Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [BPQ32] Re: BPQ RMS-Packet and D-Star

Expand Messages
  • USAF MARS National Auto-link Manager
    Howard, If I m correct, RFSM8000 is Russian developed and a kludge and our MARS ALE software team already evaluated it and rejected it. We try to stick to
    Message 1 of 12 , Sep 14, 2009
      Howard,
      If I'm correct, RFSM8000 is Russian developed and a kludge and our
      MARS ALE software team already evaluated it and rejected it. We try to
      stick to what can be MIL-STD. Winlink of course isn't; its proprietary
      by Victor. His romance with Army MARS notwithstanding,
      And Pactor is owned by SCS. And TNC's cost money, which
      is something I don't want to do. Why do with firmware when can do with
      software that is free. True, about bandwidth, in fact MARS-ALE works
      inside 3kHz which MARS FAU's are authorized but is wider than the
      ham authorization. On the other hand, most MARS radios are modified
      ham radios for DoD frequencies, and are limited to 2.4 kHz width, so we
      have to cram it inside that bandwidth for that reason, not the
      authorization.
      Tom


      USAF MARS National Auto-link Manager wrote:
      >
      >
      > Howard
      > I can't find download for rms8K, where is it?
      > Tom
      >
      > howard_z wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > Hi Tom,
      > >
      > > It's a little off topic, but Region 3 Army Mars has been experimenting
      > > with RFSM8000 which has an email server feature, file server, and an
      > > order-wire keyboarding feature. It uses a modified version of the
      > > military software modem used by Mars/Ale, except all transmissions fit
      > > in a 2.4khz bandwidth which makes it work with more amateur radio
      > > equipment.
      > >
      > > Howard
      > >
      > > --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com <mailto:BPQ32%40yahoogroups.com>
      > <mailto:BPQ32%40yahoogroups.com>, USAF
      > > MARS National Auto-link Manager <afa1bu@...> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Thanks, ok. The results of p/p communication with Airmail, not relying
      > > > on RMS,
      > > > would be helpful to some of us in MARS. Relaying between Airmail
      > clients
      > > > via RMS can be done, however. My greater concern is to not rely on
      > > CMS's,
      > > > the system is too dependent on the internet to work well. If therefore
      > > > Airmail
      > > > clinet stations can move traffic without an RMS, it gives us another
      > > > tool method,
      > > > not needing CMS or RMS.
      > > > Tom
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > howard_z wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Perhaps I was not clear.
      > > > >
      > > > > Airmail2000 - instead of selecting PTC-II TNC, one can select D-star
      > > > > and specify the com port and baud rate.
      > > > >
      > > > > People are experimenting using Airmail2000 to connect to each
      > > other in
      > > > > a point-to-point connection.
      > > > >
      > > > > What is lacking is that RMS Packet does not support d-star. But RMS
      > > > > Packet does support BPQ, and BPQ ports can do all sort of things.
      > > > >
      > > > > So, I was thinking if my RMS Packet station using BPQ can
      > communicate
      > > > > with a port going to my d-star radio, then I can do Winlink email on
      > > > > behalf of Airmail 2000 users via d-star.
      > > > >
      > > > > It might be fun to try.
      > > > >
      > > > > Howard
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.