Re: [Repeater-Builder] Nice article on the Molotora Gontor
On 4/1/2010 9:57 PM, George Henry wrote: I suppose I should clarify: I don't do D-STAR, either. Moral objection to their use of a proprietary codec. You're going to be a while on that soap box. CODECs are almost literally the only way to make any money in the audio streaming, video streaming, and related technology worlds these days... mixed with Patents, you won't see any high-quality free CODECs that can properly encode voice at 4800 bps any time soon. DVSI has ALL of that market locked up until someone hires a pile of PhD's in math and goes after them. And even then, they'd have to make a significant impact on bandwidth utilized or voice quality over either AMBE/AMBE2, or IMBE... to have a chance of dislodging the first player to market... the only player to be written into multiple standards (P25, D-STAR, even the TDMA-based things from Kenwood/Icom... all using DVSI chipsets.) Brilliant of them really... heavily patent-encumbered CODEC, super-high price on using the CODEC in software, sell a $20 (in low-quantity, slightly cheaper in high-quanity) chipset, in a market as small as 2-way radio... they're making a bloody killing. I'd love to know what the development costs of the CODECs were... to see just how lucrative their lock on the market(s) is. But anyway... good luck finding a commercial product that doesn't use their chipset anytime soon. The next CODEC chipset maker is going to be an also-ran forever, unless their mathematicians and algorithms are uber-brilliant. Nate WY0X
Re: [Repeater-Builder]DVSI was: Nice article on the Molotora Gontor
On 4/2/2010 2:17 AM, Nate Duehr wrote: But anyway... good luck finding a commercial product that doesn't use their chipset anytime soon. The next CODEC chipset maker is going to be an also-ran forever, unless their mathematicians and algorithms are uber-brilliant. Nate WY0X One good thing, in my book anyway, at least that's all DVSI does is vocoders. They don't make radios. They don't make telephones. They don't make channel banks or muxes. They just make the chips and some software to use them. Now, if Icom (or any other radio mfg) came up with their own vocoder, and IT had become the standard, such that all other mfg had to pay royalties to them, I would have a BIIIG problem with that, because it gives that mfg a decidedly unfair advantage. Jim WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
My biggest problem with the D-Star repeaters is that they didn't make them analog compatible. Knowing as little as I do about the D-star hardware, it would seem easy enough for Icom to have done so. All they would have needed to do would have been to look at the incoming signal, see if it was analog or digital, and process it correctly. While you'll pry my analog repeater pairs from my cold dead hands; if D-Star machines were analog capable, I'd swap every pair I have to that format tomorrow. As RB (the company) I have been asked about D-star more times than I can count. I tell people it's nice to play with, but what happens in an emergency? If Icom would have made the D-star machines analog capable, those that wanted to (and had D-star radios) could play with it all they wanted to. When an emergency arose and you had 10x as many people out there with analog rigs, the machine would *still* be useful. As it is at present, if an emergency arises, only those with D-star rigs can use a D-star machine. That concept is fine, as long as ALL of your volunteers have D-Star radios! (How many places is this the case?) Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the government in the mentality that they have been in the past few years, maybe that's their way of thinning the heard. I *think* I remember someone saying that some other company had made an analog capable D-Star controller? Do any of you list members know anything about that? Scott Scott Zimmerman Amateur Radio Call N3XCC 474 Barnett Road Boswell, PA 15531 Nate Duehr wrote: On 4/1/2010 9:57 PM, George Henry wrote: I suppose I should clarify: I don't do D-STAR, either. Moral objection to their use of a proprietary codec. You're going to be a while on that soap box. CODECs are almost literally the only way to make any money in the audio streaming, video streaming, and related technology worlds these days... mixed with Patents, you won't see any high-quality free CODECs that can properly encode voice at 4800 bps any time soon. DVSI has ALL of that market locked up until someone hires a pile of PhD's in math and goes after them. And even then, they'd have to make a significant impact on bandwidth utilized or voice quality over either AMBE/AMBE2, or IMBE... to have a chance of dislodging the first player to market... the only player to be written into multiple standards (P25, D-STAR, even the TDMA-based things from Kenwood/Icom... all using DVSI chipsets.) Brilliant of them really... heavily patent-encumbered CODEC, super-high price on using the CODEC in software, sell a $20 (in low-quantity, slightly cheaper in high-quanity) chipset, in a market as small as 2-way radio... they're making a bloody killing. I'd love to know what the development costs of the CODECs were... to see just how lucrative their lock on the market(s) is. But anyway... good luck finding a commercial product that doesn't use their chipset anytime soon. The next CODEC chipset maker is going to be an also-ran forever, unless their mathematicians and algorithms are uber-brilliant. Nate WY0X Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
