Not exactly. You must add the upper and lower keying sidebands spacing
to the upper and lower tones to get an aproximate idea of the occupied
bandwidth. The sidebands lie at half the signalling speed around the
carriers, and the keying harmonics, whose level and width depends on the
I don't think anyone was more of a promoter of SCAMP, and certainly
supporting the FCC rules of not intentionally interfering with others,
than I was. I found the protocol to be brilliant and it worked extremely
well with good signals, especially close to the MUF as we expected it
would since
Although Easypal is currently the primary digital SSTV program , it also
can be used to transmit any kind of data. A very experienced digital ham
took me to task a while back for making this claim since he understood
it to always compress data with a lossy characteristic and could not be
used
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
Dave,
It is a good start, but I am afraid the lines were drawn long ago, and
the opponents are so emotionally involved that nothing would appease
them.
I would really expect the only thing that will satisfy would be the
total abandonment from the amateur bands and 100% move to NTIA spectrum.
The NZ4O Daily LF/MF/HF/6M Frequency Radiowave Propagation Forecast #2009-09
has been published on Friday 03/27/2009 at 1400 UTC, valid UTC Saturday
03/28/2009 through 2359 UTC Friday 04/03/2009 at
http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf6.htm .
73 GUD DX,
Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O
Lakeland, FL, USA
I understand, Jose. My question is whether the inner tones -- the ones
between the ensemble's highest and lowest tones -- contribute to the bandwidth
if their magnitudes are identical to those of the lowest and highest tones.
Asked another way, is the bandwidth of 300 baud 1 khz 4-tone FSK
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rick W mrf...@... wrote:
snip
The administrator at Winlink 2000 does not support busy frequency
detection of their existing system and has publicly stated this with the
rationale that malicious operators would shut down their e-mail
Dave Bernstein escribió:
I understand, Jose. My question is whether the inner tones -- the
ones between the ensemble's highest and lowest tones -- contribute to
the bandwidth if their magnitudes are identical to those of the
lowest and highest tones.
I expect little contribution from
The FCC rules are antiquated. Sending anything other than voice or image is
illegal there if you use only one sideband. However, if you use both sidebands
(B7W, B8W or B9W), any content is legal.
73,
John
KD6OZH
- Original Message -
From: Rick W
To:
All,
I'll be QRV on Contestia / MT63 this evening.
14106.5 USB + 1000Hz.
It's 22:00 utc, March 27.
Tony -K2MO
What is it with some of the WSPR folks these days?
Looking at the WSPRnet DB recently and I see guys running 50W, 100W,
500W and even 1000W???
I thought the WS part of WSPR meant Weak Signal?
Sholto
K7TMG
Les Keppie wrote:
I have forwarded your email on to Erik VK4AES for information
and got this reply
Hi Les,
Well, that is a surprise.
I made a few changes from the MARS group requests, but never hear any
reply to see if it is what they want.
The missing FileOK in the waterfall is still a
-Yes, I find it most annoying.
Andy
K3UK
-- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher sho...@... wrote:
What is it with some of the WSPR folks these days?
Looking at the WSPRnet DB recently and I see guys running 50W, 100W,
500W and even 1000W???
I thought the WS part of WSPR
Many moonbounce operators are running
1.5kW transmitters with more than 10kW ERP
(effective radiated power with antenna gain).
In that context, Weak Signal has traditionally
meant that the signal at the receive end
of the QSO is at or below the noise level.
It doesn't mean weak transmitter
I understand that Bonnie but I meant in context of using WSPR on HF.
I have used WSPR at the mW level and been spotted all around the US,
surely there's no need to be running 50 or 100W (or higher) with this
mode on HF?
73
K7TMG
expeditionradio wrote:
Many moonbounce operators are
All,
It's always interesting to see how different modes perform under adverse
conditions. The polar ionosphere can be especially brutal on throughput and
choosing the right mode can make all the difference.
To illustrate this, I recorded a few QSO's I made this evening with JA1RZD,
UA0QGG
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
18 matches
Mail list logo
