line of CQ for tuning. I also noticed that without looking at the screen, I instantly recognized the signal by WB4MWD by virtue of the inclusion of the Pilot tones. First time I've been able to identify an exotic mode by ear per se, so the tones have an additional value. I think we just need to adopt a reasonable protocol for the tone use and also allow for manual insertion as needed. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Norbert Pieper polar_elect...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 4:55 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY 3.0.143 is out Hello Howard and all, In fact the V3.0143 !!DOES!!- send out pilot tone by SEND button or Send By Enter Key The thing is that the pilot is sent out ONLY if there was a reasonable pause between the transmissions. I did set the pause time to a value that is equivalent to the transmission time of 4 Words (20 characters) This was done to avoid an un-needed flood of bothering pilots. My question to the group is: In Pratice: Is that pause time and the effective number of pilots sufficent or is there higher or lower occurrence of pilots needed?
Re: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY 3.0.143 is out
Hey, Skip! Long time no. Yes, I think you're touching on some things that could go well toward enhancing the operation. I, too, am having a little difficulty with the TX Macro box as well. However, I suspect that if we keep the cards 'n letters coming in, there'll be some attention given to the ideas for sure. HI had not thought about using a marco for the Pilot thingie. DUH! I've been trying it by manually typing it in. I wasn't thinking macro in that instance. Trying to capture the callsign, QTH, etc does take time and causes dead time too, not to mention creating a cumbersome process. But, then again, this is new as we are awareand interesting. So far, I'm one up on the receiver side. Still working to get my first transmit check out moment. Regards, Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: kh6ty kh...@comcast.net To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:05 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: MFTTY 3.0.143 is out I think we just need to adopt a reasonable protocol for the tone use and also allow for manual insertion as needed. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN Howard, for manual Pilot insertion, just configure a macro as only Pilot and click that to insert a Pilot whenever you want. What I think FMTTY needs more than anything is the ability to double-click on a callsign and use it for the macros, such as CALL (for the other station's callsign). I cannot seem to get the TxMacro boxes to work. When I configure a macro with Box1 and put a callsign in for Box 1, I still get Box1 transmitting instead of the callsign. The macros also need to be linked to function keys for ease of keyboarding use. There really is not enough time to fill in the TxMacro box for every QSO. You have to capture a callsign as quickly as possible in order to keep from losing a contact. A double-click has proven to be the fastest way to do that. For example, the significant default DigiPan macros which many are familiar with are: F2 CQ F3 Call 3 (transmit, 3x3, 3x3, 3x3, receive) F4 Call (transmit, 1x1) F5 BTU (1x1, receive) F6 Signoff (73, 1x1, SK, receive) This way, the new user only has to press F2 to call CQ, F3 to answer a CQ, and then just alternate between F4 and F5 for the QSO. When finished, he just goes to the next function key in line to signoff. Of course preferences of others may vary! 73, Skip KH6TY Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New MFTTY Version 30.145
To All, I did download the new release and found a couple of things. Pressing the Appointments button takes me to K3UK's page but there's no way to post comments or log in. If I instead go to my Favorites and select the page, I can log in and post comments, etc. Also, I've been running in HALF setting. Has anyone tried the other settings: Double or 1/4? I tried Normal and found garbage on the screen with no success in cleaning it up, operator error possibility not withstanding. Is there a real incentive for operators to be able to change tone frequencies in the TX options? Are we supposed to uninstall the previous release before unpacking a newer release? After running the newest version now for a few minutes, I find now that I cannot get it to go to maximized from a minimized condition. The small replica of the program does appear when moving the cursor to the minimized position on the lower bar. I also downloaded the