| |
EB2DVY > PSK31 24.07.99 00:53l 642 Lines 22510 Bytes #-9957 (0) @ WW.SYD.NSW
BID : 194-EB2DVY
Read: OE1RRB GUEST
Subj: PSK31 Digest V1 #105
Path: OE1XAB<OE3XSR<OK0PPR<OK0PPL<DB0RGB<DB0SL<DB0FSG<DB0AAB<DB0KFB<DB0CZ<
DB0LJ<DB0IZ<DB0OVN<ON5VL<ON0RTB<ON0OB<ON0CK<ON0DOR<ON0HU<F5JOE<F1OYP<
F1JRN<F6GGY<F6HRW<F5FVC<F6FBB<F6DSP<F6KNI<F5KAT<EA3D<EA3B<EA3ARR<
EA2C<EA2K<EA1URR<EA1URM<EA2G<EA2URV
Sent: 990711/1618Z @:EA2URV.EABI.ESP.EU #:62163 [URV-ABRA Bilbao] $:194-EB2DVY
From: EB2DVY@EA2URV.EABI.ESP.EU
To : PSK31@WW.SYD.NSW.AUS.OC
De: Psk31 Digest <owner-psk31@aintel.bi.ehu.es>
Para: <psk31-digest@aintel.bi.ehu.es>
Asunto: Psk31 Digest V1 #105
Fecha: sßbado 10 de julio de 1999 4:39
Psk31 Digest Saturday, July 10 1999 Volume 01 : Number 105
In this issue:
Re: [psk31] Logger Logging and PSK Program
[psk31] Unofficial PSK31 DXCC Table
Re: [psk31] Boston and QEX
[psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Re: [psk31] Taking another look at Pactor
Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
[psk31] Spanish P31SBW107 Help File available
[none]
[psk31] 40 meter round table
Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Re: [psk31] Boston and QEX
Re: [psk31] Hey I remebered the subject this time :-)
Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Re: [psk31] pactor/ digital band plans
Re: [psk31] Hey I remebered the subject this time :-)
Re: [psk31] Hey I remebered the subject this time :-)
Re: [psk31] Boston and QEX
[psk31] Yaesu FT-847 & PSK31
Re: [psk31] Taking another look at Pactor
[psk31] (no subject)
Re: [psk31] pactor/ digital band plans
See the end of the digest for information about psk31-digest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 22:40:23 -0400
From: "Andrew J. O'Brien" <obrienaj@netsync.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Logger Logging and PSK Program
> Use the Pause/Break key to toggle transmit on and off.
PAUSE/BREAK does not work for me, alt X toggles but not pause/break.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 06:05:34 EDT
From: RS174461@aol.com
Subject: [psk31] Unofficial PSK31 DXCC Table
Hi everyone,
Those who still wish to submit scores but have not done so yet have until
0000z on the 11/7/99 to do so. I shall be publishing the results during the
morning of the 11th.
So far submissions have been very minimal, with not one single entry from the
US. Please send your band by band DXCC worked scores on PSK31 mode (AS OF
30/6/99) to me so that I can produce the table.
TIA for your support,
Karl - RS174461
SWARL (Shortwave Amateur Radio Listening) List-owner
HTTP://swarl.listbot.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 06:26:00 -0500
From: "Grins" <Grins@interconnect.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Boston and QEX
> 2) Is there anyone active on PSK31 willing to give presentations to ham
> clubs on PSK31? and close enough to Boston Mass (W1)?
Welll gosh, I am doing that for our next meeting here in Corpus Christi,
TX... on both PSK and Hellschreiber... so not close to Boston, but am hoping
to get the word out about both of these modes and generate some interest in
our part of the Country...
I am working on the handouts now... does anyone have such a text file they
can send me for some possible additional ideas? At present, we have 3 guys
on PSK (me included) in our town of 250,000... so there is plenty of room
for growth... ;-)
73...
Mike Kelly, K5AWI
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 08:32:04 -0400
From: "Andrew J. O'Brien" <obrienaj@netsync.net>
Subject: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Although not a huge fan of mix32 yet , I thought I would share this
experience.
