] Re: HF Packet BBS?
Hi Walt,
Guess I was less than precise in describing my position on this. In
an emergency... telephones, cell phones, any internet connectivity
and sat-phones and the like may well be disabled. I was saying our
internet link here is much more fragile than many in the US
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bill McLaughlin
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 7:06 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: HF Packet BBS?
Hi Walt,
Thanks for your concise response. We do not even have (up north) DSL
or cable...just dialup via the phonelines...all
Hi Walt,
Guess I was less than precise in describing my position on this. In
an emergency... telephones, cell phones, any internet connectivity
and sat-phones and the like may well be disabled. I was saying our
internet link here is much more fragile than many in the USthe
point is we
HF messaging whether packet or another mode is really the only possible
way to have an RF system that covers very wide areas, particularly with
low or no population.
While community wireless could be done for some in a given community,
but it would be unlikely that it would any connection with
and may soon support DominoEx
for NVIS paths.
73, Walt/K5YFW
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bill McLaughlin
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 10:28 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: HF Packet BBS
Bill,
What you have left is noisy HF.
So this is the time to try PSKMail. Its only (ONLY???) 200 WPM user
throughput but 100% error free and even under the very worst conditions, 25-50
WPM? What is WPM? Bytes per second is a fixed measure. Assuming 5
bytes plus a space that's 6 bytes
Hi Walt,
Thanks for your concise response. We do not even have (up north) DSL
or cable...just dialup via the phonelines...all it takes is one iced-
over phone line and connectivity to the internet is lost so any comm
means that relies on the internet is worthless in an emergency of any
sort.
And that is how this discussion started. There is
already a framework for that kind of communication.
It is now operating. Check out 14.098 LSB, 10.147
LSB, 10.141 LSB, 7105.USB , or 7100.5 LSB and you will
see skipnets operating by radio only, using 300
baud, fully frequency flexible in case
No, I don't have such a map. I agree it would be a
good thing. If you are interested you might contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and get the net listings showing the
stations in each net.
73
Mark KQ0I
Des Moines, Ia
--- kd4e [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you have a regularly updated coverage --
In our area, if we lose power and the phone system, we likely will lose
internet connectivity. Our EC looked into the situation in our rural
area and found that if internet is down, it will be down our a huge area
since we really have one main ISP. In some areas, where you have
separate
The reason we don't have a nationwide wireless system is that it is not
possible to do this with amateur radio. That is why the Winlink
developers abandoned the system and moved to the internet based Winlink
2000 system. They felt that there just is not enough capacity with
amateur radio to
-
From: Mark Milburn
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: HF Packet BBS?
And that is how this discussion started. There is
already a framework for that kind of communication.
It is now operating. Check out
Same here Rick...ever more dire at our other home in far Northern
WI..nearest gas ststion is 20+ miles away let alone an internet
connection...we tend to get along by helping others, a novel concept
in this day and age, but still investigating a viable connection to
the rest of the world when
my view is that, while we were screwing around trying to make an HF packet
messageing system a reality, the time and money would have been better spent
developing community wide wireless systems operated by hams for the benefit
of their communities and neighbors. using public community brad
A couple comments on KV9U's notes... (one is Jose)
KV9U wrote:
When you are using xNOS aren't you also needing to be using TCP/IP
with considerable overhead? From what I have understood, using xNOS
on a 1200 baud system is not really practical although at 9600 baud
it is OK.
The
It is too bad that packet could not have advanced with new technology to
make it work well on HF. In order for it to be able to work under many
conditions, it needed to have the agility to change baud rates/packet
sizes to match those conditions and it was really only designed for VHF
and for
My view would be that any change to the packet RADIO
system to utilize the internet was a step in the
direction of eliminating it altogether. The value of
packet radio is the emphasis on the radio part. Once
you say the system would be more useful if the end
result was email, then why utilize
It seems I should state the part of the history I have lived.
1n 1991 I started with my C-64 and KPC-2 as user of several HF BBS's, on
different frequencies, surfing the NETROM nodes, etc, until I
settled as user of YV2AEH on 14095 LSB. It solved a problem I had
not been told : stable mail
Well, the internet was reality and there was no way to stop it. The only
way that radio amateurs could have prevented the linking to the internet
would have been to making it illegal and I don't think many would
support you on that.
Radio by itself has a benefit. Primarily an emergency
KV9U wrote:
E-mail is tremendously more useful than the hierarchical packet
system because it works not just for hams, but for anyone with
e-mail, which is ubiquitous in countries such as the U.S.
What I wish for is a system that could do both.
Most xNOS can do it. Say, GRINOS, TNOS,
Jose's comments have been helpful. I used VHF packet in the old days and
also used the first satellite gateway on the east coast. run by my neighbour
down the street!
When I started this thread I had one goal in mind, a simple way that hams
can send brief email without use of the Internet ,
Hi Andy,
A system that implemented the ALE Data Block Message (DBM) ARQ
protocol using the PC Sound Device Modem (PCSDM) which at a raw 125
baud with its deep interleaving providing a full 3x throughput on a
good circuit where no ACK/NAK failures occurred would be much better.
GTOR which
When you are using xNOS aren't you also needing to be using TCP/IP with
considerable overhead? From what I have understood, using xNOS on a 1200
baud system is not really practical although at 9600 baud it is OK.
Having said that, I know that JNOS2 now supports both HF and VHF.
Unfortunately,
Steve and group,
The part of ALE that has this ARQ mode sounds pretty good. Is it fair to
say that the 8 tone modulation is actually closer to what Pactor 3 uses?
The speed is a bit fast for many HF conditions but it has FEC as well as
ARQ so like Pactor, is that why it tends to overcome some
Mark Milburn wrote:
Hi Rick..
You understand it exactly right. There are a few HF
users, but most of the product of our efforts are VHF
stations running bulletin boards who receive the
messages by VHF nodes which are part of the HF packet
station setup.
We're just a bunch of stubborn
16, 2007 8:45 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: HF Packet BBS?
Snipping abit...
That seems to be the key to me...try Echolink, ax25 wormholes or newer
Winlink versions when there are no phone lines or T1 lines due to
whateverTechnology advances are great, when they work; but we
Hi Rick,
The U.S. Declaration of Independence of late has become a popular
MARS EXERCISE test message in testing MARS-ALE and with ALE DBM ARQ,
that as the body of the message along with the standard MARS message
header and tail takes just over 6 minutes if there are no ACK/NAK
failures
Are any open to non BBS operators? I'm doing a presenation soon
about packet without a TNC and just wondered if old-fashioned packet
email at 300 baud was still an option when all else fails ?
Andy K3UK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Mark Milburn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Oh my yes.
I think so, but probably none of the ones I am
involved with unless there are prior arrangements. I
know any of our guys would be glad to help you with a
demonstration, but the question would be who you could
connect with at the time of the presentation. I think
there are some guys that hang
Mark,
Something I never really understood is what is the HF packet network
was actually doing. You mentioned that mail is not done much anymore,
but bulletins are. Who can connect to the system to receive the data or
are you feeding it via HF to local VHF packet BBS systems?
In the past was
: [digitalradio] Re: HF Packet BBS?
Mark,
Something I never really understood is what is the HF packet network
was actually doing. You mentioned that mail is not done much anymore,
but bulletins are. Who can connect to the system to receive the data or
are you feeding it via HF to local VHF
Hi Rick..
You understand it exactly right. There are a few HF
users, but most of the product of our efforts are VHF
stations running bulletin boards who receive the
messages by VHF nodes which are part of the HF packet
station setup.
We're just a bunch of stubborn folks who think that
packet
32 matches
Mail list logo
