| |
PA2AGA > PACDIG 09.02.00 18:45l 209 Lines 7300 Bytes #-9565 (0) @ EU
BID : PR_2000_29B
Read: GUEST
Subj: PacketRadioDigest 2000/29B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0SON<DB0SIF<DB0AIS<DB0ME<ON6AR<PI8HWB<PI8HGL<
PE1MVX<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000209/1335Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:50525 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : PACDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA30097 ; Wed, 09 Feb 00 12:22:23 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00017881 ; Tue, 08 Feb 2000 18:19:06 MET
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 00 18:13:00 MET
Message-Id: <pr_2000_29B>
From: pa2aga
To: pr_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: PacketRadioDigest 2000/29B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Subject: PTC-II
I'm still learning to use mine, after 18 months of using a KAM for
RTTY mostly. Be aware, the tuning indicator is not very good for
RTTY. It works pretty well for PSK31, and I've not tried it for
PACTOR.
I wish it had true FSK for RTTY, but that's a very minor niggle.
Because it's AFSK only, and the IC706 doesn't handle the high tones on
AFSK, I can't use a RTTY-1 tuning indicator, so I think I'll have to
come up with something else.
73, doug
"Rob" <Pse@NoEmail.Com> writes:
>
> PACTOR II is great. It is by far the best mode I have ever used! It is
> amazing. Even when the conditions are terrible, you can get through at a
> good pace.
>
> You will notice a difference on PACTOR I as well. Most TNC's do not
> implement PACTOR I very well (eg do not have hardware memory ARQ)
>
> I also have a KAM. The KAM is terrible on PACTOR I. The SCS PTC II is much
> better.
>
> The KANTRONICS GTOR is better than the KANTRONICS version of PACTOR 1. But
> in my view, the SCS PTC II Pactor I is better than the KAM's GTOR. PACTOR
> II is clearly better than PACTOR 1 and GTOR.
>
> The PTC II is very well shielded and all its lines bypass RFI to ground.
>
> I use my PTC II not only for PACTOR II but also for SSTV and PSK31. It
> works great on SSTV and PSK31. (But if you want to try PSK31, it is a lot
> cheaper to use your computer's sound card and a freeware PSK31 program, like
> Logger (www.itis.net/golist)
>
> If you want to save some money, buy the SCS PTC IIe model which is a single
> port TNC (i.e. you can't add the optional packet modems).
>
> Any drawbacks-- well the SCS PTC II does not have a true hostmode. There is
> a pseudo hostmode which will allow you to use PACKET and PACTOR
> simultaneously (but you can't use any other HF mode like AMTOR, RTTY etc
> simultaneously with the Packet modems).
>
> This is a shame. Some like to monitor a DX PACKET Cluster during a RTTY
> contest.
>
> The PTC II does not have a transparent mode for sending binary files. But
> some terminal programs get around this limitation and can send binary files
> using a specialised binary transfer protocol (e.g. XPWARE for windows)
>
> But overall, the SCS PTC II is amazing!
>
> 73's
>
> Rob
>
> "Ken Holland" <viajera@freewwweb.com> wrote in message
> news:86v54a$9pi$1@news.smartworld.net...
> > Has anyone worked much with Pactor-II?? Is it really as good as I hear it
> > is? I've been using Pactor-I a little and am impressed. I've got an old
> > MFJ-1278 with the update to allow pactor-I and wondering if it would be
> > worth spending the money to buy a new TNC with Pactor-II abilities. I
> sure
> > like the looks of that SCS PTC-II but it's $650 and does not allow control
> > of the radio from the computer.
> >
> > The MFJ is very sensitive to RFI - so much so that it doesn't work with my
> > ICOM-706 and I have to use an old Kenwood TS-680 I have.
> >
> > Just some comments to see what others think.
> >
> > Ken H.
> >
> > WA4UBD
> >
> >
>
>
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2000 18:18:03 -0800
From: "William F. Hagen" <whagen@inreach.com>
Subject: What the heck is Packet radio good for anyway?
packet was really cool until the internet became readily available with
email access, then packet became 2nd rate as a method, now it is only a
personal interest to those who like to continue it for their own
reasons. It could also be used if in dire circumstances where the net
was down.
Inquisitor wrote:
>
> Please forgive me if that sounds harsh. I'd like to start a serious
> discussion about how Packet (Ham Radio Packet) is really useful. I've
> searched the net and read everything I could find. If you've found a really
> good use for it, please contribute your story. Perhaps you can list the
> worthwhile benefits in the order of most to least and including the most
> cost effective solutions. What's it good for?
>
> Thank You!
>.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Feb 2000 06:53:42 GMT
From: jfenn@lava.net (Joseph Fenn)
Subject: What the heck is Packet radio good for anyway?
Packet Radio is still very much in use whereever accurate and fast
msg traffic is required. At least for VHF areas it is, and its
other mode PACTOR does equally well for HF radio traffic handling.
Where a large volume of text traffic is to be handled it is a
requisite for RADIO as the media, not wires such as internet
depends so heavily on. Its system is "Self correcting" as far
as error handling is concerned and the only way to go. All
branches of MARS (Army, Airforce, Navy) all lean on Pactor
heavily. In major disasters usually the first thing to go
into INOPERATIVE mode are things that are wired together like
the Internet and Telco lines and power lines. Heck even on
any given day the internet acts up at regular intervals for
a myriad of reasons not related to natural disasters.
You go to to a URL that was good the day before but inexplicably
dont work on the next given day.
Joe (aka kilroy) KH6JF
--
************************************
* jfenn@lava.net *
* Ham KH6JF (since '37) *
* MARS (AARS) ABM6JF (since '40) *
* WW2 Vet ARMY SIGNAL CORPS *
************************************
>.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Feb 2000 07:02:02 GMT
From: jfenn@lava.net (Joseph Fenn)
Subject: What the heck is Packet radio good for anyway?
Packet is still the ultimate means for heavy message traffic handling
during emergencies and Natural disasters. For VHF it is ideal,
for HF its counterpart PACTOR fills the bill nicely. Both modes
permit heavy message handling without errors. Even voice traffic
would be much slower and harder to use for this purpose. PACTOR
servers the same purpose and also is "error correcting" so that
its essentially accurate. The internet however and all things
wired together like Power lines, Telephone systems, internet etc
are the first to go into "DOWN" mode when disasters occur.
All branches of MARS (Airforce, Army, Navy) depend heavily on
Packet and Pactor in their emergency backup traffic handling.
So its not really a "fetish" its a proven emergency communications
system. Even Voice comms is a poor second and takes much longer
to accomplish what Packet/Pactor can.
Joe (aka kilroy) KH6JF
--
************************************
* jfenn@lava.net *
* Ham KH6JF (since '37) *
* MARS (AARS) ABM6JF (since '40) *
* WW2 Vet ARMY SIGNAL CORPS *
************************************
>.
------------------------------
End of Packet-Radio Digest V2000 #29
******************************
You can send in your contribution to this digest by
sending an e-mail to: packet-radio@pa2aga.ampr.org
or (via BBS-net) to: praga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
