Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Phil Williams]

"In the end, we're all just a bunch of nerds who enjoy a strange hobby"

An honest assessment.

or

"in the end, we're all a bunch of strange nerds who enjoy a hobby"

Personally,  I would not have it anyway.

philw de ka1gmn

[digitalradio] New ARRL Course on Digital Technology for EmComms

[Mark Thompson]

New ARRL Course on Digital Technology for
EmComms

With digital technology becoming an
integral part of Amateur Radio, hams interested in emergency communications now
have a new tool to help them take advantage of emerging modes such as Packet
Radio APRS, Winlink 2000, IRLP, EchoLink and WIRES-II, D-STAR, APCO25, HF
sound card modes and Automatic Link Establishment (ALE). The ARRL Digital
Technology for Emergency Communications 
Coursehttp://www.arrl.org/catalog/?item=1247 will introduce hams to all of
the ways Amateur Radio operators are using digital technology as a valuable
emergency communications tool.


Written by ARRL
Publications Manager and QST Editor Steve Ford, WB8IMY, this self-study
CD-ROM will answer such questions as: Can you transfer supply lists or
personnel assignments between emergency operations sites? Can you get critical
e-mails to the Internet if a connection goes down? Can you relay digital
images of damage at specific locations? Can you track the locations of emergency
personnel and display them on computer maps?


Illustrations, screenshots, Internet links and audio files are used to 
demonstrate
transmission modes and equipment configurations. Bite-sized learning units
and interactive knowledge checks make learning interesting and fun.

"This course is a great starting point for anyone interested
in the public service applications of digital communications technology,"
said Ford.


  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Techs on HF digital

[Dave Sparks]

Gary,

That was a great comeback.  Eventually, sunspots should make 10 M usable for 
the techs.  If it doesn't, then we may be in for a new ice age (Maunder's 
Minimum?) and ham radio will acquire a whole new value as a survival tool, 
perhaps.

It's human nature to suspect that the next guy isn't pulling his weight, 
whether it's possessing (or not) computer literacy, knowledge of Morse code, 
spark gap experience, or whatever.  In so many fields, newbies are met with 
"You guys have it too easy.  Back in my day ..."  followed by the technical 
equivalent of something like walking five miles to school every day, in the 
snow, in bare feet, uphill both ways.

Licensing needs to be practical, whether it's a ham ticket or a driver's 
license.  I don't need to know how to crank start a Model T to drive, nor 
even to master a stick shift, unless I buy a car that is so equipped. 
That's why the question pools are updated periodically to add newly relevant 
subject matter and delete that which was formerly so.  Perhaps there might 
be some value in specialty licensing, to require special knowledge to earn 
certain operating privileges, such as sound card digital or MANUALLY sent 
CW, EME, etc.  But what I don't see is that certain tests produce more 
CONSIDERATE operators.  Some of the worst lids are people who seemingly paid 
their dues, and yet still cannot control their potty mouth on the air, 
deliberately QRM others, etc.

Although I haven't taken the test in 25+ years, the GROL (2nd Class Phone, 
back then) exam contained a lot of practical troubleshooting material that 
is missing from current ham exams.  It took me two or three tries, despite 
the fact that I already had earned a BSEE.  It was much more vacuum tube 
related than the current ham exams are, but perhaps that has changed.

Personally, I think that some knowledge of HF, missing from the technician 
exam, would be valuable to operating digital HF.  You could sure frustrate 
yourself, especially now, transmitting on the wrong band at the wrong time 
of day because you don't understand ionospheric propagation.  As such, 
upgrading to General is not insurmountable, nor is it trivial, either.

--
Dave Sparks
AF6AS

- Original Message - 
From: "Gary" 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 9:15 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Techs on HF digital


> Ok fellas, I hear the message.  No tech digital on the 80, 40, and 15 
> meter bands.  I'll drop the idea.
>
> I do get a bit of a chuckle at the comments about reduced licensing 
> requirements.  Sure, I and my buddies had to study hard for our tests and 
> we had to learn the code.  By the time we took our Novice tests, we could 
> probably have drawn out the complete schematic of a workable CW 
> transmitter.  That did not, however, mean that we knew what the heck we 
> were doing.
>
> Today's CB converts know more about the basics of radio that most of the 
> hams we knew back then.  Heck, only one guy in our town with probably a 
> dozen hams even owned a SWR bridge.  Unfortunately, he didn't know how to 
> use it.  I'm not sure any of us knew why you would use one in the first 
> place.  Those CBers we all complain about may have developed some annoying 
> operating habits but they seem to grow out of them as they get experience 
> on the ham bands.  They are no worse technically than we were back then
>
> Knowing the code and having to take a test without seeing the question 
> pool ahead of time did not make us technical experts and it certainly did 
> not make us good radio operators.  We stumbled around, accidentally QRMed 
> each other, messed up TV reception for the whole neighborhood, but we had 
> fun.  I'm just concerned that same level of fun does not appear to be 
> available to new entry level hams, at least under these solar conditions.
>
> Now back to playing radio.
>
> Gary - N0GW

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Bob McGwier]

Cortland Richmond wrote:
> 
> 
> One problem with "cognitive radio" is that it seems it will be designed 
> to detect only emissions similar to those it is meant to receive. 
> Therefore, it is best used in spectrum particularly allotted to 
> just those kinds of emissions.   This rather defeats the purpose of 
> "white space."
>  
> RMS Express by way of contrast has a busy detector that will prevent 
> transmitting over many kinds of modulation different than it uses.  
> Compare this with (say) ALE, whose polling (encountered on MARS 
> frequencies) takes no account of voice or even Olivia on channels it 
> happens to select.  
>  
>  
> Cortland
> KA5S
>  
>  

This is not correct in my experience. In all serious systems under 
development, the CR is looking to characterize all energy to some degree 
or another, irrespective of whether it is a "matched filter" to a 
particular waveform.

The purpose is to find a channel that works.  Energy on the channel is 
an indicator it would not as the source would be cochannel interference 
and with some high degree of probability,  the interference would be mutual.

Dislike for any particular system which automates channel usage but does 
not behave responsibly is not to be used to condemn responsible digital 
system developers.  The enforcement of this responsibility is done by 
pressure (peer) and performance (being interfered with by those not 
detected).

Bob
N4HY


-- 
(Co)Author: DttSP, Quiktrak, PowerSDR, GnuRadio
Member: ARRL, AMSAT, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC.
"the only people for me are the mad ones,
  the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk,
  mad to be saved, desirous of everything at
  the same time, the ones who never yawn or
  say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
  like fabulous yellow roman candles" Kerouac
Twitter:rwmcgwier
Active: Facebook,Myspace,LinkedIn

[digitalradio] Re: Techs on HF digital

[Gary]

Ok fellas, I hear the message.  No tech digital on the 80, 40, and 15 meter 
bands.  I'll drop the idea.

I do get a bit of a chuckle at the comments about reduced licensing 
requirements.  Sure, I and my buddies had to study hard for our tests and we 
had to learn the code.  By the time we took our Novice tests, we could probably 
have drawn out the complete schematic of a workable CW transmitter.  That did 
not, however, mean that we knew what the heck we were doing.

Today's CB converts know more about the basics of radio that most of the hams 
we knew back then.  Heck, only one guy in our town with probably a dozen hams 
even owned a SWR bridge.  Unfortunately, he didn't know how to use it.  I'm not 
sure any of us knew why you would use one in the first place.  Those CBers we 
all complain about may have developed some annoying operating habits but they 
seem to grow out of them as they get experience on the ham bands.  They are no 
worse technically than we were back then

Knowing the code and having to take a test without seeing the question pool 
ahead of time did not make us technical experts and it certainly did not make 
us good radio operators.  We stumbled around, accidentally QRMed each other, 
messed up TV reception for the whole neighborhood, but we had fun.  I'm just 
concerned that same level of fun does not appear to be available to new entry 
level hams, at least under these solar conditions.

Now back to playing radio.

