Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Diane Bruce via cctalk]

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 01:12:03PM -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> 
> > On Oct 20, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> > Was looking at the digital repeater modes this morning
> > http://www.mikemyers.me/blog/2016/2/19/d-star-dmr-fusion-which-is-right-for-you
> > 
> > Pretty disappointing that the most popular ones use proprietary comms 
> > protocols.
> 
> I see that Yaesu's "Fusion" is closed, but D-Star is open.  For DMR it 
> doesn't say; is it published but with license fees, as is sometimes done?
> 
> I've suggested to the ARRL in the past that they should treat closed 
> protocols as non-existent, so for example Yaesu radios would show in their 
> review articles as analog only.  That might help somewhat to fix this issue.

*grumble* You forgot the elephant in the room. PACTOR. 

Diane va3db

> 
>   paul, ni1d
> 
> 

-- 
- d...@freebsd.org d...@db.net http://www.db.net/~db

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Brian L. Stuart via cctalk]

On Fri, 10/20/17, Al Kossow via cctalk  wrote:

> I've noticed since I've gotten into this again that there is a lot of 
> closed-source thinking

It's pretty disturbing when you think about how the amateur
radio world developed and that it was given legal status
in part to encourage experimentation.

Personally, I wish people would wake up to the reality that
any proprietary protocol is actually a violation of the prohibition
against encrypted traffic.  Any protocol that is not published
is a shared secret (i.e. a key).  The original plaintext cannot
be recovered without the secret.  That's pretty much the
definition of symmetric encryption.

Of course, some would claim that a proprietary protocol is
not "encoded for the purpose of obscuring the meaning."
However, I would argue that such protocols exist for the
purpose of obscuring the meaning in such a way that those
who have not paid the key ransom (purchase of proprietary
equipment, paying licensing fees, etc) are prevented from
understanding the traffic.  In other words, a proprietary
protocol exists precisely to obscure for the purpose of
monatary gain.

This same reasoning is also one of the reasons that I
summarily reject any proprietary file formats, closed
source software, etc.

BLS
wd4awy

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

I've noticed since I've gotten into this again that there is a lot of 
closed-source thinking


in the ham world. A lot of devices with microcontrollers released as 
binary only, for example.


Not very good if you want to build something the guy no longer makes 
available.



On 10/20/17 12:12 PM, Paul Koning wrote:

On Oct 20, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk  
wrote:

...
Was looking at the digital repeater modes this morning
http://www.mikemyers.me/blog/2016/2/19/d-star-dmr-fusion-which-is-right-for-you

Pretty disappointing that the most popular ones use proprietary comms protocols.

I see that Yaesu's "Fusion" is closed, but D-Star is open.  For DMR it doesn't 
say; is it published but with license fees, as is sometimes done?

I've suggested to the ARRL in the past that they should treat closed protocols 
as non-existent, so for example Yaesu radios would show in their review 
articles as analog only.  That might help somewhat to fix this issue.

paul, ni1d

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Oct 20, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> ...
> Was looking at the digital repeater modes this morning
> http://www.mikemyers.me/blog/2016/2/19/d-star-dmr-fusion-which-is-right-for-you
> 
> Pretty disappointing that the most popular ones use proprietary comms 
> protocols.

I see that Yaesu's "Fusion" is closed, but D-Star is open.  For DMR it doesn't 
say; is it published but with license fees, as is sometimes done?

I've suggested to the ARRL in the past that they should treat closed protocols 
as non-existent, so for example Yaesu radios would show in their review 
articles as analog only.  That might help somewhat to fix this issue.

paul, ni1d

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

On 10/19/17 9:15 PM, Ed Thierbach via cctalk wrote:

I'd be interested in a classic computing net as well.  I have 40 - 10
meters available on HF.  Our area is lagging in digital repeater coverage,
so no Fusion or DMR or D*Star for me just yet.
73,
-Ed- AB8OJ

I took an analog VHF/UHF radio and a SDR with me while I've been on 
vacation in WI

Drove out here up through NV,ID,MT,SD,MN. Amer Comp Museum was closed by the
time I got to Boseman :-(

Probably was a mistake to bring a laptop with me though, been spending 
too much

time on the web.

