:29:15 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to use it,
though, and I guess both RTTY and PSK31 are so established now that you'll
never
persuade people to give them up.
Julian, G4ILO
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, k...@... wrote:
Quite frankly, RTTY could easily be replaced with PSK63 as the prime digital
contest mode. However, many PSK operators are so clueless and often
downright rude when it comes to contests that its an extremely uphill battle.
We could
The IMD shouldnt be a significant problem unless something is overdriven.
However, you see that with PSK31 and to a lesser extent RTTY fairly often on
the bands, although most of what i see is 60 cycle hum and audio harmonics
related to that, rather than just pure overdrive. AFSK, etc., is
- Original Message
From: g4ilo jul...@g4ilo.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 4:29:15 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to use it,
though, and I
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 4:29:15 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
Just because a mode is better doesn't mean that people will want to
use it,
though, and I guess both RTTY and PSK31 are so
: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
- Original Message
From: g4ilo jul...@g4ilo.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 4:29:15 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
Just because a mode
From: J. Moen j...@jwmoen.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 8:33:06 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia vs. RTTY vs. PSK spectrum efficiency
I completely understand the lure of the old mechanical teleprinters. But I
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:09:50 -, g4ilo jul...@g4ilo.com said:
I downloaded Pawel's source code for his text mode demo application and
despite not knowing C++ managed eventually to compile and run it under
Linux. However I understand that on Windows it must run under CygWin or MinGW
which
OK. So could one create a DLL that could be called by Windows programs written
in VB, VC++, Delphi etc. using MinGW?
Julian, G4ILO
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Stelios Bounanos m0...@... wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:09:50 -, g4ilo jul...@... said:
I downloaded Pawel's source
Julian,
An Olivia DLL already exists for MixW, but I do not think that it is
documented sufficiently for others to use.
73 - Skip KH6TY
g4ilo wrote:
OK. So could one create a DLL that could be called by Windows programs
written in VB, VC++, Delphi etc. using MinGW?
Julian, G4ILO
Andy. Do you or anyone know if there is an Olivia DLL that can be used to add
Olivia support to a program, in a similar way to the PSK Core DLL made by
AE4JY? I know there is one that is used by MixW but I am not sure if it is only
for use with that package as I can't find any documentation on
I don't know of one. Pawel is a member of this group, so perhaps he can
chime in on this. To have one avaiable much like the PSK Core that Moe gave
the ham world, would be very nice.
Andy K3UK
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 4:27 AM, g4ilo jul...@g4ilo.com wrote:
Andy. Do you or anyone know if there
I downloaded Pawel's source code for his text mode demo application and despite
not knowing C++ managed eventually to compile and run it under Linux. However I
understand that on Windows it must run under CygWin or MinGW which are a kind
of Linux emulation. So quite a lot of work would need to
That is my understanding...
/paul W3FIS
Siegfried
We would need a wrapper around Olivia or PSK that would send
signal-quality responses so the sender could adjust its speed.
I would imagine the turnover time would play a part in how well that would
work.
Tony -K2MO
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Siegfried Jackstien
siegfried.jackst...@... wrote:
i like the ida of automatic changing of the modes . would act as pactor
123 .
But the reason Pactor can do that is that the sending station is
constantly getting acknowledgment packets that tell
i know and after that we are in the area of programming the modes as arq
modes :-)
- Original Message -
From: jhaynesatalumni
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 12:21 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia
--- In digitalradio
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@... wrote:
Would not WINMOR be an option here?
Well, except that WINMOR seems to be single-mindedly a message
passing mode. I wish there was some layering so that the modulation
means and the error correcting means and the
Jim,
I agree with you completely about Clover II. Some years back, when I
would call CQ, I would sometimes get a connection with Ray Petit, W7GHM,
(the inventor of CCW, Clover and Clover II), but with our distance and
dipole antennas, could rarely do much more than trade the path
information,
Proposed bands:
80, 40, 20, 15 and 10
Band segments: above the present PSK segments
Proposed time: 1200 - 2400 UTC
Proposed modes: 500/16 and 250/8 (this would allow the use of DM780 as well as
Multipsk, FLDigi), no 1000/x
proposed day: Saturday
Proposed date: no conflict with TARA, EPC or
Steinar,
I dont see the capture ? may be I have the group settings wrong ?
ezey , send it to g0...@hotmail.com
thanks
Graham ..
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steinar Aanesland saa...@...
wrote:
Hi Graham
Here is a screen capture from Norway .
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
: Vojtech Bubnik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 4:14 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia mode comparisons, testers needed.
Hi Andy.
