|
ZL3AI > APRDIG 15.06.04 10:14l 749 Lines 29660 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3457-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Jun 08, 3/5
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OE5XBL<OE3XSR<OK0PBX<OK0PHK<OK0NAG<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<
IK1ZNW<ZL2TZE<ZL3VML
Sent: 040615/0712Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:25877 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:3457-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: "Brian Riley (maillist)" <n1bq_list@wulfden.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 13:00:38 -0400
X-Message-Number: 44
This brings up an interesting point, Is there any way that we can buy new
THD7Es here in the US? That is, without going through a charade of having
someone like Henk buy them and reship to us.
Also if the KISS in the Alinco works, then it could be a digipeater. Thanks
to some work by Henk. I have a version of DigiNed that runs just fine on a
i386ex embedded processor board under DOS622. 3 inches square and needs 5
volts at 500 mills.
On 6/8/04 10:32 AM, "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Brian Riley (maillist) wrote:
>
>>Yes, its the TASCO TNC. There are several flavors of it though. The D7A and
>>its upgrade D7A(G) have the crippled TNC where KISS transmit doesn't work.
>>The D7E (European version) upgrade had KISS fixed. As far as I know the
>>D700A and D700E have the same flavor TNC and KISS works on them and yes, ist
>>essentially the same TASCO TNC in the Dr135, but I have no idea what the
>>KISS Status is on that ... Curt?????
>No idea on the Alinco rig, sorry. I think Henk was the source of KISS info on
>the TH-D7E. I investigated the Alinco rig for my own purposes when it first
>came out, and decided against it because it didn't do digipeating. The TH-D7
>doesn't either, but the D700A does. If the Alinco would have had that one
>feature, I probably would have bought a couple of them back then.
>Is the KISS mode in the D700A capable of 1024 byte packets? As I recall, the
>TH-D7A was capable of KISS as long as you kept to very short packets. If you
>overran the buffer, that's when you ran into problems. I'd have to re-read
>the stuff that Henk sent out a while ago regarding this, but that's what I
>recall.
>TCP/IP'ers like to do 1024 byte packets. The TH-D7A doesn't work for that.
>If the D700A and the TH-D7E do, that's great.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [ "Curt, WE7U" ] RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: "Brian Riley (maillist)" <n1bq_list@wulfden.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 13:02:09 -0400
X-Message-Number: 45
On 6/8/04 10:39 AM, "Gregg G. Wonderly" <gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com>
wrote:
[deleted]
>I experimented with KISS on my TH-D7A(G) for some time. It would receive in
>KISS mode just fine. When transmitting, it keyed the transmitter, and emitted
>modulation, but none of the local TNCs could decode it. I never had a chance
>to look at it with a scope to see what was wrong with the packet. But, it
>apparently is transmitting something wrong. I had quite an exchange with Henk
>here on the format of the packet that I was sending.
It comes up, keys, sends flags, and then drops ... I nevers gets the frame
out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: This sig has lost it!
From: "Steve" <kf6wax@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 12:39:24
X-Message-Number: 46
I agree with the person who said recently..."grow up"
I am deleteing well in excess 100 to 150 emails from this sig with
basically the same banal drivel in each and every one of them!
You are achieving nothing by conducting yourselves in this manner in this
sig, and only succeeding in driving people FROM the sig who would like to
learn more about APRS!
Do not bother to flame me as I will not be reading it!
I like many others will leave the sig until I see people agreeing to agree
instead of agreeing to disagree!!
73s
Steve, KF6WAX, PHOENIX VALLEY AREA IGATE SYSOP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:56:14 -0400
X-Message-Number: 47
Hey Doug:
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 02:51:01 -0400, Doug Bade wrote:
>I would like to forward a thought... which seems to have been
>overlooked by the prosecutors involved.
You see, this is the problem. "prosecutors". What a way to start a technical
presentation Doug! In my Kenwood emphircal data thread, I didn't try to make
this a "us vs. them' thing. I presented data. Got silence back. So maybe the
key here to dialog is to immediately attack the other party and make this a
us vs. them thing? Naw... all you do there is immediately shut down the
thought processes of those you are trying to convince. I'll stick with hard
data, thank you.
