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

The Missing Link

Expand Messages
  • mitchwinkle
    I was pondering the camps in digital databfor EmComm such as packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast light suite and integrate
    Message 1 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
    • 0 Attachment
      I was pondering the "camps" in digital databfor EmComm such as packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast light suite and integrate them into an email-styled client that shows the messages in a logical format. RMS Express does this fairly well and AirMail does it a bit better but neither support the Linux community.So what I am proposing is something like this:1. An email type interface 2. An inbox for newly received messages 3. An outbox for queued messages 4. User creatable folders 5. Typical Sent, Trash, etc. Folders 6. Radio--centric configuration for mode of operation, wrap, compress, etc.Obviously fldigi is the engine for comms and there is already so much in the way of port integration.So I suppose, in a sentence, "Why not create a messaging client to integrate the key components of the fast light suite for the benefit of EmComm users?"I understand that FLARQ has some folder monitoring capabilities, yet this is not standardized and would be difficult to train.Not having to teach users how to find files and how to decipher them on disk would be a real boon.
    • Charles Brabham
      Drop WinLink, learn to participate in an NBEMS group and you ll be in great shape. Email-type interfaces are not required. 73 DE Charles, N5PVL
      Message 2 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
      • 0 Attachment
        Drop WinLink, learn to participate in an NBEMS group and you'll be in great shape. Email-type interfaces are not required.

        73 DE Charles, N5PVL


        On 6/30/2014 2:09 PM, mitchwinkle@... [linuxham] wrote:
         

        I was pondering the "camps" in digital databfor EmComm such as packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast light suite and integrate them into an email-styled client that shows the messages in a logical format. RMS Express does this fairly well and AirMail does it a bit better but neither support the Linux community. So what I am proposing is something like this: 1. An email type interface 2. An inbox for newly received messages 3. An outbox for queued messages 4. User creatable folders 5. Typical Sent, Trash, etc. Folders 6. Radio--centric configuration for mode of operation, wrap, compress, etc. Obviously fldigi is the engine for comms and there is already so much in the way of port integration. So I suppose, in a sentence, "Why not create a messaging client to integrate the key components of the fast light suite for the benefit of EmComm users?" I understand that FLARQ has some folder monitoring capabilities, yet this is not standardized and would be difficult to train. Not having to teach users how to find files and how to decipher them on disk would be a real boon.


      • Larry Jennings
        Good ideas there. You should also assume that the operators in an emergency situation will not be familiar with any of the fldigi software, and that if they
        Message 3 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
        • 0 Attachment
          Good ideas there.  You should also assume that the operators in an emergency situation will not be familiar with any of the
          fldigi software, and that if they have ANY computer expericence at all, it will be with (ugh) Windows.  I know that a lot of fldigi
          installations are running on various versions of Linux.  Most often this is because you can get better performance from Linux
          on some of the older laptops which have become available because Microsoft has gone onto Windows 7, 8 and etc.
           
          Use the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) principle as your guide, because some of the operators can also be newly minted hams
          without a lot of experience in operations, particularly emergency operations. 
           
          For instance, When fldigi receives a message that
          has been checksummed by flwrap, it will automatically place it into the received message folder.  In Windows, the folder is
          easily found and accessible, but in Linux, these folders and others are part of the .nbems folder there.  Flmsg also stores
          its messages to be sent under the same directory.  The problem is that the .nbems folder is a "hidden" directory that doesn't
          show up in the Graphical User Interface window or with a plain "ls" command in the terminal.  So even if the inexperienced user
          uses flmsg to "fill in the blanks" and saves the result to the default flmsg directory, he can't find it again to send it.  He also
          can't find it again if it is received by fldigi and automatically stored.
           
          The point of all this is, when you design your software for emergency operations use, assume that the operator will be new to
          ham radio, and have a background of using Windows.  He probably will not be able to run Linux other than by GUI similar to
          Windows.  I am applying the same ideas to my "GO" kits.  I have a VHF/UHF "GO" kit that can be: (1) separate VHF/UHF radios,
          (2) one voice and one data radio, or (3) a VHF/UHF crossband repeater.  I have included in the "GO" kit a looseleaf notebook
          containing the radio user's manual (the same manual for both radios) and photographs of the equipment setup in each of the
          three configurations given above.
           
          A good way to check that you have succeeded is to ask a bunch of newly minted hams to try out your software and/or hardware
          to see if they can work out how to do it.  I am making a trial run of this at our radio club meeting very soon, and it should make
          and interesting program for all.  I am going to see if these new hams can connect my "GO" kit together without any other instructions
          that what is is the notebook - I'll probably have to revise my notebook from some of the good suggestions I'll receive.
           