Gary - N0GW

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Gary A. Hinton"  wrote:
>
>  Hello Gary,
> 
> Gone are the days of being proud of getting your General or
> Extra Class ticket. Taking a bus to the FCC field office in the city 
> making
> a day of it. Now days just memorize the answers and your a Extra Class.
> The system nowadays is so easy a Cave Man with a IQ of five, could get a 
> license.
> Being a VE here also, I see testes that know the answers but nothing more 
> about them. 
> The basic problem people are just lazy and want everything on a silver 
> platter.
> You should show these Tech's what they are missing out on, maybe they 
> will upgrade.
> Remember you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
> Now flame time.
> 
> 73 Gary WB6BNE
> 
> 
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Gary 
>   To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:55 AM
>   Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
> 
> 
> 
>   I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Tim N9PUZ]

Gary wrote:

> So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician
> Class licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands
> and do you think that would be of interest to new hams?

I do not think this is a good idea. In fact if it were up for comment at 
the FCC I would campaign against it.

Just because a current technician licensee CHOOSES to not use the 
privileges he/she already has is no reason to give them additional 
privileges. I agree there is a fair amount of effort involved in 
learning CW. There is however no more effort in learning to use computer 
generated/computer decoded CW than any of the other digital modes you 
propose they be allowed. They have that privilege now yet they don't use 
it to any great extent. Why aren't they using it if they think digital 
modes on HF would be so cool?

I think most people who really derive satisfaction from a hobby, any 
hobby, do so because they learn new skills and accomplish things over 
time. For many of us that may be mastering CW, upgrading our license, or 
building a first successful kit. For others it may be their first solo 
RC flight, their first slot car race where they don't come in dead last 
or a perfect finish on the furniture they just built. Satisfaction and 
fulfillment are EARNED.

You can't 'give' someone a sense of self-satisfaction by eliminating or 
relaxing all the rules. They can't buy real satisfaction by plunking 
down money for an HF station and paying someone to install it because 
they don't know how. There's a saying among long time motorcycle 
riders... "Twenty Thousand Dollars and a black T-Shirt doesn't make you 
a biker." There should be something similar for amateur radio.

I am absolutely for the changes we've seen to make amateur radio more 
accessible. It's great that someone can test and upgrade with a VE Team 
instead of taking vacation to go to an FCC Field office like I did when 
I upgraded from Novice to Technician (I failed the 13WPM code test the 
first time.) I don't even mind dropping the CW requirement but only as a 
separate test element. I think it should still be on the test but with 
no more or less weight than any other mode.

People who get involved in amateur radio do so for all sorts of 
different, valid reasons. Some are happy and fulfilled doing public 
service events with a VHF hand held without ever going further. Others 
attend a course thinking the general idea sounds interesting but they 
decide maybe it isn't even though they've passed their test. Others do 
it all and earn their Extra and try every mode imaginable over time.

I think that one reason we don't have more ACTIVE hams that decide to 
pursue higher licenses and privileges is that we do a poor job of 
teaching them about ham radio. Don't get me wrong, we do a bang up job 
of teaching them to pass their Tech exam. How much time is actually 
spent "Elmering"? You know... having a club station with times for 
people to come by, drink a coffee or a can of pop and have one of the 
grey beards show them how to build a dipole or have a CW QSO across the 
table with code oscillators, or setup and use an HF rig with computer 
software to do CW, or ... Well, I imagine you see my point. Though you 
may not agree.

I'll turn it over to someone else now. I'm sure I've written enough to 
have been branded a curmudgeon.

73,

Tim, N9PUZ

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Dan Hensley]

Mr. Hinton, 

You have hit the nail right on the head! I have a really busy life the last 
many months and want to get study in for my Extra class ticket. I have my ARRL 
VE Credentials but cannot give a test until I have that Extra ticket in hand. 

Your comment about being proud of earning your ticket is right on and it really 
resonated with me because even though I am a No Code, I actually wish they 
would have kept the code and added skills instead of taking away. 

I just came along at the wrong time. I was once very proficient with CW, but 
wonder if I can ever pick it up again. I never used it on the bands, as I 
didn't have my ticket back then. I wanted to say that my pride in having earned 
everything I have is diminished. I am contemplating letting my ticket expire 
and giving it up from the experience I have had so far. 

I was going to sell my shack many months ago because I needed money, but it 
worked out that I didn't have to go that far. I have ambitions such as getting 
DXCC and WAS and Triple Play, but I have sadly found that everyone wants to use 
eqsl.cc and those don't count! 

No one wants to send real cards. I would have cards made, but who would I send 
them to when i know damn well I ain't gonna get a REAL card in return? My LOTW 
confirmations are a joke. I see many amateurs who can get confirmation on LOTW 
like wildfire, but those are powerhouse stations and I think I see that us 
lower power 100 watt stations just don't seem to be worth anyone's time.

--- On Tue, 12/15/09, Gary A. Hinton  wrote:

From: Gary A. Hinton 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 7:27 PM







 



  



  
  
  


     Hello 
Gary,
 
    Gone are the days 
of being proud of getting your General or
    Extra Class 
ticket. Taking a bus to the FCC field office in the city making
    a day of it. Now 
days just memorize the answers and your a Extra Class.
    The system 
nowadays is so easy a Cave Man with a IQ of five, could get a 
license.
    Being a VE here 
also, I see testes that know the answers but nothing more about 
them. 
    The basic problem 
people are just lazy and want everything on a silver platter.
    You should show 
these Tech's what they are missing 
out on, maybe they will upgrade.
    Remember you can 
lead a horse to water, but you 
can't make it drink.
    Now flame 
time.
 
    73 Gary 
WB6BNE
 
    

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Gary 
  To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com 
  
  Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:55 
  AM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF 
  digital
  
  
  
  I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone 
  salutes:

With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the 
  occurrence of 10 meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new 
  hams for radio operating opportunities besides VHF FM. Many of the people who 
  attend our Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than 
  chatting with the local guys on a local repeater. Sure, VHF SSB is a 
  possibility but for us rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for 
  distant contacts.

We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed 
  people ever buying a transceiver and getting on the air. We are estimating 
  that number to be less than 10%. Other clubs in our area are experiencing the 
  same problem: good turn out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few 
  new hams getting on the air. It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping 
  stone to getting very many new folks active in Amateur Radio. 

Being an 
  old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF bands. Finding 
  other stations to make contact with was never a problem as there was always 
  activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time of day. Making 
  contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was common. While that 
same 
  opportunity is available today, at least theoretically, CW operation is not 
  part of a new ham's skill set.

So... Here is the idea. Would you be 
  amenable to allowing Technician Class licensees to operate digital modes in 
  the Technician CW bands and do you think that would be of interest to new 
  hams?

I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state 
  something like a maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt 
  power limit. There may be other limitations that might be nice to toss into 
  the mix but this is a starting point for discussion.

Your 
  thoughts?

Gary - N0GW





 





 



  






  

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Gary A. Hinton]

 Hello Gary,

Gone are the days of being proud of getting your General or
Extra Class ticket. Taking a bus to the FCC field office in the city making
a day of it. Now days just memorize the answers and your a Extra Class.
The system nowadays is so easy a Cave Man with a IQ of five, could get a 
license.
Being a VE here also, I see testes that know the answers but nothing more 
about them. 
The basic problem people are just lazy and want everything on a silver 
platter.
You should show these Tech's what they are missing out on, maybe they will 
upgrade.
Remember you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
Now flame time.

73 Gary WB6BNE


  - Original Message - 
  From: Gary 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:55 AM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital



  I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

  With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10 
meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio 
operating opportunities besides VHF FM. Many of the people who attend our 
Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting with 
the local guys on a local repeater. Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but for us 
rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.

  We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
transceiver and getting on the air. We are estimating that number to be less 
than 10%. Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem: good turn 
out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams getting on the 
air. It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone to getting very many 
new folks active in Amateur Radio. 

  Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF 
bands. Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as there 
was always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time of day. 
Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was common. While 
that same opportunity is available today, at least theoretically, CW operation 
is not part of a new ham's skill set.

  So... Here is the idea. Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class 
licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do you think 
that would be of interest to new hams?

  I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something like a 
maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power limit. There may 
be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the mix but this is a 
starting point for discussion.

  Your thoughts?