>Some "evidence" may have
>been " overlooked" or just omitted in a hasty trial.
Direct protocol problems where being looked for, such as midisplays. HamHud
was the ONLY reported protocol problem.
BTW, "trial"?!? I think a better analogy to what occurred here is a OpenTrak
lynching. (That would be my Lenny Briscoe qwip of the day)
I think it best you focus on hard data, and your pointing out primarily
problems with the bad choice of a path (wide,wide), which BTW, also did and
would apply to the APRS packets. Into itself, the balloon only made about 480
RF transmissions during the mission (rough estimate). The wide,wide
dramatically multiplied the packets and trashed the channel. If the proper
path had been chosen, the RF channel would have had a relatively weak signal
causing some collisions once a minute, but most locals would have been to
overlay its packets (due to the low power, 500mw and free space loss)
Its a physical layer (RF) thing, which applies to APRS just as it does
OpenTrak.
In other words, I am saying protocol issues, RF issues, choice of paths, and
APRS spec compliance all all distinct things. You can discuss them in the
same thread, but you can't roll all one into physical law. They all interact.
Did you observe any RF protocol problems with your own eyes? (not channel
loading, that is a given due to the wide, wide, but actual misdisplays when
you received the balloon directly)
Thanks
73
Jeff
p.s.
>For the record, I am glad it all happened. I think a lot
>was learned by all, even if it was heated at times...
We agree 100%. It has helped me get my head focused, and has really increased
the interest in OpenTrak.
>I think it does demonstrate, that at least in the US, these two modes are
>incompatible today,
Remember, ONE protocol problem, just ONE guy in Virginia using a HamHUD. Now
if by "incompatible", you mean doesn't display on your 5 year old Kenwood,
guilty as charged Doug. Off with its head! But then again, I guess that
depends what court you are in?
>and as long as they are, that measures should be
>implemented to keep history from repeating itself,
What would repeat itself? I can think of some analogies in the evolution of
mankind, but I don't want to jump to a conclusion.
>and the they
>should be separated by frequency domain, not time domain, until the
>network is ready to handle both, if that ever happens.
And I suggest to you, that happened last Thursday. As I and some others have
said, if Robert hadn't announced the balloon test, and/or been a little more
careful on his choice of paths, there wouldn't have been a peep on the SIG.
Do recall , Scott(help me here) indicated there had already been a balloon
opentrak test with a 6 land call, and not a peep.
Much to do about nothing is my courts determination.
Case closed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:00:08 -0400
X-Message-Number: 48
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 08:29:55 -0700, Scott Miller wrote:
>>add, to say there was none! EVERY packet which got stomped was
>>collateral damage if the stomp-er was not useable for anything. So
>>in my opinion a guestimate of hundreds, if not thousands, maybe
>>10's of thousands of
>You make a valid point about impact to the network, but the fact is
>it was a load issue, not a protocol problem.
And don't forget the bad path, "wide,wide", from 60,000 feet, was really the
real problem , and that could (and did!) just as easily occur with APRS
packets. Into itself, the balloon likely made less then 480 transmissions,
from a 500mw transmitter, in a wire dipole. Not sure of the orientation, but
if hanging down, there would have been quite a null beneth the balloon, so
likely not a heavy RF footprint anywhere. Like I said, I was hearing it at S6
to S3 (80 to 250 miles). It effected the network here... my closest wide
being about 30 miles away, and it repeated everyone, but loading is very
light where I live
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS user beware part 2
From: "Eric H. Christensen" <kf4otn@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:51:26 -0400
X-Message-Number: 49
>>>>Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> 6/7/04 3:58:20 PM >>>
>>At a beach front hotel. I spent most of my time
>>explaining the VAN's really were not driving on
>>the beach when they in fact where waiting by the
>>lobby to pick everyone up.
>>Sounds to me like you didnt check your map datums first.
>>I dont know of any place where 60 feet (the default
>>precision of APRS) would give that error.
