Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread wd8chl
On 4/7/2010 3:34 PM, k7...@skybeam.com wrote: > Yep, were all aware of the issues here in the USA. On my commercial TDMA > system I did a test 75miles away from the site with a portable and get back > into the site with no problem. Way out of the FCC license but works great. > > > > Mike I guess

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread k7pfj
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wd8chl Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 12:57 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters) On 4/7/2010 11:47 AM, k7...@skybeam. <mailto:k7pfj%40skybeam.com> com wrote:

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread wd8chl
On 4/7/2010 11:47 AM, k7...@skybeam.com wrote: > Yes, > > > > Tetra 4 slot TDMA over a 25Khz channel, Phase 1 P25 12.5Khz digital over a > single channel, NXDN Kenwood& Icom FDMA 6.25 KHz digital and DMR standard > is TDMA digital over a 12.5khz channel witch is 6.25Khz. I wish Tetra was > here in

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread wd8chl
On 4/7/2010 11:22 AM, Nate Duehr wrote: > Yep all understood. My point was, I haven't seen any of those > DEPLOYED in a Public Safety environment yet, so I doubt his posting > was accurate about whatever system he's talking about being TDMA... > It's probably something else... P25 phase I, most l

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread k7pfj
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 8:49 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters) Don't forget Tetra, which is huge in Europe... 73 de Darren G7LWT On 7 April 2010 13:11, Doug Bade mailto:k...@thebades.net> net> wrote:

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread Nate Duehr
On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:07 AM, wd8chl wrote: > On 4/7/2010 2:28 AM, Nate Duehr wrote: > > > It almost sounds like you're talking about a trunked (multi-site) > > system though, and I don't know of any trunked TDMA-based commercial > > offerings in the 2-way radio market. Anyone else heard of one? >

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread Storer, Darren
Don't forget Tetra, which is huge in Europe... 73 de Darren G7LWT On 7 April 2010 13:11, Doug Bade wrote: > > > There are several. Harris- OpenSky, P25 Phase 2 are currently being > deployed, and Iden ( Nextel ) Motorola has a version for municipals. I do > not know if anyone ever built it but

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread wd8chl
On 4/7/2010 2:28 AM, Nate Duehr wrote: > It almost sounds like you're talking about a trunked (multi-site) > system though, and I don't know of any trunked TDMA-based commercial > offerings in the 2-way radio market. Anyone else heard of one? As Doug said, Harris (formerly M/A-Com) has Open Sky

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-07 Thread Doug Bade
There are several. Harris- OpenSky, P25 Phase 2 are currently being deployed, and Iden ( Nextel ) Motorola has a version for municipals. I do not know if anyone ever built it but I saw it on proposals a few years back. It almost sounds like you're talking about a trunked (multi-site) system th

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-06 Thread Nate Duehr
On Apr 6, 2010, at 8:45 PM, vr2 xvd wrote: > Syetem Planed <1,xxx sites for "full" out door coverage . > As the result it is double the site. > They tried to increase the R.F power output. > The field strength increase ,but only a bit change. > It is because the TDMA format time slot overlap by d

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-06 Thread vr2 xvd
Dear sirs, Thank very much for the information. Yes, it is difficult to say which one will better than other. For me/my team we get intend to know more on it before start the project. I heard a story that some where police digital radio system use TDMA format. Syetem Planed <1,xxx sites for "ful

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread Nate Duehr
On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:01 PM, vr2 xvd wrote: > hi all, > > > May I ask the follow question. > For a single site Voice communication digital repeater operation in identical > conditions, which format /system type will work better in multi path signal > ,with lager coverage area. > FDMA,TDMA (D-

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread vr2 xvd
busy trying > > to talk people out of it in favor of P25 or old fashioned analog. > > > > Just my 2 cents. I'll go back to my corner now. > > > > John N3SPW > > > > ---------- > > *From:* Repeat

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread Doug Bade
Both GMSK modem and DMK URI provide a shaped and limited waveform that can be directly FM'ed at what is easily set to 1.8khz +/- typical... ( this is what the Icom stations use) the waveform is cleaner out of my station than the Icom D-Star radio keying it and filtering is better out of t

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread Paul Plack
my headphones for 8 hours at a Red Cross shelter. (Disclaimer: I also still prefer a good AM signal to SSB, and good vinyl audio recordings to 32K MP3s. ;^) 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: John Szwarc To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 5:

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread Nate Duehr
On 4/5/2010 5:10 AM, John Szwarc wrote: Okay. I've been reading with some interest the threads on D-STAR. There have been some very good points and some pretty amusing ones. P25 sounds interesting, but you will have to take note of the fact that it has not been widely accepted by the ham c

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread MCH
--- > *From:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Nate Duehr > *Sent:* Monday, April 05, 2010 4:01 AM > *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters) >

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread Jeff DePolo
> Anyone who is currently building analog AllStar Link > repeaters using a DMK URI already has the parts for a D-Star > repeater .. assuming your TX and RX will handle GMSK data of > your repeater.. This includes many Mastr II stations which > seem to be a large portion of the amateur repeater

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread Doug Bade
epeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Szwarc Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:11 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters) Okay. I've been reading with some interest the threads on D-STAR. There have been some

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread John Szwarc
om] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 4:01 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters) On Apr 4, 2010, at 2:30 PM, John wrote: > > > --- In Repeater-Builder@ <mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-05 Thread Nate Duehr
On Apr 4, 2010, at 2:30 PM, John wrote: > > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr wrote: > > > > > > I like D-STAR as a not-very-well-designed "first try" and use it... but > > it's seriously technologically flawed. Some of that can be fixed... other > > things like the heade

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star (Protocol and Repeaters)

2010-04-04 Thread MCH
Threaded... John wrote: > > Hmmm... I'm sitting here with my NQMHS Node Adapter (GMSK Modem) and watching > the binary stream, in both Hex and Char, off of my IC-91AD, while > transmitting for a few seconds. It seems the callsign information is > repeated on a pretty continuous basis looking