| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 01.10.00 19:04l 193 Lines 7535 Bytes #-8629 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_264A
Read: DB0FHN GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/264A
Path: DB0ABH<DB0LAN<DB0RBS<DB0SWR<DB0FP<DB0CWS<DB0ROF<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0GOS<
DB0PKE<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 001001/1122Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:20057 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_264A
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 00 22:09:45 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_264A>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Wed, 27 Sep 2000 Volume 2000 : Issue 264
Today's Topics:
Airmail/Winlink Pactor works GREAT!
APRS Operating Question (3 msgs)
APRS Transmission Interval Etiquette (2 msgs)
modifying phone modem for use on HF
Packet Experimentors Society of Texas
satelites
TEKK (was Re: UHF APRS frequency?)
UHF APRS frequency?
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:2000/264
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 02:01:09 GMT
From: "Mike Pupeza" <michael.pupeza@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Airmail/Winlink Pactor works GREAT!
A while ago, I whined and moaned that my PacComm PacTOR controller became
useless, since I was unable to check into the WinLink 2000 HF/Internet
Gateways. The 'new' systems required Airmail Software, which didn't support
my TNC. This put me off, especially since my unit was excluded, yet it
conformed to the PTC-1 protocol, which was the backbone of ALL the later
advancements.
I recently found that Jim (KE6RK) of the Aimail Software, HAD listened to me
and patched his program to include the PTC-1 and PacComm PacTOR Controller
into the useable drivers for his system.
I used his system for a recent 5 day camping trip and it worked GREAT!
I was able to keep in touch with my wife at home twice a day with no
problems using the HF Xcvr (Why I would want to - that's another story!)
I was North of Parry Sound Ontario (250M N of Toronto) and regularly cleared
my traffic with K4CJX and N0ZO, usually - although N8PGR and VE1(?) were
also used.
Gang - this is a GOOD system.
Airmail2000
Winlink
Look them up, check them out, and use them.
I apologize for some of my previous venom! (However, if there are
programmers who want to get Mac, Linux, Palmtops, etc., to work - you better
offer to help!)
--
Mike Pupeza VE3EQP
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:02:04 GMT
From: ckg@osu.edu (Christopher K. Greenhalgh)
Subject: APRS Operating Question
On 25 Sep 2000 11:37:13 GMT, XXXXrlubash@poco.mv.com. (Richard Lubash)
wrote:
>If I have a packet transceiver operating at my home qth receiving and
>transmitting APRS information am I then allowed to leave that device
>operating unattended and activate and operate a mobile APRS rig away
>from my house. I know I can operate more than one rig when I am present
>but am curious about the legality of operating from my car while my
>base station continues to archive APRS info.
The rules state you must be "in control" of your station(s).
I suppose you could have 20 or 30 stations if you like...as long as
you can control them somehow.
73.
_________________________________
Christopher K. Greenhalgh, N8WCT
Packet: n8wct@w8cqk.#cmh.oh.usa.noam
AX.25: N8WCT-1 on 144.390 MHz FM
"It's just about going fast...that's all...
http://home.columbus.rr.com/n8wct/boats.html"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:49:29 GMT
From: "D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org>
Subject: APRS Operating Question
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Christopher K. Greenhalgh wrote:
> On 25 Sep 2000 11:37:13 GMT, XXXXrlubash@poco.mv.com. (Richard Lubash)
> wrote:
>
> >If I have a packet transceiver operating at my home qth receiving and
> >transmitting APRS information am I then allowed to leave that device
> >operating unattended and activate and operate a mobile APRS rig away
> >from my house. I know I can operate more than one rig when I am present
> >but am curious about the legality of operating from my car while my
> >base station continues to archive APRS info.
>
> The rules state you must be "in control" of your station(s).
>
> I suppose you could have 20 or 30 stations if you like...as long as
> you can control them somehow.
..But remember that "automatic control" is control, and it is allowed for
digital modes above 50 MHz (47 CFR 97.109(d)).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 08:33:17 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: APRS Operating Question
D. Stussy <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Christopher K. Greenhalgh wrote:
>> On 25 Sep 2000 11:37:13 GMT, XXXXrlubash@poco.mv.com. (Richard Lubash)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >If I have a packet transceiver operating at my home qth receiving and
>> >transmitting APRS information am I then allowed to leave that device
>> >operating unattended and activate and operate a mobile APRS rig away
>> >from my house. I know I can operate more than one rig when I am present
>> >but am curious about the legality of operating from my car while my
>> >base station continues to archive APRS info.
>>
>> The rules state you must be "in control" of your station(s).
>>
>> I suppose you could have 20 or 30 stations if you like...as long as
>> you can control them somehow.
>...But remember that "automatic control" is control, and it is allowed for
>digital modes above 50 MHz (47 CFR 97.109(d)).
I don't know what is written in the USA regulations, but from the above it
seems to me that there is a potential confusion about what "control" really
means.
I can think of "automatic control" meaning that an automated system is
somehow controlling the switching on/off of the transmitter (as it is done
on packet: the AX.25 software completely automatically controls the
transmitter, independently from what the operator types or does). This
would be different from "manual control" e.g. with a voice transmitter
that keys when you push a PTT button.
With packet, there is "automatic control" even when the operator is
present, in this definition.
I can also think of "automatic control" meaning a completely autonomous
system being completely automatically run. Like a repeater, packet BBS,
APRS station with weather data.
The important point probably is (it would have been here, until the
governing bodies lost all interest in what is happening inside the bands)
"are in control of your station in case it misbehaves".
They should be able to contact you (at your station address or telephone
number) and you should then be able to control the station (turn it off
when it causes interference or operates/is being operated beyond the
limits specified in the license). When you can do that, you are "in
control" of your station. But most mobile APRS users with a station at
home left unattended probably can't.
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 |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_264B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