This morning , using PSKSBW, I could hear a very weak PSK signal on 20M but
despite a couple of minutes of trying I could not "see" a signal in the
waterfall and thus was unable to tune it in. So, I booted Mix32 up and used
the peak wave display , I spotted the twin peaks and tuned in the signal
right away. Print was only about 30 %, so that will tell you how weak it
was.
So perhaps the psksbw waterfall (I never tried the mix32 waterfall) is not
as good as the wave display for detecting really weak signals.
Andy.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 13:06:46 -0400
From: "Robert Lay" <w9dmk@crosslink.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Dear Andy,
You reported as follows:
>This morning , using PSKSBW, I could hear a very weak PSK signal on 20M but
>despite a couple of minutes of trying I could not "see" a signal in the
>waterfall and thus was unable to tune it in. So, I booted Mix32 up and used
>the peak wave display , I spotted the twin peaks and tuned in the signal
>right away. Print was only about 30 %, so that will tell you how weak it
>was.
>
>So perhaps the psksbw waterfall (I never tried the mix32 waterfall) is not
>as good as the wave display for detecting really weak signals.
Here is an extract of a message that I sent to another Warbler recently that
helps to explain the dynamics of the waterfall display.
***********************************************
The human eye and the typical computer monitor will combine to fool the eye
about the darker shades of gray as you appoach black black.
So I got into Paint Shop Pro with some of the off-the-air screen images from the
waterfall display and started looking for some of the smudges that would be
representative of the dimmest signal discernable to the eye on the computer
monitor. Guess what? The dimmest signal that I can find is not nearly as close
to 0,0,0 (on the scale of 0 - 255) as you might expect. The dimmest "smudges"
that I could detect were never less than 49,49,49.
That's 15.3 dB that we are losing because the eye is not able to see those last
gradations of black. Ain't science wonderful?
*****************************************
Now, back to your observations. I have suspected for some time that Nick has
incorporated some AGC action into his MixW32 input signal processing. It's time
to do some experiments to see whether or not that's the case. Stay tuned!
73 de Bob Lay, W9DMK, King George, VA
http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/albania/784
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 09:28:06 -0400
From: Vince <wa2rsx@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Taking another look at Pactor
John:
IZ8BLY wrote a small program called VOX recorder, or something like that, and
it is at Nino's Website. If you cannot locate Nino's website, let me know
and I will look here and send it to you.
His prgrm simply monitors a Squelched radio on one frequency, with a VOX
functioning to eliminate QRN pulses, etc. when working with the radio's
squelch function. Primarily intended for a Scanner Radio on VHF FM, but
perhaps you could use it to monitor an HF frequency.
73s,
~Vince~
"John E. Jewkes" wrote:
> <<SNIP>>
> 73's de John Jewkes W6HNC es tnx fer my 30 seconds of time.
>
> BTW- Has anyone thought of making a chunk of software so if
> you are away But your radio/computer are on to see a log of
> any PSK that went on while you were gone, including relative
> signal strength ?
>
> de JJ
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 13:47:27 -0400
From: "Robert Lay" <w9dmk@crosslink.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Dear Andy and Fellow Warblers,
I have just run an experiment using the two co-located PSK31 stations that we
have available here.
The objective was to determine whether or not any significant advantage lies
with one or the other of the two displays in regard to one's ability to locate
and identify a very weak PSK31 signal.
The two displays compared were the MixW32 spectrum analyzer display with the
"Thick Blue Line" and the PSK31SBW waterfall display.
This test is very subjective, because it depends on the observer's observational
powers vis-a-vis the two radicaly different displays. In order to be very
specific about the configuration, the "Thick Blue Line" is enabled by the
"Setup -> Spectrum Tab and in the Average Spectrum Group check the boxes labeled
"Show Average" and "Thick Line".
I transmitted a text file from station "A" and proceded to tune the signal in on
station "B" using each of the two programs, one at a time. I found the level at
which the two programs would lose lock on the signal and the slightly higher
signal level at which the two programs could acuire and lock onto the signal.
The two programs were observed to have no noticeable difference in their
capabilities with respect to acquiring and losing lock on a given signal in a
typical noise environment.
However, in my opinion, the "Thick Blue Line" feature in MixW32 provided a more
recognizable indicator of the presence of a PSK31 signal - thus making it easier
to locate and identify a PSK31 signal. Under the very low signal to noise
conditions in my testing, the twin peaks were not even discernable in the MixW32
display, but the "Thick Blue Line" was much more noticeable than the faint white
vertical trace in the PSK31SBW waterfall display.
