Its my plan to enable Commander to provide for outgoing CW via a
modem control signal on the same serial port used for CAT commands
and RX-TX switching (aka PTT). Besides eliminating the need for a
second serial port, this will exploit those transceivers with built-
in ascii-to-CW capability.
In RTTY mode, WinWarbler can run a soundcard RTTY engine (MMTTY) in
parallel with an external RTTY modem like your AEA232MBX, a KAM, an
MFJ RTTY modem, or an SCS multimode controller. This can be used in
two useful ways:
1. to provide diversity decoding, which can improve your copy of RTTY
DX
,
Rick, KV9U
Dave Bernstein wrote:
Bob did not suggest a docking station, Sal, he suggested a second
hard drive. I have used his recommended solution with my IBM T42P
laptop, and it works extremely well; one can swap identities in
the
time required to terminate Windows and reboot
Its unfortunately a little more complicated than that, Larry. An IDE
or ATA 66/100 controller can indeed be connected to two hard drives --
a master and a slave -- with an appropriate cable. However, each
drive can be jumpered as always master, always slave, or cable
select; the later means
Bob did not suggest a docking station, Sal, he suggested a second
hard drive. I have used his recommended solution with my IBM T42P
laptop, and it works extremely well; one can swap identities in the
time required to terminate Windows and reboot; the physical drive
swap takes a few seconds.
As do I.
Aren't there some upper-case-only fonts around?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The option to display in upper case is better than nothing, but
readability is best
The option to display in upper case is better than nothing, but
readability is best optimized by letting the user choose
- the font and its associated metrics (size, bold, italic)
- the font color
- the background color
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com,
Continued failure to eliminate the preventable QRM from unattended
digital stations reinforces the position that amateurs cannot be
trusted with the maximum possible autonomy to determine the highest
valued use of their spectrum.
Actual evidence that the operators of such stations will
/K5YFW
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dave Bernstein
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 2:23 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Dec 15?
The scenario where neither A or B can hear C or D
The asymmetric propagation case is impractical to address, whether
the stations involved are attended or unattended; fortunately, its
not common. The case we can address is that of the unattended station
that could, if suitably equipped, detect an already busy frequency
and thereby avoid
control
the
radio (still am). The only busy detector was me...
73
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein aa6yq@
wrote:
Unfortunately, semi-automatic operation is problematic. The
initiating operator can know that the frequency is clear at his
or
her
The scenario where neither A or B can hear C or D, but that C or D
are QRM'd by transmissions from A or B is indeed possible, but is
relatively infrequent. No one expects A or B -- whether they are
attended or unattended -- to suspend transmission to avoid QRMing a
station that neither can
appearance,
letting your apps use the Windows standard is 40% faster or so.
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
- Original Message -
From: Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developers tend to hold on to older machines because they must
continue to support the older versions of Windows.
DX Central is also down. Must be something going around...
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
What's the status of telnet://cluster.dynalias.org ? I'm getting
connection
refused (nothing listening on port 23).
Server as it does on a native system.
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
- Original Message -
From: Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm sure its fine for IT stuff, but do you find the fidelity of
execution under VMware to be acceptable when testing multi-
threaded
real-time systems
You could host the last automatic digital QSO on 80m. If you ensure
that the frequency is clear at both ends beforehand, then the QSO will
be unique on two counts.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew J. O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I assume the new
stations are a whole other discussion!
Be well and 73
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein aa6yq@
wrote:
You could host the last automatic digital QSO on 80m. If you
ensure
that the frequency is clear at both ends beforehand, then the QSO
Are there any facts behind your pronouncement, Bonnie? If so, please
share them, or point us in their direction.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rick KV9U wrote:
there won't be any more fully automatic stations
If PSK is successfully using 3580 to 3584, then perhaps it should
stay there. It would be natural for RTTY and the other digital modes
to operate between 3584 and 3600.
We should respect the 3560 QRP calling frequency.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com,
97.221 limits 80m automatic operation with more than 500 hz bandwidth
to 3.620-3.635; for verification, see
http://www.w5yi.org/page.php?id=136
As far as I know, 97.221 was not changed in the recent FCC action.
Anyone have hard evidence to the contrary?