Was looking at the digital repeater modes this morning
http://www.mikemyers.me/blog/2016/2/19/d-star-dmr-fusion-which-is-right-for-you

Pretty disappointing that the most popular ones use proprietary comms 
protocols.


Haven't scanned the VHF/UHF bands since I worked in 2-way radio in the 
70's. Wow
things have changed. Almost everything is digital/scrambled with the 
exception of the

AM aviation band.

You can also see a huge difference in the noise floor in populated areas.

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Marc Howard via cctalk]

KISS.  Keep It Single Sideband.  Not many can do AM and even fewer have
linear amps for that.  Ditto for HF digital.

And the anoying thing about nets is the ionisphere can't tell time.

That said, it is much easier to do coast to coast now with WebSDR.  Go to
websdr.org and choose a receiving site.  They have way better antennas than
you or I and you can (cheat) pick one near the person your talking to.

Marc
NC6SU


On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
> > On Oct 19, 2017, at 7:15 PM, Ed Thierbach via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > I'd be interested in a classic computing net as well.  I have 40 - 10
> > meters available on HF.  Our area is lagging in digital repeater
> coverage,
> > so no Fusion or DMR or D*Star for me just yet.
>
> This would be cool.  Since it's computing-related, an HF digital mode
> would be appropriate, no?  Preferably something I could chat on with my
> 5W-into-a-mag-loop-on-the-balcony setup :-P  Seems appropriately stone
> aged for the computers we're talking about ;-)  And the bit rate sounds
> about right for matching the various card/paper-tape/ readers.
>
> --lyndon (VE7TFX et al)

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Lyndon Nerenberg via cctalk]

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 8:39 PM, Marc Howard  wrote:
> 
> That said, it is much easier to do coast to coast now with WebSDR.  Go to 
> websdr.org and choose a receiving site.  They have way better antennas than 
> you or I and you can (cheat) pick one near the person your talking to.

WTF does that have to do with playing *radio*? :-P

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Lyndon Nerenberg via cctalk]

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 7:15 PM, Ed Thierbach via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> I'd be interested in a classic computing net as well.  I have 40 - 10
> meters available on HF.  Our area is lagging in digital repeater coverage,
> so no Fusion or DMR or D*Star for me just yet.

This would be cool.  Since it's computing-related, an HF digital mode would be 
appropriate, no?  Preferably something I could chat on with my 
5W-into-a-mag-loop-on-the-balcony setup :-P  Seems appropriately stone aged for 
the computers we're talking about ;-)  And the bit rate sounds about right for 
matching the various card/paper-tape/ readers.

--lyndon (VE7TFX et al)

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Ed Thierbach via cctalk]

I'd be interested in a classic computing net as well.  I have 40 - 10
meters available on HF.  Our area is lagging in digital repeater coverage,
so no Fusion or DMR or D*Star for me just yet.
73,
-Ed- AB8OJ

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Ben Sinclair via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Ian S. King via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > Does anyone on this thread know if there are any regularly scheduled
> > traffic nets?
> >
>
> I don't do much with HF nets, traffic or otherwise, but I would be
> interested in participating in an informal classic computing net if we
> could get one going! I'm mostly active on 20M and 40M.
>
> --
> Ben Sinclair
> b...@bensinclair.com
>

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Diane Bruce via cctalk]

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 09:32:38AM -0500, Jay West via cctalk wrote:
> Us lowly technician license holders would love to participate :)

Hey there is always DMR or something. de VA3DB
> 
> J/KE0FJW
> 
> 

-- 
- d...@freebsd.org d...@db.net http://www.db.net/~db

RE: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Jay West via cctalk]

Us lowly technician license holders would love to participate :)

J/KE0FJW

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[allison via cctalk]

Conditions have been poor for HF lately but some of the higher bands 
like 15,10 and 6
have seen Es and extended propagation despite the current point in the 
sunspot cycle.