I am in the process of deploying a home built 70cm Mastr III conversion to D-Star. It is quite capable of doing both with existing technology. I do not CHOOSE to do both.. but it can.. It also does analog enough to do diagnostics on it which is a bit of an improvement over Icom's digital only.. I do have a discriminator and cor point to watch when I send an rx signal in.. J Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Zimmerman Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:54 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor My biggest problem with the D-Star repeaters is that they didn't make them analog compatible. Knowing as little as I do about the D-star hardware, it would seem easy enough for Icom to have done so. All they would have needed to do would have been to look at the incoming signal, see if it was analog or digital, and process it correctly. While you'll pry my analog repeater pairs from my cold dead hands; if D-Star machines were analog capable, I'd swap every pair I have to that format tomorrow. As RB (the company) I have been asked about D-star more times than I can count. I tell people it's nice to play with, but what happens in an emergency? If Icom would have made the D-star machines analog capable, those that wanted to (and had D-star radios) could play with it all they wanted to. When an emergency arose and you had 10x as many people out there with analog rigs, the machine would *still* be useful. As it is at present, if an emergency arises, only those with D-star rigs can use a D-star machine. That concept is fine, as long as ALL of your volunteers have D-Star radios! (How many places is this the case?) Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the government in the mentality that they have been in the past few years, maybe that's their way of thinning the heard. I *think* I remember someone saying that some other company had made an analog capable D-Star controller? Do any of you list members know anything about that? Scott Scott Zimmerman Amateur Radio Call N3XCC 474 Barnett Road Boswell, PA 15531 Nate Duehr wrote: On 4/1/2010 9:57 PM, George Henry wrote: I suppose I should clarify: I don't do D-STAR, either. Moral objection to their use of a proprietary codec. You're going to be a while on that soap box. CODECs are almost literally the only way to make any money in the audio streaming, video streaming, and related technology worlds these days... mixed with Patents, you won't see any high-quality free CODECs that can properly encode voice at 4800 bps any time soon. DVSI has ALL of that market locked up until someone hires a pile of PhD's in math and goes after them. And even then, they'd have to make a significant impact on bandwidth utilized or voice quality over either AMBE/AMBE2, or IMBE... to have a chance of dislodging the first player to market... the only player to be written into multiple standards (P25, D-STAR, even the TDMA-based things from Kenwood/Icom... all using DVSI chipsets.) Brilliant of them really... heavily patent-encumbered CODEC, super-high price on using the CODEC in software, sell a $20 (in low-quantity, slightly cheaper in high-quanity) chipset, in a market as small as 2-way radio... they're making a bloody killing. I'd love to know what the development costs of the CODECs were... to see just how lucrative their lock on the market(s) is. But anyway... good luck finding a commercial product that doesn't use their chipset anytime soon. The next CODEC chipset maker is going to be an also-ran forever, unless their mathematicians and algorithms are uber-brilliant. Nate WY0X Yahoo! Groups Links image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
I would be glad to elaborate about D-Star Repeater conversions as there are multiple ways to do it now and Any EDACS capable or Smartnet Capable repeater would do D-Star as both fundamentally have the parts to transmit and receive GMSK type waveforms There are several Yahoogroups that are focused on alternate D-Star hardware and software devices. Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Zimmerman Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:54 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor My biggest problem with the D-Star repeaters is that they didn't make them analog compatible. Knowing as little as I do about the D-star hardware, it would seem easy enough for Icom to have done so. All they would have needed to do would have been to look at the incoming signal, see if it was analog or digital, and process it correctly. While you'll pry my analog repeater pairs from my cold dead hands; if D-Star machines were analog capable, I'd swap every pair I have to that format tomorrow. As RB (the company) I have been asked about D-star more times than I can count. I tell people it's nice to play with, but what happens in an emergency? If Icom would have made the D-star machines analog capable, those that wanted to (and had D-star radios) could play with it all they wanted to. When an emergency arose and you had 10x as many people out there with analog rigs, the machine would *still* be useful. As it is at present, if an emergency arises, only those with D-star rigs can use a D-star machine. That concept is fine, as long as ALL of your volunteers have D-Star radios! (How many places is this the case?) Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the government in the mentality that they have been in the past few years, maybe that's their way of thinning the heard. I *think* I remember someone saying that some other company had made an analog capable D-Star controller? Do any of you list members know anything about that? Scott Scott Zimmerman Amateur Radio Call N3XCC 474 Barnett Road Boswell, PA 15531 Nate Duehr wrote: On 4/1/2010 9:57 PM, George Henry wrote: I suppose I should clarify: I don't do D-STAR, either. Moral objection to their use of a proprietary codec. You're going to be a while on that soap box. CODECs are almost literally the only way to make any money in the audio streaming, video streaming, and related technology worlds these days... mixed with Patents, you won't see any high-quality free CODECs that can properly encode voice at 4800 bps any time soon. DVSI has ALL of that market locked up until someone hires a pile of PhD's in math and goes after them. And even then, they'd have to make a significant impact on bandwidth utilized or voice quality over either AMBE/AMBE2, or IMBE... to have a chance of dislodging the first player to market... the only player to be written into multiple standards (P25, D-STAR, even the TDMA-based things from Kenwood/Icom... all using DVSI chipsets.) Brilliant of them really... heavily patent-encumbered CODEC, super-high price on using the CODEC in software, sell a $20 (in low-quantity, slightly cheaper in high-quanity) chipset, in a market as small as 2-way radio... they're making a bloody killing. I'd love to know what the development costs of the CODECs were... to see just how lucrative their lock on the market(s) is. But anyway... good luck finding a commercial product that doesn't use their chipset anytime soon. The next CODEC chipset maker is going to be an also-ran forever, unless their mathematicians and algorithms are uber-brilliant. Nate WY0X Yahoo! Groups Links image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
