| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 11.04.00 09:58l 226 Lines 7610 Bytes #-9514 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_98B
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/98B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0ROF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<
PI8ZAA<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PI8VNW
Sent: 000408/1541Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:60145 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA32166 ; Sat, 08 Apr 00 14:05:13 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00000263 ; Sat, 08 Apr 2000 14:33:10 MET
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 00 14:19:43 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_98B>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/98B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Subject: Need help checking out a KAM+ on 1200 baud VHF packet
I tried running it unsquelched before posting here - it didn't help.
What are the 9600 frequencies? Aren't those standardized?
Jerry W4UK
On Thu, 6 Apr 2000 15:34:38 -0700, "Cathryn Mataga"
<cathryn@junglevision.com> wrote:
>
>"Jerry Flanders" <jflanders2@home.com> wrote in message
news:38ecf989.349607033@news...
>> I am brand new to VHF packet, and am trying to check out a used KAM+ I
>> just purchased. I have it connected to my FT-847.
>>
>> I hear a lot of packet activity here (near Augusta, GA) on 145.75, but
>> cannot print a single character of it! I assume it is 1200 baud, but I
>> don't know that for sure. Is it likely to be 9600, which would explain
>> my lack of copy? If so, where can I find 1200 to copy?
>>
>> The receive LED on the KAM+ lights when I unsquelch the radio (and
>> when the 145.74 packet "noise" breaks the squelch, also). Also, when I
>> do a "connect" command to a fictitious station, the FT-847 seems to
>> transmit OK, so I probably have my KAM+ to FT-847 cable wired up AOK.
>>
>> Any tips? I just want to make sure everything is working OK.
>
>
>Well, if it sounds like a 'hisss' -- almost like an unsquelched
>FM radio, then it's 9600. If you hear tones
>it's 1200. I'm not familiar with the
>KAM+, but I run my KPC9612 unsquelched. That is with the
>squelch open all the way. Even if the KAM+ can't run unsquelched
>opening up the squelch shouldn't affect your receive. There's
>a setting for this on the 9612.
>
>(It's possible, but not really certain, that your squelch is
>slow, and is cutting off the beginning of packets -- but it's
>something to check.)
>
>I agree, that it sounds like it's wired up right, if you see the
>'receive LED' light up when you unsquelch. Hmm.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 20:20:08 -0500
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: Need help checking out a KAM+ on 1200 baud VHF packet
Try listening to 144.390 that's the APRS freq, and you
should hear some activity there at 1200 baud. There isn't
much 9600 in the US, and what little there is, is mostly on
UHF, as inexpensive FM radios are easy to find in that band.
Steve K5OKC
"Jerry Flanders" wrote
> I tried running it unsquelched before posting here - it didn't help.
> What are the 9600 frequencies? Aren't those standardized?
>
> Jerry W4UK
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 20:18:46 -0500
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: Need help checking out a KAM+ on 1200 baud VHF packet
Try listening to 144.390 that's the APRS freq, and you
should hear some activity there at 1200 baud. There isn't
much 9600 in the US, and what little there is, is mostly on
UHF, as inexpensive FM radios are easy to find in that band.
Steve K5OKC
"Jerry Flanders" wrote
> I tried running it unsquelched before posting here - it didn't help.
> What are the 9600 frequencies? Aren't those standardized?
>
> Jerry W4UK
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 17:27:06 -0500
From: "Rick Ruhl" <ricker@cssincorp.com>
Subject: Need help checking out a KAM+ on 1200 baud VHF packet
Setting the command
CMD: CD SOFTWARE
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 02:24:16 GMT
From: jflanders2@home.com (Jerry Flanders)
Subject: Need help checking out a KAM+ on 1200 baud VHF packet
Thanks Steve. I tuned down to 144.39 and am now copying all the
packets I want from the APRS stations.
Sure is curious about the 145.75 stations - they sound exactly the
same as the 144.39 stations to my ear, so they must be 1200 baud also,
but I still cannot copy a thing there.
Tomorrow I will see if I can connect to a station.
Jerry W4UK
On Thu, 6 Apr 2000 20:18:46 -0500, "Steve Sampson"
<ssampson@usa-site.net> wrote:
>Try listening to 144.390 that's the APRS freq, and you
>should hear some activity there at 1200 baud. There isn't
>much 9600 in the US, and what little there is, is mostly on
>UHF, as inexpensive FM radios are easy to find in that band.
>
>Steve K5OKC
>
>"Jerry Flanders" wrote
>> I tried running it unsquelched before posting here - it didn't help.
>> What are the 9600 frequencies? Aren't those standardized?
>>
>> Jerry W4UK
>
>
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2000 13:42:57 GMT
From: Tapio Sokura <oh2kku@iki.fi>
Subject: TM-D700 tnc features?
Dana H. Myers K6JQ <dana@source.net> wrote:
> The manuals for the TM-D700A are online at:
Thanks for the info, I found what I was looking for.
I wish all manufacturers had their manuals available on the 'net...
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2000 13:46:41 GMT
From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)
Subject: Will a GPS provide continuous, accurate altitude measurements?
In article <8cgm18$m5v$1@bob.news.rcn.net>, "Bob Lewis" <aa4pb@erols.com>
writes:
|> > GPS seems to be fairly good for tracking the location of
|> > moving objects, but almost useless for staionary ones
|>
|> The accuracy is the same moving or stationary - you just don't notice
|> the error so much when you're moving. GPS with a differential receiver
|> and sitting at a fixed location for a period of time is often used by
|> surveyors to fix a point within millimeters.
Interesting point. How consistent is the error?? If one were to collect,
say 24 hours worth of position data and then plot the whole thing would it
be likely (possible?) that the center of the plot wold actually reflect your
true and accurate location??
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill@cs.uofs.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 14:48:36 GMT
From: joedb@spambegone.earthlink.net (Joe Della Barba)
Subject: Will a GPS provide continuous, accurate altitude measurements?
On 6 Apr 2000 13:46:41 GMT, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
>In article <8cgm18$m5v$1@bob.news.rcn.net>, "Bob Lewis" <aa4pb@erols.com>
writes:
>|> > GPS seems to be fairly good for tracking the location of
>|> > moving objects, but almost useless for staionary ones
>|>
>|> The accuracy is the same moving or stationary - you just don't notice
>|> the error so much when you're moving. GPS with a differential receiver
>|> and sitting at a fixed location for a period of time is often used by
>|> surveyors to fix a point within millimeters.
>
>Interesting point. How consistent is the error?? If one were to collect,
>say 24 hours worth of position data and then plot the whole thing would it
>be likely (possible?) that the center of the plot wold actually reflect your
>true and accurate location??
>
>bill
>
>--
>Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
>bill@cs.uofs.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
>University of Scranton |
>Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
I have done this. I put a GPS in plot mode on my back deck overnight.
You get a circle about 600 feet in diameter with you in the middle.
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_98C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
