| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 18.02.00 06:38l 177 Lines 7448 Bytes #-9576 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_48D
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/48D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0FSG<IN3TRX<OE7XBB<OE2XUM<OE5XBR<OE3XBS<S50BOX<9A0YKZ<
9A0YDA<HA3KHB<HA1KZH<HA5OB<HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000218/0128Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:52280 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA30642 ; Thu, 17 Feb 00 22:46:11 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00018001 ; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 18:22:06 MET
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 00 18:18:45 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_48D>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/48D
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
In reply to what can we do with it, think if somehow NEXRAD Radar
imaging during storms was combined with aprs, for each radio
club/township EOC was a goal, develop a fast network backbone, and leave
out the internet, then when storms aren't in progress, we would have a
lot of bandwidth. Would take more
networking of the social kind and less individualism. Also, the price
tag needs to come down.
Maybe it would expand nationwide.
Mike WB5GMK
Steve Sampson wrote:
>
> I used to meet with several Hams every week, and we discussed
> packet and other Ham stuff over a pizza. Some of us were into the
> software, some into the hardware. Mostly we just had fun with the
> mode. Most of those guys have passed away, and I don't see anyone
> on the band who wants to experiment. Mostly it's just DX Cluster
> and APRS. So, I look at the wide-band radios and say that's pretty
> neat, but say I bought 4 of them, I bet I couldn't find 3 people who
> would set one up and form a network to experiment with them.
>
> I have been messing around with Part-15 stuff lately, and it's hard to
> find others willing to experiment with long range Spread Spectrum.
> While the cards are cheap for in the home, the price goes up rather
> quickly as you move to the roof. People who are used to paying
> $400 for a 5 Watt talkie, just won't spend that much for a 100 mW
> 1.6 Mbps network. Plus the microwaves are a little more difficult to
> aim, as there are no repeaters as such. Since I've set up a 4 1/2 mile
> link, I have been asked a lot about my system from commercial
> entities, but Hams so far have just circled their fingers around their
> ears when I describe it :-) But the throughput is very exciting when
> compared to FSK modes. Heck it's more exciting than my ISDN
> throughput! I'm about the same speed as a cable modem, and
> the annual fee ($500 a year) will set you up for about 4 miles range
> at 100 mW (into a 21 dB gain parabolic). But there is just no
> interest in networking for any other purpose than web browsing on
> the internet it seems... I should be able to take this knowledge to
> Part-97 Ham when Spread Spectrum modems begin to appear, but
> we're still a few years off.
>
> Just a few comments, I'm not trying to start anything :-)
>
> Steve
>
> Cathryn Mataga wrote:
> >
> > ...The real answer lies
> > in what kind of people use that mode, and are those
> > the kind of humans you want to hang out with?
> >
> > I would say that to the extent you're insterested in developing
> > or even using 'weird technology' -- well, that's part
> > of it too. Obviously the specifics, and perhaps the 'rules'
> > are a matter for some debate. But at the bottom of it,
> > is always, 'what kind of 'interesting' techology can
> > we use to communicate' and 'are the other people doing
> > this the kind of people I want to hang out with.'
>.
------------------------------
Date: 17 Feb 2000 10:39:25 GMT
From: Hans-Peter Zorn <hpz@gmx.net>
Subject: What is a good TNC?
Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote:
> "Mike Blankenship" <mikeb@rectec.net> wrote in message
> news:38AB8A4A.B713146A@rectec.net...
>> I believe the original question still remains un-clearly answered and I
>> also happen to be interested in the outcome.
> Actually, my original post was a bit of a troll ... to see if there was
> any actual data to back up that "Kantronics sucks" thread that comes
> around every few months. There wasn't, of course.
Huh? What about the URLs I posted? I _once_ saw a KAM TNC here in
Germany at the USAR HQ's Club Station in Heidelberg (DA1US) where we
built a packet-node. We couldn't use it for anything because it
supports neither TheFirmware nor 6pack. The outdated Firmware didn't
even understand DAMA, has no Frame collector, .... It might have been
a good TNC about 5 or 10 Years ago, but for me it looked somehow
historic.
I would prefer a SCC-Card which is much more flexible and cheaper, and if
it has to be a TNC I would choose something like a TNC2Multi which supports
the standard bitrates 9k6 and 19k2 as well as good old 1k2 afsk. Or - if
it has to be cheap - the YAM, supports both 9k6 and 1k2. Or the EPP-adaptor
which supports everything between 1k2 and 600kbit/s and is cheaper than
a TNC. I gave the URLs some weeks ago. If that gear isn't available in
the US it doesn't make it worse, it is not our problem :) I can purchase
it here.
Tell me one reason to use a TNC noadays, it is more expensive, takes
extra space, likely supports only one modem, needs a dedicated
power supply (takes even more space), has problems with data curruption
on the rs-232, is limited by the speed of rs-232 (max 115kbit/s).
73s Hans-Peter
--
Hans-Peter Zorn, Karlsruhe, Germany
http://www.stud.uni-karlsruhe.de/~uhsm/ hpz@gmx.net (preferred)
http://1409.org/people/hp/ hp@1409.org (hamradio stuff)
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 09:15:01 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: What is a good TNC?
Mike Blankenship <mikeb@rectec.net> wrote:
>So the bottom line might read this way:
>Just about anything that is out there will work. Opinions vary as to the
>quality of that 'work', however. I take it that a PK-232MBX would work fine
>to start.
Sure, but only when you can get it at a flea market and pay $30 or so.
When you want to start on packet now, don't buy a TNC. Use one of the many
other solutions.
>It would seem that DSP based solutions are the only thing that is feasible
>for the long run.
Yes, but we have heard this story for over 10 years, and the first cheap
and widely available (and used) DSP modem for amateur packet radio still
has to appear. I can remember (name of person deleted) holding up a first
prototype of the DSP-2232 at an AMSAT-UK colloquium and giving lectures
about how powerful this thing is and how nice and efficient the modems to
be written for it would be. But as we all have seen, this didn't
materialize and the product is sort of withdrawn from the market, after
many many years.
The implementations for soundcards have fared a bit better, probably
because the hardware already is widespread so it "only" takes a good
programmer to write the modem code and distribute it. That is one big
hassle less than to have to design and market your own box, and
additionally write the software (which then tends to be proprietary, and
usually no alternative software or even modem modules will become
available)
Rob
--
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWW: http://www.knoware.nl/users/rob |
| AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V2000 #48
******************************
You can send in your contribution to this digest by
sending an e-mail to: hd-group@pa2aga.ampr.org
or (via BBS-net) to: hdaga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