Nets I listen to and sometimes check into...

7.163 5-7am east coast time, wb2rem NC.  informal ssb DX net with chat.
  I am mobile during this window.
1945kcs Grey Hair net, AM mode,  8pm eastern.
Afternoon I put up 14.300 on the mobile for the Marine maritime net.
50.272 SSB, Sundays 9:30 AM local (east cost) NC me and two others.

No band scared or left unused 160M through 432MHZ.

Allison/kb1gmx



On 10/17/17 7:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:

And to keep it in the classic vein it should be done on AM.  


bill - KB3YV


From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> on behalf of sandy hamlet via cctalk 
<cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 8:53 PM
To: Ben Sinclair; General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

Ben,

I'm on the west coast, California, and have antenna's for 40 and 80.
There are several nets on the west coast but none that talk classic computers.
Maybe we need one?
Informal would be the best.


- Original Message -
From: "General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 11:58:33 AM
Subject: Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Ian S. King via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:


Does anyone on this thread know if there are any regularly scheduled
traffic nets?


I don't do much with HF nets, traffic or otherwise, but I would be
interested in participating in an informal classic computing net if we
could get one going! I'm mostly active on 20M and 40M.

--
Ben Sinclair
b...@bensinclair.com

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Bill Gunshannon via cctalk]

And to keep it in the classic vein it should be done on AM.  


bill - KB3YV


From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> on behalf of sandy hamlet via 
cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 8:53 PM
To: Ben Sinclair; General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

Ben,

I'm on the west coast, California, and have antenna's for 40 and 80.
There are several nets on the west coast but none that talk classic computers.
Maybe we need one?
Informal would be the best.


- Original Message -
From: "General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 11:58:33 AM
Subject: Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Ian S. King via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
> Does anyone on this thread know if there are any regularly scheduled
> traffic nets?
>

I don't do much with HF nets, traffic or otherwise, but I would be
interested in participating in an informal classic computing net if we
could get one going! I'm mostly active on 20M and 40M.

--
Ben Sinclair
b...@bensinclair.com

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[sandy hamlet via cctalk]

Ben,

I'm on the west coast, California, and have antenna's for 40 and 80.
There are several nets on the west coast but none that talk classic computers.
Maybe we need one?
Informal would be the best.


- Original Message -
From: "General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 11:58:33 AM
Subject: Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Ian S. King via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
> Does anyone on this thread know if there are any regularly scheduled
> traffic nets?
>

I don't do much with HF nets, traffic or otherwise, but I would be
interested in participating in an informal classic computing net if we
could get one going! I'm mostly active on 20M and 40M.

-- 
Ben Sinclair
b...@bensinclair.com

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Ben Sinclair via cctalk]

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Ian S. King via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
> Does anyone on this thread know if there are any regularly scheduled
> traffic nets?
>

I don't do much with HF nets, traffic or otherwise, but I would be
interested in participating in an informal classic computing net if we
could get one going! I'm mostly active on 20M and 40M.

-- 
Ben Sinclair
b...@bensinclair.com

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Alan Perry via cctalk]

What kind of nets are you looking for?

I am an emergency communications volunteer with Kitsap County so I am 
aware of all sorts of emergency response related nets, but I only have 
equipment for the local nets.


Have you looked at the ARRL Net database?

alan

On 10/16/17 11:24 AM, Ian S. King via cctalk wrote:

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 1:34 PM, allison via cctalk 
wrote:


On 10/08/2017 02:47 PM, Ed via cctalk wrote:

When I see something that is   neat...I  camp on it   until I decide or
have a friend  put his hand on and stand in front. Yea...  to many

times  turn

around and  then look  down and someone else  now  has it...  Ed#



In a message dated 10/8/2017 9:52:59 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
cctalk@classiccmp.org writes:

I missed  out on a nice Hallicrafters receiver at a hamfest last

weekend...