  Gary - N0GW



  

Re: [digitalradio] HRD Final Beta

[John Netro-N9WVM]

I just downloaded V5 dated October 8, 2009 and I don't like it
 
They took out the info button where you could move the curser over a call to 
see there qth OR IF YOU HAVE WORKED them or not 
 
Now you have to have the logbook running before you can enter a call sign for 
look up and have the quicklog runing while in DM780 to look up a call to see if 
you worked the station or not
 
I liked the the V4 I had the reason I changed was because I lost my log of abt 
12 qso's and couldn't find it so I had to go to EQSL and get it but V4 wouldn't 
reload it so I downloaded v5 and was able to get my log back
 
N9WVM, John

--- On Tue, 12/15/09, Peter L. Jackson  wrote:


From: Peter L. Jackson 
Subject: [digitalradio] HRD Final Beta
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 8:41 PM


  






Release Date
The target release date for HRD 5.0 is October 31st, 2009.
The next beta kit is scheduled for late October 2009.
Any one know when the final beta is coming out ???
Peter
VK6KXW







  

[digitalradio] ARD9000 and HF Digital Audio

[th_30909]

I am looking into purchasing the ARD9000 MKII for the purpose of HF ssb 
communications. 

I have done quite a bit of research on the web trying to determine if how much 
latency is involved with the digital audio mode during HF SSB communications. 
Several of us are looking into this mode as a possibility for communications 
when conditions are extreme. 

1. Is this mode conducive to "rag chew", IE... are voice communications real 
time, or does the latency preclude this.

2. What is the duty cycle for digital audio mode?

3. Are lower output levels acceptable or recommended for this mode?

Any answers or suggestions that you have would be greatly appreciated. We are 
looking to test the waters prior to laying out money for equipment that will 
not fit our desired goal.

Thanks in advance!

Terry Harden
N5ESR

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Dan Hensley]

...We're no longer amateur radio operators though. We're all just a bunch of 
"educated CB'ers". When you take the licensing we have in place, the lack of 
equipment availability for working on one's equipment and teh fact that the 
factories make it damn impossible even if you DO know what you're doing. 

Take all teh similarities between us and CB, especially the ignorance that 
happens on ALL of the bands CONSTANTLY, and we're just using "souped up CB". 
Like any other amateur, I understand some things better than others and have my 
weaknesses. My strength is antenna feedlines, antennas, propagation, and 
manipulative operating in substandard propagation conditions. 

Others are more skilled in the interior of the radios and are hard core 
components gurus. Most of those folks are also the math geniuses. My strength 
is NOT math, except certain types of math for very specific uses.
That goes to say I have a limitation. In the end, we're all just a bunch of 
nerds who enjoy a strange hobby.  

--- On Tue, 12/15/09, "John Becker, WØJAB"  wrote:

From: "John Becker, WØJAB" 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 6:02 PM







 



  



  
  
  At 06:54 PM 12/15/2009, you wrote:



>I would agree with Danny but think it would be better just limiting them to 5 
>watts (and avoiding the CW bands) .  To really annoy people, I will point out 
>my long standing view that a license should not be required at all,  other 
>than the completion of a three hour safety and regulation course.  

>

>Andy K3UK



I remember way back in the 50's and 60's listing to the 11 meter band

there was some kind of law & order. Then the FCC again with all their

wisdom dropped having to have a license of any kind and I think the rest

of the story is well known by all.






 





 



  






  

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[John Becker, WØJAB]

At 06:54 PM 12/15/2009, you wrote:




>I would agree with Danny but think it would be better just limiting them to 5 
>watts (and avoiding the CW bands) .  To really annoy people, I will point out 
>my long standing view that a license should not be required at all,  other 
>than the completion of a three hour safety and regulation course.  
>
>Andy K3UK


I remember way back in the 50's and 60's listing to the 11 meter band
there was some kind of law & order. Then the FCC again with all their
wisdom dropped having to have a license of any kind and I think the rest
of the story is well known by all.

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital--Just a course in safety?

[DANNY DOUGLAS]

I have to disagree with this one.  The one reason we have for being able to 
legally work on or even build our own equipment is that we supposedly have 
proven at least some technical knowledge and ability in the electronics field.  
Where does it stop?  CBers cannot even tune up their own gear, let alone build 
it, and the great difference is that they havent proven their ability to do so. 
 Yes, I know, a majority of todays hams simply dont open the case of their 
rigs, but many of us do.  It all comes down the the point:  we are allowed to 
do so.  Even a Novice was allowed to do so.  The systemitic steps upward to 
Extra class were intended to encourage us to learn more, in order to gain more 
bandwidth and modes.  Take that away, and we could just throw up our hands and 
let Sears and Walmart sell ham gear to anyone who walks in.  Where would we be 
then?  (Yeah, cheaper gear- with lots more ignorant operators who arent there 
for the hobby, but to jam the rest of us?).  
Danny Douglas
N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB
All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at:  DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU
CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F
Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred,

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Dan Hensley]

The key word here is "past". we are in the here and now. People have changed. I 
agree with Andy...get rid of licensing and just give amateurs a good, solid 
course on safety, regulations, and ethical behavior. 
 
--- On Tue, 12/15/09, Dave Ackrill  wrote:

From: Dave Ackrill 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 4:38 PM







 



  



  
  
  Dan Hensley wrote:



> I want to start with the fact that we remain in a very bad economy and people 
> are losing their jobs. People are losing their homes, and everyone is trying 
> to hold on to their money. Along with this problem, there exists the issue of 
> what it costs to buy quality amateur equipment and then there is having to 
> deal with any antenna restrictions. 



Sorry, but it you look back over the last 60 years the economic ups and 

downs have very little effect on the numbers of Radio Amateurs, or even 

people engaging in hobbies.



In fact, if you look at slot cars and model trains, the major jumps in 

people taking up these hobbies occur when the slumps in economic trends 

occur...



Dave (G0DJA)




 





 



  






  

[digitalradio] HRD Final Beta

[Peter L. Jackson]

Release Date
The target release date for HRD 5.0 is October 31st, 2009.

The next beta kit is scheduled for late October 2009.

Any one know when the final beta is coming out ???

Peter

VK6KXW

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Cortland Richmond]

One problem with "cognitive radio" is that it seems it will be designed to 
detect only emissions similar to those it is meant to receive. Therefore, it is 
best used in spectrum particularly allotted to just those kinds of emissions.   
This rather defeats the purpose of "white space."

RMS Express by way of contrast has a busy detector that will prevent 
transmitting over many kinds of modulation different than it uses.  Compare 
this with (say) ALE, whose polling (encountered on MARS frequencies) takes no 
account of voice or even Olivia on channels it happens to select.   


Cortland
KA5S


- Original Message - 
From: Phil Williams 
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 12/15/2009 1:21:30 PM 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?




I first heard of cognitive radio systems when efforts were underway to make use 
of the 'white space' in the television broadcast bands.  The whole idea is to 
make more efficient use the the spectrum by putting situational awareness in to 
the client device.

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsections&sc=emergingtech&id=16471

http://www.commsdesign.com/news/tech_beat/www.eet.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18700443

philw

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[John Becker, WØJAB]

At 03:33 PM 12/15/2009, you wrote:
>Another problem is that the "old guard" who have an axe to grind against new 
>amateurs due to the change in licensing requirements and other new FCC 
>policies to go with that change which occurred back in Feb of 2007, are 
>running new amateurs off in droves. 

I really think all of us "old guard" guys got over it years ago.

John, W0JAB
have a look inside my pick up here

http://www.hamradio-dv.org/aor/digital-ssb/fellow-users/fellow-users-pics/w0jab/w0jab-stn.htm

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Andy obrien]

I would agree with Danny but think it would be better just limiting them to
5 watts (and avoiding the CW bands) .  To really annoy people, I will point
out my long standing view that a license should not be required at all,
other than the completion of a three hour safety and regulation course.

Andy K3UK

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Dave Ackrill]

Dan Hensley wrote:

> I want to start with the fact that we remain in a very bad economy and people 
> are losing their jobs. People are losing their homes, and everyone is trying 
> to hold on to their money. Along with this problem, there exists the issue of 
> what it costs to buy quality amateur equipment and then there is having to 
> deal with any antenna restrictions. 

Sorry, but it you look back over the last 60 years the economic ups and 
downs have very little effect on the numbers of Radio Amateurs, or even 
people engaging in hobbies.

