| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 11.09.00 00:57l 182 Lines 7160 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_243B
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/243B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0GPP<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0PSC<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 000910/2322Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:12324 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_243B
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 00 20:35:38 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_243B>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> a "cell"-based system can't be made to work.
>
> One of the biggest problems with the 2m Amateur packet systems was(and
> still is) the existance of high-powered, wide-coverage "high-level"
> nodes. With one of them on a channel - it basically becomes unusable.
> In the Los Angeles area; 145.01, 145.03, 145.05 are perfect examples of
> this(K6VE seems to be the biggest blow-hard). At times these "blabber-
> mouths" even affect San Diego and Riverside/San Bernardino Counties.
> The 2W ERP and repeater limitations actually assist the "cell"
> technique - they do NOT "cripple" it.
The reason why K6VE is there is because he is the ONLY ONE LEFT who is holding
things together. Remove his system and the entire packet network for Southern
California dissolves. (Also, K6VE's system is not on ALL THREE of those
channels.) As for his ERP, his station's location, being AT HIS HOUSE on
Mount
Wilson, will virtually guarentee an effective ERP greater than 2W, unless
someone forces him to use a milliwatt radio (most amateur equipment comes with
1W min. [HT's] or 5W min. [Moblies] in that frequency range). Try working
with
him, not against him, and see where that gets you.
As Hank Oredson says in a different response, just how do you expect to "glue"
your cells together without some sort of backbone or meta-cell?
Also, what's the deal with using just 2m? You treat it as if there are no
other digital amateur radio allocations whatsoever.
I will admit, you're not the only one with the 2m problem. There are
allocations reserved for the DX-packetcluster operations on 6m and 223 MHz
that
go unused by them, yet the SCDXC still insists on using only 2m, including
many
simplex frequencies beyond those reserved for them. This angers many people,
especially those who are trying to use those [non-reserved 2m] simplex
frequencies for VOICE (for which the bandplan says they are).
> > I thought you were the fella hyping
> > what "technically aware" would do if you could just find a few 12-
> year-
> > olds to help you out.
>
> Why not. All most hams know how to do is argue, criticize, block
> progress, and put up old-fashioned high-power jamming stations - so
> that they can be king-of-the-channel. Building functional
> communication networks seems to be one their lowest priorities.
..And speaking of that, just why haven't you voiced your opinion before one
of
the Southern California digital amateur radio organizations? Instead of
complaining about it, do something about it.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 02:21:49 GMT
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: MURS potential
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.10.10009060107040.6945-100000@exp.bde-arc.ampr.org...
> On Tue, 5 Sep 2000 horseshoestew@my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <8ou609$o4o$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > K0HB <k0hb@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > In article <8otsf6$ecu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > > horseshoestew@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > You always seem to be critical of low-power, cell-based systems.
> > >
> > > MURS is not a cell based system. It is a technologically simplistic
> > > point-to-point channelized system, several technology-generations
> > > inferior to amateur radio.
> >
> > Using TCP/IP as the communication protocol, and "cell" hubs connected
> > to Internet thru cable modems/DSL connections - there is no reason
> > a "cell"-based system can't be made to work.
> >
> > One of the biggest problems with the 2m Amateur packet systems was(and
> > still is) the existance of high-powered, wide-coverage "high-level"
> > nodes. With one of them on a channel - it basically becomes unusable.
> > In the Los Angeles area; 145.01, 145.03, 145.05 are perfect examples of
> > this(K6VE seems to be the biggest blow-hard). At times these "blabber-
> > mouths" even affect San Diego and Riverside/San Bernardino Counties.
> > The 2W ERP and repeater limitations actually assist the "cell"
> > technique - they do NOT "cripple" it.
>
> The reason why K6VE is there is because he is the ONLY ONE LEFT who is
holding
> things together. Remove his system and the entire packet network for
Southern
> California dissolves. (Also, K6VE's system is not on ALL THREE of those
> channels.) As for his ERP, his station's location, being AT HIS HOUSE on
Mount
> Wilson, will virtually guarentee an effective ERP greater than 2W, unless
> someone forces him to use a milliwatt radio (most amateur equipment comes
with
> 1W min. [HT's] or 5W min. [Moblies] in that frequency range). Try working
with
> him, not against him, and see where that gets you.
I forward with K6VE, KM6RZ and N6IYA in California (40M, CLOVER).
Without those folks, and a very few others, the entire California network
would be totally dependent on the internet for it's connectivity.
> As Hank Oredson says in a different response, just how do you expect to
"glue"
> your cells together without some sort of backbone or meta-cell?
>
> Also, what's the deal with using just 2m? You treat it as if there are no
> other digital amateur radio allocations whatsoever.
>
> I will admit, you're not the only one with the 2m problem. There are
> allocations reserved for the DX-packetcluster operations on 6m and 223 MHz
that
> go unused by them, yet the SCDXC still insists on using only 2m, including
many
> simplex frequencies beyond those reserved for them. This angers many
people,
> especially those who are trying to use those [non-reserved 2m] simplex
> frequencies for VOICE (for which the bandplan says they are).
>
> > > I thought you were the fella hyping
> > > what "technically aware" would do if you could just find a few 12-
> > year-
> > > olds to help you out.
> >
> > Why not. All most hams know how to do is argue, criticize, block
> > progress, and put up old-fashioned high-power jamming stations - so
> > that they can be king-of-the-channel. Building functional
> > communication networks seems to be one their lowest priorities.
>
> ...And speaking of that, just why haven't you voiced your opinion before one
of
> the Southern California digital amateur radio organizations? Instead of
> complaining about it, do something about it.
And instead of complaining about those "crowded channels", put some
radios on air on some other frequencies.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 02:12:36 GMT
From: "Jim" <ve9wh@nbnet.nb.ca>
Subject: THROB
Hi all
Looking for info on the mode known as THROB, specifically what frequencies
can it
be heard on and what does it sound like.
any help would be appreciated
Jim VE9WH / VE9TTY
http://ve9wh.weblink.nbtel.net/dxclusters.html
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V2000 #243
******************************
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
| |