Magic Clip, I believe it is called, and am playing with that for a bit. Is there some way to save the definitions created in the Macro Keys rather than have them erased each time a newer version of the software is installed? That is one reason why I am looking at that Magic Clip thingie and not just to reduce my transmitting burden I know this is a new mode, but has anyone determined just what the direction will be for MFTTY? I think it's a slick offering but.that's just me. I'd be curious about other thoughts. Howard W6IIDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Siegfried Jackstien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 4:31 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: New Version .144 new version of mftty now it is version 30.145 see here http://www.polar-electric.com/MFTT/index.html download it and try it out SNIP greetz dg9bfc
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New MFTTY Version 30.145
Hey, Buddy. Yeh, I know. I've only heard ONE MFTTY station and that was on or near 3591. It seems to me that perhaps 3591, give-or-take, would be the best if you wanted to take a shot at my station. I'll leave this thing on there (once I get it working right again) and perhaps we can contact each other and see how it works. At least that would b e a beginning - you'd know that someone is keeping watch out for your signal specifically. You can also try this link out, log in, and when you're transmitting, post a comment about it for others to see, including me. We can coordinate there as well - http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN. - Original Message - From: F.R. Ashley To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 12:35 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: New MFTTY Version 30.145 I've tried calling CQ endlessly on 20 and 80 meters but never once gotten a response or even heard an MFTTY station. Where is everyone hiding? I've read where some use 14.068 on 20 meters but it is so crowded there with PSK and all. I've also tried 3.591 on 80 meters but no luck there either. Can we all try to establish a meeting frequency for using this mode? 73 Buddy WB4M SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Windows Vista for digital mode soundcard applications ?
Hey, Andy - My Info -= Acer Aspire M5461 Pentium Dual CPU E2200 @ 2.2Ghz 2.2 Ghz RAM 4 Gb OS 64-bit SP1 Vista Home Premium I'm using Ham Radio Deluxe/DM780, Airmail, I've used Multipsk, and tried PC-ALE. I also have EasyPal working but, in MY case, the software won't let me do a couple of functions while using VISTA 64. Specifically, creating waterfall text or pictures. The only other issue I did have was a lack of backward compatibility with PK-232 software, XPwin, that I used on an older XP computer before it crashed three months ago, or so. Otherwise, I've had no major issues whatsoever, in MY case. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Andrew O'Brien k3uka...@gmail.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 7:58 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Windows Vista for digital mode soundcard applications ? I am in the market for a new PC to be used in my shack. I have found a few good deals, some with Vista as the OS. There are some with XP but I was wondering about a switch to Vista. My main applications would be Ham Radio Deluxe, Multipsk, FL-Digi, DX Lab , Microham device router, PC-ALE, and WSJT. Anyone know if any of these applications have issues with Vista ?
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor scanning ?
Hey, John... I think it was you that sent me a list of frequencies. I lost them. I've been working to make Windows Live Mail dedicated for Winlink/PacklinkW and had a little operator error in keeping it off the internet. So, it picked up your messages and when I removed the account for incom...@verizon.net, I killed a string of messages in the IN BOX. Yours was one of them I believe. Howard W6IDS
Re: [digitalradio] Easypal in MARS
MessageDavid, I didn't see what MARS program you're affiliated with. Interesting read. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79 - Original Message - From: David Little To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 11:23 AM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Easypal in MARS Andy, At leas one of our members has been in touch with the developer and made requests to simplify the cut and paste options of the text transfer. There have been numerous updates, and the text transfer has been updated to make it more adaptable for use to insert blocks of text for broadcast.
