| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 02.03.00 03:16l 209 Lines 7756 Bytes #-9561 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_61A
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/61A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<OK0POK<OK0PAB<HA5OB<HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<
PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000301/2218Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:55467 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA31181 ; Wed, 01 Mar 00 19:45:38 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00018204 ; Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:36:29 MET
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 00 21:35:49 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_61A>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/61A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Wed, 1 Mar 2000 Volume 2000 : Issue 61
Today's Topics:
Does this Kam98 even work?
Experimental project for a better airport control tower?
Hamcom Software
Internet over packet?
Packet (APRS) reception question
Packet in Toronto
Packet on a Palm III
SITOR on KAM98... how?
TNC and Radio
Tower Space (2 msgs)
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:2000/61
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 04:05:25 GMT
From: "Rick Ruhl" <ricker@cssincorp.com>
Subject: Does this Kam98 even work?
Dave,
Most Marine transmissions are done on USB. Change to USB and you can decode.
Also, you probably use use FEC rather than LAMTOR for monitoring these
signals.
"Dave Covert" <davecove@thecoverts.com> wrote in message
news:22BF370AE2D20B27.F7F0A9B0F8BACAEC.391FD50081F50308@lp.airnews.net...
> Can someone with a KAM98 or KAM+ go to 8.42125 MHz LSB and see if they can
> decode the SITOR (mode B FEC) there? It is from the US Coast Guard and is
> supposed to be text weather information at certain times. The rest of the
> time I am guessing the signal is repeated station ID info.
>
> Thing is, although I see my tuning LEDs go rail to rail like I suppose
they
> should, I seldom see the Link/Con light come on and I never see anything
> that lookslike intelligable data on the terminal program. I am using
LAMTOR
> to try to monitor the weather station xmission.
>
> Any ideas how I might be (mis)using my KAM98? Help?
>
> Dave KB5GOG
>
>
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 03:07:45 GMT
From: Mike Bernock <mbernock@mediaone.net>
Subject: Experimental project for a better airport control tower?
Do a net search on FANS CNS/ATM... or FANS1/A for info on datalinks used for
air
traffic control applications. Try searching on ACARS for airline operations
center datalinks... Search on TCAS and ETCAS for collision avoidance systems.
Lots going on out there.
-- Mike
Mooneer Salem wrote:
>
> I know the perfect idea for increasing the use of amateur radio
> (might not even require full-duplex or high speeds for it either).
>
> How about using packet radio as a replacement to airport control towers?
> Each airplane participating would have some type of transceiver with a TNC
> attached to it and a laptop computer. The laptop computer would also be
> connected to
> the aircraft's autopilot. Every control tower would have a similiar setup,
> except that there's no autopilot and the laptop is replaced with a mainframe
> or a server
> cluster.
>
> The airplanes would transmit the coordinates of planes within a 10-mile
> radius or so once in a while, allowing the nearest traffic control "node" to
> perform
> collision avoidance. At the nodes, the flight plans for each flight could
> also be stored
> digitally, allowing the node to give instructions to the aircraft as to how
> fast and what direction to
> fly.
>
> Eventually this could be extended to allow the nodes to control takeoff and
> landing, possibly with a full-duplex link.
>
> Any suggestions? Would it be possible to develop this type of system
> on the ham radio bands? (I'm in no way affilated with any airport or company
> but
> I want to see something that will get interest in this hobby, and this might
> be
> the spark for the engine)
>
> -Mooneer
>.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Feb 00 19:25:31 GMT
From: Firefox@Southwind.NET (Randall)
Subject: Hamcom Software
Has anyone bought and used the full version of Hamcom and how do you like it
for multi mode use ?
>.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Feb 2000 13:08:16 GMT
From: "Eric S. Johansson" <esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us>
Subject: Internet over packet?
Gary Coffman <ke4zv@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> A 10 watt full duplex 56 kb station costs us about $600 to install.
> (The DSY modems will work full duplex.) I don't see any way to
> get that cost down to $150 without very large economies of scale,
> which the digital amateur radio market does not offer at present.
understood. I think the way to bring down the price is to look into reusing
components and designs available in the commercial realm.
http://www.mxcom.com/products.htm has listings for transmitter ICs, receiving
ICs,
as well as high-speed Gaussian minimum shift keying modems.
http://www.maxim-ic.com/showcase_2463.htm
is a overview description of a high-speed MSK transceiver based on a single
chip.
my point is that it's probably difficult but not impossible to reach
the $150 price point. Compromises are inevitable but not a project
killer.
>>http://www.hamradio.si for more information.
> I checked the site again. I haven't found the order page for the turnkey
> $325 systems. Can you give a more precise URL?
http://lea.hamradio.si/~s53rm/ send email to sine. he's awfully slow
responding
so don't panic if you don't hear something back for a few days.
> The big problem we found when
> testing the Slovenian equipment was multipath. It's a killer at high speeds.
it's a killer no matter what speed you operate at. It's just that slower
speeds
make packet so boring that you never get the point of noticing the multipath.
we need to figure out what the commercial folks have done for multipath
and adapt their techniques to the amateur world. They live in the same RF
spaces we do and the only difference is they have money and users interested
in using the network.
> In our terrain, we rarely have true line of sight paths. 56 kb MSK works
> Ok if we're careful, but the faster BPSK doesn't cope as well. You have
> to design your paths the way you would for reliable point to point microwave
> links. That limits the topology of the network when you have to deal with
> the practical site acquisition problems faced by amateurs. (We don't have
> eminent domain, or infinitely deep pockets, so we can't always get the
> locations we may need the way the telcos can.)
this is abundantly clear to me and to others. The amateur radio model of
putting up a transmitter at home and establishing contact with lots of others
independent of any intermediary infrastructure just doesn't work in
networking.
> I have been hoping that the SS work being done by TAPR would be a solution
> to that problem. (SS is naturally robust against multipath, and a raking
receiver
> design can make it more so.) But progress on that front has been slow. I
also
> have some practical implementation issues with SS in amateur networks.
> The high sites to which we can gain access are usually crowded with high
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_61B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