>That just shows the vulnerability when people just
>assume that a number from a GPS when plotted
>on any-old map will give them the RIGHt position
>because there are so many points aftre the decimal
>point. A position with 10 decimal points of precision
>is no better than one with 3, if the map is no better
>than 2...
>I am sure it was a good lesson for you.
>Bob
Bob, do you know what precision level my map can handle??? And lets think
out of the box for a moment... What if I'm not using it to plot on a map...
I'm using it with robotics... No maps, all math....
Eric KF4OTN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Xastir 1.3.2 released
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 11:04:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 50
Latest "stable" release of Xastir is out. It runs on many operating
systems, handles 124 different map formats, and can use any of seven
different languages.
This release has preliminary decode support for some OpenTrac elements. You
must be running a KISS or AX.25 networking interface to receive/decode
OpenTrac packets. An AGWPE interface may work for this as well, but hasn't
been tried yet.
Xastir now also has the decaying algorithm implemented for Objects
& Items, plus brand-new support for Red Flag warnings (fire alerts).
See this link for details or to download:
http://www.xastir.org
Xastir is free under the GPL license, including all source code.
Interested in a feature comparison of most of the known APRS
clients? Check here:
http://www.eskimo.com/~archer/aprs_capabilities.html
--
Curt, WE7U http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:42:46 -0400
X-Message-Number: 51
Bob:
How you can make something that was intended to be positive, a negative? I
find this hard to understand, but here oh here I go correcting the facts.
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 08:54:35 -0400, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>With all this bunk about the kennwoods, THE ONLY COMPLAINT I HAVE
>EVER SEEN IS THAT IT CANNOT DISPLAY POSITIONS TO BETTER than 60
>feet.
Bob, your mixing up the MIC-E, WAAS and SA thread with the Kenwoods. Two
different things, and two different people.
>And look how Jeff King and the OPENtrack people have now
>amplified this thread over the last month to the point now where he
>is pronouncing the radio is obsolete.
Can't speak about the "OPENtrack people" but I imagine if a cross reference
was done against the opentrack list prior to Thursday, and all the negative
references to the kenwood since then you might be surprised that there is not
a huge correlation.
But I can speak for myself.
The only overt action I took "against" the Kenwood, was to post this almost
5year old message:
http://www.tapr.org/tapr/list-archive/aprsspec/9912/msg00059.html
and I wasn't even talking about the Kenwood! It was one of your own APRS-WG
members that posted their opinion in response to my concerns APRS was going
to be hobbled at version 1.0 ALMOST 5 YEARS ago.
Now, have I ever said anything bad about the Kenwoods? Certainly, but I think
I have been very careful not to here. Most of my past negativism has been
about the lack of flash memory. Don't need to own one to know that. Do note
what I do for a living at the bottom.
>Demanding
>one foot resolution on the front panel of a radio is just stupid)...
When did I demand this? Not that it is stupid, but one windmill at a time.
Of course, I realize you won't respond to this challenge, just like just
about every other incorrect statement you have made, but I had to ask for the
record.
>And notice that Jeff does not have one, and does not know what they
>do or how they work, yet he is one of the primary spokesman for
>their "obsolescence!!!!! See his post below:
Yes, I don't own one. I think I said that on the SIG, right?
>>...I wish I knew more about them, but I never owned one.
Yeap, there it is! I think you have known this for a few years, right?
>
>>>>Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> 6/7/04 11:15:37 PM >>>
>>I really think someone should talk to Kenwood directly here before
>>predicting there [obsolence]this. Even in the scope of APRS, there
>>is so much more they could do.
(my words above Bob which said where negative)
And exactly how is this negative? I was responded to others claims of
obsolence in that.... and trying to get some feedback if the user community
could step in, and update the firmware, much like the LinkSys WRT54G
community has taken it on.
Honest, really, no kidding. I was concerned with the APRS communities best
interest her! It is in their best interest that the Kenwood radios can be
updated, and that is COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM OPENTRAK.
