| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 25.11.99 03:00l 233 Lines 7816 Bytes #-9672 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_300A
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/300A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<OK0PHL<OK0PBB<OK0PAB<HA5OB<HA3PG<
SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991124/2231Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:24465 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_30
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA24261 ; Wed, 24 Nov 99 19:40:12 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016967 ; Wed, 24 Nov 99 20:31:17 MET
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 99 20:28:04 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_300A>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/300A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Tue, 23 Nov 99 Volume 99 : Issue 300
Today's Topics:
Decoding packet with a soundcard in Windows
FCC reallocates Ham Band
German packet radio
Have original PK-232, what needed to do PACTOR, etc...
How do I start????
internet technology resource 8911
JNOS vs TNOS??
Software for SCS Pactor-II (4 msgs)
Where docs for pactor, amtor, clover, etc...
WTB: Kantronics - KAM Plus
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:99/300
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:48:19 -0500
From: "Rob" <NoEmail@NoWay.com>
Subject: Decoding packet with a soundcard in Windows
Is this PTT interface the same used by many PSK31 programs for use with a
soundcard?? (e.g. G3PLX PSK31 program for windows or LOgger)
Rob
"Rob Janssen" <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:slrn83i5nb.a4g.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
> Rob <NoEmail@NoWay.com> wrote:
> >With Linux, do you only need a soundcard?? (Or do you also need some
other
> >hardware??)
>
> For modes that require automatic keying of the transmitter (e.g. packet
> radio), you also need to construct a trivial interface to control the
> transmitter PTT line from the PC.
> This is not required when you only want to decode.
>
> 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: 20 Nov 1999 05:04:00 GMT
From: nvjims@aol.com (NV Jims)
Subject: FCC reallocates Ham Band
Charles has shown his usual contempt for new modes and progress, and, called
me
a "bastard" in the process..............
Can't we get him banned from this newsgroup?
Jim
(formerly Nevada Jim's Outdoor Sports, Elko, NV)
Now just out there having fun!
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 22:50:09 -0800
From: "Cathryn Mataga" <cathryn@junglevision.com>
Subject: German packet radio
"Gary Coffman" <ke4zv@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6WM5OBGfkbX71SImHGfukMwE9Zgj@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 18:16:33 -0600, "Steve Sampson"
<ssampson@usa-site.net> wrote:
> >There's probably a chart somewhere (I'm not that much of an expert) that
> >shows the optimum deviation. I suspect it should be at an index slightly
> >greater than one, or about 6 sidebands of the modulating frequency.
>
> The optimum is an index of 0.5. It is called MSK.
Does that mean 9600 baud should have a 4.8khz deviation then? That is
2.4khz up and 2.4khz down from the center frequency -- right?
Is MSK better also than PSK too? Or is MSK just better than
all FSK with higher deviation? Is MSK just what it sounds like? FSK with
that specific deviation?
>
> Gary
> Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it |mail to ke4zv@bellsouth.net
> 534 Shannon Way | We break it |
> Lawrenceville, GA | Guaranteed |
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:00:28 -0500
From: "Rob" <NoEmail@NoWay.com>
Subject: Have original PK-232, what needed to do PACTOR, etc...
You have to get a daughter board and a firmware upgrade -- not cheap. It
would appear that many people have been picking up PK232s at flea markets
without realizing that you can't use it on PACTOR just with a simple EPROM
upgrade (obtained legally or illegally) . They get disappointed when they
can't use the PK232 on PACTOR without spending $$ and end up putting the
PK232 up for sale again! You see lots of PK232s on sale these days (just go
to www.ebay.com)
I would look around and pick up a PK232 (already upgraded for PACTOR) or
better yet pick up a KAM or KAM PLUS (again upgraded for PACTOR). Check out
EBAY at www.ebay.com.
In my view the KAMS perform better than the PK 232's in ever single mode.
The filters in the PK 232 aren't great. AEA did spend much money on the
front end of the PK232 to keep costs down. The KAM's use switched
capacitance filters-- much better!
To boot, the KAMS with the newer firmware also have GTOR. GTOR is much
better than PACTOR but the HF GTOR activity is limited!
But if you really want a good PACTOR modem, buy a SCS PTC modem. The newer
SCS PTC II supports PACTOR 1, PACTOR II and PSK31 )as well as RTTY etc).
PACTOR II iis by far the best mode I have used on HF. BUt the SCS PTC II is
expensive. SCS has released the SCS PTC IIe, a cheaper version but it is
still expensive. (Go to www.scs-ptc.com)
The SCS modems use DSP and real hardware memory ARQ. Big difference!
Another option is to built a VOLKSRTTY II interface ($80US) and use freeware
software for PACTOR. (eg TERMAN93)
73's
Rob
"Jeff Pierce" <piercej@preferred.com> wrote in message
news:382DFAF2.28E1BC55@preferred.com...
> After a several year break from Ham radio, about 8 to 10 years, I am
> getting a renewed interest. Especially in the HF digital modes. I used
> to operate HF RTTY, AMTOR and packet and have an original PK-232.
>
> Now, will it operate PACTOR? I see no mention in the manual about
> PACTOR.
>
> As I said it is an OLD PK-232. The sign on banner states the software is
> Release 30.DEC.88.
>
> How can I get it to new standards while spending very, very little (read
> almost none) money on it?
>
> If it is a software upgrade, I can burn EPROMs no problem.
>
> What I am really wanting to do is develop, for fun, freeware control
> software for Linux.
>
> --
> Jeff Pierce
> piercej@preferred.com
> http://pages.preferred.com/~piercej
>
>
> -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News
==----------
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
> ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers
==-----
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:59:30 -0500
From: "Rob" <NoEmail@NoWay.com>
Subject: How do I start????
Hi Dale,
Well you should consider PACTOR mode. Packet on HF is slowly dying! PACTOR
is faster and a lot less frustrating. There are many PACTOR / Internet
gateways in use! They use WINLINK and NETLINK software! They were put in
place originally to handle Marine Mobile traffic! See
http://www.winlink.org/k4cjx/ and http://www.win-net.org/
Some of these MBO/Gateways only use PACTOR II but there are still lots that
use both PACTOR1 and PACTOR II.
Many TNCs support PACTOR I (e.g. KANTRONICS KAM etc) but only the SCS PTC II
and SCS PTC IIe support both PACTOR I and PACTOR II. PACTOR II is faster
and is more robust (Ie It will work under really bad QRM etc).
To be continued in digest: hd_99_300B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