Re: [digitalradio] 40 meter opened to VK land
UH, John and Jack...disregard my other messages about the time. I just saw thisI'll keep an eye out... Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79 - Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB w0...@big-river.net To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:31 AM Subject: [digitalradio] 40 meter opened to VK land Overnight 40 metered opened to VK land I copied Jack, VK4JRC calling CQ on a center frequency of 7041 on Pactor 1. About 06:00Z This is not the first time I have seen a VK station in the last 2 or 3 weeks. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Gotcha Again, John
John, connect with your mailbox around 18Z. Put out a Connect request and the mailbox responded with a GREAT signal on 7041 CF. 7 Mhz seems sort of centralized around the U.S. per se, but it appears CONUS comms on 7 Mhz are pretty good. I might play with Airmail mailbox, since I have AM here but not doing anything with it since my Xpware program is up and running. However, I had some operator error problems come up when I had XPware in mailbox mode - Airmail may be a bit more friendly...maybe. I need to have my chipset upgraded in my PK-232 at any rate so that's my next project. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79 - Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB w0...@big-river.net To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:31 AM Subject: [digitalradio] 40 meter opened to VK land Overnight 40 metered opened to VK land I copied Jack, VK4JRC calling CQ on a center frequency of 7041 on Pactor 1. About 06:00Z This is not the first time I have seen a VK station in the last 2 or 3 weeks. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] I Have A Mailbox UP To Try it.
Hello, Group - I'm not one who's a heavy user of radio-based mailboxes - most likely because of the Internet. That said, I do see a need for one to help with communications, activity, etc. SO, I put my Airmail to work and it's now accepting incoming calls, when I'm not using my ICOM IC-746 myself for Kbd-Kbd PACTOR I QSOs or PSK, or ?? It's parked on 7041 CF for the time being. I was thinking of doing this after seeing that I missed a connect from Nick, KU2A in NH. Also missed some typing from Jose, CO2JA and Octavio, PY4OLB. I'm interested in increasing the actvity and keep striking out with other connect attempts with Denmark, Greece and the Aussies. So, maybe, just maybe this little addition might open an avenue for providing some type of communications support in that endeavor. So, the doors open to anyone who might want to give it a try and that includes the VK2 and 4 folks, Demetre and Peter for sure. If I need to change the frequency to accomodate some testing, let's do it; I'll announce the freq change. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79
[digitalradio] Your Mailbox
John, Did you do anything with the Info selection on your mailbox menu? If so, how/what?? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79
Re: [digitalradio] Your Mailbox
HA! I didn't see this message when I went to your mailbox this morning. I wanted to see what you did do with the Info command. It looks like I saw the first creation without realizing it. I saw the message below AFTER I accessed your new Info thingie. Where did you save that puppy for use? I'm looking at the Help file now and I don't see a discussion about creating an Info file and where it's stored. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: John Becker, WØJAB w0...@big-river.net To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:05 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Your Mailbox No I have not done anything with that file as yet. Never think about it till now. I'll get on that today. At 11:48 PM 4/13/2009, you wrote: John, Did you do anything with the Info selection on your mailbox menu? If so, how/what?? Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79 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 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: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.11.56/2058 - Release Date: 04/14/09 06:17:00
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Damm, my SignaLink has Stopped TXing
Hello! Since you stuck your toe in the water, care to elaborate a bit more? Your observation is a bit cryptic. Im on the verge so I'm a bit interested in YOUR experience. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79 - Original Message - From: Raymond Lunsford rmlunsfo...@gmail.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 8:26 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Damm, my SignaLink has Stopped TXing Don't expect help from Tigertronics. On 10/20/09, Gmail - Kevin, Natalia, Stacey Rochelle spar...@gmail.com wrote: HI All, The SignaLink would not work with any data software even MixW. I tried DM780, MMSSTV, WinMor, MixW and a couple of others. I pulled all the cables out and re-inserted them. This is a USB device so there is no RTS or DTS to worry about. It was very plain and simple, plug and go (basically). The thing is it ran from the day I received it which was about 5-6 weeks ago. SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] W0JAB ????????????????????????
I sent a message to his email a couple of times asking about his current operating frequencies for PACTOR I but never received a reply to either. This was a while ago. I also tried to raise his mailbox to no avail. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79 - Original Message - From: obrienaj aobri...@stny.rr.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:49 PM Subject: [digitalradio] W0JAB Anyone heard from John W0JAB lately? It has been several months since he posted here and he , along with Lynn KB3FN, is a co-moderator of this group. I know he had some health issues. I'm hoping he has just found other interests rather than being too sick to post. Andy K3UK Owner 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