>PLEASE NOTICE FOLKS, Jeff King who CONDEMS the KENWOODS and their
>obsolescence and how they are HOLDING BACK APRS is the one who JUST
>SAID HE has never owned one and doesn't really know anything about
>them. How can he then be such an expert on their capabilities to
>justify his condemnation...???
What did I condemn? The only thing you have PROVED, is I made a BUYING
DECISION, based in part on this 5 year old message:
http://www.tapr.org/tapr/list-archive/aprsspec/9912/msg00059.html
and got nervous spending that kind of money. Plus, as it has already been
clearly established here by other experts on the SIG, I haven't been on APRS
in over 5 years, so why would I even need one? ;-)
>>Its my guess both the D7 and D700 are near end of life from a
>>manufacturing standpoint...
>PLEASE everyone that owns a Kenwood and USES it for APRS, should
>speak up and resist this total uninformed, and hypocritical Jeff
>King propoganda...
OK, now, you are in my space!!! What do you do for a living? I was and am a
product engineer as well as own my own company. Designing electronic &
firmware products for the likes of Ford motor, TRW, Panasonic, Siemens, Xerox
as well as my own company. Anyone that knows ANYTHING about electronic
manufacturing knows that components are obsoleted, better techniques
developed, ect ect. Hey, don't believe me!! Go ask TAPR about their spread
spectrum radio and what one of the reasons was for the demise of it. Better
yet, read it here:
ftp://ftp.tapr.org/psr/Summer_84_2002.pdf
Your confusing "obsolescened" with "end of life". "End of life" can mean
anything from hard to get components, to market change, to just figuring out
a cheaper way to make it. After 6+ years, any electronic product is getting
long in the tooth.
Basic 101 electronic manufacturing Bob. Not a slam on Kenwood but a
suggestion that Kenwood has nothing to loose by releasing the firmware to the
ham public.
You see, as much as it is hard to believe, I do have the best interests of
APRS in mind once in a great while. Opening up the Kenwood's to ham
development would in fact do this.
That is what the message was about.
73
Jeff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:45:57 -0400
X-Message-Number: 52
That was fiction Brian, that those of us in the industry knew was a false
statement. Now, maybe a arms length relationship might need to take place,
but it was certainly doable. Problem is, most in the SIG didn't know it, as
they were not in the industry.
Now proof:
LinkSys WRT54G Open source radio.
BTW, as we speak, last week I am in a FCC test lab certifying a 900mhz ISM
radio.
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 09:38:07 -0400, Brian Riley (maillist) wrote:
>What hasn't been mentioned here and was a few years ago when the
>first upgrades for D7's and later D700s came out is the FCC. Part of
>the reasons they are not easier to flash is the FCC they flat out
>don't want users to be able to muck with it.
>
>Then there is the trade off of user flexibility versus the warranty
>service nightmare of use accessible firmware.
>
>Cheers ... 73 de brian, n1bq
>
>On 6/7/04 11:15 PM, "Jeff King" <jeff@aerodata.net> wrote:
>
>[deleted]
>
>>I wish I knew more about them, but I never owned one. Does anyone
>>know how the software prom is held in place? Is there one for the
>>radio/display/TNC or separate ones? Is it a E2, OTP micro or
>>something else? I'm thinking it might be possible to build a SMD
>>PIC daughter board, but never seeing a schematic, that is SWAG on
>>my part.
>>
>>Its my guess both the D7 and D700 are near end of life from a
>>manufacturing standpoint, so this might be the time to approach
>>them. Certainly doesn't hurt to try.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:55:43 -0400
X-Message-Number: 53
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 11:51:11 -0400 (EDT), wes@johnston.net wrote:
>Yes, I get irritated when Jeff throws quotes back into circulation
>that just "stir the pot"...
Yes Wes.... but should I come back with the personal attacks with other
personal attacks? Being able to cite history throws up a brick wall for them
to beat their head on. Mostly they just ignore it and move on to yet another
distortion. Facts are indeed facts, sometimes people just don't want to hear
them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:06:47 -0400
X-Message-Number: 54
Drew:
As I said in private e-mail to you, thanks, this is a real gem finding the
Kenwood does indeed have flash..... there is hope here.
