Hi all,
It is possible that I meet with ROS author in a local amateur radio event
(EA-QRP annual meeting) in Sinarcas (Valencia, Spain) on next Saturday. I have
thought that, if someone has specific technical questions for him, I could
translate them to him and would report his comments later
Rein
Really don't know what to say at this point.
Still trying to understand why my call was added to
the list of calls not able to use the ROS program.
But since Jose will not say I'll just move on to things
other then ROS. But I'm not the only one that this
has happen to. No big deal I have
Hello John,
At the risk of being banned for live from this list readers might and
I am interested in the details of this situation.
I got the impression from your message that you had some contacts with Mr ROS
on
facebook/twitter?
Now, I seems you are saying that you are banned/prevented
Hi Rein
let's forget about this Mr. Ros without manners and his new a Yahoo list.
There is a lot of decent programmers out there, making excellent HAM
software. Mr. Ros is not worth the attention he and he's
frequency-hopping spread spectrum software is getting.
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
Dear Steinar,
Very true.
73 Rein W6SZ
-Original Message-
From: Steinar Aanesland saa...@broadpark.no
Sent: Jun 2, 2010 4:15 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
Hi Rein
let's forget about this Mr. Ros without manners and his new a
Hello John,
If your situation is not due to an installation problem
or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned,
programmed in, it might well have other consequences.
ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other
amateur radio digital packages.
Think about that
No need to worry from being banned from this list from me.
That's not my style of moderating.
Yes I can no longer use ROS for some reason.
I did ask but that went unanswered.
All I know is that he posted a updated version and when ask for my call
the program would shut down if I recall. Never
I agree with Rein's concern. Given the actions of the author in the
past, and the fact that he is not even part of the amateur radio
community, I'd be very hesitant to use that mode in a program, not know
knowing what other malicious code might be embedded in the ROS software.
Except for the
Hello All,
from the OFFICIAL ROSMODEM WEBPAGE at 05:38 UTC:
On June 7 at 00:00:01 UTC, new improvements will be incorporated to ROS Modes
(ROS HF16, ROS HF8 and ROS MF7)
It will improve a little more the robutness that characterizes to ROS Modes.
So, this time, i expect will be possible
Exactly, Skip. Well put.
Dave
Real radio bounces off the sky
_
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of KH6TY
Sent: Wednesday, 02 June, 2010 17:38
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
- Original Message -
But since I have it on a flash drive I did install it on the laptop and
gave it a call other then my call and it worked fine.
What do you think?
I think even Ray Charles could see that.
Jose, if I'm wrong in any way - feel free to
jump in here and make any
I think that is what I said below now in RED
By my call I mean W0JAB
At 12:44 PM 6/2/2010, you wrote:
- Original Message -
But since I have it on a flash drive I did install it on the laptop and
gave it a call other then my call and it worked fine.
What do you think?
I think
Oops, I missed that.
What I *THOUGHT* you were saying is that you tried making a call (to a station
with the current release) and succeeded. You might only be able to communicate
with stations within a narrow range of release numbers near to the one you
possess.
I do think that demands for
Hello Dave, K3DCW, and all others,
What an eyeopener, that QRZ forum!
http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742.
Have been there in the beginning of this venture, but after having been shouted
down on the other Yahoo group by some individuals and their uninformed
follower's, I was
Hello Dave, K3DCW, and all others,
What an eyeopener, that QRZ forum!
http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742.
Have been there in the beginning of this venture, but after having been shouted
down on the other Yahoo group by some individuals and their uninformed
follower's, I was
Without intending to reopen the argument about spread spectrum, the FCC has
spoken about the legality of the mode. A few US hams will argue that it
isn't spread spectrum since it isn't any wider than a SSB channel. Spread
spectrum has no bandwidth definition, it is a transmission technique plain
Hello Dave, AF6AS,
IIRC what does it stand for?
