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

Re: Midwest USA 80meter QSO

Expand Messages
  • Charles Brabham
    I forgot to mention my schedule. I am on 17 meters Q15x25 mode from 3:00pm to 8:00pm central time. Sundays I m a little bit late getting started. My station
    Message 1 of 10 , Sep 15, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I forgot to mention my schedule. I am on 17 meters Q15x25 mode from
      3:00pm to 8:00pm central time. Sundays I'm a little bit late getting
      started.

      My station beacons every fifteen minutes, if not connected.

      I've heard of several groups interested in using Q15x25 mode on 75
      meters. - Seems like it was New York, Chicago and somewhere else...

      My personal favorite is to bump up the TXDelay to a 800 ms or even one
      second if necessary, in order to make it work over the local VHF or UHF
      voice repeater.

      Sure, you have a long TXD, but Q15x25 can be set up for high MAXFRAME
      and PACLEN values to reduce overhead and at 2500 baud, it's twice as
      fast as most packet to begin with.

      I think people are crazy for not utilizing Q15x25 this way for mixed-
      mode ecomms over VHF/UHF voice repeaters ( and simplex ) - but that's
      just me!

      Charles, N5PVL
    • Charles Brabham
      In the radical uses for Q15x25 category, this puts my VHF/UHF mixed- mode Q15x25 idea to shame... Get a copy of John Hansen s old RadioMirror multicast
      Message 2 of 10 , Sep 17, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        In the "radical uses for Q15x25" category, this puts my VHF/UHF mixed-
        mode Q15x25 idea to shame...

        Get a copy of John Hansen's old "RadioMirror" multicast software (
        that works with a KISS TNC ) and hook it up to MixW in virtual KISS
        TNC mode, in Q15x25.

        - A Q15x25 multicast system!

        Hanson's software sent a series of 1kb PACLEN unproto packets with
        next to no time in-between them. - It effectively ran continuously.

        Your transmitter would have to be HEAVY DUTY to operate this mode (
        Q15x25 multicast ) - but imagine the splash you would make on HF with
        that!

        RadioMirror could transfer 20MB a day at 1200 baud, according to the
        author.

        Charles, N5PVL
      • kd4e
        Question: Are all digital modes required to have a busy frequency check activated at all times? I recall back in early packet radio days that was the case and
        Message 3 of 10 , Sep 22, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Question: Are all digital modes required to have a
          busy frequency check activated at all times?

          I recall back in early packet radio days that was
          the case and it avoided packet stations stepping on
          one another or on other modes in operation.

          Given the increasing volume of complaints from Hams
          re. Pactor III operations firing up on top of ongoing
          QSO's (and being unavailable for decoding so a non-
          Pactor III user cannot even discern who it is that just
          QRM'd them) I wondered what y'all could tell me about
          other digital modes.

          I have just acquired a 706 so I can try it and my Jupiter
          on HF digital modes and still have the other one free for
          voice modes.

          Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e
        • wb8wka
          In the U.S., yes http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/100/ Which in large part was prompted by automated WinLink stations raping the bands and SCS s
          Message 4 of 10 , Oct 7, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            In the U.S., yes

            http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/100/

            Which in large part was prompted by automated WinLink stations raping
            the bands and SCS's modems not being able to generate a valid DCD.
            Just because the gun doesn't have a trigger guard, doesn't mean your
            not libel if you load it and send it to preschool with your child.

            I understand some steps are being taken with Scamp, which is a follow
            on soundcard mode targeted at WinLink.

            Not sure on Q15X25 on how DCD responds to non-native data energy.


            --- In Q15X25@yahoogroups.com, kd4e <kd4e@v...> wrote:
            >
            > Question: Are all digital modes required to have a
            > busy frequency check activated at all times?
            >
            > I recall back in early packet radio days that was
            > the case and it avoided packet stations stepping on
            > one another or on other modes in operation.
            >
            > Given the increasing volume of complaints from Hams
            > re. Pactor III operations firing up on top of ongoing
            > QSO's (and being unavailable for decoding so a non-
            > Pactor III user cannot even discern who it is that just
            > QRM'd them) I wondered what y'all could tell me about
            > other digital modes.
            >
            > I have just acquired a 706 so I can try it and my Jupiter
            > on HF digital modes and still have the other one free for
            > voice modes.
            >
            > Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e
            >
          • kd4e
            ... Thanks for this! I have forwarded this to interested Hams with a recommendation that they systematically document the offenses and assured them that Riley
            Message 5 of 10 , Oct 7, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              > wb8wka wrote:
              > In the U.S., yes
              > http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/100/

              Thanks for this!

              I have forwarded this to interested Hams with a
              recommendation that they systematically document
              the offenses and assured them that Riley will
              see to it that his warning is heeded or else serious
              consequences come to those who ignore him.

              Help Riley help Ham radio ... again.
            • Charles Brabham
              ... I generally watch for lid-like operating behavior with programs like MixW or DigiPan that have a waterfall display. The waterfall s time-line shows the
              Message 6 of 10 , Oct 10, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In Q15X25@yahoogroups.com, kd4e <kd4e@v...> wrote:
                >
                > > wb8wka wrote:
                > > In the U.S., yes
                > > http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/100/
                >
                > Thanks for this!
                >
                > I have forwarded this to interested Hams with a
                > recommendation that they systematically document
                > the offenses and assured them that Riley will
                > see to it that his warning is heeded or else serious
                > consequences come to those who ignore him.
                >
                > Help Riley help Ham radio ... again.
                >

                I generally watch for lid-like operating behavior with programs like
                MixW or DigiPan that have a waterfall display.

                The waterfall's time-line shows the original QSO - and the offending
                station coming in on top of that QSO graphically.

                By using ( Alt - Print_Screen ) which puts the current window into
                the clipboard ( Windows ) I can catch bad guys at it, and paste the
                image into a graphic program, where I crop out the unecessary part,
                leaving the waterfall display and the program's status line at the
                bottom, which displays the time, mode, etc..

                By doing this, I documented dozens of cases of interference
                perpetrated by PACTOR bots on 20 and 30 meters. - In fact, I stopped
                recording the incidents after a while as there was no sport to it...
                I could tune in on those bands at any time there was activity and
                find a PACTOR bot crashing somebody's QSO after a very short wait.
                Way too easy!

                Here is a typical incident: http://www.uspacket.org/pqrm.htm

                I would give a ratio of PACTOR related interference in comparasin to
                interference from other modes/protocols - but during the course of
                all this monitoring and recording, I did not see anybody's QSO being
                crashed by Packet, PSK31, MFSK or MT-63. Lots of PACTOR 'activity' to
                record, but not much of anything else. Obviously interference from
                these other modes does exist - but it is just as obvious that
                interference from PACTOR stations happens much, much more often than
                with the rest of these modes put together.

                Charles, N5PVL
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.