Again, this is a subjective test, which is not necessarily repeatable with all
observers.
73 de Bob Lay, W9DMK, King George, VA
http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/albania/784
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 20:08:40 +0200
From: Eduardo Jacob <jtpjatae@bicc00.bi.ehu.es>
Subject: [psk31] Spanish P31SBW107 Help File available
Pauli EA3BLQ has prepared the upgrade help file for the new version of P31SBW
It's available at:
ftp://det.bi.ehu.es/pub/ham/psk31/p31sbw107.zip or
http://www.kender.es/~edu/download/p31sbw107.zip
Edu
- --------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo EA2BAJ
DSP and HAM: http://det.bi.ehu.es/~jtpjatae/ham.html
VHF PACKET: EA2BAJ @ EA2URV
PGP Key avlb: Send email w/subject: PGPKEY
fingerprint : D8 FA 54 49 F7 40 BA AA 09 1A 73 40 A4 26 ED BD
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 12:04:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Daryl <wb4yex@yahoo.com>
Subject: [none]
Just testing this address for the list. I am going to
start using this for the list. That way I can get it
at work on those yuuukkkkyyyyy days that I'm stuck
behind a desk :-)
At the moment my ISP is having email es some server
probs. Intermittant operation.Been haveing probs.
since bad t-storm came through yesterday.
===
Daryl CLine WB4YEX
Harrisonburg, Va. 22801
<http://www.cfw.com/~jdc>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 12:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Daryl <wb4yex@yahoo.com>
Subject: [psk31] 40 meter round table
BTW we had a nice 3 way round table on 40 meters PSK
last night
===
Daryl CLine WB4YEX
Harrisonburg, Va. 22801
<http://www.cfw.com/~jdc>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 15:33:59 -0400
From: Charles Greene <cgreene@loa.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Dear Robert,
>
>Now, back to your observations. I have suspected for some time that Nick has
>incorporated some AGC action into his MixW32 input signal processing. It's
time
>to do some experiments to see whether or not that's the case. Stay tuned!
>
Nick is using colors, like Spectrogram, in his waterfall display. Question:
How do the colors stack up to the MDS (minimum discrenable signal)
vs the black-white? I use the waterfall in MixW32. Nick said it was easier
to lock in a signal using the twin peaks and I agree, but using the waterfall,
I find it easer to locate and tune in a weak signal, and it seems to always
lock in so I have not had the need to shift to the twin peak mode to lock in.
On the AGC question, why don't you ask Nick what he is using?
____________
Try PSK31.
Chas, W1CG
Rhode Island TCPIP Address Coordinator
w1cg@arrl.net
_____________
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 16:05:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: wdr@world.std.com (William D Ricker)
Subject: Re: [psk31] Boston and QEX
Charles & Grins both, and all,
> I made the mistake of putting up an antenna and trying to get some
> contacts. The next time I'll just use an indoor antenna and keep it
> in receive only. [...]
As I said direct to Charles, I've seen the same problem with Packet
demos. Live contact demos for almost any mode require a
pre-installed and pre-tested external antenna. (About the only
exception I can think of is 2m repeaters in a city ... even then you
have to walk around and find the hot-spot.)
> You must have someone closer [to Boston than Newport RI]
Well so far the other direct reply was from Texas (you've already seen it
unless like me you're on the DIGEST).
To extend Grins' implied suggestion on shared handouts, (his reply Cc'd
the list but it's not in the archive yet, maybe the archive only
updates when the digest issues?): Merging the several *presentations*
that have been done and some of the graphics screen shots on the WWW
into a shared PowerPoint presentation would not only make far it easier
for the local PSK31 experimenter to get up the nerve to go talk to a
club, but would also be a nice introductory screen sequence on the WWW
for casual browsing. (No, I'm already overcommitted editing other
shared ham documents to take this on personally, just an idea.)
- --
Bill Ricker N1VUX wdr@world.std.com "The freedom of the press belongs
http://world.std.com/~wdr to those who own one."--A.J.Liebling
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 15:57:04 -0400
From: Vince <wa2rsx@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Hey I remebered the subject this time :-)
I most likely would join the PSK Net activities, but as Daryl already knows, I
only have a 20meter dipole wire at this time.