Walked  way to look it up, and it was gone when I came  back!


I have a few Hallicrafters radios...

SX120 not much of a radio but along the lines of the S-38 (al la AA5
line powered).
  I have two one bone stock and pretty and the other has been modded
  six ways to Sunday by me.  The mods include a 2.1khz mechanical filter,
  additional IF stage and a real product detector using 6AR8 and even a
   power transformer.
SX110, more serious radio, hurts the back some too.
HT37 transmitter Phasing to create SSB at a pair of 6146 power level.

I home brew on HF though 432...

Allison


My FT-817 (5 watts) has no problem reaching from the West Coast of the US
to the East with SSB - IF the band is open.  Most recently I've found 40m
to be open most often (at least when I'm on HF).

Does anyone on this thread know if there are any regularly scheduled
traffic nets?

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Ian S. King via cctalk]

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 1:34 PM, allison via cctalk 
wrote:

> On 10/08/2017 02:47 PM, Ed via cctalk wrote:
> > When I see something that is   neat...I  camp on it   until I decide or
> > have a friend  put his hand on and stand in front. Yea...  to many
> times  turn
> > around and  then look  down and someone else  now  has it...  Ed#
> >
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 10/8/2017 9:52:59 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org writes:
> >
> > I missed  out on a nice Hallicrafters receiver at a hamfest last
> weekend...
> > Walked  way to look it up, and it was gone when I came  back!
> >
> I have a few Hallicrafters radios...
>
> SX120 not much of a radio but along the lines of the S-38 (al la AA5
> line powered).
>  I have two one bone stock and pretty and the other has been modded
>  six ways to Sunday by me.  The mods include a 2.1khz mechanical filter,
>  additional IF stage and a real product detector using 6AR8 and even a
>   power transformer.
> SX110, more serious radio, hurts the back some too.
> HT37 transmitter Phasing to create SSB at a pair of 6146 power level.
>
> I home brew on HF though 432...
>
> Allison
>

My FT-817 (5 watts) has no problem reaching from the West Coast of the US
to the East with SSB - IF the band is open.  Most recently I've found 40m
to be open most often (at least when I'm on HF).

Does anyone on this thread know if there are any regularly scheduled
traffic nets?

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Principal Investigator, "Reflections on Early Computing and Social Change",
UW IRB #42619

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[allison via cctalk]

On 10/08/2017 02:47 PM, Ed via cctalk wrote:
> When I see something that is   neat...I  camp on it   until I decide or 
> have a friend  put his hand on and stand in front. Yea...  to many times  
> turn 
> around and  then look  down and someone else  now  has it...  Ed#
>  
>  
>  
> In a message dated 10/8/2017 9:52:59 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
> cctalk@classiccmp.org writes:
>
> I missed  out on a nice Hallicrafters receiver at a hamfest last weekend...
> Walked  way to look it up, and it was gone when I came  back!
>
I have a few Hallicrafters radios...

SX120 not much of a radio but along the lines of the S-38 (al la AA5
line powered).
 I have two one bone stock and pretty and the other has been modded
 six ways to Sunday by me.  The mods include a 2.1khz mechanical filter,
 additional IF stage and a real product detector using 6AR8 and even a
  power transformer.
SX110, more serious radio, hurts the back some too.
HT37 transmitter Phasing to create SSB at a pair of 6146 power level.

I home brew on HF though 432...

Allison

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[allison via cctalk]

On 10/08/2017 10:42 AM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> One wonder how many SW hams were active in the Caribbean. Most hams today 
> seem to be into 2 meter and not so much long range SW.
The HF 3-30 mhz spectrum has propagation that makes long range possible
at modest power.
The Caribbean hams have to get back on the air first.  Their priority is
family, home, and security.
As it is many have recovered some and are moving health and welfare
messages.

Before the two hurricanes there was a good deal of activity on hf. 

