OK Thanks John. I have never used Instant messaging, and that escaped me. HMMMMMM HSMM Looks more like AMHSMDN to me. HI. Either way - its a mouthfull and if you expect us old fogies to use it, make it simple stupid, errrr - make it simply stupid - ........ welll you know what I mean. Wondering what you mean by a monster 6 meter veriticle? I use an Inverted L here at 40 ft and work out fairly well on 6 when there are stations up. Also those back-haul circuits are going to have to be pretty close together at 220 arent they? There is one up here in the Shenandoah mountains just above me, used to connect 2 meter repeaters in the area, and works fine, but still fairly close to each other, and sitting about 2500 ft above normal ground level around here.
Again, it seems like a good concept, and one which the majority of us hf/6 meter ops, with our new "all-band" equipment might be able to handle. Both of my HF rigs have 6, and one has 440 and 2 as well. Please keep us updated on this, your testing and results. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Champa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 11:20 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 3kHz or 500Hz Re: Updates on effect of FCC R&O > Danny, > > HSMM = Amateur Radio High Speed (>56 kbps) Multimedia Digital Networks > IM = Instant Messaging > > Yes, that was our thought with selecting the 6M band also, and using monster > 6M verticals. > We'd likely use beams and the 222 MHz band for the back-haul (connecting the > 6M nodes). But we haven't gotten that far yet. Remember, this is just an > experiment, not a regular operation (HI). > > 73, John - K8OCL > > > >From: "Danny Douglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: [email protected] > >To: <[email protected]> > >Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 3kHz or 500Hz Re: Updates on effect of FCC R&O > >Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:29:52 -0400 > > > >What does IM mean? Remember some of us dont know (or dont remember) all > >these initials being thrown at us. HSMM (whatever that means) sounds like > >an intereting concept, but it sounds to me like it is working a repeater, > >or > >a sattelite. You are not REALLY communicating with the middle man, but > >thru > >it. The transmitter you are hearing is NOT located at the location of the > >person whose call you are working - thru not valid for DXCC. You are > >talking from your country - to whomever has this access point - thus both > >of > >you are just working a remote transmitter from what I gather here. Again- > >not valid for DXCC. Not valid for WAS , etc. Now just for chatting , > >that > >is OK, but we can do that on computer links so I really dont see the > >advantage, except if one is not where he/she can reach an internet > >provider. > > > > For groups who just want to chat, it sounds like an good procedure, or > >possibly for emergency nets - now that would seem an excellent way to pass > >information between search units, fire and police, etc, when other > >communications is down. Much like sticking up an emergency repeater, but > >allowing many to talk at one time. I am not sure that HF would be the > >place > >for it, since the ever changing propagaton would complicate connections, > >and > >would assume 6 meters (with some power available) or 220 or 2 meters would > >be the place. Of course that shortens the distance each network group > >would > >be able to communicate, and you would have to have more of these access > >point. And how do they communicate with each other? > > > > > >Danny Douglas N7DC > >ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA > >SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all > >DX 2-6 years each. > >moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "John Champa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[email protected]> > >Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 6:50 PM > >Subject: RE: [digitalradio] 3kHz or 500Hz Re: Updates on effect of FCC R&O > > > > > > > Using HSMM networked radio techniques many operators can have separate, > > > individual, IM exchanges keyboard-to-keyboard on the same frequency, at > >the > > > same time. > > > > > > This is similar to trunked digital repeaters in which many individuals > >can > > > have separate DV QSOs on the same frequency pair at the same time. > > > > > > So when you transmit on this 10kHz wide HF channel, from your > >perspective > > > you are in a clear one-to-one QSO with another Ham, sort of like using > >PSK > > > without the QRM, except that your message is buffered and then > >transmitted > > > all at once in very short and fast burst. Thus my anology to IM. > > > > > > However, you are actully transmitting to a HSMM radio access point (AP) > > > along with hundreds of other Hams at the same time and on the same 10 > >kHz > > > channel. So, for example, if you have a beam, all stations would point > >to > > > the HF AP instead of at each other. If you are using a non-directional > > > antenna, then you would simply look for an AP in the area of the world > >you > > > wish to work. > > > Simple. > > > > > > > > > >From: "jgorman01" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > > >To: [email protected] > > > >Subject: [digitalradio] 3kHz or 500Hz Re: Updates on effect of FCC R&O > > > >Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:14:14 -0000 > > > > > > > >You need to explain this further. Just making the statement that IM > > > >is a better analogy just doesn't provide any information as to how it > > > >applies to sharing of RF frequencies, at least not to me. You might > > > >help me out by elucidating a little on just what shared resource with > > > >IM is applicable to HF data transmission. > > > > > > > >Jim > > > >WA0LYK > > > > > > > >--- In [email protected], "John Champa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > IM would be a better analogy than a party line. > > > > > > > > > > John - K8OCL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.11/493 - Release Date: > >10/23/2006 > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.11/493 - Release Date: 10/23/2006 > > 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/ <*> 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/