In fact, if you look at slot cars and model trains, the major jumps in 
people taking up these hobbies occur when the slumps in economic trends 
occur...

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Bob McGwier]

So long as vanity repeaters are put up by people who are willing to 
become litigious, this is a war that will have MANY casualties.  We are 
not the government (anywhere in the world, not just US) and have the 
right of "eminent domain" over spectrum, property, etc.

I would love to see repeater coordination bodies grow a set of .

guts.

Bob


Bill V WA7NWP wrote:
>> I first heard of cognitive radio systems when efforts were underway to make 
>> use of the 'white space' in the television broadcast bands.  The whole idea 
>> is to make more efficient use the the spectrum by putting situational 
>> awareness in to the client device.
> 
> One example we're discussing is how to use the repeater channels
> (over allocated - under used) for data when the repeaters aren't in
> use.   Cognitive radios could learn which channels had the least use
> and make more use of them.   There are issues to be resolved but the
> concept is promising at the very least.
> 
> Yes - ham radio has never been so alive.   We have incredible tools
> (toys) there but for the using.
> 
> 73
> Bill - WA7NWP
> 


-- 
(Co)Author: DttSP, Quiktrak, PowerSDR, GnuRadio
Member: ARRL, AMSAT, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC.
"the only people for me are the mad ones,
  the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk,
  mad to be saved, desirous of everything at
  the same time, the ones who never yawn or
  say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
  like fabulous yellow roman candles" Kerouac
Twitter:rwmcgwier
Active: Facebook,Myspace,LinkedIn

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[F.R. Ashley]

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digitalI totally agree with W2XJ

73 de WB4M
Buddy
  - Original Message - 
  From: W2XJ 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 1:48 PM
  Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital




  I think it is a bad idea. With the way licensing has already been simplified, 
anyone with a technician license can easily just go get a General.



--
  From: Gary 
  Reply-To: 
  Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:55:14 -
  To: 
  Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

   
   
   
 

  I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

  With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10 
meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio 
operating opportunities besides VHF FM.  Many of the people who attend our 
Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting with 
the local guys on a local repeater.  Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but for us 
rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.

  We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
transceiver and getting on the air.  We are estimating that number to be less 
than 10%.  Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem: good turn 
out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams getting on the 
air.  It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone to getting very many 
new folks active in Amateur Radio. 

  Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF 
bands.  Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as 
there was always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time of 
day.  Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was common.  
While that same opportunity is available today, at least theoretically, CW 
operation is not part of a new ham's skill set.

  So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class 
licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do you think 
that would be of interest to new hams?

  I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something like a 
maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power limit.  There 
may be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the mix but this is a 
starting point for discussion.

  Your thoughts?

  Gary - N0GW

   
 





  

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[F.R. Ashley]

Why not encourage them to simply UPGRADE their license??  Instead handing 
out more freebies?

73 WB4M
Buddy
- Original Message - 
From: "Gary" 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:55 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital


>I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:
>
> With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 
> 10 meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for 
> radio operating opportunities besides VHF FM.  Many of the people who 
> attend our Technician license classes are interested in doing much more 
> than chatting with the local guys on a local repeater.  Sure, VHF SSB is a 
> possibility but for us rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for 
> distant contacts.
>
> We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
> transceiver and getting on the air.  We are estimating that number to be 
> less than 10%.  Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem: 
> good turn out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams 
> getting on the air.  It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone 
> to getting very many new folks active in Amateur Radio.
>
> Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF 
> bands.  Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as 
> there was always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the 
> time of day.  Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away 
> was common.  While that same opportunity is available today, at least 
> theoretically, CW operation is not part of a new ham's skill set.
>
> So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician 
> Class licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do 
> you think that would be of interest to new hams?
>
> I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something 
> like a maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power 
> limit.  There may be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the 
> mix but this is a starting point for discussion.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> Gary - N0GW
>
>
>
> 
>
> Suggested frequencies for calling CQ with experimental digital modes =
> 3584,10147, 14074 USB on your dial plus 1000Hz on waterfall.
>
> Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at
> http://www.obriensweb.com/sked
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

[digitalradio] Re: Techs on HF digital

[af6it]

Gary,

>From the ARRL website:
Novice and Technician classes:

   28.000-28.300 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data--Maximum power 200 watts PEP
   28.300-28.500 MHz: CW, Phone--Maximum power 200 watts PEP

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/allocate.html#10

Personally, I do not particularly encourage Techs to use digital modes
on 10m, and would strongly oppose opening any other Novice/Tech CW sub
bands to digital mode use by Techs. Band plans are already in a state of
chaos and this would probably render those "novice" areas nearly
useless.  It would be a free for all the way I see it.  It is
sufficiently complex that I see plenty of Generals & Extras have a hard
time using digital modes appropriately.  Don't get me wrong, I love
digital modes and welcome their responsible use- but if it cannot be
done at least as orderly as now then we had best not open the gates to a
herd of exuberant greenhorns without sufficient coaching. There are
still three license classes for a reason!

Now if you propose that local clubs or even via online that some classes
be put together to coach Techs into upgrading to General with a focus on
setting up & using digital modes (or for that matter CW) I'd be all for
that! The biggest obstacles keeping people from upgrading is the lack of
readily available elmering and the persistent attitude of the crusty
OF's who think they own HF. Has been that way for the 20 years I've been
licensed at least.

Stu AF6IT


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Gary"  wrote:
>
> I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:



> So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician
Class licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and
do you think that would be of interest to new hams?
>
> I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something
like a maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power
limit.  There may be other limitations that might be nice to toss into
the mix but this is a starting point for discussion.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> Gary - N0GW
>

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[kevin asato]

Why not? I used to do packet on 10 meters back about 1990 or so when I got my 
Tech (Kam TNC with a Radio Shack HTX-100 at home. Whatever my club station had 
at work.) Could stimulate more activity on 10 meters while waiting for the sun 
spots to show up! Should also consider digital modes on U/VHF, too. 

73,
kevin
kc6pob



  

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Bill V WA7NWP]

> I first heard of cognitive radio systems when efforts were underway to make 
> use of the 'white space' in the television broadcast bands.  The whole idea 
> is to make more efficient use the the spectrum by putting situational 
> awareness in to the client device.

One example we're discussing is how to use the repeater channels
(over allocated - under used) for data when the repeaters aren't in
use.   Cognitive radios could learn which channels had the least use
and make more use of them.   There are issues to be resolved but the
concept is promising at the very least.

Yes - ham radio has never been so alive.   We have incredible tools
(toys) there but for the using.

73
Bill - WA7NWP

RE: OT!!! Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Simon HB9DRV]

Indeed they are: here's a video of N9VV using my radio over the internet...

http://www.sdr-radio.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=DYGMyXoqIS8%3d&tabid=178&;
mid=1016

Simon Brown
http://sdr-radio.com


> -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> 
> I am happy amateur radio OPERATORS are benefiting now from that
> experience and effort.
> 

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Dan Hensley]

Perhaps I can give you some insight at various levels of though as to why new 
hams are NOT getting on the air. 

What I'm about to say should not be mistaken for the words of someone with an 
axe to grind or confused with someone who is simply being unpleasant.

I want to start with the fact that we remain in a very bad economy and people 
are losing their jobs. People are losing their homes, and everyone is trying to 
hold on to their money. Along with this problem, there exists the issue of what 
it costs to buy quality amateur equipment and then there is having to deal with 
any antenna restrictions. 

There are new hams who don't have antenna restrictions and have to contend with 
neighbors who complain to the hills about an antenna being erected before it 
can even become operational. I personally had to deal with some local idiots 
who kept calling the police and the police kept trying to tell me I had to stop 
operating or get arrested for som offense they couldn't even name. I explained 
to these coppers that amateur radio is not within their jurisdiction, but was 
simply told to shut up. 

Another problem is that the "old guard" who have an axe to grind against new 
amateurs due to the change in licensing requirements and other new FCC policies 
to go with that change which occurred back in Feb of 2007, are running new 
amateurs off in droves. 

Hazing or outright threatening behavior by hams licensed before Feb of 2007 is 
another reason new hams are not getting on the air. I went through this myself. 
A mentality has arisen that "amateur radio is only for listening and you're 
never supposed to transmit". Everyone wants the bands quiet and wants the next 
amateur to just stop operating. 