> I would suspect it was still quite important.
It still is as it provides the longer range link that VHF generally cannot.
With the addition of digital modes Winlink,Pactor, and others it give the
supplemental connections that can out reach a broken infrastructure
area and provide connectivity to the Internet at some point where that
is functional.

Like networking you have layers of communications.  VHF is local and
can be very portable.  For longer wide area communications you resort
to lower frequencies for the ability to reach beyond the horizon.

The reason ham radio is important is not unlike adhoc networks, they
can setup and do useful communications independent of infrastructure. 
An example is a group of volunteers went to PR to provide radio support
for agencies and utilities there that are out of the range of working
cells (last heard 1300 out of 1600 cell sites are down) and land mobile
systems that often shares the same towers or resources like back
up power.

Doesn't hurt that lowering costs of high performance batteries (LiFePo)
and solar panels make off the grid radio at moderate power (100W)
on HF very doable.  I know this because that how my station and a few
computers are run without connection to the grid.

> As a fun project, a number of years ago, I used a modem card with a DSP chip 
> to decode radio weather fax. I used to DSP to be a narrow band filter and to 
> digitize the signal, when connected to a receiver. As far as I know, they 
> still transmit weather fax on SW.
Wefax is still there, PCs or even RaspberryPi/Beaglebone and other ARM
platforms make it 
easier to do and continue to lower the power and space needed to do this..

Its easy to do now using PC as the processing platform and sound cards
as the baseband IO.
Many of the newer radios even have the sound card and USB IO built in to
make the physical
connection easier.

Computers and communications have been married for many decades and well
before PCs. 
An example was a friends VHF packet node that relied on a Commodore to
do store and
forward back when Internet was called Arpanet.

Way off topic I know but computers are a part of communications,and have
been for a long time.

Allison/kb1gmx




> Dwight
>
>
>
> 
> From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> on behalf of Jon Elson via 
> cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2017 7:51:14 PM
> To: Brent Hilpert; gene...@ezwind.net; Discussion@
> Subject: Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85
>
> On 10/07/2017 06:46 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote:
>> SW is dead. The internet killed it. You can fix your S-40B
>> but there won't be much to make it fly with. There are a
>> couple international broadcasters left, but nothing like
>> it used to be. I was an SWL'er as a kid in the 70s,
>> learned a lot about the world. Voice of America, Armed
>> Forces Network, Radio Japan, Radio Hilversum Holland,
>> Deutsche Welle, HCJB Voice of the Andes, Radio Prague,
>> Radio Moscow, Radio Peking, BBC, etc., etc., etc.
>> Listening to the Cold War play out on the international
>> airwaves. Pretty much all gone. Left between the static
>> are a few religious broadcasters.
> I used to do a lot of RTTY receiving.  I copied RCC in
> Washington DC.  That was the Soviet embassy!  They'd send
> some clear test stuff for a while, then go off the air for 5
> minutes and start sending 5 digit code groups.
>
> I also figured out how to decode a binary synchronous
> transmission that turned out to be a police net among the
> French-speaking Caribbean islands.  It was standard ITA2
> (5-level teletype code, often called Baudot) with the start
> and stop bits removed, and blocked into groups.
>
> Only hams seem to use RTTY any more.  There are a plethora
> of digital modes used by hams, though.
>
> Jon
>
>

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[allison via cctalk]

On 10/08/2017 11:20 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
>
> On 10/8/17 7:42 AM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
>> Most hams today seem to be into 2 meter and not so much long range SW.
>>
> There is a huge base of HF work being done along with real-time mapping
> of HF and Tropo propagation, along with all the software defined radio work.
>
> http://www.reversebeacon.net/main.php
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSPR_(amateur_radio_software)
WSPR is most interesting as its what some of us call communicating on
coin cell power.
Its hard to imagine being heard thousands of miles away using milliwatts
or less power.

> http://aprs.mountainlake.k12.mn.us/
There are also new digital modes like FT8 that at low power can communicate
around the world.