There has to be enough information to at least reverse-engineer a mode by the
FCC (and the NSA).
Is that documented somewhere, not that I want to question the statement or
you.
What about something like: Those need to be able to
IIRC = if I remember correctly.
The documentation issue stemmed from someone who complained that PACTOR, and
maybe other digital modes, could be considered codes or cyphers, and the
FCC ruled that they weren't because they were publicly documented. The
source code has not been released by
Hello Dave,
Don't sse ypou much anymore on HF WSJT ,changes in antenna?
OK and thanks.
I contacted the people in VA and they replied right away. telling me
that they had stopped the mode. as a result of this case and I believe
a ruling / statement by ARRL ( probably only , no official FCC
Found the section. It is 97.309(a)(4) of the code:
http://www.arrl.org/technical-characteristics
The reverse-engineering part is an inference on my part.
--
Dave Sparks
AF6AS
--
From: rein...@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 1:01 PM
I have been experimenting with APRS-PSK63 lately. I'll probably get back to
JT65 one of these days. I may even run ROS in beacon receive-only mode on
occasion.
--
Dave Sparks
AF6AS
--
From: rein...@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010
Can anyone tell me which is better to use now ver4.2 or go on ahead and go with
ver 5.0 that is still listed as beta on the HRD site.
73, Chuck AC5PW
--- On Wed, 2/6/10, Dave Sparks dspa...@pobox.com wrote:
Found the section. It is
97.309(a)(4) of the code:
http://www.arrl.org/technical-characteristics
The reverse-engineering part is an inference on my part.
No chance of reverse-engineering Pactor III from the information provided.
Dave wrote:
Spread spectrum has no bandwidth definition, it is a transmission
technique plain and simple.
This is a nuance, but an important technical one: There is a spreading
ratio definition in SS that is one of the formal identifiers of spread
spectrum vs other modulation techniques.
Rein,
You can decide for yourself if ROS is spread spectrum or not, just be
observing it with any audio spectrum analyzer, or program like fldigi or
Digipan that has a waterfall. Just observe the behavior with data and
without data at idle and you will see.
You find that the carriers of the
MT63 is PSK, and if you go to this link
http://f1ult.free.fr/DIGIMODES/MULTIPSK/MT63_en.htm you can see how the
carriers are fixed in frequency and not random in frequency. In fact,
the description of MT63 is, DBPSK on 64 carrier tones. The tones are
separated by 7.81 Hz for the 500 Hz
Trevor,
I was not privy to the names of the engineers - only told in confidence
by one of the group that it was done. There is no report, and Dan
Henderson is the ARRL spokesman who relayed the information to hams.
That finding was also published on the ARRL website. This is all I can
say
Dave,
The answer to your question is no for MT63, as it is nearly just as wide
as ROS 16 baud, but will stop decoding at -8 dB S/N for the 50 wpm mode,
Contestia 1000/64 at -13 dB S/N at 30 wpm, and Olivia slower at 15 wpm,
but probably around -15 dB S/N. PSK31. PSK31 works down to -11.5 dB
Version 5 is fine.
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:09 PM, ac5pw10 ac5p...@yahoo.com wrote:
Can anyone tell me which is better to use now ver4.2 or go on ahead and go
with ver 5.0 that is still listed as beta on the HRD site.
73, Chuck AC5PW
Trevor,
Just to clarify, the FCC defines modes by emission types and other
things, such as if SS is allowed, and where. It is the operator who
must follow the FCC regulations, and he has no legal right to decide
whether or not HIS judgement is the one to follow, or if he follows the
*[Attachment(s) from CT1QK included below]
ALO to All
I am listening now 11.00 UTC a very strong sinal since 7.175 to 7.185
more or less 10 kc wide with 59+30 db on the sstv frequencies
I join a waterfall pic.
Can someone tell me what kind of signal could it be?
CT1QK
*Attachment(s) from
31 matches
Mail list logo