D-STAR may not be adopted by the majority of VHF/UHF users until the end-user gear prices drop significantly. I think there will be too few users to justify the efforts of a trustee or club to migrate to D-STAR/digital. One D-STAR follower noted 12,000 units sold globally. That number of unit sales over a period of five years or more is a product line waiting to be dropped. D-STAR is no IPOD ;-) What is holding D-STAR adoption back is pretty obvious; no competition from Kenwood or Yasue that might help drive the prices down as has been the case with all previous technology evolutions. Kenwood actually offers D-STAR re-selling ICOM's units with a stick-on Kenwood label.doesn't look like Kenwood is going to adopt this technology as a viable alternative to analog systems. Without competition there is a dead-end coming around the bend for D-STAR travelers, IMHO. The digital repeaters are also very expensive. The new hardware/software workarounds for the repeater side make migrating to the digital mode less expensive for the trustees and clubs that are interested in the mode but users make a repeater system and without the users why bother. This isn't one of those build-it-and-they-will-come scenarios. Perhaps an analogy might be why tone a repeater in a vacation spot when most of the users are from out of town and won't know the tone. Sure you can tone but you'll reduce the number of users, at least that was the case before receivers were smart and could detect the tone for us. But you get idea. So, I suspect those considering digital are thinking about adding a new repeater rather than converting an existing system. That approach is also going to lead to that dead-end for ICOM D-STAR. I think it is great that repeaters can now be enhanced with bolt-on applications running on PCs but I can't imagine hand-held owners enjoying the few if any tangible benefits of D-STAR if they have to lug a lap-top around with them so their existing mobile or hand-held can operate the mode... Linking analog repeaters via the Internet may be a better approach then trying to force or wait for 99% of the user community to migrate to the new mode. I give ICOM D- for implementation. They totally misread the marketplace IMHO. Please flame direct ;-) Best, Dave WA3GIN/W4AVA/W4KGC _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Doug Bade Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 9:50 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor I would be glad to elaborate about D-Star Repeater conversions as there are multiple ways to do it now and Any EDACS capable or Smartnet Capable repeater would do D-Star as both fundamentally have the parts to transmit and receive GMSK type waveforms There are several Yahoogroups that are focused on alternate D-Star hardware and software devices. Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Zimmerman Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:54 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor My biggest problem with the D-Star repeaters is that they didn't make them analog compatible. Knowing as little as I do about the D-star hardware, it would seem easy enough for Icom to have done so. All they would have needed to do would have been to look at the incoming signal, see if it was analog or digital, and process it correctly. While you'll pry my analog repeater pairs from my cold dead hands; if D-Star machines were analog capable, I'd swap every pair I have to that format tomorrow. As RB (the company) I have been asked about D-star more times than I can count. I tell people it's nice to play with, but what happens in an emergency? If Icom would have made the D-star machines analog capable, those that wanted to (and had D-star radios) could play with it all they wanted to. When an emergency arose and you had 10x as many people out there with analog rigs, the machine would *still* be useful. As it is at present, if an emergency arises, only those with D-star rigs can use a D-star machine. That concept is fine, as long as ALL of your volunteers have D-Star radios! (How many places is this the case?) Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the government in the mentality that they have been in the past few years, maybe that's their way of thinning the heard.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
Doug, you have my sympathy and admiration.. for hanging in there to marry those two worlds. I follow one of the yahoo groups hoping the little module becomes more user friendly for installation into a motorola 5000 or micor. The reluctance is the module, I want it working and bullet proof before tackling the varables of installation. The hardware (and firmware) seems only now taking the quantum leaf out of betaville. I am watching with baited breath.. . Bill Atlanta w4oo . . --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Doug Bade k...@... wrote: I would be glad to elaborate about D-Star Repeater conversions as there are multiple ways to do it now and Any EDACS capable or Smartnet Capable repeater would do D-Star as both fundamentally have the parts to transmit and receive GMSK type waveforms There are several Yahoogroups that are focused on alternate D-Star hardware and software devices. Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Zimmerman Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:54 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor My biggest problem with the D-Star repeaters is that they didn't make them analog compatible. Knowing as little as I do about the D-star hardware, it would seem easy enough for Icom to have done so. All they would have needed to do would have been to look at the incoming signal, see if it was analog or digital, and process it correctly. While you'll pry my analog repeater pairs from my cold dead hands; if D-Star machines were analog capable, I'd swap every pair I have to that format tomorrow. As RB (the company) I have been asked about D-star more times than I can count. I tell people it's nice to play with, but what happens in an emergency? If Icom would have made the D-star machines analog capable, those that wanted to (and had D-star radios) could play with it all they wanted to. When an emergency arose and you had 10x as many people out there with analog rigs, the machine would *still* be useful. As it is at present, if an emergency arises, only those with D-star rigs can use a D-star machine. That concept is fine, as long as ALL of your volunteers have D-Star radios! (How many places is this the case?) Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the government in the mentality that they have been in the past few years, maybe that's their way of thinning the heard. I *think* I remember someone saying that some other company had made an analog capable D-Star controller? Do any of you list members know anything about that? Scott Scott Zimmerman Amateur Radio Call N3XCC 474 Barnett Road Boswell, PA 15531 Nate Duehr wrote: On 4/1/2010 9:57 PM, George Henry wrote: I suppose I should clarify: I don't do D-STAR, either. Moral objection to their use of a proprietary codec. You're going to be a while on that soap box. CODECs are almost literally the only way to make any money in the audio streaming, video streaming, and related technology worlds these days... mixed with Patents, you won't see any high-quality free CODECs that can properly encode voice at 4800 bps any time soon. DVSI has ALL of that market locked up until someone hires a pile of PhD's in math and goes after them. And even then, they'd have to make a significant impact on bandwidth utilized or voice quality over either AMBE/AMBE2, or IMBE... to have a chance of dislodging the first player to market... the only player to be written into multiple standards (P25, D-STAR, even the TDMA-based things from Kenwood/Icom... all using DVSI chipsets.) Brilliant of them really... heavily patent-encumbered CODEC, super-high price on using the CODEC in software, sell a $20 (in low-quantity, slightly cheaper in high-quanity) chipset, in a market as small as 2-way radio... they're making a bloody killing. I'd love to know what the development costs of the CODECs were... to see just how lucrative their lock on the market(s) is. But anyway... good luck finding a commercial product that doesn't use their chipset anytime soon. The next CODEC chipset maker is going to be an also-ran forever, unless their mathematicians and algorithms are uber-brilliant. Nate WY0X Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [Repeater-Builder]D-Star conversion of existing Repeaters
I have built both sound device/software versions of the repeater and hardware modem/software versions and both are operational however Linux support is behind Windows support on the software side. Not for the lack of trying of the authors. There are internal Linux issues at hand.. that are in the middle of operational issues. They are being fixed so I would call a lot of that still Alpha to Beta. but in XP is ready to work assuming you can do your part on the hardware side. Some of us would rather deploy site computers as Linux.. but that is currently admin level deployment level today and not really ready for the masses unless you are tolerant of bugs. XP will do in the mean time albeit less than optimal solution in my book.. I will be glad to post my results as I can but I tend to post on the digital yahoo groups associated with the project as I assume here is not the appropriate place for such. While it is a repeater and I am a builder it is a focused technical subject most analog builders have little interest in. as seen in some negative comments whenever D-Star is brought up. Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 10:29 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor Doug, you have my sympathy and admiration.. for hanging in there to marry those two worlds. I follow one of the yahoo groups hoping the little module becomes more user friendly for installation into a motorola 5000 or micor. The reluctance is the module, I want it working and bullet proof before tackling the varables of installation. The hardware (and firmware) seems only now taking the quantum leaf out of betaville. I am watching with baited breath.. . Bill Atlanta w4oo . . --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com , Doug Bade k...@... wrote: I would be glad to elaborate about D-Star Repeater conversions as there are multiple ways to do it now and Any EDACS capable or Smartnet Capable repeater would do D-Star as both fundamentally have the parts to transmit and receive GMSK type waveforms There are several Yahoogroups that are focused on alternate D-Star hardware and software devices. Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Scott Zimmerman Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:54 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor My biggest problem with the D-Star repeaters is that they didn't make them analog compatible. Knowing as little as I do about the D-star hardware, it would seem easy enough for Icom to have done so. All they would have needed to do would have been to look at the incoming signal, see if it was analog or digital, and process it correctly. While you'll pry my analog repeater pairs from my cold dead hands; if D-Star machines were analog capable, I'd swap every pair I have to that format tomorrow. As RB (the company) I have been asked about D-star more times than I can count. I tell people it's nice to play with, but what happens in an emergency? If Icom would have made the D-star machines analog capable, those that wanted to (and had D-star radios) could play with it all they wanted to. When an emergency arose and you had 10x as many people out there with analog rigs, the machine would *still* be useful. As it is at present, if an emergency arises, only those with D-star rigs can use a D-star machine. That concept is fine, as long as ALL of your volunteers have D-Star radios! (How many places is this the case?) Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the government in the mentality that they have been in the past few years, maybe that's their way of thinning the heard. I *think* I remember someone saying that some other company had made an analog capable D-Star controller? Do any of you list members know anything about that? Scott Scott Zimmerman Amateur Radio Call N3XCC 474 Barnett Road Boswell, PA 15531 Nate Duehr wrote: On 4/1/2010 9:57 PM, George Henry wrote: I suppose I should clarify: I don't do D-STAR, either. Moral objection to
Re: [Repeater-Builder]D-Star conversion of existing Repeaters
Does the Linux / XP box need to be behind a firewall in order to prevent unauthorized access to the boxes? Or are these boxes completely separate from any internet access? Im a computer expert, but not a radio expert..yet. :) John Hymes La Rue Communications 10 S. Aurora Street Stockton, CA 95202 - Original Message - From: Doug Bade To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:26 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder]D-Star conversion of existing Repeaters I have built both sound device/software versions of the repeater and hardware modem/software versions and both are operational however Linux support is behind Windows support on the software side. Not for the lack of trying of the authors. There are internal Linux issues at hand.. that are in the middle of operational issues. They are being fixed so I would call a lot of that still Alpha to Beta. but in XP is ready to work assuming you can do your part on the hardware side. Some of us would rather deploy site computers as Linux.. but that is currently admin level deployment level today and not really ready for the masses unless you are tolerant of bugs. XP will do in the mean time albeit less than optimal solution in my book.. I will be glad to post my results as I can but I tend to post on the digital yahoo groups associated with the project as I assume here is not the appropriate place for such. While it is a repeater and I am a builder it is a focused technical subject most analog builders have little interest in. as seen in some negative comments whenever D-Star is brought up. Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 10:29 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor Doug, you have my sympathy and admiration.. for hanging in there to marry those two worlds. I follow one of the yahoo groups hoping the little module becomes more user friendly for installation into a motorola 5000 or micor. The reluctance is the module, I want it working and bullet proof before tackling the varables of installation. The hardware (and firmware) seems only now taking the quantum leaf out of betaville. I am watching with baited breath.. . Bill Atlanta w4oo . . --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Doug Bade k...@... wrote: I would be glad to elaborate about D-Star Repeater conversions as there are multiple ways to do it now and Any EDACS capable or Smartnet Capable repeater would do D-Star as both fundamentally have the parts to transmit and receive GMSK type waveforms There are several Yahoogroups that are focused on alternate D-Star hardware and software devices. Doug KD8B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Zimmerman Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:54 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor My biggest problem with the D-Star repeaters is that they didn't make them analog compatible. Knowing as little as I do about the D-star hardware, it would seem easy enough for Icom to have done so. All they would have needed to do would have been to look at the incoming signal, see if it was analog or digital, and process it correctly. While you'll pry my analog repeater pairs from my cold dead hands; if D-Star machines were analog capable, I'd swap every pair I have to that format tomorrow. As RB (the company) I have been asked about D-star more times than I can count. I tell people it's nice to play with, but what happens in an emergency? If Icom would have made the D-star machines analog capable, those that wanted to (and had D-star radios) could play with it all they wanted to. When an emergency arose and you had 10x as many people out there with analog rigs, the machine would *still* be useful. As it is at present, if an emergency arises, only those with D-star rigs can use a D-star machine. That concept is fine, as long as ALL of your volunteers have D-Star radios! (How many places is this the case?) Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the
Re: [Repeater-Builder]DVSI was: Nice article on the Molotora Gontor
You mean like the Motorola RF devices and chips used in many two-way radio products other than Motorola's? (including directly competing products) Joe M. wd8chl wrote: One good thing, in my book anyway, at least that's all DVSI does is vocoders. They don't make radios. They don't make telephones. They don't make channel banks or muxes. They just make the chips and some software to use them. Now, if Icom (or any other radio mfg) came up with their own vocoder, and IT had become the standard, such that all other mfg had to pay royalties to them, I would have a BIIIG problem with that, because it gives that mfg a decidedly unfair advantage. Jim WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder]DVSI was: Nice article on the Molotora Gontor
