| |
PA2AGA > PACDIG 06.01.99 10:46l 140 Lines 4771 Bytes #-9996 (0) @ EU
BID : PR_98_289B
Read: GUEST
Subj: PacketRadioDigest 98/289B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0PSC<DB0ACH<DB0PKE<PI8DRS<PI8ZWL<PI8APD<
PI8GCB<PI8MBQ<PI8VNW
Sent: 990106/0652Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:32069 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:PR_98_28
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : PACDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA13805 ; Wed, 06 Jan 99 06:38:44 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00011944 ; Wed, 06 Jan 99 06:48:37 MET
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 99 06:40:19 MET
Message-Id: <pr_98_289B>
From: pa2aga
To: pr_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: PacketRadioDigest 98/289B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
From: jmorris@nemonet.com (John Morris)
Subject: KPC-3 v. KPC-3 plus
POSTED & MAILED:
>I have and am using both. The + has a couple analog to digital control
>lines where you can remotely read temps, voltages etc., the reason I bought
>the +. They also added a couple commands, as usual, that I don't use. I
>doubt you can upgrade a non + to a + but check out Kantronics web page.
>Jim
>N0FTC
What kinda neat things could you do with the
analog inputs on the KPC3+??
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 10:57:09 -0500
From: "Jon Bloom" <jbloom@arrl.org>
Subject: Packet Hackers
Charles Brabham wrote in message <76l9st$2fv@enews1.newsguy.com>...
>
>K0HB@arrl.org wrote in message <75lrhf$9ka$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>>Charles Brabham wrote:
>>
>>> Less than ten years ago, a global digital network consisting entirely
and
>>> solely of Amateur Radio links existed. This unique all-Ham network is
now
>>> fragmented and in disarray, and this damage occured because of the lack
>of
>>> "anti-hacker" legislation to protect the digital Amateur Radio network
>>> from.... [clip]
>>
>>The "damage" (if that's even the proper term) occured because the "global
>>digital network consisting entirely and solely of Amateur Radio links" was
>>less capable than the hybrid network which has evolved.
>
>Following your reasoning above, can I assume that you would support a move
>to add "hybrid" capabilities to other aspects of the hobby as well? Using
a
>telephone to get though last few contacts needed to score well in a contest
>or to recieve a DX award certificate would certainly make the ham involved
>"more capable", so why not? Hmmm?
If you are using digital for making "official" DXCC or contest contacts, I
doubt anyone would support use of non-radio means. But DXCC and contesting
are different from traffic handling. Traffic handlers have used non-radio
means for years, before a digital network was even conceived of.
>I do not see the efforts of hams to communicate by digital means to be
>somehow "less Ham Radio" as you appear to. Why is it that you can
understand
>why Hams use Radio to communicate for voice and CW, but not for digital
>stuff? I think I smell a bit of prejudice and discrimination here.
Darned if I can see anything that Hans said that indicates he believes that
digital is "less Ham Radio." Aren't strawmen nice? They're so easy to knock
down!
>So maybe you do not care for the digital stuff, and see it as less
important
>to Hams? That's fine, but keep in mind that what happens to digital hams
>happens to all others as well. You cannot separate the two. - Spectrum lost
>from lack of use is gone. Period. Think it through.
Think this through: If we insist that only "pure" all-RF digital networks be
used -- networks that are certain to be less capable than hybrid networks --
all but the fanatical few (you and Hank :-) will abandon the digital
networks altogether. Then there will be *less* use of spectrum by digital
stations, not more. And if/when we need to build an ad hoc network of
digital stations to pass emergency traffic, practically nobody will be
equipped to do so.
Jon
--
Jon Bloom, KE3Z
jbloom@arrl.org
Electronic Publications Manager
(CD-ROM publications, software products and Web site)
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 04:59:59 GMT
From: jmorris@nemonet.com (John Morris)
Subject: Wireless Internet of Moving Handheld Hosts
>We are trying to set up a nationwide wireless network of handheld hosts, and
>would like to get responses from anyone who may be working on such a thing.
So
>far we are looking at the new Kenwood TH-D7A dual bander HT (
>http://www.kenwood.net ) and at various spread-spectrum transceivers, and at
>the new Sony Vaio PCG-C1, available from Japan Palmtop Direct (
>http://www.jpd.com ), for the portable hosts. Our special concern is for
>pass-off routing as units move randomly, perhaps using GPS position-reporting
>to calculate the best routes. The idea would be to have a system that would
>provide Internet services in an emergency in which the wired Internet goes
>down.
Interesting.
Can you explain what this system would do exactly?
>.
------------------------------
End of Packet-Radio Digest V98 #289
******************************
Both my XYL and myself wish you a very
happy and prosperous New Year. Adam PA2AGA.
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