> I was surprised at how much was going on, figuring the Internet had killed off
> any interest in ham radio.
>
Current licensed numbers of hams exceed 700,000 and represents an all
time high.
Part of this is that the former block of CW has gone away  and the
internet has
made information to understand and get into the hobby more accessible and
highlights what can be done without internet.

Allison

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Ed via cctalk]

When I see something that is   neat...I  camp on it   until I decide or 
have a friend  put his hand on and stand in front. Yea...  to many times  turn 
around and  then look  down and someone else  now  has it...  Ed#
 
 
 
In a message dated 10/8/2017 9:52:59 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
cctalk@classiccmp.org writes:

I missed  out on a nice Hallicrafters receiver at a hamfest last weekend...
Walked  way to look it up, and it was gone when I came  back!

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Ben Sinclair via cctalk]

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk  wrote:

>
> There is a huge base of HF work being done along with real-time mapping
> of HF and Tropo propagation, along with all the software defined radio
> work.
>
>
I'm a ham and pretty much only do HF, though I have been playing with a new
network of DMR (digital, internet linked) repeaters covering the state.

I missed out on a nice Hallicrafters receiver at a hamfest last weekend...
Walked way to look it up, and it was gone when I came back!

There was a VT220 there too, but no keyboard and the seller didn't know
anything. It looked rough, so I passed. I did buy some floppy disks however!

Hamfests do occasionally have vintage computing stuff, which is part of why
I go to most of the local ones.



-- 
Ben Sinclair
b...@bensinclair.com

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

On 10/8/17 7:42 AM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> Most hams today seem to be into 2 meter and not so much long range SW.
> 

There is a huge base of HF work being done along with real-time mapping
of HF and Tropo propagation, along with all the software defined radio work.

http://www.reversebeacon.net/main.php
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSPR_(amateur_radio_software)

http://aprs.mountainlake.k12.mn.us/

I was surprised at how much was going on, figuring the Internet had killed off
any interest in ham radio.

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[dwight via cctalk]

One wonder how many SW hams were active in the Caribbean. Most hams today seem 
to be into 2 meter and not so much long range SW.

I would suspect it was still quite important.

As a fun project, a number of years ago, I used a modem card with a DSP chip to 
decode radio weather fax. I used to DSP to be a narrow band filter and to 
digitize the signal, when connected to a receiver. As far as I know, they still 
transmit weather fax on SW.

Dwight




From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> on behalf of Jon Elson via cctalk 
<cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2017 7:51:14 PM
To: Brent Hilpert; gene...@ezwind.net; Discussion@
Subject: Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

On 10/07/2017 06:46 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote:
> SW is dead. The internet killed it. You can fix your S-40B
> but there won't be much to make it fly with. There are a
> couple international broadcasters left, but nothing like
> it used to be. I was an SWL'er as a kid in the 70s,
> learned a lot about the world. Voice of America, Armed
> Forces Network, Radio Japan, Radio Hilversum Holland,
> Deutsche Welle, HCJB Voice of the Andes, Radio Prague,
> Radio Moscow, Radio Peking, BBC, etc., etc., etc.
> Listening to the Cold War play out on the international
> airwaves. Pretty much all gone. Left between the static
> are a few religious broadcasters.
I used to do a lot of RTTY receiving.  I copied RCC in
Washington DC.  That was the Soviet embassy!  They'd send
some clear test stuff for a while, then go off the air for 5
minutes and start sending 5 digit code groups.

I also figured out how to decode a binary synchronous
transmission that turned out to be a police net among the
French-speaking Caribbean islands.  It was standard ITA2
(5-level teletype code, often called Baudot) with the start
and stop bits removed, and blocked into groups.

Only hams seem to use RTTY any more.  There are a plethora
of digital modes used by hams, though.