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:31:29 -0700, Scott Miller wrote:
>>Next, the Flash chip inside the D700A is NEC Part number:
>>D78F4218AGC ..
>It
>>is a 78K4 style microcontroller, the F is (FLASH), the type is
>>784218A,
>and
>>it is a GC package, which is a 100 pin LQFP. It has 256K of flash
>
>Very interesting information. But I think you're still stuck with
>petitioning Kenwood for the updates you want, and sending your radio
>in for service to get them done.
Scott:
Hey, I can't speak for kenwood, but I HAVE released code for products I had
that I didn't actively support. I was done making money with them, so it
didn't matter. In Kenwoods case, it might be a little more complicated, but
the LinkSys WRT54G, has proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, you can hav ea
new product AND release source for it AND make money. In fact, the VERY
REASON the WRT54G was open source was the reason I bought one, and later a
second.
>I really doubt they'd release
>their source, redistributing code that included any of theirs would
>be a copyright violation, and reverse-engineering that code (the
>hardware interface part)
Well, this is all conjecture. Has someone actually found a principle at
Kenwood and asked them?
>would be a major undertaking and probably
>wouldn't make you any friends at the FCC.
Look in your wallet. See that Amateur Radio FCC license? It lets you do neat
things with radios. ;-)
>>Furthermore, the Tasco radio is cabled using a flat cable and has a Kenwood
>>part number.
OK, so this is distinct from the radio? Sounds to me like a great little
microbusiness. TNC-X are you listening? What do we have, 5000-20000 Kenwoods
out there? I'd say a good majority might buy a upgrade like this. Cha
Ching!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:47:12 -0400
X-Message-Number: 55
On 6/8/04 at 3:06 PM Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> sent:
>As I said in private e-mail to you, thanks, this is a real gem finding the
>Kenwood does indeed have flash..... there is hope here.
This is not really news...
There was a generally available software upgrade for the D7, called the (G)
model, that was released just after the D700, that fixed a couple bugs and
added new features from the D700 code. Those of us with prototype units
knew even sooner, our units were flashed with the release software when the
D7 began shipping.
The problem is reflashing requires disassembly of the unit and soldering
the programmer onto the processor board, there is no way to flash from the
serial port. As I recall, Kenwood offered this service under warranty for
the first year, older units were done for something like $60 if I remember
correctly, it was a non-trivial amount.
They set up a booth at Dayton when the update first became available,
otherwise you had to ship the unit back to California. There was much
griping about this at the time...
You relive those magical days here:
http://www.tapr.org/tapr/list-archive/htaprs/0005/
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:59:48 -0400
X-Message-Number: 56
At 03:47 PM 6/8/2004, you wrote:
>The problem is reflashing requires disassembly of the unit and soldering the
>programmer onto the processor board, there is no way to flash from the serial
>port. As I recall, Kenwood offered this service under warranty for the first
>year, older units were done for something like $60 if I remember correctly, it
>was a non-trivial amount.
You can make a 10 wire cable for a (3 wire serial I/O flash).. I gave you
the Pin Outs, go read the Data sheet for the microcontroller. You are
incorrect. I traced the pins this morning to make sure. I do not know
what the D7 or D7AG uses. .Bob said it involves desoldering chips and all
this other nonsense. The 10 pin connection on the D700 board connects to
every pin that's needed for In-circuit flashing. This isn't a Kenwood
thing, this is an NEC thing.
All you need is the FlashPro III and the appropriate Interface board for
the controller. Make the cable into a flat with the right pins, and it'll
flash.
Again, this is in the NEC Spec sheet for the microcontroller. There are
several revisions of the hardware (At the very least in Europe if not here
too), so it's always possible they mixed and matched and some older units
have Masked ROM..
I have printed pages of the spec in front of me. 3 Wire Serial I/O Channel
3 can be used for flash memory programming. Consult page 567, and 569 to
see how.