          Thanks for your time reading this, 73's
          de WB5IZL
          Larry


          From: linuxham@yahoogroups.com [mailto:linuxham@yahoogroups.com]
          Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 2:10 PM
          To: linuxham@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [linuxham] The Missing Link

           

          I was pondering the "camps" in digital databfor EmComm such as packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast light suite and integrate them into an email-styled client that shows the messages in a logical format. RMS Express does this fairly well and AirMail does it a bit better but neither support the Linux community. So what I am proposing is something like this: 1. An email type interface 2. An inbox for newly received messages 3. An outbox for queued messages 4. User creatable folders 5. Typical Sent, Trash, etc. Folders 6. Radio--centric configuration for mode of operation, wrap, compress, etc. Obviously fldigi is the engine for comms and there is already so much in the way of port integration. So I suppose, in a sentence, "Why not create a messaging client to integrate the key components of the fast light suite for the benefit of EmComm users?" I understand that FLARQ has some folder monitoring capabilities, yet this is not standardized and would be difficult to train. Not having to teach users how to find files and how to decipher them on disk would be a real boon.

        • Dave Wright
          Something like this, perhaps? http://pskmail.wikispaces.com -- Dave Wright K3DCW “Real radio bounces off the sky ... Something like this, perhaps?
          Message 4 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
          • 0 Attachment
            Something like this, perhaps?  http://pskmail.wikispaces.com

            -- 
            Dave Wright
            K3DCW

            “Real radio bounces off the sky"

            On Monday, June 30, 2014 at 15:09, mitchwinkle@... [linuxham] wrote:

             

            I was pondering the "camps" in digital databfor EmComm such as packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast light suite and integrate them into an email-styled client that shows the messages in a logical format. RMS Express does this fairly well and AirMail does it a bit better but neither support the Linux community.So what I am proposing is something like this:1. An email type interface 2. An inbox for newly received messages 3. An outbox for queued messages 4. User creatable folders 5. Typical Sent, Trash, etc. Folders 6. Radio--centric configuration for mode of operation, wrap, compress, etc.Obviously fldigi is the engine for comms and there is already so much in the way of port integration.So I suppose, in a sentence, "Why not create a messaging client to integrate the key components of the fast light suite for the benefit of EmComm users?"I understand that FLARQ has some folder monitoring capabilities, yet this is not standardized and would be difficult to train.Not having to teach users how to find files and how to decipher them on disk would be a real boon.


          • Michael Coslo
            ... Abandon all hope then. The roof is falling in, the water is rising; life, limb and property is in grave danger, and the untrained person is going to be
            Message 5 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
            • 0 Attachment
              On Jun 30, 2014, at 5:05 PM, 'Larry Jennings' jenninle2@... [linuxham] <linuxham@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

              >
              > Good ideas there. You should also assume that the operators in an emergency situation will not be familiar with any of the fldigi software, and that if they have ANY computer expericence at all, it will be with (ugh) Windows.


              Abandon all hope then. The roof is falling in, the water is rising; life, limb and property is in grave danger, and the untrained person is going to be reading the instruction manual? That dog don’t hunt.

              I have become intimately familiar with fldigi on all of the big three. Pretty darn close in operation, at least as close as programs can be when dealing with different directories. But it takes experience and practice.

              Do not cater to the lowest common denominator , or as Einstein noted, “We should make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler."

              At some point, some way, some how, we have to get to the point where the radio operator is not considered to be someone just picked out of a crowd. At some point, we have to have the self respect to consider ourselves professional, if not in name, at least approach. At some point, the emcomm operator needs to know they have to learn a valuable skill. We need people who read the manual.

              It’s a bit of a pet peeve of mine, because I see people simply not wanting to learn the skills to operate sophisticated hardware and software. Emergency operations are a whole lot more than just wearing a green vest and an sporting a HT.

              It’s like the soundcard classes I am teaching. The technical guys show up all the time. But altogether way too many of the emcomm oriented guys figure they are going to hold their HT up to the computer speakers to pass messages.

              I’ve already put everyone on notice that when we start the nets, we will not be troubleshooting basic setups.

              And as you might suspect, I’ve p****d off a few people. But if someone gets through my classes successfully, their first emergency won’t be the first time they’ve looked at the setup

              - 73 Mike N3LI -
            • mitchwinkle
              Comments inline VVV ... ... For instance, When fldigi receives a message that has been checksummed by flwrap, it will automatically place it into the received
              Message 6 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
              • 0 Attachment

                Comments inline VVV

                ---In linuxham@yahoogroups.com, <jenninle2@...> wrote :

                ...
                 
