Danny,

The 6M vertical we are using must be two 1/2 waves in phase?  It's over 24' 
tall !
For a 6M vertical, that's a MONSTER to me (HI).

Although your inverted L sounds intersting.  I have used a simple indoor 1/2 
wave
dipole on 6M, but never thought of using an inverted L.  Interesting!

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 23:56:34 -0400
>
>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/
 

Reply via email to