If so, there will be no automatic or
Try [EMAIL PROTECTED] , Flavio.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Flavio Padovani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Saludos Dave,
I have tried to contact you directly, but everytme the message is
undeliverable. I would like to get some advice on flat screen
monitors.
That's not universally true, Flavio. Its defintely not true of any of
the Nanao or Dell LCD monitors I use, or the IBM Thinkpad or Sony
Vaio laptop displays.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Flavio Padovani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Saludos Dave,
All LCD or
There are many versions of the AMD 64 3200+, ranging in clock speed
from 2 to 2.2 GHz. All have 128 kb of level-1 cache; some have 512 kb
of level-2 cache, and some have 1 mb.
All versions of the AMD 64 X2 Dual-core 3800+ clock are specified as 2
GHz, with 128 kb of level-1 cache and 512 kb of
A critical parameter with monitors in amateur radio applications is
resolution. $160 for a 20 monitor that can't do better than 1024 x
768 would be no bargain. 1280 x 1024 would be reasonable for that
price, but check its reviews for good text readability. You should
also verify that the
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Chris Jewell ae6vw-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I certainly wish that regulation-by-bandwidth had been rolled into the
current rulemaking, but the next-best choice is for the Commission to
act promptly on that matter now that the current rules are out.
The
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
As for the supposed loss or disappearance of the automatic band at
3620kHz to 3635kHz, I do not believe this FCC error should be allowed
to stand for very long.
Perhaps the FCC's interim correction to the
If a conversion to bandwidth-based rules is imminent, why would the
FCC role out these changes?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FCC error?
3620kHz to 3635kHz Automatic Band -vs- Extra Voice
Is there a sub-band
The Unibus? There's a DEC-defying trip down memory lane.
As for the ARRL and FCC, they're off singing We're all Bozos on this
Omnibus.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, I thought this was the big unibus, or whatever!
When operating in PSK mode, WinWarbler provides an Omega 25 button
that replays the last 25 seconds of audio, allowing you to decode any
signal in the waterfall during that interval.
If you have WinWarbler's broadband decode function enabled, its
Channel Monitor window decodes all QSOs
Sorry, Andy. KD4E is an experimental AI application I've been
developing. The recent HP spying scandal combined with a tract on
religious freedom combined to expose a defect in its deduction
module. Its fixed in the next release...
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In
Looks like its working better now...
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, kd4e [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Think outside the technological box.
There are few unique patterns of human behavior.
Bonnie accused the ARRL technical folks of being
deceptive about the
a private email message --
just as they would if they noticed key clicks or splatter.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Michael Keane K1MK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
At 03:44 PM 9/26/06, Dave Bernstein wrote:
So my longwinded answer to your question, Bill, is the human
1. it is often difficult to determine an operator's location from his
or her callsign. TO5DX might be operating from any French territory.
Anyone using my signal as an indication of propagation to California
will reach the wrong conclusion.
2. The IARU beacons transmit at known power levels
Beacons are allocated space in all three IARU regional band plans.
This is as much to protect live operators from being QRM'd by beacons
as it is to protect beacon users from QRM from live operators.
Given that the beacons don't have busy frequency detectors and
pragmatically couldn't QSY even
PSK -- which many posters here have asserted is the most popular sound
card mode -- can be used in either LSB or USB at the operator's
discretion.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I ask this before but tell me again why
the wrong
polarity, you
will lost the copy.
It is recommend to use upper sideband for PSK31. It will be easier
to read
the waterfall display and decide which way to QSY if the RF
spectrum is the
same way up as the audio spectrum.
On 9/22/06, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED
The main problem with sole source technology is the absence of
competition, which generally keeps prices high. And message delivery
over HF is a niche market if ever there was one.
If we want out of this box (pun intended),
1. expand the market
Very few hams are interested in sending email
Before you change the subject, please acknowledge that its possible
for computers with soundcards to run protocols with ARQ. Two examples
have been cited: SCAMP, and PSKMail.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 11:28 PM
There are two possible explanations for why we don't see PC-hosted
Pactor 3 running on the bands today, even though its technically
feasible:
1. a PC-based implementation makes little financial sense
2. information sufficiently detailed to implement Pactor 3 has not
been publicly released
+++AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:49 PM 9/17/2006, you wrote:
Before you change the subject, please acknowledge that its
possible for computers with soundcards to run protocols with ARQ.