It was so bad in my area that I am one of several amateurs who have had their 
vehicle vandalized or an attempt made to remove their antenna. There are more 
details I could go into, but will suffice to say that amateur radio has become 
a very nasty place to be with other hams who want to run everyone off. This is 
proven by the various amateur radio internet forums...outsiders such as new 
hams or potential hams see what is being discussed and they see the behavior 
there and decide they can spend their time and money in better places on better 
activities. 

Over the past year, I have tried to introduce amateur radio to two local 
schools. My proposals were turned down solely because of disparaging and 
unbecoming behavior on part of the amateur community. The schools cited two 
sources: amateur radio internet forums and one incidence during which a school 
official bought a radio receiver, heard horrible discussions happening locally 
and on the HF bands, and labeled it a possible threat to the children. Another 
incidence happened when I forgot to turn my radio down while waiting for one of 
my kids to come out of school and a school official heard one of our local 
jammers...the school wanted nothing to do with us at that point and opted to 
say thanks but no thanks.

Combine this with a city official who found the online amateur radio 
enforcement letters at the FCC site who used that to also say thank you but we 
aren't interested.

I have been told that Digital is very neat and have been at several 
demonstrations. I've operated RTTY with a good friend / elmer from my club and 
enjoy it immensely!

Let's all examine the named factors now that I have put them out here and try 
to work with whatever we have left of a good public image. There has to be a 
way for us to find some redeeming quality in spite of the bad behavior of our 
ranks.
 
--- On Tue, 12/15/09, Glenn L. Roeser  wrote:

From: Glenn L. Roeser 
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 10:48 AM







 



  



  
  
  Gary,
I think that it is a very good idea. I would surely go into the Novice 
sub-bands to work them. I for one see the Digital Modes as the future of 
Amateur Radio. As the Digital Modes become more popular we are also going to 
need more bandwidth. That will be something to think about as well.
Very 73 to all, Glenn (WB2LMV)




From: Gary 
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Tue, December 15, 2009 12:55:14 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital


  

I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10 
meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio 
operating opportunities besides VHF FM. Many of the people who attend our 
Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting with 
the local guys on a local repeater. Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but for us 
rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.

We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
transceiver and getting on the air. We are estimating that number to be less 
t

AW: [digitalradio] TS2000 and SDR I.F. Stage Use for digital moded ?

[Siegfried Jackstien]

A friend from me married power sdr together with hrd for controlling his ts
2000 and used the sdr soft for receiving

Don´t know if it is what you need …

As I know he took the 12 khz if out of the ts 2000 without any additional
mixer ….

But if you put a downmixer at the if stage it is better cause you have the
wider bandwith for the panadapter

So the receiving bandwith depends on your soundcard

So put the downmixer at the second if BUT before the narrow bandfilters….

That can be easy done with a ne 612 and maybe a little preamp before it

I don´t know if you can use yozur softrock for this …

http://www.ham-on-air.de/?p=4152

this is a video my friend made … I think it explains a lot

if you will not need the panadapter but only the software for receiving via
your pc

you can use lots of soft like winrad, power-sdr, if-dsp (ik2czl), and some
more ….

Best 73´s de dg9bfc

Sigi

Ps: I have a downmixer in my icom 765 that mixes the 455 down to 12 khz … I
hear drm and sometimes play around with the different softwares

 

  _  

Von: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] Im
Auftrag von Andy obrien
Gesendet: Dienstag, 15. Dezember 2009 13:58
An: digitalradio
Betreff: [digitalradio] TS2000 and SDR I.F. Stage Use for digital moded ?

 

  

Is anyone using a TS2000, or similar radio, with a Softrock Lite for
I.F. Stage Use ? I have half of what I need to do this and was
wondering if anyone here is already ahead of me ? I was wondering
about software that is available, I assume Simon's SRD console does
not interface with it... yet ?

Andy K3UK

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Glenn L. Roeser]

Gary,
I think that it is a very good idea. I would surely go into the Novice 
sub-bands to work them. I for one see the Digital Modes as the future of 
Amateur Radio. As the Digital Modes become more popular we are also going to 
need more bandwidth. That will be something to think about as well.
Very 73 to all, Glenn (WB2LMV)



From: Gary 
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, December 15, 2009 12:55:14 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

  
I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10 
meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio 
operating opportunities besides VHF FM. Many of the people who attend our 
Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting with 
the local guys on a local repeater. Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but for us 
rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.

We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
transceiver and getting on the air. We are estimating that number to be less 
than 10%. Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem: good turn 
out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams getting on the 
air. It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone to getting very many 
new folks active in Amateur Radio. 

Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF bands. 
Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as there was 
always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time of day. 
Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was common. While 
that same opportunity is available today, at least theoretically, CW operation 
is not part of a new ham's skill set.

So... Here is the idea. Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class 
licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do you think 
that would be of interest to new hams?

I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something like a 
maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power limit. There may 
be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the mix but this is a 
starting point for discussion.

Your thoughts?

Gary - N0GW





  

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[John Becker, WØJAB]

At 11:55 AM 12/15/2009, you wrote in part:

>So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class 
>licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands.

No.

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[DANNY DOUGLAS]

Sounds like an excellent idea to me, to get them involved in digital modes.  I 
do not, however suggest it be within the CW bands.  And keep them limited to 
less than 50 or at most 100 watts.  Other than RTTY, I see no reason whatsoever 
to run that much power on PSK etc.  Todays rigs easily are adjustable upward 
from 5  or so watts, so it is no problem to limit power to less than full 
output. 

  I thought getting rid of Novice, was the worst (or maybe second worst) thing 
that the FCC ever did.  

We have always had a problem getting new ops to purchase equipment and get on 
the air. In the Novice days, and because they had actually worked at getting 
the ticket, I would have estimated that 90 percent or more got on the air.   I 
never heard it was now anything like 10 percent though, and that would be 
terrible if it is that wide spread across the board.

  
Danny Douglas
N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB
All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at:  DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU
CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F
Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred,
I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do.  
Moderator
DXandTALK
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
Digital_modes
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159

  - Original Message - 
  From: Gary 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:55 PM
  Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital



  I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

  With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10 
meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio 
operating opportunities besides VHF FM. Many of the people who attend our 
Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting with 
the local guys on a local repeater. Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but for us 
rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.

  We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
transceiver and getting on the air. We are estimating that number to be less 
than 10%. Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem: good turn 
out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams getting on the 
air. It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone to getting very many 
new folks active in Amateur Radio. 

  Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF 
bands. Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as there 
was always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time of day. 
Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was common. While 
that same opportunity is available today, at least theoretically, CW operation 
is not part of a new ham's skill set.

  So... Here is the idea. Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class 
licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do you think 
that would be of interest to new hams?

  I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something like a 
maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power limit. There may 
be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the mix but this is a 
starting point for discussion.

  Your thoughts?

  Gary - N0GW



  

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Dave Ackrill]

Simon HB9DRV wrote:
> There's much more to amateur radio than just operating - at least over this
> side of the pond. Here self-education is important. Despite all the code
> I've written there's nothing I enjoy more than listening to 160m CW.

And that's why the predictions of the death of Amateur Radio often fall 
down, in my experience, Simon.  Like a lot of hobbies people start on 
one thing but then move onto other things.  Some of these other things 
may be older modes of communication like using Morse code or Hellscriber 
etc.

I can think back to people who started out with an FM only 2M radio 
bolted into the car and chatting on the local 2M repeater in the 80s. 
Often decried as 'not Amateur Radio' but many moved onto HF and alot 
even onto CW on the HF bands.

I've also heard the arguments about mobile phones and other modern 
technologies like VoIP 'killing' the hobby but I think this misses the 
point, for me anyway, of Amateur Radio.  For me it isn't just about 
talking to someone a long way away, it's the fact that it isn't always 
possible to do it and finding why it isn't possible some times but 
possible at others.  It's not even about always communicating only with 
someone I already know either.

I'm not knocking the development of systems that allow communication to 
occur by finding the best frequency as some work has to go into 
developing it and implementing it.  I've heard the arguments that the 
people who eventually use the system didn't put in that work, but like 
the 2M FM repeater system example it might get someone talking to 
someone else about the delights of using some other mode, or making a 
sked to try something else just to see if it might work.