Jon

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Jon Elson via cctalk]

On 10/07/2017 06:46 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote:
SW is dead. The internet killed it. You can fix your S-40B 
but there won't be much to make it fly with. There are a 
couple international broadcasters left, but nothing like 
it used to be. I was an SWL'er as a kid in the 70s, 
learned a lot about the world. Voice of America, Armed 
Forces Network, Radio Japan, Radio Hilversum Holland, 
Deutsche Welle, HCJB Voice of the Andes, Radio Prague, 
Radio Moscow, Radio Peking, BBC, etc., etc., etc. 
Listening to the Cold War play out on the international 
airwaves. Pretty much all gone. Left between the static 
are a few religious broadcasters. 
I used to do a lot of RTTY receiving.  I copied RCC in 
Washington DC.  That was the Soviet embassy!  They'd send 
some clear test stuff for a while, then go off the air for 5 
minutes and start sending 5 digit code groups.


I also figured out how to decode a binary synchronous 
transmission that turned out to be a police net among the 
French-speaking Caribbean islands.  It was standard ITA2 
(5-level teletype code, often called Baudot) with the start 
and stop bits removed, and blocked into groups.


Only hams seem to use RTTY any more.  There are a plethora 
of digital modes used by hams, though.


Jon

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Adrian Stoness via cctalk]

:,(

Sent from my iPad

> On Oct 7, 2017, at 6:46 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
>> On 2017-Oct-07, at 2:39 PM, Ed via cctalk wrote:
>> Good collection  start  Al!
>> What  homed  you in  collecting Hallicrafters?
>> 
>> We have various  SW radios at  SMECC  but  I was  really  touched to get  
>> hold of a S-40B  like  I had   in my youth.  Now to put new power supply 
>> capacitors in it  and make  it  Fly.
>> 
>> I imagine there are a number of  folks on list  that like  radios  too as  
>> before we were able to own computer to  do  electronics  with in  the times 
>> of  old  (50s &  60s)  we  ll played  with radios, got ham licenses, 
>> shortwave  listened, got CBs or had a pirate neighborhood radio station!
> 
> SW is dead. The internet killed it.
> 
> You can fix your S-40B but there won't be much to make it fly with.
> 
> There are a couple international broadcasters left, but nothing like it used 
> to be.
> I was an SWL'er as a kid in the 70s, learned a lot about the world.
> Voice of America, Armed Forces Network, Radio Japan, Radio Hilversum Holland, 
> Deutsche Welle, HCJB Voice of the Andes, Radio Prague, Radio Moscow, Radio 
> Peking, BBC, etc., etc., etc.
> Listening to the Cold War play out on the international airwaves.
> 
> Pretty much all gone.  Left between the static are a few religious 
> broadcasters.
> 

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Alan Perry via cctalk]

> On Oct 7, 2017, at 17:57, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/07/2017 04:46 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote:
>> 
>> SW is dead. The internet killed it.
> 
> I tune through the commercial broadcast bands every couple of years
> Bible-thumpers mostly.  The last I checked, the semi-religious HCJB was
> still 5-by-9 here.

I listen to shortwave all of the time.

I have a wire antenna run up a 100 foot cedar tree behind the house. I listen 
on a Sony ICF-SW1 that I got in the 90s when I lived in Europe. Had to get the 
capacitors in it redone a few years ago.

The atmospherics here in the Seattle area are good for picking up Asia. At 
times I can pick up Japan and China better than local stations. There is an 
English-language Beijing commute time show that I often listen to. If 
conditions are right, I can pick up broadcasts from Africa. All with a radio 
the size of a pack of playing cards and 100 feet of speaker wire.

I just got a SDR (software defined radio), but haven't yet tried to attach it 
the wire antenna to see what I can pick up with it.

alan 

> 
> I have fond memories of planting trees on a cold winter day almost 25
> years ago with my wife, listening to the BBC World Service on her
> Grundig Yacht Boy, yours truly with a hoedad, she with a bucket of
> seedlings.
> 
> --Chuck
> 

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 10/07/2017 04:46 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote:
> 
> SW is dead. The internet killed it.

