| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 03.09.00 22:38l 150 Lines 5751 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_239A
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/239A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0SON<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0WTS<DB0ME<ON6AR<
PI8HWB<PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 000903/2012Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:9869 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_239A
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 00 21:39:05 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_239A>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Sat, 2 Sep 2000 Volume 2000 : Issue 239
Today's Topics:
Digipan 1.2 under Win 2000
MURS potential (9 msgs)
packet
SSTV & BP2-M
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:2000/239
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 16:27:52 +0100
From: "Huw Weatherhead" <huw@llucent.com>
Subject: Digipan 1.2 under Win 2000
All,
Has anybody tried Digipan 1.2 under Win 2000, It can't find my sound
card, I was wondering if Win 2000 (aka NT 5) was preventing it talking
directly to the hardware? If that is what digiPan does?
Thanks & 73
Huw G7CNP
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:41:57 GMT
From: horseshoestew@my-deja.com
Subject: MURS potential
At first glance it would appear that the 2W ERP limit for MURS
is "crippling".
However, if someone mounted a "moderate" gain antenna at a decent
height, through good coax, from a 1W transmitter - he wouldn't be
exceeding the ERP limit by very much, if at all, but would have
excellent coverage.
On GMRS you can use 5W ERP. But, unfortunately, with GMRS you can't
transmit data.
There is obviously much more chance for users to attempt to exceed the
ERP limitations(especially if they don't exceed it by much) than there
is for them to attempt to skirt the emission type limitations(a "yes or
no" proposition - there is no grey area). So, there is no doubt that
MURS offers more potential than GMRS, and there is a potential impact
to Amateur Technician Class growth.
Now, let's look at digital modes. I think that this is where MURS
offers the most potential. The lack of repeaters is actually a benefit
for digital modes(as the use of dedicated repeaters for packet are
extremely rare). Also, there is a renewed chance to try to build a
9600bps network on VHF. In the 80's, there was massive growth of the
1200bps Amateur packet network. There actually was a time when Hams
were using 1200bps, when most telephone modem users were at 300bps.
But the 1200bps standard soon became an anchor around the neck of
Amateur packet radio. In the 90's, as telephone modem users saw their
communications rates climb to 2400, 4800, 9600, 14.4, 28.8, and then to
56kbps - the hams were STILL slugging along at 1200bps. In 1990
2400bps packet was easily achievable, but everyone had standardized on
1200bps - besides, everyone felt that 9600bps was just around the
corner. However, by this time, the majority of hams had
become "appliance operators", and were not capable of the effort that
was needed to build a non "plug-and-play" system(which 9600bps systems
generally were at the time). This was not helped by the major radio
manufacturers, who had a difficult time producing a true 9600bps-
capable radio. Today, however, the story is changing. It is much
easier to build a 9600-bps capable station.
I wonder if the 9600bps-capable Kenwood TH-D7A(with builtin TNC) can be
modified to operate on the MURS channels(150Mhz)?
BTW, with the 2W ERP limitation, and no repeaters, the 5 channel
limitation also sounds worse than it actually is. Besides, very few
people are using any the Amateur 2m channels, at least here in Southern
California. There are a few busy repeaters, but that is it. The rest
of the channels are "dedicated" to silent, unused repeaters. Albiet,
there is one channel dedicated to 1200bps 2m APRS use that is well
utilized; but the few other channels where packet activity is seen, are
just filled by hi-level nodes incessantly "blabbering" to each other at
1200bps - filling the channel bandwidth, while not performing any
useful function. At least at 9600bps, it is possible to use TCP/IP,
and get away from THAT nonsense.
------- Stewart - N0MHS --------
Wireless High-Speed Networking and
Public Radio Services Information(MURS,FRS,GMRS,ARS,CB):
http://www.pubcel.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:57:51 GMT
From: K0HB <k0hb@my-deja.com>
Subject: MURS potential
In article <8oot9g$6qs$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
horseshoestew@my-deja.com wrote:
> So, there is no doubt that MURS offers more potential than
> GMRS, and there is a potential impact to Amateur Technician
> Class growth.
Why would a technically capable person opt for 5 discrete CHANNELS
and a limitation of 2W under MURS, when the Technician license
allows 1500W and literally hundreds of available MEGAHERTZ of to
build out their data, voice, or image network? Your notion
of "potential impact" to Amateur Radio disappears under the simplest
reality-check.
> I wonder if the 9600bps-capable Kenwood TH-D7A(with builtin
> TNC) can be modified to operate on the MURS channels(150Mhz)?
The modification would be easy, but it would be illegal to use
on MURS.
73, Hans, K0HB
--
~~~
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you;
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_239B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