Like most hobbies and interests, Amateur Radio will always develop and 
change and one mode or system of communication is not going to persuade 
everyone, or even every new comer, to use only that mode of 
communication.  Otherwise, they wouldn't use Amateur Radio, they would 
use a mobile phone or VoIP...

Personally, I do enjoy a whole range of different digital modes.  I'm 
not really set up for fast band hopping and I tend to use the Internet 
to arrange skeds, but I don't see them as the ultimate threat to Amateur 
Radio either.

I also do think that it would be just as bad to have everyone, say, on 
20M all at the same time, or any other band come to that.  A range of 
different modes and interests keeps everyone spread out a bit.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] Simon's SDR console via remote access !

[Andy obrien]

When I did 2k today it was plenty but 2MHz would be useful in a phone contest

On 12/15/09, Simon HB9DRV  wrote:
> All,
>
> Actually you don't need to register, you can download and play. SoftRock
> (soundcard) support inside two weeks. And then when I add RSID detection
> you'll be able to demod all digital modes in a bandwidth of up to 200kHz
> (later 2MHz).
>
> Simon Brown
> http://sdr-radio.com
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>> [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andy obrien
>>
>> For those , like me, that have not really tried SDR radios, Simon's
>> remote access to his SDR console is really amazing!   I got to get
>> active via SDR.
>>
>
>

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[James French]

On Tuesday 15 December 2009 12:55:14 Gary wrote:
> I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:
> 
> With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10 
> meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio 
> operating opportunities besides VHF FM.  Many of the people who attend our 
> Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting 
> with the local guys on a local repeater.  Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but 
> for us rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.
> 
> We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
> transceiver and getting on the air.  We are estimating that number to be less 
> than 10%.  Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem: good 
> turn out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams getting on 
> the air.  It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone to getting 
> very many new folks active in Amateur Radio. 
> 
> Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF 
> bands.  Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as 
> there was always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time 
> of day.  Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was 
> common.  While that same opportunity is available today, at least 
> theoretically, CW operation is not part of a new ham's skill set.
> 
> So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class 
> licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do you 
> think that would be of interest to new hams?
> 
> I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something like a 
> maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power limit.  There 
> may be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the mix but this is 
> a starting point for discussion.
> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> Gary - N0GW
> 
> 
> 
>

Correct me if I am wrong here, but Technicians have digital privliges on 10
meters from 28.000MHz to 28.500MHz already. As for 15, 40 and 80 meters, they
have CW only for about 100khz range on each band.

I have never had a problem finding someone to chat on 10 meters for the
past year even with the sunspots as low as they are. I have even heard
activity in PSK and other modes not counting the Propnet group.

Granted, I only get a chance to play below 30MHz right now about three times
a month from a club station about thirty miles away from my home. But i seem
to be listening or calling CQ at the right time also...:)

If this is to discuss about 'amending' Part 97, I would be for it. I would
like to see a portion of 160 meters added also. I usually hear about ten to
fifteen stations operating there during the week and plenty more during
contests to get away from the congestion.

As for power restrictions, I would say max about 200 watts. Baud rate I would
not even consider unless your doing Packet which already has a limit set for
HF usage.

Another suggestion here is to introduce the newly licensed operater to
interfacing a computer to an HF radio and doing CW that way. I have had a few
very nice QSOs with other operators that way. Thats my way of seeing if I
have my interface and computer hooked up correctly.

James W8ISS

Re: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[W2XJ]

I think it is a bad idea. With the way licensing has already been
simplified, anyone with a technician license can easily just go get a
General.



From: Gary 
Reply-To: 
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:55:14 -
To: 
Subject: [digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

 
 
 
   

I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10
meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio
operating opportunities besides VHF FM.  Many of the people who attend our
Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting
with the local guys on a local repeater.  Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but
for us rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.

We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a
transceiver and getting on the air.  We are estimating that number to be
less than 10%.  Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem:
good turn out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams
getting on the air.  It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone to
getting very many new folks active in Amateur Radio.

Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF
bands.  Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as
there was always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time
of day.  Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was
common.  While that same opportunity is available today, at least
theoretically, CW operation is not part of a new ham's skill set.

So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class
licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do you
think that would be of interest to new hams?

I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something like
a maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power limit.
There may be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the mix but
this is a starting point for discussion.

Your thoughts?

Gary - N0GW

 
   

RE: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Simon HB9DRV]

I doubt whether amateur radio has ever been more alive than it is at
present.

Simon Brown
http://sdr-radio.com


> -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Ackrill
> 
> It seems, to me, that the predictions of the death of Amateur Radio
> have
> been around since well before I obtained my licence in the early 1980s,
> and I've seen articles in magazines going back to the 1930s predicting
> the imminent demise of the hobby for various reasons as well...

OT!!! Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Bob McGwier]

Same here.  I do not operate digital modes at all personally, even those 
I helped to create and/or improve.  I operate 160m and 40m CW almost 
exclusively.  That does not stop me from conducting experiments, doing 
design work, and using the brain I was given to learn and expand 
knowledge.  I believe this is in the highest tradition of amateur radio 
and should continue.  When that stops, I have lost interest.

Simon and I and many others like us write lots of code and do lots of 
experiments.  And rather than look at the development of all of this as 
dehumanizing,  I view it as humanist in the extreme.  It is an enabler 
of new things by the HUMANS using the new capabilities.

I think we should leave philosophy and concentrate on digital radio here 
probably.  CR is here to stay as is SDR which has been around for a long 
time.  In my case, I was doing SDR for work two years before Mitola 
popularized the term.

I am happy amateur radio OPERATORS are benefiting now from that 
experience and effort.

Bob
N4HY


Simon HB9DRV wrote:
> 
> 
> There's much more to amateur radio than just operating - at least over 
> this side of the pond. Here self-education is important. Despite all the 
> code I've written there's nothing I enjoy more than listening to 160m CW.
> 
>  
> 
> Simon Brown
> 
> http://sdr-radio.com
> 
>  
> 
> *From:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *DANNY DOUGLAS
> 
> It seems to me that this is all in preparation of dehumanizing amateur 
> radio as we know it.
> 



-- 
(Co)Author: DttSP, Quiktrak, PowerSDR, GnuRadio
Member: ARRL, AMSAT, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC.
"the only people for me are the mad ones,
  the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk,
  mad to be saved, desirous of everything at
  the same time, the ones who never yawn or
  say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
  like fabulous yellow roman candles" Kerouac
Twitter:rwmcgwier
Active: Facebook,Myspace,LinkedIn

[digitalradio] Techs on HF digital

[Gary]

I thought I'd run something up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes:

With the currently extended low sunspot cycle reducing the occurrence of 10 
meter openings to near zero, there is little to offer new hams for radio 
operating opportunities besides VHF FM.  Many of the people who attend our 
Technician license classes are interested in doing much more than chatting with 
the local guys on a local repeater.  Sure, VHF SSB is a possibility but for us 
rural folks, even that provides slim pickings for distant contacts.

We are seeing a very low percentage of newly licensed people ever buying a 
transceiver and getting on the air.  We are estimating that number to be less 
than 10%.  Other clubs in our area are experiencing the same problem: good turn 
out for classes and lots of licenses issued but few new hams getting on the 
air.  It may be that VHF FM is not a viable stepping stone to getting very many 
new folks active in Amateur Radio. 

Being an old fart, I naturally began as a novice operating CW on the HF bands.  
Finding other stations to make contact with was never a problem as there was 
always activity on either 40 or 80 meters, depending upon the time of day.  
Making contact with other stations hundreds of miles away was common.  While 
that same opportunity is available today, at least theoretically, CW operation 
is not part of a new ham's skill set.

So... Here is the idea.  Would you be amenable to allowing Technician Class 
licensees to operate digital modes in the Technician CW bands and do you think 
that would be of interest to new hams?

I would imagine, the license limitations would have to state something like a 
maximum of 300 baud and 500 Hz bandwidth with a 200 watt power limit.  There 
may be other limitations that might be nice to toss into the mix but this is a 
starting point for discussion.

Your thoughts?