Let's say one works with Olivia 1000/32. Olivia sends/receives 7bit
ASCII letters. Each 7 bit letter
- Original Message -
From: Andrew O'Brien
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia mode comparisons, testers needed.
So does this mean that Patrick has IMPROVED on Pawel's design and the true
implementation
Message -
From: Andrew O'Brien
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia mode comparisons, testers
needed.
So does this mean that Patrick has IMPROVED on Pawel's design and
the true implementation within
-- an AV update, say -- as XP is set up here.
Cortland
KA5S
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Lindecker
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 11/23/2008 4:15:19 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia mode comparisons, testers needed.
Hello Andy,
The Multipsk code is not better
Hi Andy.
Let's say one works with Olivia 1000/32. Olivia sends/receives 7bit
ASCII letters. Each 7 bit letter is coded by Walch-Hadamard
transformation into 2^(7-1)=64 bits. One of 32 tones modulation codes
32=2^5 combinations, which equals to 5 binary bits. Olivia is
spreading 5 7bit letters
Vojtech,
If you can improve this with Pawel's code base many developers would be most
grateful :-)
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
- Original Message -
From: Vojtech Bubnik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I believe Pawel's code may be improved to decrease time lag in case
the
- Original Message -
From: Vojtech Bubnik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 4:14 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia mode comparisons, testers needed.
Hi Andy.
Let's say one works with Olivia 1000/32. Olivia sends/receives 7bit
ASCII
The lag is in the software - it's part of the design for the error
correction. Where error correction is part of the design then *in general*
with Ham modes you have to wait a while before text is decoding is the error
correction is applied. The lag is not caused by CPU load.
To really
Folks, when Simon was first adding Olivia to DM780 he studied Pawel
Jalocha's coding and consulted with him about the correct implementation.
The lag noticed in DM780 is reportedly as the Pawel Jalocha intended. What
I am looking for is people to get on the air with Olivia and see if the
Interleave is a tradeoff... improved error correction
vs latency. If you are going to use a digital mode, as an Amateur,
you have a responsibility to learn something about how it works. For
the general population, software needs to be idiot proof. This
shouldn't be a constraint for software
Well...I guess if you consider that asking reasonable questions in a
technical forum to qualify someone as an idiot, it kind of says
something about the technical value of your response.
Where better to turn in order to learn how it works than a forum
like this??
Thanks for nothing..
Curt
KU8L
In the December 2008 QST there is an article about Olivia.
In that article is a reference to the latency, to me it
sounded as if it's part of the protocol.
If only some Programs have the latency issue, then the
operators using that software should tell the other
operator about it in their
Here is my personal experience comparing Multipsk and DM-780 in
Olivia 500/16:
DM-780 needs significant more time for synchronizing than Multipsk
(the first 2 or even 3 or 4 letters of a call are not decoded in DM-
780). I haven't seen any better decoding by DM-780 under S/N figures
down to
Andy...
I can help out Mon, Tue, and Wed of next week during the day. Also the week of
15 December, 22 December and 29 December... Please advise as to times and
frequencies you wish to use...
I use OLIVIA 1000hz/32 tones for a MARS digital net I run and we have found it
to be very good in
Andy,
I can test all software packages any weekday during the mid-day hours
or weekends.
Lynn - KB3FN
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Olivia mode comparisons, testers needed.
I am interested in testing weak signal reception of Olivia 500/16
How are you going to make sense of the variety of MIPS performance
across different testers, or are you just looking for trends. A is
faster here than B, etc?
I run all but DM780--it doesnt like Win2K and my soundcard/machine
configuration. Currently running Fldigi--Win, not Linux.
Curt
KU8L
MIPS shouldn't have any effect as long as the CPU doesn't run at 100%.
Olivia likes a calibrated soundcard.
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
www.ham-radio-deluxe.com
- Original Message -
From: captcurt2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How are you going to make sense of the variety of MIPS performance
Maybe there would be interest in what some of us sometimes monitor for
the NBEMS frequencies of 3584, 7067, 10136, 14074, all with + 1500 Hz
audio center.
If you have a known frequency, you can even print stations that would
otherwise never be copied in the noise.
73,
Rick, KV9U
Lynn
Sooo. a 500Mhhz machine running at 20% is going to perform the
integrations and decoding same delay as a 2 Ghz machine running at 20%??
That seems counter intuitive to me..
I'm sure you're right but I don't understand how that can be.
I thought the load information talked about resources not
He's on now but conditions just aren't there for me.
Hi will be calling CQ on 10.137.750 + 1500 only
Aug 21 to 25
active in the morning and evening ADST time zone
73
John VE1CDD/VY2
Hi: May you try in 20 or 15 meters?.