73s
~Vince~
mills-owen wrote:
> The info is on http://www.qsl.net/wm2u/psk31.html but here it is anyway :)
>
> Mark Erbaugh, N8ME runs a great PSK Net on Tuesday nights at 10:00pm EDT on
> 7.071 MHz. Their a good crew. Come and join us!
>
> Enjoy, 73 Ernie
>
> Ernest Mills
> ICQ #3948450
> http://www.qsl.net/wm2u
> http://www.n2ty.org
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 16:30:34 -0400
From: Vince <wa2rsx@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Mix32 better than PSKSBW ?
Yes, I would agree with you, that science is wonderful; that said, however ,
perhaps
your observations should be sent to the authors of PaintShop et. al. and have
thes/w modified such that 49,49,49 is normalized to 0,0,0 ?
I dunno, Ive never used such image editors. hi..hi..
73s AND, Have Fun out there !
~Vince~
Robert Lay wrote:
> Dear Andy,
>
> You reported as follows:
>
> >This morning ,
<<Snipped>>
>
> So I got into Paint Shop Pro with some of the off-the-air screen images from
the
> waterfall display and started looking for some of the smudges that would be
> representative of the dimmest signal discernable to the eye on the computer
> monitor. Guess what? The dimmest signal that I can find is not nearly as close
> to 0,0,0 (on the scale of 0 - 255) as you might expect. The dimmest "smudges"
> that I could detect were never less than 49,49,49.
>
> That's 15.3 dB that we are losing because the eye is not able to see those
last> gradations of black. Ain't science wonderful?
> *****************************************
>
<<Snipped again>>
> 73 de Bob Lay, W9DMK, King George, VA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 16:08:12 -0400
From: Vince <wa2rsx@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] pactor/ digital band plans
Robert:
I am off-line at this moment, but is this something that a part-time RTTYer,
part-time CW opr, part-time HELLish opr, also review? Or, just PSKers? :-)
I shall review when I get back on-line here.
73s, AND Have Fun out there !
~Vince~
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Daryl <wb4yex@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Hey I remebered the subject this time :-)
AH HAH !!!! I was going to suggest that in the US we
use 7070.150 as the hailing freq for PSK31.
7035.150 is swamped with CW. There is hardly any
activity (digital) on 40. I never hear anything much
between 7070 and 7080.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 17:02:44 -0500
From: "Dale L. Martin" <kg5u@hal-pc.org>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Boston and QEX
>As I said direct to Charles, I've seen the same problem with
Packet
>demos. Live contact demos for almost any mode require a
>pre-installed and pre-tested external antenna. (About the only
>exception I can think of is 2m repeaters in a city ... even then
you
>have to walk around and find the hot-spot.)
>
Wouldn't it be better to simply have a couple of people bring in
radios (with dummy loads) and computers, demonstrate the hookup
of each, and the computer software.
Put both radios on the air with minimum power out and on their
dummy loads and go to town.
With a little preparation and planning, you can have a
demonstration that is effective and impressive and which works.
You may even be able to demonstrate the weak-signal comm
capability of the mode by running both radios RF Gain down.
Don't depend on being able to communicate from who knows where,
on whatever band, at whatever time, and hope that someone is
around to work you or for you to work. You'd be asking a lot. A
failed demonstration does not impress or spark interest.
73,
dale, kg5u
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 18:26:52 -0400
From: "Ramon Gonzalez" <kp4tr@leading.net>
Subject: [psk31] Yaesu FT-847 & PSK31
I just purchased a new Yaesu FT-847 and was wondering if there are any
pitfalls to be aware of when wiring the soundcard to the radio for PSK31.
I still havent connected anything, but this weekend I will be doing so via
the "data in/out port" of the radio and using the COM1 port to key the rig
up. The problem I foresee is that if there is no keyup via the data in/out,
no audio is passed.
I just built the circuit described on page 16 of the manual and it works
great using a TNC (AEA DSP2232). Only problem is that I have to ground the
TNC directly to the radio's chassis to avoid a hum present in the audio
line.
So if anyone is using this radio, please advise.
Thanks!