Two examples have been cited: SCAMP,
A question for you, Patrick: in your opinion, is the public
documentation for Pactor 2 and Pactor 3 sufficient to allow you to
build your own implementations?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello,
Is it just
SCAMP and PSKMail make it clear that a PC and soundcard can reliably
deliver messages over HF even with the wrong operating system. The
trick is to choose an error detection and correction mechanism that
is compatible with the operating environment.
Pactor-2 and Pactor-3 chose an error
I Googled SCS Pactor buy to get you a link or two, and was
surprised to see these modems selling for $1100 rather than $300. A
dedicated PC implementation would make more financial sense than I
thought!
Anyway, here's some links:
http://www.marinenet.net/Radio%20Modems.htm
That's not true, John. SCS multimode controllers do a fine job with
Pactor-2 and Pactor-3, both of which utilize ARQ. These protocols are
implemented in software running on a computer -- one of the 68K
variants, as I recall.
The impediment to running ARQ protocols on Windows PCs is the absence
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I knew that.
So is my AEA TNC that I got back in 1988
Bottom line - there is *NO* computer running software with out
any hardware (TNC) that will do the same right?
Wrong. SCAMP, a
By definition Hardware solutions do not include dedicated
microprocessors. They use non-programmable control mechanisms, e.g.
finite state machines, stepping relays, or cam shafts.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John,
Not
Dave Bernstein wrote:
Your characterization of Linux as further from real-time than
older
operating systems is inaccurate, Rick. See
http://linuxdevices.com/articles/AT8073314981.html
http://www.mvista.com/products/realtime.html
http://www.realtimelinuxfoundation.org/
http
.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Open source is one solution. Another is to establish
and maintain a
repository containing source code and all necessary
development
Google says [EMAIL PROTECTED] but if ntlworld.com is non-responsive,
this address may also be non-functional.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jerry W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looking for email address of Frank G7IZW who was the support for
WinPix32 SSTV
of the software, but he knew that MMSSTV being
freeware would kill WinPix32. Don was working on some improvements
to
WinPix32 before he got so sick he went into a hospice. Was a great
ham and good friend.
Jerry - K0HZI
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein aa6yq@
wrote:
Google
, Leigh L Klotz, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
But Purify gave us Netflix!
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 2:05 pm, Dave Bernstein wrote:
C++ was a huge step backward from Ada, IMHO. There'd have been no
need for Purify if everyone programmed in Ada instead of C and C++.
Need a Digital mode QSO
If I understood its description correctly, PSKmail is a server-base
architecture: if you you want to send an email message, you establish
an HF connection on a known frequency with a PSKmail server, which
then forwards your message via the internet.
Is this the right network architecture?
Is
33 unique callsigns were decoded -- each at least twice -- during the
last ~10 minutes between 14070.5 and 14072.5. I thought there might be
a contest going, but its all just keyboard-to-keyboard chatting.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
In the case of 40M, if each data channel (mode bandwidth) is 5 KHz
wide, there would be room for 25 QSOs. I RARELY hear 25 QSOs between
7000 and 7150 KHz on any given
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I don't know about the ARRL DV WG's request. However, I believe that
the League and its legal staff have come to understand that you don't
want to ask the FCC for a ruling
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I were Hollingsworth and you ask me for an official opinion I
would tell you that it applied to the mode.
So you already know the answer to the question. Everything else is
Re Dr. Hopper is also know for her work on Flow-Matic business
language, COBOL and Ada.
I met Grace Hopper when we (Rational Software) validated the first
Ada compiler in the early 80s. She was inspirational...
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to
C++ was a huge step backward from Ada, IMHO. There'd have been no
need for Purify if everyone programmed in Ada instead of C and C++.
How many billions of dollars have been lost just to = vs ==, much
less to memory leaks.
Pascal was a teaching language never intended for industrial use.
Both
I'm not a lawyer either, Walt, but the 300 baud symbol rate
limitation from §97.305(c)(3) below applies to a RTTY or data
emission, not the individual components of that emission IMHO.
