About CAT PTT.
Support for most of ICom-transceivers is alredy built-in to RFSM-8000.
User can define ANY commands for CAT PTT.
Dmitry.
Hi Les,
The HFLINK organisation corresponded with WIA bandplanners during the
planning of the new Australian bandplan in 2006. As a result, there
are several frequencies on 40m and 80m that were coordinated in the
new Australian bandplan (and IARU Region 3) for ALE -141 and 188-110
(RFSM2400)
expeditionradio wrote:
The HFLINK organisation corresponded with WIA bandplanners during the
planning of the new Australian bandplan in 2006. As a result, there
are several frequencies on 40m and 80m that were coordinated in the
new Australian bandplan (and IARU Region 3) for ALE -141 and
Dave, 3580 usb is what I would normally use. Also the digital modes
guys gather at 3560 friday evenings there will be dominoEX there.
Most of my testing has been on the AREC 5 mHz as we have a clear
channel there and its the area where most emergency traffic will be.
i havent thought of a 40m
zl1tbg wrote:
Dave, 3580 usb is what I would normally use. Also the digital modes
guys gather at 3560 friday evenings there will be dominoEX there.
Most of my testing has been on the AREC 5 mHz as we have a clear
channel there and its the area where most emergency traffic will be.
i havent
Hi from Les VK2DSG
You will not make any friends using wide RFSM transmissions
down at 7030 to 7040 or even anywhere below 7100 even though
the bandplan says transmissions up to 2khz may be used
7040 to 7100 is the prime operating area for ssb DX and local
ragchew operations
I would suggest
Hi from Les VK2DSG
Would also like to make known that on 80m the vk digital
section of the band is 3620 to 3640 - 3.6375 is used by
a number of people using and debugging Easy_pal which is new (DRM)
programme being written by Erik VK4AES - this programme can be used
for picture transfer -
John, will you post the method you used to resolve this?
Thanks,
Howard K5HB
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HELP!!!
I cannot seem to get this software running properly.
I can call another station, and his station answers me , looking for
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 10:32 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400
John, will you post the method you used to resolve this?
Thanks,
Howard K5HB
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HELP!!!
I cannot
John VE5MU wrote:
... everything works as it is supposed to, and what a
great piece of software Dmitry and partners have developed.
connects under very poor conditions, and seems to be immune
to the usual noise etc on 80M over a 1500km distance.
Hi John,
I agree with you. RFSM2400 is an
Yes, absolutely. Fax is legal only in the phone band. I even confused
myself!
I don't want to hazard a guess why Hellschreiber, which faxes pictures
of characters, is used in the data band and now the phone/image band.
Leigh/WA5ZNU
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 8:35 am, kv9u wrote:
Leigh,
This is the
John VE5MU
So where and when can hams in the US play with RFSM2400?
I'll be back on 3587.5 after all the RTTY is done, probably
around 0100Z March 18, on until 0400Z using mil standard .
Technically speaking, USA hams can only play with it on dummy loads...
or in the exercise yard of the
Considering that a commercial mode like Pactor can be used on the U.S.
ham bands, it would not require that much to have the specifications
posted or made available in some way to fulfill the minimal FCC rules
that are logical and well thought out.
They do not prohibit new technologies that
: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:05:50 -0500
Considering that a commercial mode like Pactor can be used on the U.S.
ham bands, it would not require that much to have the specifications
posted or made available in some way to fulfill the minimal FCC rules
that are logical and well thought
I think that makes it fax, which isn't legal in the phone band.
It's screwy, isn't it?
Hellschreiber and Feld-Hell, which is much like what you describe, is
legal in the cw/data band but not the phone band.
Leigh/WA5ZNU
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 3:49 pm, Howard Brown wrote:
So we are legal if we
Leigh,
This is the exact opposite of my understanding of Part 97 rules.
Fax is specifically what is permitted in the phone bands. Hell modes
were kind of borderline modes since they were similar to CW in some
respects.
Upon further reading of Part 97 wouldn't you consider facsimile as
Yes.
Bonnie
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Bonnie,
To condense, is your opinion as follows?
It is legal, in the US, for image or voice content on HF in the
image/voice subbands.
It is not legal at all, in the US, in the RTTY/data
in
Canada!
Original Message Follows
From: expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:18:53 -
Yes.
Bonnie
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Bill
To be argumentative, this quote was from the play Henry VI, believe
Dick the Butcher made it. He also wanted to execute all those that
could read or write. Shakespeare apprenticed for a law firm and do
not think he would wish for my family to be deprived of income thru
death :)
Also doubt
PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
- Original Message -
From: John Champa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:28 PM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Bonnie
Hi Andy,
I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious as to why it is not
legal. Is it speed and/or bandwidth?
Thanks in advance,
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just a reminder to the USA based hams , this mode is not considered
Haven't the HF-LINK folks been using this mode for over 5 years?
John. K8OCL
Original Message Follows
From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Date: Fri, 16 Mar
: Thursday, March 15, 2007 8:37 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re:
RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Hi Andy,
I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious
as to why it is not
legal. Is it speed and/or bandwidth?
Thanks in advance,
Bill N9DSJ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew
O'Brien
- Original Message -
From: Bill McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 8:37 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re:
RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Hi Andy,
I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious
as to why it is not
legal
]
Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: RFSM2400/MIL-STD-188-110
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:37:47 -
Hi Andy,
I have not tried it (even on VHF); but curious as to why it is not
legal. Is it speed and/or bandwidth?
Thanks
25 matches
Mail list logo