Gary - N0GW

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Phil Williams]

I first heard of cognitive radio systems when efforts were underway to make
use of the 'white space' in the television broadcast bands.  The whole idea
is to make more efficient use the the spectrum by putting situational
awareness in to the client device.

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsections&sc=emergingtech&id=16471

http://www.commsdesign.com/news/tech_beat/www.eet.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18700443

philw



On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Andy obrien  wrote:

>
>
> The ARRL Newsletter mentioned ..
>
> One of the major topics of discussion at the AC meeting involved the
> upcoming WRC-12, the World Radiocommunication Conference in 2012. The
> AC adopted preliminary IARU positions on the WRC agenda items that
> relate to amateur radio or may impact the amateur radio service. The
> most significant agenda items are:
>
> 3. AI 1.19 - Software-defined radio and cognitive radio systems;
>
> Just what is considered to be a "cognitive radio system" ? Most
> radios these days are pretty "smart", maybe the next generation will
> think more ?
>
> Andy K3UK
>  
>

RE: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Simon HB9DRV]

There's much more to amateur radio than just operating - at least over this
side of the pond. Here self-education is important. Despite all the code
I've written there's nothing I enjoy more than listening to 160m CW.

 

Simon Brown

http://sdr-radio.com

 

From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of DANNY DOUGLAS



It seems to me that this is all in preparation of dehumanizing amateur radio
as we know it.

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Dave Ackrill]

DANNY DOUGLAS wrote:

> This all may sound like sour grapes to those who are pushing these 
> innovations, but I do really worry about the future of this hobby, and where 
> it is heading, but I have heard others saying the same things.  As one who 
> has enticed young people into the hobby, taught classes and encouraged 
> operating: I am having more and more problems convincing them that this is 
> something that they want.  They already have computers,  cell phones, 
> blackberries, whatever berries, so why do they need radio?  I could let them 
> read about cognitive radio systems, but I still wonder if that is enticement, 
> because they can already pick up the phone, or key the keyboard and talk 
> anywhere in the world, without worry about sun spots.

It seems, to me, that the predictions of the death of Amateur Radio have 
been around since well before I obtained my licence in the early 1980s, 
and I've seen articles in magazines going back to the 1930s predicting 
the imminent demise of the hobby for various reasons as well...

In fact, maybe what we are saying is that "my" interpretation of what 
the hobby is to others is either going to have to change, or die?

At various times new modes or ways of communicating have been deemed to 
be 'not Amateur Radio' or 'not in the spirit of Amateur Radio'.  Often, 
about ten or twenty years latter it seems to me, those people new to the 
bands who were using the new fangled modes or systems are, themselves 
heard to bemoan new modes or systems in use as being "not what they 
joined the hobby for".

Digital modes, such as AX:25 and even PSK31 were treated with a great 
deal of suspicion when they came out.  I remember people who didn't like 
them questioned whether they were 'illegal' codes or cyphers.  But, here 
we are decades later still with predictions of the death of Amateur Radio.

Dave (G0DJA)

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[DANNY DOUGLAS]

It seems to me that this is all in preparation of dehumanizing amateur radio as 
we know it.  Technology moves on, and maybe that is one of the reasons we seem 
to be getting older and older.  Young people look at it, and ask why they need 
to bother to learn code, or even electronics, since they can just push a button 
someone else has put in front of them. 

It does sound exciting for our military, government, commercial businesses to 
have and be able to communicate, since they really are not interested in 
anything other than the capability to move data as easy and quick  and cheaply 
as possible.  As for me, this is a hobby, and I want to be in charge of my own 
thinking, and thankfully there are still going to be radios that allow me to 
push buttons, turn knobs and press switches to choose my own operating band, 
and modes.  It is great to have technology available to help me make those 
decisions; such as propagation forecasting, RSID etc. but then those still 
require ME to make the final selection of where I want to transmit and how I 
want to operate.  I believe we are getting out of the decision making process 
with too much technology and might as well forget about contests etc. when 
having to compete with such technological forward stations as you mention here. 
 As an individual with limited financial means, who will never be able to 
afford the "best and most powerful" technology I am, even today, depressed when 
I tune around and find the big contest stations giving out numbers in the 
hundreds,within an hour or so the beginning of the contests, mainly due to the 
technology of the day.  Expeditions seem to be in the same "numbers" mode, 
attempting to work as many contacts as possible, no matter that they may be 
working the same operator 30 or more times, to the expense of the actual number 
of hams who are able to get thru.  

This all may sound like sour grapes to those who are pushing these innovations, 
but I do really worry about the future of this hobby, and where it is heading, 
but I have heard others saying the same things.  As one who has enticed young 
people into the hobby, taught classes and encouraged operating: I am having 
more and more problems convincing them that this is something that they want.  
They already have computers,  cell phones, blackberries, whatever berries, so 
why do they need radio?  I could let them read about cognitive radio systems, 
but I still wonder if that is enticement, because they can already pick up the 
phone, or key the keyboard and talk anywhere in the world, without worry about 
sun spots.



Danny Douglas
N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB
All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at:  DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU
CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F
Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred,
I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do.  
Moderator
DXandTALK
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
Digital_modes
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159

  - Original Message - 
  From: Bob McGwier 
  To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 9:10 AM
  Subject: Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?



  Andy and others:

  I think you mean that the people who programmed today's radios are 
  smart. They have written excellent DSP algorithms to process the 
  signals YOU select for the radio.

  Suppose we have a radio capable of doing any kind of waveform we wish to 
  do (gnuradio is a step in the right direction).

  http://gnuradio.org/trac

  But suppose we built radios with algorithms in them to do sensing, 
  measurement, of the environment for interference, large signals that 
  will not be co-channel but can generate intermodulation distortion which 
  does result in inband interference, estimates the quality of the path, etc.

  Some systems do something like this in rudimentary form already. HF 
  Automatic Link Establishment was set up to replace the smart operator, 
  which a smart radio. It sounds the channel repeatedly and if two radios 
  operating using HF ALE wish to connect to exchange information, the two 
  radios, based on the data gathered from the sensing algorithms from a 
  pool of frequencies assigned by the system administrator. This is radio 
  with some artificial intelligence in it, that does not need a software 
  defined radio behind it.

  But let us go much further. Let's get the FCC to pass rules that allow 
  almost any waveform within reason and assign this operation to "any 
  vacant television channel", i.e., the so called white space rules now 
  being put into place.

  Such a radio system will be equipped with a complex set of sensing 
  algorithms. These algorithms have one job: fine the best set of 
  parameters to put into our software defined radio to allow us to 
  communicate with (say) the internet.

  The radio is COMPLETELY in charge once it has been informed by settings, 
  databases, sensors

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Bob McGwier]

Andy and others:

I think you mean that the people who programmed today's radios are 
smart.  They have written excellent DSP algorithms to process the 
signals YOU select for the radio.

Suppose we have a radio capable of doing any kind of waveform we wish to 
do (gnuradio is a step in the right direction).

http://gnuradio.org/trac

But suppose we built radios with algorithms in them to do sensing, 
measurement,  of the environment for interference,  large signals that 
will not be co-channel but can generate intermodulation distortion which 
does result in inband interference,  estimates the quality of the path, etc.

Some systems do something like this in rudimentary form already.  HF 
Automatic Link Establishment was set up to replace the smart operator, 
which a smart radio.  It sounds the channel repeatedly and if two radios 
operating using HF ALE wish to connect to exchange information,  the two 
radios, based on the data gathered from the sensing algorithms from a 
pool of frequencies assigned by the system administrator.  This is radio 
with some artificial intelligence in it, that does not need a software 
defined radio behind it.

But let us go much further.  Let's get the FCC to pass rules that allow 
almost any waveform within reason and assign this operation to "any 
vacant television channel", i.e., the so called white space rules now 
being put into place.

Such a radio system will be equipped with a complex set of sensing 
algorithms.  These algorithms have one job:  fine the best set of 
parameters to put into our software defined radio to allow us to 
communicate with (say) the internet.

The radio is COMPLETELY in charge once it has been informed by settings, 
databases, sensors, etc.  about the channel(s) it is going TO CHOOSE to 
operate on from the restricted set we as administrators allow.

The optimality criterion is a balance of maximize channel capacity (data 
rate if you will) without causing harmful interference.