Claudio-LU2VCD
2008/8/24, Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
He's on now but conditions just aren't there for me.
Hi will be calling CQ on 10.137.750 + 1500 only
Aug 21 to 25
active in the morning and evening ADST time zone
73
John VE1CDD/VY2
garylinnrobinson wrote:
I didn't do my comparison's on MixW and Olivia Aid - I did them with
DM780 and just recently FLDigi on a separate computer but same sound
feed from transceiver since FLDigi is on Linux. Same results.
You can say it's just Gary but I don't believe it. And it is
I was reading through these earlier postings and came across this one
and was a little bit baffled. How did you measure the throughput of
Olivia 250/2? From my testing it appears to be approx. 38wpm not 10.
Though that is clearly not as fast as RTTY. Olivia has never been
about being super
Hi Andy
Are you sure ? I have only 4/125 in my DM780 beta 1.1 build 1686
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
Andrew O'Brien skrev:
DM780 also supports 2/250
Andy K3UK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Jose Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Jon Maguire
DM780 also supports 2/250
Andy K3UK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon Maguire escribió:
Sholto, does Multipsk support 2/250? I didn't see it in the
selection
list.
73... Jon W1MNK
No...but MixW does, from the very useful to the very
Did not my message go through yesterday? I had mentioned that Ham Radio
Deluxe/Digital Master 780 works with 2/250 although the speed is very
slow and probably not practical for most of us at perhaps 10 wpm.
Someone had mentioned that it was competitive with RTTY but I would have
to say that
Sholto, does Multipsk support 2/250? I didn't see it in the selection list.
73... Jon W1MNK
Has anyone ever experimented with the 2 tone Olivia submodes?
How does say the 2/250 mode compare to regular RTTY?
73, Sholto KE7HPV
Jon Maguire escribió:
Sholto, does Multipsk support 2/250? I didn't see it in the selection
list.
73... Jon W1MNK
No...but MixW does, from the very useful to the very useless tones/BW
combinations
Jose, CO2JA
__
Participe en Universidad 2008.
Jeff,
What program are you trying to set up for Olivia also what is your
brand and model of the transceiver and sound device (internal or USB?).
Jerry - K0HZI
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jeffnjr484 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hello,
Happy New year to everyone!!. Anyone good with
Hola Claudio,
Para informacion de moda la Olivia en las otras frecuencias:
http://hflink.com/olivia
73 Bonnie KQ6XA
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, toalje [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi: i read a post about WB6REZ calling in 14074 usb. The signal was
very clear in my screen but i didnt
I have MixW, Olivia isnt on the list of Modes, ?? how can I get it
tks
Joe WB6AGR
** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
To answer my own question, I found that I need to download the Olivia DLL
files from the MIxW Website. I tried to do this but must not be doing it
right. I am not getting it into the MixW program.
Joe
** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
Copy the Olivia.dll file into the MixW folder (WinXP C:/Program
Files/MixW/) If MixW is open, close it before doing this then after
copying the dll file reopn MixW. It should then show up in the Mode
Menu. If you continue to have difficulty feel free to email me off the
reflector at
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KP4VP [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have idea how to get a free OLIVIA software? Any URL is
appreciated.
Sincerely,
Jos� - KP4VP
Try Multipsk.
Does anyone have idea how to get a free OLIVIA software? Any URL is
appreciated.
MixW supports Olivia. You DO need to download the (free) DLL, however.
de Peter K1PGV
Multipsk supports it as well, and the entire program is free of charge. Except
for it's psychedelic interface, I have used it and it compares well to MixW,
for which I am a registered user.
73,
AL WB2JEP
of buttons and no menus).
73
Patrick
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] RE: Olivia software
Multipsk supports it as well, and the entire program is free of charge
David WB2HTO wrote:
What are the best frequencies and times to listen for
Olivia signals? Also, I understand there are variations
in the mode - what do I operate and where?
Most Olivia activity is on 14MHz.
Olivia using 32 Tones 1000Hz Bandwidth at 1000Hz Centre Audio
is found on the
Last night I heard ZS6BUN on 40m above a little above 7070. Dick's
signal got progressively weaker but still copyable. I couldn't see it
in the noise, ans when I accidently jostled the rig, I couldn't find it
again, so I couldn't try calling when the other QSO ended.
73,
Leigh/WA5ZNU
I have been working repeatedly into ZS and 5R4 on 40 m since November, a
bit before their local sunrise. ZS6BUN has quite a good signal here, for
that distance.