________________________________
Ramon Gonzalez
Tampa Bay, Florida
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 00:58:20 +0200
From: "Kjell W. Strom" <strom@lime.demon.nl>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Taking another look at Pactor
Dear PSK31 Friends,
Most Pactor operators are as courteous as hams in other modes - in most cases
they are multimode operators. Most of them operate at low power and don't
call a BBS station on a frequency where there is already traffic, since that
will cause problems for their own communication. A Pactor/Amtor BBS on 14 MHz
is typically scanning 5 frequencies and if you want to link up you choose a
free channel. The problem is in most cases when you suffer from "QRM" from a
succenly starting BBS is caused by propagation. The station calling the BBS
may not hear you, but you are "within the range" of the BBS station.
Ideally the unmanned BBS should recognize that there was traffic on the
channel just before it received a call, but unfortunately there is no
technical solution which can discriminate between all the legitimate modes
and other noises on the band. Pactor-2 goes some way to reduce interference
with other traffic: if the link is perfect the modem is reducing the output
power until a few odd requests for re-sending from the receiving end occur.
This is in line with the regulations for amateur radio: not to use more power
than is required for a contact. How often did you hear the S-9+ stations on
SSB or CW (or, indeed, PSK31) do the same?
Whatever mode we are operating in: there is nothing to replace operator skill
and experience. Regulations will always lag development and work against
further progress.
73
"Kel"
"Robert G.Wagner" wrote:
> Hi Fellow Warbler's
>
> Hearing some QRM near 14070, I decided to re-visit my PK-900 and Pactor
> mode to see who it was. Although we have been experiencing "some" TOR
> QRM from time to time, looking from their standpoint, our warble doesn't
> help their QSO either. Hopefully there will be some part of the band
> for PSK31 too, so we don't bang into each other so much. Some PSK31
> users may not even be familiar with the "agreed/courteous" use of the
> digital comm freqs. If not, you might want to take a look. AC6V's
> website has lot's of info about this and other Ham Info. Take a look at
> Rod's great site:
>
> http://www.ac6v.com/
>
> However, that's not the point of this EMail. Getting back on Pactor
> made "me" realize just how great PSK31 is compared to operating Pactor,
> for the routine QSO. The throughput is noticably better for average
> band conditions and power out, and the weak signal print is great too .
> It is also pleasant not to have the handshaking necessary with TOR and
> extra QRM, and PSK31 is much better for "reading the mail" , when
> monitoring a QSO, instead of those missing text underlines associated
> with the TOR mode. Yes, if you want error free communications, send it
> Pactor or some other error correcting/ handshaking mode, but for regular
> rag chews, PSK31 is the way to go. "Thanks Peter, G3PLX", we're
> having a lot of Fun.
>
> de N6DUR BOB
>
> P.S. Yes I know, No Gateway, Mail Box, etc,. . . . . .
>
__________________________________________________
Kjell W. Strom, LIME Consulting, SM6CPI - PB3SM
P.O.Box 597, NL-2130 AN Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
Fax & Phone: +31-252-412 736, GSM +31-653-870 195
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 18:23:47 -0500
From: Carl Smith <cwsk5so@gte.net>
Subject: [psk31] (no subject)
I have been using Logger ver. 6.07b for the last few days and think it's
great. Since I don't use the GOLIST, I wonder if there is some way to
prevent the GOLIST window from popping up when a call sign is entered in
the Log Window.
Thanks for any thoughts,
Carl/K5SO
cwsk5so@gte.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 19:26:35 -0500 (CDT)
From: Bob Roehrig <broehrig@admin.aurora.edu>
Subject: Re: [psk31] pactor/ digital band plans
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Vince wrote:
> I am off-line at this moment, but is this something that a part-time RTTYer,
> part-time CW opr, part-time HELLish opr, also review? Or, just PSKers? :-)
> I shall review when I get back on-line here.
I relayed what someone else suggested about that web site. Basically, it
says where the digital stuff is recommended to be, but does not break
it down into individual digital modes.
"Nostalgia is a thing of the past"
E-mail: broehrig@admin.aurora.edu or k9eui@arrl.net 73 de Bob, K9EUI
CIS: Data / Telecom Aurora University, Aurora, IL
630-844-4898 Fax 630-844-4222
------------------------------
End of Psk31 Digest V1 #105
***************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