--Droo, K1XVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:02:17 -0400
X-Message-Number: 57
Not only does it have flash, but it has the proper connection (a flat 10
pin ribbon would attach to the NEC Programmer interface) to actually
program it in-circuit. It's clear their intentions were to be able to
update the software if the need came up. Noone'd put an ICP compatible
plug there for, no reason.
I used a multitester and documented all the pins instead of sleeping
because I was so baffled by this.
Anyone else who has a D700 is encouraged to pull it apart and see if you
see what I do.. Maybe there are some that use a Masked ROM. I'm sure it
still probably has the same programming connection and probably the Non-F
model of the same chip, or a compatible one, if that's the case.
I'd be interested to know who made the firmware for them.. I was VERY
bummed to find out it doesn't have an easy in-system flash though.
Otherwise I would've dumped the chip this morning too.
The Tasco TNC board also has a flash memory.. I forget the part number but
it likely has the firmware in it. Tasco is long gone (by the looks of it),
although I think maybe they sold their FSK Modem designs to TI.. Not 100%
sure though. Could probably use any TNC Modem. The thing is on a
daughterboard.
Not sure how the D7A and A(G)'s are done since I don't own one to rip apart.
--Droo, K1XVM
At 03:06 PM 6/8/2004, you wrote:
>Drew:
>
>As I said in private e-mail to you, thanks, this is a real gem finding the
>Kenwood does indeed have flash..... there is hope here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:19:24 -0400
X-Message-Number: 58
On 6/8/04 at 3:59 PM Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com> sent:
>>The problem is reflashing requires disassembly of the unit and soldering the
>>programmer onto the processor board, there is no way to flash from the serial
>>port. As I recall, Kenwood offered this service under warranty for the first
>>year, older units were done for something like $60 if I remember correctly, it
>>was a non-trivial amount.
>
>You can make a 10 wire cable for a (3 wire serial I/O flash).. I gave you
>the Pin Outs, go read the Data sheet for the microcontroller. You are
>incorrect. I traced the pins this morning to make sure. I do not know
>what the D7 or D7AG uses. .Bob said it involves desoldering chips and all
>this other nonsense. The 10 pin connection on the D700 board connects to
>every pin that's needed for In-circuit flashing. This isn't a Kenwood
>thing, this is an NEC thing.
You are saying exactly what I said. Bob was wrong about the chips needing
to come off, I most defintely did not say the chips, all I said was
"requires disassembly of the unit and soldering the programmer onto the
processor board". Perhaps you erroneously infered that meant something more
than the wires from the programmer. The wires from the programmer must
indeed be soldered to the board. The pads are VERY small, this is not a
minor task. I watched them doing it to my unit, it is not somthing 99% of
the hams are going to be able to do, even if they have access to the
programmer.
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:19:34 -0400
X-Message-Number: 59
Steve, there's no soldering involved..
You need a flat cable, 10 pin, like the TNC uses but smaller. Open the
unit or I'll email you the URL in private to the photo of my unit. There's
actually a SOCKET there, seriously..
--Droo, K1XVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:25:36 -0400
X-Message-Number: 60
On 6/8/04 at 4:19 PM Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com> sent:
>Steve, there's no soldering involved..
>
>You need a flat cable, 10 pin, like the TNC uses but smaller. Open the
>unit or I'll email you the URL in private to the photo of my unit. There's
>actually a SOCKET there, seriously..
I clearly indicated I was talking abou the D7, that most definitely required
soldering the three wires to the board. I've seen it done. REALLY!
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit Programming.
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:31:05 -0400
X-Message-Number: 61
Ok, the topic is the D700 though at the top so I assumed we were still
talking about that.. Glad we're on the same page though. Least we know
the D7 isn't as easy to do.
My curiosity is if all D700's are using flash memory and have the 10 pin
flat programmer socket, or if mine is just newer..
But, D7 requires some soldering and effort.. I'll keep that in mind, Thanks.
--Droo, K1XVM
At 04:25 PM 6/8/2004, you wrote:
>I clearly indicated I was talking abou the D7, that most definitely required
>soldering the three wires to the board. I've seen it done. REALLY!
>
>Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |