| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.09.00 23:40l 206 Lines 7379 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_252F
Read: DC1TMA GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/252F
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0SON<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0HAG<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<
PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 000920/2014Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:16299 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_252F
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 00 16:38:20 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_252F>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> provide a telephone tent which is used as a command center or
> citizen access to call outside the disaster area, via the Satcomm link.
> They have access to NCIC and all the channels you need to run a
> city, just like before the disaster.
>
> If you really want to have an impact, develop a wireless solution in
> your community. Hams know how to do this, as it involves antennas,
> coax, lightning protection, solar power, and radio towers. With new
> rules in hand, Hams can now do high power spread spectrum, that
> can blow away anything done under Part-15 of the CFR.
>
> Forget about a low-baud HF link to a point 2000 miles away, and
> concentrate on developing a megabit link to the next town, or up to
> a peak with a solar powered relay site to the next town, etc.
>
> Steve
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:10:18 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@swb.net>
Subject: internet repeater linking
"Ed_Woodrick" <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:eDEnnelHAHA.249@cpmsnbbsa09...
>
> "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net> wrote in message
> news:GESv5.5666$6i1.519969@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >
> >
> > "Ed_Woodrick" <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com> wrote in message
> > news:#dX7VScHAHA.316@cpmsnbbsa09...
> > >
> > > The Amateur Packet System showed most folks, years ago, that it was
not
> > > capable of handling the amount of traffic that was needed of it.
> >
> > "... was needed of it."
> >
> > > And nothing
> > > has been done to make the situation better.
> >
> > Please read what I've posted.
>
> I have read what you've been posting, many times. I don't remember hearing
> where you've created a solution to move messages across the country at
more
> than 1200 bps. And no one else has either. The DSY modem is about the
> fastest in general use, that's only 56kb.
>
I've suggested a way to beat that speed for distribution of "across the
country" several times, and even did a brief on the air test. I didn't get
much feedback, and assumed a lack of interest... Are you interested? - Or
just shooting your mouth off?
http://home.swbell.net/n5pvl/multi.htm
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
n5pvl@swbell.net
http://home.swbell.net/n5pvl/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 12:07:24 -0400
From: "Ed_Woodrick" <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com>
Subject: internet repeater linking
Hank,
Folks who know me know that about as far from the truth as their is. I've
been doing networks for years, both professionally and personally. I created
the design for the packet network used in CAP. I really don't care "how"
things are done, I just want to solve problems. In CAP we had a fairly nice
transcontinental network setup. We were moving a fair number of messages and
getting the rank and files interested in the solution. But then the big guys
stepped in. In short, they outlawed our equivalent of @ww messages. This
dropped traffic on the network significantly. And with this drop, user's
interest dropped also, there just wasn't enough information to warrant the
expenditure to get on the air.
Hank, you were one of the instigators in this phase of Amateur Radio, and
you efforts were widely appreciated. You led many Amateur Operators away
from a CW or Voice only attitude to a Digital way of life. I find it sad
that someone that I have looked up to over the years has an attitude such as
yours. I was expecting a forward looking individual, not one set in his ways
such as yours.
Your arguments were exactly the same ones that many used to defend the voice
and CW traffic nets. "How can a CW net survive if packet gets the message
there first?" It's really ironic to hear you using the same arguments. I'm a
technology guy. Amateur Radio used to mean technology, sadly no longer does
it. But I think that there are some areas in which we can regain that title.
Connecting repeaters together with digital audio over any type of link is an
exciting opportunity. It indeed would be much better if we had 64k+ radio
links, but we don't, so we have to settle for the next best thing, the
Internet.
People aren't here to make your life miserable. They aren't forwarding
traffic across the Internet just to put you out of business. They do it to
experiment and provide a better level of service. Who likes reading ARRL
bulletins that are three days old?
What I'm upset is that you see the word Internet and you go jumping all over
it. Let others do their thing. Where would packet be today if it wasn't
allowed to do its thing? Remember how many people didn't want to set aside
ANY spectrum for packet radio? Remember how much of a fight it was to get
145.01, and then the other frequencies allocated to packet radio?
And while I don't talk about packet with the authority that that RLI brings,
I do have a little background to speak from. I've create some packet
software that's still used today. I've got a half dozen VHF packet stations
in cases for rapid deployment. I've spent a few years doing transcontinental
forwarding.
Oh, and by the way, this group is rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc not
rec.radio.amateur.digital.packet. This group is for folks who want to do
OTHER things with radio. Packet Radio isn't the ONLY digital mode.
Hank, I wish that you could come out of your current attitude and put your
creative talents to work again.
Ed
"
>
> Just can't get over your "digital modes of ham radio must be JUST
> like the internet or they are useless" fixation.
>
> Just go away, this newsgroup is for hams who want to do things
> over radio links. It is not for you, since you don't want to do that.
>
> --
>
> ... Hank
>
> http://horedson.home.att.net
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:12:55 -0700
From: "Dana H. Myers K6JQ" <Dana@Source.Net>
Subject: internet repeater linking
Ed_Woodrick wrote:
> Oh, and by the way, this group is rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc not
> rec.radio.amateur.digital.packet. This group is for folks who want to do
> OTHER things with radio. Packet Radio isn't the ONLY digital mode.
Whoa there pardner. This group is rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc because,
way back when the rec.radio.amateur.* hierarchy was reorganized. A family
of rec.radio.amateur.digital.* newgroups were proposed - and only this one
survived the vote. It really wasn't meant to end up this way.
I'd be a little cautious about newsgroup-charter-mongering :-)
Dana K6JQ
dana@source.net
k6jq@pacbell.net
------------------------------
Date: 14 Sep 2000 14:58:57 -0400
From: esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us (Eric S. Johansson)
Subject: internet repeater linking
"Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net> writes:
> "Ed_Woodrick" <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com> wrote in message
> news:#dX7VScHAHA.316@cpmsnbbsa09...
> > And I've delivered 35,000 message in 4 hours across the Internet. And
that's
> > message about 10k long. To destinations around the world. And the server
or
> > circuits weren't working hard.
> >
> > And that is the issue!
>
> Do you have any idea how silly that sounds?
>
> Perhaps you could compare ham radio to the US Post Office,
> or FedEx, or UPS, or a Volkswagen full of DAT tapes.
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_252G
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