Not really, as those are more 'generic'...sorta...and don't have licensing or royalties attached. Or at least we're talking so cheap as to be inconsequential. And there's no software generally either. On 4/2/2010 12:19 PM, MCH wrote: You mean like the Motorola RF devices and chips used in many two-way radio products other than Motorola's? (including directly competing products) Joe M. wd8chl wrote: One good thing, in my book anyway, at least that's all DVSI does is vocoders. They don't make radios. They don't make telephones. They don't make channel banks or muxes. They just make the chips and some software to use them. Now, if Icom (or any other radio mfg) came up with their own vocoder, and IT had become the standard, such that all other mfg had to pay royalties to them, I would have a BIIIG problem with that, because it gives that mfg a decidedly unfair advantage. Jim WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder]DVSI was: Nice article on the Molotora Gontor
IOW, they aren't *required* to use Motorola's products. Joe M. wd8chl wrote: Not really, as those are more 'generic'...sorta...and don't have licensing or royalties attached. Or at least we're talking so cheap as to be inconsequential. And there's no software generally either. On 4/2/2010 12:19 PM, MCH wrote: You mean like the Motorola RF devices and chips used in many two-way radio products other than Motorola's? (including directly competing products) Joe M. wd8chl wrote: One good thing, in my book anyway, at least that's all DVSI does is vocoders. They don't make radios. They don't make telephones. They don't make channel banks or muxes. They just make the chips and some software to use them. Now, if Icom (or any other radio mfg) came up with their own vocoder, and IT had become the standard, such that all other mfg had to pay royalties to them, I would have a BIIIG problem with that, because it gives that mfg a decidedly unfair advantage. Jim WD8CHL Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Scott Zimmerman wrote: Around here (Western PA) the governments bought Icom D-Star radios for RACES. I had no objection to that since those radios can be used in analog modes with analog repeaters. Now they are wanting to get D-Star repeaters for RACES and emergency use. I *strongly* object to that since they CANNOT be used in analog modes for emergencies. In my view, you'd be alienating much of your volunteer base that doesn't have the correct equipment right at the point where you need all the help you can get! Of course with the government in the mentality that they have been in the past few years, maybe that's their way of thinning the heard. There's also a substantial base of users who like D-STAR because there isn't a scanner that can decode it. This provides the benefits of an encrypted channel without the encryption. IMO, any use of this mode for that purpose is strictly against the rules. I'll take my analog Motorola Saber with a 2700mAH battery any day over a ham HT for being out in the sticks or having to transmit/receive for eight or more hours. When the battery dies, I can at least bludgeon a squirrel to death with it and get a meal out of the radio. Disaster situations are about survival. Individuals who go into a disaster situation need to have basic survival skills, plan to carry everything in that they need, and to have a way out. Skip the air-conditioner for the shack, pack an extra water tank, and pick the most effective radios you can for the job. They should all be MIL-810E tested or higher. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
RE: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Doug Bade wrote: I would be glad to elaborate about D-Star Repeater conversions as there are multiple ways to do it now and Any EDACS capable or Smartnet Capable repeater would do D-Star as both fundamentally have the parts to transmit and receive GMSK type waveforms There is one issue that needs to be handled. When a D-Star repeater hears another user on the input for a callsign not it's own, the modem is captured, and any input packet that starts or is received in the middle of that transmission is discarded. This, of course, would not be permitted in the Motorola world; something would have to be done with the received information, even if a band-opening allowed a remote digital user to interfere with a digital trunking system's input channel(s). Practically speaking, I think that the earlier data should be thrown out, and the packet decode restarted with the new signal. Of course, short of doing SDR and de/re-coding on the fly, this is not a trivial problem to fix. When your RSSI is measured as BER, it's a different world. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Maxtrac
Have some Micor Low Band . All on 47.xxx K.Paul Boggs ab...@earthlink.net Mountain Emergency Communications - Original Message - From: John Sehring To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: 9/23/2009 8:30:54 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Maxtrac Hi All, Been looking for Motorola Maxtrac's Micor's, both low band, low split, for amateur radio use, forever! Any tips, leads, rumors, pointers gladly followed. Thanx. --John WB0EQ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
If you don't count the Icom scanning receivers. They CAN decode D-STAR. Joe M. Kris Kirby wrote: There's also a substantial base of users who like D-STAR because there isn't a scanner that can decode it.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
Unless you have a Aeroflex 3920 with the options you can scan DStar as well as Mototrbo and all others. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, CO 80504 303-736-9693 k7...@skybeam.com On Apr 2, 2010, at 11:24 AM, MCH wrote: If you don't count the Icom scanning receivers. They CAN decode D-STAR. Joe M. Kris Kirby wrote: There's also a substantial base of users who like D-STAR because there isn't a scanner that can decode it.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Maxtrac
Want low split? Got a Radius D51LRA9732BK 29.7~36MHZ @60W 16pin collecting dust, but works just fine if your interested. --- On Fri, 4/2/10, K.Paul Boggs ab...@earthlink.net wrote: From: K.Paul Boggs ab...@earthlink.net Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Maxtrac To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, April 2, 2010, 1:17 PM Have some Micor Low Band . All on 47.xxx K.Paul Boggs ab...@earthlink. net Mountain Emergency Communications - Original Message - From: John Sehring To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Sent: 9/23/2009 8:30:54 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Maxtrac Hi All, Been looking for Motorola Maxtrac's Micor's, both low band, low split, for amateur radio use, forever! Any tips, leads, rumors, pointers gladly followed. Thanx. --John WB0EQ
[Repeater-Builder] PRO3100
I am in the market for a couple of Motorola PRO3100 UHF 45 Watt radios, a UHF mobile duplexer, and a DTMF microphone, any ideas. Leroy. J39AI
Re: [Repeater-Builder]D-Star conversion of existing Repeaters
I guess it depends on how you want to set it up. As a standalone repeater it needs no internet connection. if you want to use connectivity to other systems, you need and internet connection and it can or not not be behind a firewall depending on your skill and/or expertise in securing same... In reality they work just fine behind a firewall as only one UDP port needs to be port forwarded to process inbound network traffic.. Outbound and inbound connection related traffic is TCPIP which NAT handles fine... Now I am in particular speaking of alternate implementations of hardware on alternate systems.. Not Icom's Implementation of Icom hardware and servers.. I have a general knowledge of those but do not currently own same. Digital voice repeating using D-Star Voice protocols will soon be possible without needing a PC.. but right now that is what is needed.. subject to change in days.. not weeks.. as it is soon to be released or maybe is already... The internet side is where PC based software is needed to handle packet streams..in and out. Some folks have implemented bent pipe repeaters for P25 and D-Star but coupling the discriminator to the tx mod line is not an optimal repeater.. What is currently done with GMSK modems etc.. is strip off the digital GMSK signals in the discriminator and break them down to headers and payload and generate a new transmitted repeated signal with correct headers and ID's etc.. as well as separate them for UDP transit on the internet to destinations determined by the user..At this time a PC is used to decipher the data that comes out of the modem chip in a USB stream... is repackaged and routed as needed by the PC ... including back to the repeater transmitter.. A particular GMSK modem board or maybe even 2 versions will soon be able to repeat on the modem board without need of a PC... Both hardware/software authors of GMSK modem boards are working on this... Doug KD8B Doug KD8B La Rue Communications wrote: Does the Linux / XP box need to be behind a firewall in order to prevent unauthorized access to the boxes? Or are these boxes completely separate from any internet access? Im a computer expert, but not a radio expert..yet. :) John Hymes La Rue Communications 10 S. Aurora Street Stockton, CA 95202 - Original Message - *From:* Doug Bade mailto:k...@thebades.net *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Friday, April 02, 2010 8:26 AM *Subject:* RE: [Repeater-Builder]D-Star conversion of existing Repeaters I have built both sound device/software versions of the repeater and hardware modem/software versions and both are operational however Linux support is behind Windows support on the software side. Not for the lack of trying of the authors… There are internal Linux issues at hand.. that are in the middle of operational “issues”. They are being fixed so I would call a lot of that still Alpha to Beta… but in XP is ready to work assuming you can do your part on the hardware side… Some of us would rather deploy site computers as Linux.. but that is currently admin level deployment level today and not really ready for the masses unless you are tolerant of “bugs”. XP will do in the mean time albeit less than optimal solution in my book.. I will be glad to post my results as I can but I tend to post on the digital yahoo groups associated with the project as I assume here is not the appropriate place for such… While it is a “repeater” and I am a “builder” it is a focused technical subject most analog builders have little interest in… as seen in some negative comments whenever D-Star is brought up. Doug KD8B Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: repeater-builder-dig...@yahoogroups.com repeater-builder-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: repeater-builder-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
I do not know that it needs to be handled... The day we have enough D-Star repeaters and users on the air that an out of town DX signal trips mine I will be tickled to death... not complainBecause JRRL did not put an equivalent to CTCSS or DSQ in the system does not make it need repair... APCO P25 and Smartnet P25 ( as well as EDACS AEGIS ) for the last 10+ years uses a codec/vocoder that is inferior to D-Star (IMBE vs AMBE)... does that make it broken??? No .. just not perfect :-) We still use it. We just live with it and work around it.. It DOES mean try and do better in the next generation.. IE P25 Phase II... If that is the greatest failing we have in a totally amateur digital system... it does not seem to be a big issue to meWith 6k25 emissions we can carve up the band pretty tight on adjacents to keep overlap contours to a minimum from adjacent service areas. Sounds like a coordination issue.. not a technological failing... we do it on 12k5's now.. we can do it on 6k25's next... Yes... Icom oversold it.. but 6k25 does quite well as long as you use reasonable dbu contours to protect adjacents from each other or on channel.. Same in commercial when you get to 6k25... Line them up and they do not play nice end to endThe IF filters are what they are and DSP has limits... I had no intention of comparing D-Star to Smartnet or EDACS if that is how you took it... I was saying that the repeaters used in those trunking systems inherently have the modulator