I tune through the commercial broadcast bands every couple of years
Bible-thumpers mostly.  The last I checked, the semi-religious HCJB was
still 5-by-9 here.

I have fond memories of planting trees on a cold winter day almost 25
years ago with my wife, listening to the BBC World Service on her
Grundig Yacht Boy, yours truly with a hoedad, she with a bucket of
seedlings.

--Chuck

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Sat, 7 Oct 2017, Ed via cctalk wrote:

I was  quite shocked  when I heard on radio Havanamost  Americans
supplemented their  daily diet  with   dog  food!


That was an exaggeration.
They meant McDonald's.

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Ed via cctalk]

In a message dated 10/7/2017 4:46:42 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
cctalk@classiccmp.org writes:

On  2017-Oct-07, at 2:39 PM, Ed via cctalk wrote:
> Good  collection  start  Al!
> What  homed  you in   collecting Hallicrafters?
> 
> We have various  SW radios  at  SMECC  but  I was  really  touched to get 
  
> hold of a S-40B  like  I had   in my youth.   Now to put new power supply 
> capacitors in it  and make   it  Fly.
> 
> I imagine there are a number of  folks on  list  that like  radios  too 
as  
> before we were  able to own computer to  do  electronics  with in  the  
times 
> of  old  (50s &  60s)  we  ll  played  with radios, got ham licenses, 
> shortwave  listened,  got CBs or had a pirate neighborhood radio station!

SW is dead. The  Internet killed it.

You can fix your S-40B but there won't be much to  make it fly with.

There are a couple international broadcasters left,  but nothing like it 
used to be.
I was an SWL'er as a kid in the 70s,  learned a lot about the world.
Voice of America, Armed Forces Network,  Radio Japan, Radio Hilversum 
Holland, Deutsche Welle, HCJB Voice of the Andes,  Radio Prague, Radio Moscow, 
Radio Peking, BBC, etc., etc., etc.
Listening  to the Cold War play out on the international airwaves.

Pretty much all  gone.  Left between the static are a few religious  
broadcasters.
Yes  very diminished from the 60s...
 
2 things I always  considered  my gateway to freedom... by SW  sets and   
my motorcycle! in my youth... Got  to have both at  young ages a  quick 
push to   dead end of Crenshaw and I  could  go allover part of Palos 
Verdes on dirt roads and trails...
 
I was  quite shocked  when I heard on radio Havanamost  Americans 
supplemented their  daily diet  with   dog  food!
 
Ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)  
 

Re: OT: the death of shortwave / Re: Hallicrafters S-85

[Charles Anthony via cctalk]

On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On 2017-Oct-07, at 2:39 PM, Ed via cctalk wrote:
> > Good collection  start  Al!
> > What  homed  you in  collecting Hallicrafters?
> >
> > We have various  SW radios at  SMECC  but  I was  really  touched to get
> > hold of a S-40B  like  I had   in my youth.  Now to put new power supply
> > capacitors in it  and make  it  Fly.
> >
> > I imagine there are a number of  folks on list  that like  radios  too as
> > before we were able to own computer to  do  electronics  with in  the
> times
> > of  old  (50s &  60s)  we  ll played  with radios, got ham licenses,
> > shortwave  listened, got CBs or had a pirate neighborhood radio station!
>
> SW is dead. The internet killed it.
>
> You can fix your S-40B but there won't be much to make it fly with.
>
> There are a couple international broadcasters left, but nothing like it
> used to be.
> I was an SWL'er as a kid in the 70s, learned a lot about the world.
> Voice of America, Armed Forces Network, Radio Japan, Radio Hilversum
> Holland, Deutsche Welle, HCJB Voice of the Andes, Radio Prague, Radio
> Moscow, Radio Peking, BBC, etc., etc., etc.
> Listening to the Cold War play out on the international airwaves.
>
> Pretty much all gone.  Left between the static are a few religious
> broadcasters.
>
>
Are the numbers stations still going?

-- Charles