You and I have discussed this potential loophole in the past, and my
advice was to run it up the flagpole
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fortunately, that's not the way it works with ALE, John. There is
plenty of room for thousands of ALE operators around the world on
the few ALE HF channels we presently use now. Signals are
The issue is control over the operating system's scheduling
decisions. There are real-time versions of Linux that are comparable
in this dimension to the firmware running in a TNC; given sufficient
CPU horsepower, a Pactor-2 or Pactor-3 implementation on realtime
Linux is feasible.
The
The documentation in http://hflink.com/ recommends that a station
transmit a 20-30 second sounding hourly on each frequency.
Below, Bonnie says In amateur radio ALE, there is only one pilot
channel per ham band where repetitive sounding (station ID) happens
on a regular basis.
How many
There are variants of Linux with pre-emptive scheduling; this enables
guaranteed real-time response. Linux-based cellphones use this
approach, for example.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_real-time
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Chris Jewell ae6vw-
[EMAIL
Precise timing isn't the issue, Steve. WinWarbler originally used
GetTickCount() and QueryPerformanceCounter() in its CW generation
code, but a high-resolution timer using the multimedia library is
sufficiently accurate and more convenient. The problem is thread
scheduling. WinWarbler uses
Steve, I asked a few simple questions about the amateur
implementation of ALE; these questions were not focused on
politeness, but rather on understanding how many ALE users can be
simultaneously QRV if there's one pilot channel per amateur band.
Bonnie claimed 1000, but two multiplications
so that computers will at
least
match the SCS type units?
73,
Rick, KV9U
Dave Bernstein wrote:
The issue is control over the operating system's scheduling
decisions. There are real-time versions of Linux that are
comparable
in this dimension to the firmware running in a TNC
Those are all low-occurrence events that could be implemented with
one-to-one messages with no significant performance degradation.
One-to-one messaging with ARQ would seem optimal. KISS, remember?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
I have reviewed enough of the military documentation to understand
that they employ dedicated ALE transceivers capable of much faster
scanning rates.
Really? Please enlighten me, I was
Agreed, there's no problem if you can own the OS; but on an end-
user's Windows PC, you can't do that.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Dave,
I mentioned AMTOR as its timing is more robust that PACTOR I.
As I
Chas, the term modem is a contraction of modulator
and demodulator; it purpose is the bidirectional conversion of
digital signals to analog signals. There are many different kinds of
modems, employing different modulation techniques to achieve
different speeds and error rates over different
In the case of Pactor-2 and Pactor-3, the developers knew they were
running on dedicated processors with complete control over scheduling,
so there was no reason to reduce performance by unnecessarily extending
turnaround time or pipelining control messages (which extends recovery
when an
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
I have no idea how much ALE will take root in the future via Amateur
Radio period, I would love to see at least one station Sounding 24/7
on each Amateur Band (excluding 60m) from 160-6m
There is no implied priority in the enumeration of principles in
§97.1, Steve; had a priority been intended, it would have been made
explicit.
In today's world, (e) is arguably the most important.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek [EMAIL
No priority is stated, thus all of the principles set forth in §97.1
are equally important.
In particular, no one can claim that one activity is more important
than another solely because its applicable principle has a lower
ordinal.
This is not a matter of interpretation. Regulations are
I said
In today's world, (e) is arguably the most important.
The rationale for this prioritiation is that a typical month sees
more people killed, injured, or displaced by conflict than by natural
disaster. This is a personal view that shapes my time allocation. I
did not derive it from its
If as you say, ham radio operators have not been thinking outside
the box, and are largely content with the status quo, having never
known anything better, then how do you explain
- the blizzard of new digital modes developed over the past 5 years
- the rapid adoption of panoramic reception
Bonnie claimed that amateur radio had devolved to random QSOs. Since
amateur radio began with random QSOs and random QSOs remain a
significant component of amateur communications today, that claim is
false. If the original post was on topic, then correcting its factual
errors must also be on
A misstatement of that magnitude is hardly a nit. Its a foundation of
her argument!
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Mayfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
And I suppose that nit-picking every statement made by others on
the reflector
is to be considered
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
The ALE antenna issue is a major one for either portable or fixed
though.
How's that?
I have a NVIS antenna that above that range starts to look like a
random wire with gain that is a 125 foot dipole make of
by the
NVIS. It sure does tame the noise to an acceptable level though.