Jose, CO2JA
---
Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote:
Last night I heard ZS6BUN on 40m above a little above 7070. Dick's
signal got
If you know the exact frequency, I will add it to the list.
Bonnie KQ6XA
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose A. Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been working repeatedly into ZS and 5R4 on 40 m since
November, a
bit before their local sunrise. ZS6BUN has quite a good signal
No, Bonnie. It was within 7070.3 and 7072.75R8GZ has always been on PSK,
as well as other ZS's. I did QSO with ZS6BUN in Olivia, but a shot QSO,
he always
makes a stir on this side when many people start copying him.
It has been funny and interesting after all, because the lack of QSO's
is
Greetings...
Now, I don't know whether to feel awkward or not...
What is Olivia?...
Larry ve3fxq
- Original Message -
From: Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia Frequencies
to LOTW
or hard card.
moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message -
From: larry allen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia Frequencies, Olivia
Thanks
Larry
- Original Message -
From: Danny Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia Frequencies, Olivia Frequency List
Another digital mode. You can find it on MixW, and apparently
larry allen wrote:
Greetings... Now, I don't know whether to feel awkward or not... What
is Olivia?... Larry ve3fxq
Olivia is the daughter of Pawel Jalocha.
He named the new mode created by him after his daughter. It is MFSK
plus a layer of Walsh code.
Very versatile in tones,
Hi Andy,
It is still a viable mode often used. Some other modes have other
upsides...mfsk is robust yet fast and narrow and also has pic xfer
capabilities. DominoEx does very well with or without FEC on
160/80/40 and is also a narrow bandwidth mode at that speed.
RTTYM/Contestia are less
Hi Leigh,
No protocol/technical reason...not sure there is a need as MFSK already
does thatif there is an upside to Olivia sending pics versus MFSK
it could be implimented.
73
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Is there any
Bonnie, why are you so persistently trying to relocate 20m Olivia
operation from 14100-14110 to 14075-14078 ?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Olivia is the excellent digital mode that works like magic for
QRP and DX.
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 9:38
PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: "Olivia" the
Magic Mode for QRP and DX (Olivia 500/16)
Bonnie, why are you so persistently trying to relocate 20m
Olivia operation from 14100-14110 to 14075-14078 ?
73, D
Considering all the talk about how some countries have moved or are
moving to bandwidth specified allocations on the amateur frequencies, it
seems to me that we also have to make some adjustments in the way we
view digital modes. If you have a narrow bandwidth mode (CW, PSK31,
PSK63) and then
RTTY remains the digital-mode-of-choice for DXing, despite efforts
to replace it with PSK31 or PSK63. The MMTTY and MMVARI engines
enable freeware soundcard applications to perform well in this mode.
Given the continuing interest in DXing and Contesting, I doubt we'll
see any significant
I did not know there was even an effort to replace RTTY.
And that brings me to this question. Why replace something
like RTTY that has worked so well for so long of time?
At 11:01 AM 2/20/06, you wrote:
RTTY remains the digital-mode-of-choice for DXing, despite efforts
to replace it with PSK31
PSK63 is significantly faster than RTTY, and consumes less
bandwidth. The PSKCORE engine can simultaneously decode all PSK63
signals within a 3 khz band segment; coupled with callsign
extraction logic, this makes for a powerful DXing and contesting
tool.
Why replace something like RTTY that
Thanks Dave,
But then again PKS of any type it not RTTY.
And when it comes to RTTY I'am a purist. Use
a TTY machine.
At 12:32 PM 2/20/06, you wrote:
PSK63 is significantly faster than RTTY, and consumes less
bandwidth. The PSKCORE engine can simultaneously decode all PSK63
signals within a 3
Hi Rick,
So far, it looks like the Olivia 500 Centre-of-Activity
freqs at 14076-14079 have good support, and not much opposition.
If it continues well for Olivia, I will put up a web page on
HFLINK's international bandplan website with other band charts
of existing modes and trends for
Why avoid the 14080 kc RTTY scared cow
frequency? We shouldn't andI say thatas abig time RTTY
operator! Everyone wants to stake out their own little turf frequencies
according to the mode that "they" like to operate. We don't need to avoid use of
ALE or MT63 turf frequencies either,
Dear Bonnie, at all ,
proposed by - We ??? at least I am not in this WE group
Please count me out - Vilnis Vosekalns , YL2KF .
Using Olivia and all other modes too and do not see a reason to
give such a drastic suggeastion to move down from 14.100 Khz with
Olivia. This can start
Title: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia frequencies
I heard the same sort of comment when SSB was new. The SSB equipment cost so much that only rich hams can afford it. Now everyone has it.