and discriminators capable of extracting GMSK ( D-Star) modulation for external processing...no more... I have spent a lot of internet study time, testing etc.. but still less than $500.00 ( of that $350.00 was for the nice little 1U rackmount PC ) converting my Mastr III station... it seems like I am still about $6000.00 in the black compared to converting it to P25... for example... which would sort of be a rational ... albeit expensive comparison :-) I am not trying to push anything on anyone... it is another repeater technology.. and you no longer need to buy the repeater from a sole source.. hopefully that growth might trigger other vendors to offer terminals.. if the market were bigger.. they would be in the game... ignoring it does not help to that end :-) Doug KD8B Kris Kirby wrote: On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Doug Bade wrote: I would be glad to elaborate about D-Star Repeater conversions as there are multiple ways to do it now and Any EDACS capable or Smartnet Capable repeater would do D-Star as both fundamentally have the parts to transmit and receive GMSK type waveforms There is one issue that needs to be handled. When a D-Star repeater hears another user on the input for a callsign not it's own, the modem is captured, and any input packet that starts or is received in the middle of that transmission is discarded. This, of course, would not be permitted in the Motorola world; something would have to be done with the received information, even if a band-opening allowed a remote digital user to interfere with a digital trunking system's input channel(s). Practically speaking, I think that the earlier data should be thrown out, and the packet decode restarted with the new signal. Of course, short of doing SDR and de/re-coding on the fly, this is not a trivial problem to fix. When your RSSI is measured as BER, it's a different world. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
[Repeater-Builder] Re: if you have a commercial license
A very interesting view. I never this before. The opposite. In the old days, 1960's, a young kid who started with a ham license as a young teenager, could have a great summer job in Broadcasting at 18, if you got your first phone. Again, a union shop in a major market. I have also heard that some broadcasters would not hire hams as they liked to take things apart. Over the last 40 years I have had the opportunity to hire many engineers doing LMR, common carrier MW, cellular, etc. The hams always hit the floor running and never looked back. Hams made my work life much easier.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: HP E8285A Cellular Test Sets
I have one and am very pleased with it. It is very heavy so it is best on the bench. The analog functions are fairly straght forward, however, I still have some questions about the spectrum analyze that seems to be a great feature. Sid. --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Dawn seape...@... wrote: I checked the archives and noticed there was scant mention of these units. For the money, these seem like a dream come true. From what I understand, once set up in the test mode, they have most all of the function of the HP-8920 series minus the following: No Edacs,LTR or any signaling formats or DPL except raw tone generation and DTMF. Three watt limitation No frequency count on Spec A screen Pre-set squelch or none. Otherwise these function as a complete service monitor from 100kc-1 gig and another second band to 1.7gig. I also gather that with a suitable thruline or similar power attenuator, the wattmeter indication can be adjusted to read correctly removing the 3 watt limitation. If all this is correct and with an external multi format tone generator such as Motorola's or Cromco's and a Multiformat tone reader such as Opto's or Connect System's boxes, you pretty much have the entire enchilada por poco dinero. Am I missing something or is this quite possibly a fantastic deal due to the shere amount of orphaned CDMA/TDMA test sets since GSM? Anyone have one of these? The 100 kc-1 gig isn't part of Agilent's specs. Is this a hack or was this a function of earlier units? Any info or caveats appreciated on these units.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star Was: Molotora Gontor
At 4/2/2010 09:49, you wrote: There's also a substantial base of users who like D-STAR because there isn't a scanner that can decode it. Funny you should mention that. A pair of bootleggers using D-STAR showed up on the input to a friend's 2 meter analog repeater. After a couple of months he decided to buy a D-STAR HT so he could listen in eventually make contact. As soon as they heard another voice they were gone haven't been back. Bob NO6B
[Repeater-Builder] Kenwood TKR-820 Reverse Burst Questions
I've been using a Kenwood TKR-820 as a repeater on part of a linked UHF system for a few years now. The repeater runs flawlessly, I've never had any trouble with it. I noticed when I initially built the radio that the external PTT on the accessory connector works as it should, but that the repeater does not generate reverse burst when the transmitter unkeys when using this lead. I run all commercial equipment, and it would be nice to have reverse burst on this radio, but if it means I have to use an external tone deck, I'll pass. Anyone know if the TKR-820 can be configured to provide reverse burst with an external controller, using the internal CTCSS encoder/decoder? Thanks, Chris
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Maxtrac
John, I have 2 Micors, both low band. I have 1 complete control head/cable assembly, and 1 very short (about 3) control cable only. One is the high split (42-50), the other is the mid split (30-42). Email me off list if you would like one or both! Steve KD8BIW kd8biw at hotmail.com --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, John Sehring wb...@... wrote: Hi All, Been looking for Motorola Maxtrac's Micor's, both low band, low split, for amateur radio use, forever! Any tips, leads, rumors, pointers gladly followed. Thanx. --John WB0EQ