Best,
Hank
KI4MF
NN0BBX
_
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Bernstein
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 3:20 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject
Here's a technique that can be used with PSK31 or PSK63.
WinWarbler has the ability to decode all PSK31 or PS63 QSOs within a
3 khz band segment. It further has the ability to decode each QSO to
extract the two callsigns involved (or the fact that one station is
calling CQ or CQ DX). Using
Another approach is the Who's on the Air? database, which is under
development. See
http://www.wotadb.org/
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For communication between two ham radio stations to exist,
some type of
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Rick, KV9U wrote:
- The technology you recommend requires considerable extra
equipment (computers/interfaces/frequency agile antennas
and band hopping) which is fairly
Amateur radio began with the randomness of chance QSOs -- you
remember CQ, don't you? Its not exactly honest to claim that
amateur radio is devolving from the style with which it began, has
used during all of its existence, and remains dominant to this day.
No one is saying you can't use ALE
*** new AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Walt, what would make an HF-based system constucted by amateurs
invulnerable to cyber-attack?
### If you are NOT connected to the Internet and don't use 100%
I understand that your proposed HF system would be entirely
independent of the internet, Walt. My points are
1. If we could reliably distinguish attack payloads from valid
payloads, we'd already be doing this on the internet -- where its
easier to accomplish given the hierarchical routing
AA6YQ comments
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW Dave...if I come up to your neck of the woods, I'll take you out
to some place that you can recommend that serves good crab cakes, New
England Clam Chowder and lobster.
You're on,
If any digital radio software authors here would like to check their
code for vulnerabilities, RATS is available via
https://securesoftware.custhelp.com/cgi-
bin/securesoftware.cfg/php/enduser/doc_serve.php?2=Security
This is a primitive static analysis tool compared to commercial
products
If messages to N recipients are converted to N messages to 1
recipient, under what circumstances would a message transport layer
require one-to-many transmission?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris,
There are several amateur
The message you cite provides no reference to an amateur
implementation of the 5066 standard in amateur radio. I Googled it,
but the only hits were to commercial manufacturers of milspec
equipment.
We have indeed amassed collection of soundcard digital mode
implementations over the last few
An HF email system that could operate entirely independently of the
internet (as opposed to using HF links to overcome local-area
internet outages) would require a significant infrastructure. Either
its a mesh, in which case users must be persuaded to keep their nodes
(transceiiver + PC
Re: The technical world, and especially amateur radio should rise
above that in concerted efforts to accomplish desired common goals.
A prerequisite for concerted action is to clearly state the goal, and
to have that goal make sense.
To me, pronouncements from inept bureacratic organizations
I agree that an application that convey can convey email to the
internet via HF would be handy during emergencies or other
disruptions, and during portable operation (though 3G cellular and
WiMax are beginning to reduce the need for the latter). Enabling it
exploit a direct internet connection
Oh, I see, Steve. You believe that the internet is insufficiently
reliable, despite the multi-billion dollar investments by telecom
companies and suppliers, governments, and research institutions. Thus
there's an opportunity for amateurs to build a more reliable means of
conveying email thats
Walt, you're going to have to do MUCH better than that if you want
motivate concerted action.
The fact that we CAN do something is irrelevant; the question is
whether we SHOULD. Answering this question generally involves
identifying the value to stakeholders, understanding the costs and
Yes, there's opportunity to use digital radio to augment current
communication systems to overcome local outages -- but we don't need
to duplicate the internet to accomplish this.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Harold Aaron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree
AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC
CONS/LGCA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What was the motivation for a man to try and circumnavigate the
globe in a hot air balloon?
Why do individuals enter a triathlon or climb a high mountain?
Because its there to
Walt's suggestion is to replicate the internet's worldwide email
transport capability. After getting beyond because we can, his
rationale is to protect against cyber-attack, though he has yet to
reveal why a system constructed by amateurs would not be equally
vulnerable to cyber-attack, or why
?)
- generate QSL cards
- synchronize with LotW
and so on...
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/20/06, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fine, Steve, but none of that satisfies the need for
interoperation
As Rick KV9U pointed out, determining that a frequency is not in use
requires more than seeing an absence of signals for the 200 ms before
you transmit.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
GM Dave,
Just back at here in
201 - 300 of 533 matches
Mail list logo
