| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 18.06.00 04:48l 235 Lines 7351 Bytes #-9439 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_167D
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/167D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0SAA<DB0TTM<DB0FP<DB0SON<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<
PI8GCB<PI8HGL
Sent: 000617/2336Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:52336 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_167D
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 00 00:19:24 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_167D>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> CLOVER II for HF use.
>
> Let's talk apples with apples.
I did a simple experiment.
Made the measurements over a period of time.
CLOVER moved about twice the data per hour compared to PACTOR-II.
Note in the above "... based on my EXPERIENCE ...".
No point in arguing with this observation.
It is simply what I observed, and continue to observe.
Note also that I observed that PACTOR-II appears better for
weak signal (and low data rate) work. Others may have different
observations.
For weak signal work, I personally prefer CW.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 08:50:59 GMT
From: hamish@cloud.net.au (Hamish Moffatt VK3SB)
Subject: Hottest and fastest HF mode
W6RCecilA <Cecil.A.Moore@ieee.org> wrote:
> Of course, all the FCC has to do to monitor it is acquire an
> SCS modem. And there's enough published material that dedicated
> DSP engineers could duplicate the functions of the SCS modem on
> a DSP eval board. There is no built-in encryption and all the
> techniques are old hat to DSP modem designers.
Can you tell us where to find published information on
the protocol with enough detail to build a decoder?
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 07:40:58 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Packet Radio
David Findlay <nedz@bigpond.com> wrote:
>I am about to try and get my HAM liscence. I am interested in getting into
>packet radio. What sort of transmission speeds are currently obtainable? Can
>you get 10Mb/sec?
More like 1200 bits/s. Or 9600 if you are living in a techologically
advanced area.
Some people even run 56kbps.
10 Mbit/s only exists on some random experimental links, not in general
operation.
> I want to set up a small network of automated weather
>stations that will report to a central location. Could I use small FM
>transmitters, that don't require a liscence to operate?
Do your weather stations collect 10 Mbit/s worth of data?
Of course you can use license-free wireless LAN products. These include
the transmitter hardware, so you don't need to fiddle with that. You may
need to provide and connect an external antenna for extended range.
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 |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:32:11 GMT
From: horseshoestew@my-deja.com
Subject: Packet Radio
In article <2dY15.7$c5.136@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>,
"David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com> wrote:
> I am about to try and get my HAM liscence. I am interested in getting
into
> packet radio. What sort of transmission speeds are currently
obtainable? Can
> you get 10Mb/sec?
Bwahh-hah-hah! You're kidding, right?! 10Mb/sec - that's a HOT one.
Mostly 1200bps, man. Some(including me) have 9600bps equipment
(nowadays it is more plug and play than before).
TAPR is working on a 100Kbps-500Kbps FHSS radio(www.tapr.org) -
although I haven't heard much out of them in a LONG time, so it might
be vaporware.
> I want to set up a small network of automated weather
> stations that will report to a central location. Could I use small FM
> transmitters, that don't require a liscence to operate?
What is the distance between stations?
If it is more than a few hundred yards, and you don't want to spend a
lot of money, and if 9600bps is good enough - THEN, amateur packet
radio is your answer!
BTW, it is VERY easy to pass the test for your Amateur Radio Technician
class license - no Morse code test is necessary.
> David Findlay
Stewart Teaze - N0MHS/AG
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 08:11:36 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
"Scott Schultz" <n0iu@arrl.net> wrote in message
news:Cr225.2751$mZ5.42991@news.corecomm.net...
> The "standard" on VHF-FM Packet for many years was 1200 baud, but now 9600
> is very common. Be sure to get a radio that has a 9600 baud data port on
it
Are there any circuit designs that you can build yourself? I wouldn't mind
actually building my own packet radio(then I could have any baud rate I want
:-) ).
David Findlay
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 08:09:35 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
> More like 1200 bits/s. Or 9600 if you are living in a techologically
> advanced area.
> Some people even run 56kbps.
>
> 10 Mbit/s only exists on some random experimental links, not in general
> operation.
What barriers stop it from general use?
> Do your weather stations collect 10 Mbit/s worth of data?
No. I was actually thinking of the 10Mbit/s to use for broadcasting the data
to other users using TCP/IP. The data from the stations would be processed
before being sent out, and the network would also have to handle email and
rich(HTML) content.
> Of course you can use license-free wireless LAN products. These include
> the transmitter hardware, so you don't need to fiddle with that. You may
> need to provide and connect an external antenna for extended range.
I have a small kit for a transmitter with a 1km range. If I use a larger
recieving antenna and a more powerful receiver could I get better range. For
the link between the station and me all I need to get is about 1000 bps.
David Findlay
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 08:17:20 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
<horseshoestew@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8ib3ur$597$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Bwahh-hah-hah! You're kidding, right?! 10Mb/sec - that's a HOT one.
>
> Mostly 1200bps, man. Some(including me) have 9600bps equipment
> (nowadays it is more plug and play than before).
>
> TAPR is working on a 100Kbps-500Kbps FHSS radio(www.tapr.org) -
> although I haven't heard much out of them in a LONG time, so it might
> be vaporware.
I was actually thinking of building my own gear. The 10Mb wouldn't be
between the actual weather stations more like 1000baud. Where I want 10 Mb
is for the rest of the network, where I would need email and HTML content to
be carried.
> What is the distance between stations?
Up to 5km from my location.
> If it is more than a few hundred yards, and you don't want to spend a
> lot of money, and if 9600bps is good enough - THEN, amateur packet
> radio is your answer!
All I need on the station side is 1000baud. I will then process it on my
computers for rebroadcasting into a packet network using TCP/IP.
> BTW, it is VERY easy to pass the test for your Amateur Radio Technician
> class license - no Morse code test is necessary.
In Australia it is actually called a Limited liscence, but allows the same
thing
David Findlay
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:21:53 +1000
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_167E
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