That is a service coming into existence now.

Now suppose you are a military unit about to be dropped into hostile 
territory.  You are outfitted with a radio whose first job when you 
enable it is to sense the environment FOR EXISTING radio systems and 
figure out its parameters so you can use it for your own communications.

The combination of

a) sensors for determining everything within reason about the channel.
b) a set of goals to be achieved:
   1) construct a waveform that will allow me to communicate using the 
  channel
   2) minimize interference to others
   3) determine if the desired end of the conversation is reachable on 
this channel
   4) ?
c) communicate until done, modifying waveform, channel, etc. as needed 
to maintain communications and minimize interference.

This is a form of cognitive radio.  It has been under intensive study 
for nearly 15 years since Mitola coined the term.

Having done several years of research in both software and cognitive 
radio fields,  this is a very exciting time for me personally. 
Contributing to implementations in Flex Radio,  GnuRadio, etc. has 
really been enjoyable.

I have to say that for many in amateur radio,  this will not seem like 
radio at all and they will object strongly to its existence because it 
does indeed move more stuff between the operator and the radio.  Let's 
just say that I don't see why the two visions necessarily should be in 
conflict.  I am heading off to W2GD/2 in Tuckerton, NJ this weekend to 
prepare for the remainder of the 160 meter contest season.  This year we 
are introducing software radios of various types.  But it will still be 
my teammates and I that sit in front of the radio and wield the paddle 
to make the contact.  The SDR and limited CR will aid this but will not 
replace it.  Every major contesting group is now using or planning to 
use SDR and CR to enhance their work because the competition is 
definitely going to use it.

Bob
N4HY



Andy obrien wrote:
> The ARRL Newsletter mentioned ..
> 
> 
> One of the major topics of discussion at the AC meeting involved the
> upcoming WRC-12, the World Radiocommunication Conference in 2012.  The
> AC adopted preliminary IARU positions on the WRC agenda items that
> relate to amateur radio or may impact the amateur radio service.  The
> most significant agenda items are:
> 
> 
> 
>3. AI 1.19 - Software-defined radio and cognitive radio systems;
> 
> Just what is considered to be a "cognitive radio system" ?  Most
> radios these days are pretty "smart", maybe the next generation will
> think more ?
> 
> Andy K3UK
> 
> 

-- 
(Co)Author: DttSP, Quiktrak, PowerSDR, GnuRadio
Member: ARRL, AMSAT, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,
NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC.
"the only people for me are the mad ones,
  the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk,
  mad to be saved, desirous of everything at
  the same time, the ones who never yawn or
  say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
  like fabulous yellow roman candles" Kerouac
Twitt

RE: [digitalradio] Simon's SDR console via remote access !

[Simon HB9DRV]

All,

Actually you don't need to register, you can download and play. SoftRock
(soundcard) support inside two weeks. And then when I add RSID detection
you'll be able to demod all digital modes in a bandwidth of up to 200kHz
(later 2MHz).

Simon Brown
http://sdr-radio.com


> -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andy obrien
>
> For those , like me, that have not really tried SDR radios, Simon's
> remote access to his SDR console is really amazing!   I got to get
> active via SDR.
> 

[digitalradio] Simon's SDR console via remote access !

[Andy obrien]

For those , like me, that have not really tried SDR radios, Simon's
remote access to his SDR console is really amazing!   I got to get
active via SDR.

go to sdr-radio.com and register, then read

http://sdr-radio.com/Forum/tabid/175/aff/1/aft/63/afv/topic/afpgj/1/Default.aspx#215

for details on how to use Simon's radio.

Andy K3UK

[digitalradio] TS2000 and SDR I.F. Stage Use for digital moded ?

[Andy obrien]

Is anyone using a TS2000, or similar radio, with a Softrock Lite for
I.F. Stage Use ?  I have half of what I need to do this and was
wondering if anyone here is already ahead of me ?  I was wondering
about software that is available, I assume Simon's SRD console does
not interface with it... yet ?

Andy K3UK

Re: [digitalradio] Digital voice in general

[Tony]

James,

> Wondering if anyone has done any digital voice other than with
> the AOR unit? James W8ISS

I have several digital voice clips that you can listen to on my website. The 
voice quality is quite good with FDMDV and WinDRM (MELP CODEC). Most were 
recorded on 20 meters while we participated in DV nets hosted by my good 
friend Mel, K0PFX.

We even did some experimenting with software EQ while running FDMDV. Neat 
stuff...

http://tim-tom1.magix.net/

Tony -K2MO






Suggested frequencies for calling CQ with experimental digital modes =
3584,10147, 14074 USB on your dial plus 1000Hz on waterfall.

Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at
http://www.obriensweb.com/sked
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:
digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

RE: [digitalradio] XW-1 Launched-Tracking with HRD ?

[Simon HB9DRV]

Yes you can, I'll fix my antennas now and see if I can hear the new china :)

 

Let's hope their next satellite is a HEO or even MEO - would be fantastic
for the hobby.

 

Simon Brown

http://sdr-radio.com

 

From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Andy obrien




I use HRD's sat tracking program, does anyone know if we can add NEW birds
to that application ?
 I have never tried that.



 

AW: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Siegfried Jackstien]

Snip.

Just what is considered to be a "cognitive radio system" ?

Snip...

A intelligent radio .

If you say one of the "bad words" like terrorism, bomb, president ... etc

The qso is stored as mp3 file . now if there is a cellphone repeater or a
wlan net available, the radio connects to cia and rings a big alarm bell ..

Just kidding

Dg9bfc

Sigi

 

Re: [digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Ian Wade G3NRW]

 >-Original Message-
From: Andy obrien 
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009   Time: 05:43:46
>
>   3. AI 1.19 - Software-defined radio and cognitive radio systems;
>
>Just what is considered to be a "cognitive radio system" ?  Most
>radios these days are pretty "smart", maybe the next generation will
>think more ?
>
>Andy K3UK
>
>

Hi Andy,

I wondered that too. These may help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_radio
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1234390

Google for "Congnitive Radio Systems" for many more references.

-- 
73
Ian, G3NRW

[digitalradio] cognitive radio systems;?

[Andy obrien]

The ARRL Newsletter mentioned ..


One of the major topics of discussion at the AC meeting involved the
upcoming WRC-12, the World Radiocommunication Conference in 2012.  The
AC adopted preliminary IARU positions on the WRC agenda items that
relate to amateur radio or may impact the amateur radio service.  The
most significant agenda items are:



   3. AI 1.19 - Software-defined radio and cognitive radio systems;

Just what is considered to be a "cognitive radio system" ?  Most
radios these days are pretty "smart", maybe the next generation will
think more ?

Andy K3UK

Re: [digitalradio] XW-1 Launched-Tracking with HRD ?

[Andy obrien]

This is good news, thanks for posting it.

I use HRD's sat tracking program, does anyone know if we can add NEW birds
to that application ?
 I have never tried that.


Andy K3UK


On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:24 AM, Trevor .  wrote:

>
>
> The Amateur Radio satellite XW-1 was launched this morning. As well as
> transponders for SSB/CW and FM working it also has an AX.25 packet BBS:
>
> PacSat BBS
> Uplink: 145.825 MHz AFSK 1200 BPS
> Downlink: 435.675 MHz AFSK 1200 BPS
>
> Currently only the telemetry beacon on 435.790 MHz CW has been activated.
>
> Further details at
> http://www.southgatearc.org/news/december2009/xw_1_launched.htm
>
>

[digitalradio] XW-1 Launched

[Trevor .]

The Amateur Radio satellite XW-1 was launched this morning. As well as 
transponders for SSB/CW and FM working it also has an AX.25 packet BBS: 

PacSat BBS 
Uplink: 145.825 MHz AFSK 1200 BPS
Downlink: 435.675 MHz AFSK 1200 BPS 

Currently only the telemetry beacon on 435.790 MHz CW has been activated.

Further details at 
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/december2009/xw_1_launched.htm 

73 Trevor M5AKA 
Daily Amateur Radio News Email or RSS: http://www.southgatearc.org/ 
Email Your News Items to: editor at southgatearc.org 
Or use the Form at: http://www.southgatearc.org/news/your_news.htm