My only problem with P3 or any new mode is that as hams we should try to exploit COTS hardware
Title: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia frequencies
Have you ever heard of the Rag Chewer's Award? Given to individuals who have a continuous 24 hour QSO?
Walt/K5YFW
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Tim Gorman
Dave,
You may also mention that that propagation moves in both directions.
If I am in one location, and here one of the two stations pulsing, I
would certainly know that there is another station on that frequency.
So, hearing only one half of the pulsing would certainly tip me off
that I may
of
this group and had never read about it anywhere else.
- Original Message -
From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia frequencies
With the current state of the art
The problem is not with PSK, the problem is with OLIVIA, whose users
have incorrectly determined that because their stations use a 1000 Hz
signal, that they must squat in the auto-forward Part 97.221 sub-
bands. In these sub-bands, the normal listen before you transmit
criteria is a bit
We should do what hams have always done -- police ourselves. If you
are QRM'd during a contest and you can't engage the offender on the
air, look up his or her callsign in QRZ.com, and contact the
offender. If that doesn't produce a sheepish agreement to do better
next time, contact the ARRL
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 11:10 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia frequencies
Conversational QSOs don't necessarily turn around every 15 seconds,
Steve. One could call QRL? and legitimately listen while the unheard
station is transmitting, and, hearing nothing, activate the remote
methodology set up for those who want to reinvent the telephone or
telegraph.
- Original Message -
From: F.R. Ashley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia frequencies
I just wish someone would
No one owns a frequency, Steve. The sub-bands defined in 97.221 are
not defined for exclusive use by semi-automatic and automatic
stations. You use of the verb squat is both legally incorrect and
in complete opposition to the spirit of amateur radio.
The real issue here is lack of a band plan.
PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 11:10 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia frequencies
Conversational QSOs don't necessarily turn around every 15
seconds,
Steve. One could call QRL? and legitimately listen while the
unheard
station
Dave,
RM-11306 is making an attempt to rectify this situation. On 40 meters
for example, a station under local or remote control, with a
bandwidth of over 500 Hz, cannot move from the 5 KHz space provided,
regardless of who else is there, including fully automatic stations.
With P3, the
Volume of traffic is the issue.
-- Dean
On 2006-01-24 12:40, Steve Waterman, k4cjx wrote:
Buddy,
Why is the Amateur service more a free e-mail system to over-the-air
licensed operators any more than it is a free phone system for those
who use phone? I don't see anything in the 3rd party
Rick,
I have no objections to protocol or operation type placement, but I
am vigorously opposed to hard coded regulated sub-bands. Semi-
automatic (local or remote control stations using P1 and P2 now
VOLUNTARILY operate below the RTTY VOLUNTARY portion of the bands.
They exclude the
Dean,
I see nothing in Part 97 about volume of traffic. Currently, there are
a total approximately 280,000 monthly minutes. What volume would you
suggest??
Steve, k4cjx
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dean Gibson AE7Q [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Volume of traffic is the issue.
--
AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia
frequencies
I just wish someone would explain to me why ham radio needs
to be turned into a free email system, especially for non-hams to
use. I fear this is just the foot in the
door..Buddy,WB4M- Original Message -
From
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dean Gibson AE7Q [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Volume of traffic is the issue.
Why is that an issue? The last time I checked, the FCC doesn't
limit us to the number of QSO's we have, or the time we can spend on
the air.
Now, As a general comment...
- Original Message -
From: mulveyraa2 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 4:25 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Olivia frequencies
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dean Gibson AE7Q [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Volume of traffic
Buddy,
Why is the Amateur service more a free e-mail system to over-the-air
licensed operators any more than it is a free phone system for those
who use phone? I don't see anything in the 3rd party agreements about
mode of operation.
Steve, k4cjx
You didnt answer my question.
73
Tim Gorman wrote:
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 14:40, Steve Waterman, k4cjx wrote:
Buddy,
Why is the Amateur service more a free e-mail system to over-the-air
licensed operators any more than it is a free phone system for those
who use phone? I don't see anything in the 3rd party
At 10:20 AM 1/24/06, you wrote:
I just wish someone would explain to me why ham radio needs to be turned
into a free email system, especially for non-hams to use. I fear this is
just the foot in the door..
Buddy,
WB4M
Ten years ago, before Al Gore invented the internet I had 500 plus
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 19:45, Rich Mulvey wrote:
Tim Gorman wrote:
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 14:40, Steve Waterman, k4cjx wrote:
Buddy,
Why is the Amateur service more a free e-mail system to over-the-air
licensed operators any more than it is a free phone system for those
1 - 100 of 149 matches
Mail list logo
