| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 13.11.99 01:16l 174 Lines 5476 Bytes #-9687 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_289A
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/289A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0FSG<DB0PV<OE2XOM<OE5XBL<OE3XSR<OK0PPL<OK0POK<OK0PAB<
HA5OB<HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991112/2044Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:17227 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_28
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA23084 ; Fri, 12 Nov 99 20:17:29 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016835 ; Fri, 12 Nov 99 21:11:17 MET
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 21:08:57 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_289A>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/289A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Fri, 12 Nov 99 Volume 99 : Issue 289
Today's Topics:
Anyone Sending/Receiving CW over the Net?
best doulband 9k6 ? (2 msgs)
German packet radio (3 msgs)
PSK31 PROBLEM W/SOUND CARD
vx-5R and cellular reception
WTB Model 15 teletype
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Ham-Digital@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <Ham-Digital-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the Ham-Digital Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-digital".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
Loop-Detect: Ham-Digital:99/289
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 08:39:07 -0500
From: wd1v@amsat.org
Subject: Anyone Sending/Receiving CW over the Net?
In article <38295DA3.22D88AB9@ix.netcom.com>, Cal Kutemeier
<ckuter@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>.. ... - .... .. ... .-- .... .- - ..- -- . .- -. ..--..
>
>wd1v@amsat.org wrote:
>>
>> Please pass along the details.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> John/WD1V
I meant like a chat room where you can hear and
send audio CW.
Better get your keyboard fixed. Your print
is all compressed onto a single line. :-)
John D. Seney
wd1v@amsat.org € http://people.ne.mediaone.net/wd1v
Amateur Radio FAQ € Macnet € Oscilloscope FAQ
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 10:19:41 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: best doulband 9k6 ?
Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au> wrote:
>Joop van der Velden <pe1dna@amsat.org> wrote:
>> Dave wrote:
>>> whats the best daulbaud (144/440) rig for 9k6 packet?
>> Icom IC821 seems to be one of the very few. Mobile rigs are all crap.
>>> easist to modify?
>Costs a small fortune -- more than most medium-grade HF rigs.
He asked for the best, and was not mentioning cost considerations...
Rob
--
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWWhome: http://www.pe1chl.demon.nl/ |
| AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 19:44:46 -0500
From: Dave <floydboyz@hotmail.com>
Subject: best doulband 9k6 ?
whats the best daulbaud (144/440) rig for 9k6 packet?
easist to modify?
tnx de dave
>.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 1999 08:53:36 -0500
From: esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us (Eric S. Johansson)
Subject: German packet radio
"Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net> writes:
> Eric S. Johansson wrote
>
> Yes. There's not any radio information there, just modems.
>
> >that might be why people are using FM radio's for the FSK
> > transport. Wouldn't the capture effect help compensate for some of the
> >drift? Or am I merely displaying my appalling ignorance of RF systems?
>
> To answer your question though, picture a bandpass filter waveform.
> Now shift one to the right of another. This frequency error then
> cuts off energy and errors are the result. Yes, the carrier is rock
> solid and captured, but the audio is in the noise. Lots of bit
> errors.
things for the response. This is the kind of information folks need
to help make good decisions about their radios etc.
Now, if one was to keep the deviation low and the consumed bandwidth
smaller in relation to the filter, would that not help compensate for
the drift?
Another way of asking the question is if the band pass filter is
larger than the possible drift of the signal, would you still have the
same problems with high bit error rate?
this kind of problem might be why the Slovenian is used what looked
like a near direct conversion receiver and BPSK modulation.
--- eric
--
Eric S. Johansson ka1eec esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us
This message was composed almost entirely using NaturallySpeaking
>.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 1999 16:43:04 GMT
From: Hans-Peter Zorn <hpz@gmx.net>
Subject: German packet radio
Eric S. Johansson <esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us> wrote:
> Hans-Peter Zorn <hpz@gmx.net> writes:
>> Yes, but for user access 9k6 is sufficient.
> I seriously disagree with this. It's useful for batch processes like email
> or news transport but not for anything beyond that. Those pipes fill up
> really fast when you start doing something interesting. I personally would
> put minimum end-user access at something like 76 K. and backbones well over
> a megabit. Think of your competition (Internet) and you will understand
why.
We have about 12 25 Khz user access channels for simplex, 12 for echoduplex
To be continued in digest: hd_99_289B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