                For instance, When fldigi receives a message that has been checksummed by flwrap, it will automatically place it into the received message folder.  In Windows, the folder is easily found and accessible,

                Hardly true.  I have had to work with folks from every walk of life with computers and they CAN use email.  Many times those same people could not find a file on the computer if their life depended upon it.

                 but in Linux, these folders and others are part of the .nbems folder there.  Flmsg also stores
                its messages to be sent under the same directory.  The problem is that the .nbems folder is a "hidden" directory that doesn't show up in the Graphical User Interface window or with a plain "ls" command in the terminal.  So even if the inexperienced user uses flmsg to "fill in the blanks" and saves the result to the default flmsg directory, he can't find it again to send it.  He also can't find it again if it is received by fldigi and automatically stored.

                I don't think this is a Linux vs. Windoze issue really.  Windows has the same hidden folder issues.  A smart email interface in Linux is EXACTLY the same in Windows.  Thunderbird is a great example.  That's one reason I use LinBPQ as my packet software.  I can use Thunderbird (or any other POP/SMTP conversant email client) to send and receive messages, including WL2K.
                 
                The point of all this is, when you design your software for emergency operations use, assume that the operator will be new to ham radio, and have a background of using Windows.  He probably will not be able to run Linux other than by GUI similar to Windows. 

                My original thinking exactly, but as above, not a Linux vs. Windows issue.  A smartly designed client is a smartly designed client no matter the underlying OS.  Naturally, as with all things Fast and Light, there would be a Windows version ;)  All OS versions of FLxxx look alike.
                ...

                A good way to check that you have succeeded is to ask a bunch of newly minted hams to try out your software and/or hardware
                to see if they can work out how to do it.  I am making a trial run of this at our radio club meeting very soon, and it should make
                and interesting program for all.  I am going to see if these new hams can connect my "GO" kit together without any other instructions
                that what is is the notebook - I'll probably have to revise my notebook from some of the good suggestions I'll receive.

                SMART TRAINING!  Part of my adventure and thinking here also.  Having ONE email-styled client that all can use, in any F-L data mode should be way easier to train and then they can all support one another also.  
                 
                Thanks for your time reading this, 73's

                Thanks for pitching in Larry!

                de WB5IZL
                Larry

              • mitchwinkle
                Charles, I am not the world s biggest fan of Winlink, but I can recognize a few very valuable things it has to offer. 1. FOCUS - move an email from one point
                Message 7 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                • 0 Attachment

                  Charles, I am not the world's biggest fan of Winlink, but I can recognize a few very valuable things it has to offer.

                  1. FOCUS - move an "email" from one point to another by multiple modes or even the 'net
                  2. REDUNDANCY - lots of redundant RF network nodes worldwide and internet links to fill in the blanks
                  3. High Speed and robust HF data modes like Pactor 3 and Pactor 4.

                  #1 is what I am talking about in this discussion
                  #2 is what WE provide as operators point to point, which again, is the direction that much of the WL2K crowd is heading now.
                  #3 brings up an interesting side question...."What F-L modes are comparable to P3 and P4 in speed and robustness?"

                  All that said there are a few "cons" as well.
                  1. Effectively Windows only support and buggy and/or overly complicated software.
                  2. P3 and P4 modems are stupid costly for the average EmComm volunteer.
                  3. On the lighter side....a bit of a stuffy crowd, really. :D

                  As far as no email being required, don't misunderstand me.  I am fully aware that it can and IS done routinely now with NBEMS.  It can also ALWAYS be done better and more efficiently.  That's why folks write software to begin with!

                  Bring a 21 year old new Technician Class into the room and he's going to take to an email-styled interface in about 15 seconds and be productive.  That's a positive development.



                  ---In linuxham@yahoogroups.com, <n5pvl@...> wrote :

                  Drop WinLink, learn to participate in an NBEMS group and you'll be in great shape. Email-type interfaces are not required. 

                  73 DE Charles, N5PVL


                • mitchwinkle
                  Have you tried it Dave? I have had nothing but frustration with it and there s no network outside Europe to speak of. Though you could do point to point I
                  Message 8 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Have you tried it Dave?  I have had nothing but frustration with it and there's no network outside Europe to speak of.  Though you could do point to point I suppose, the GUI is slow and choppy.  While I am a HUGE Java fan, and spent many years writing code in it, as a GUI, it lacks a lot.  It is much better suited to web apps and console apps.

                    I also don't like the "Send me your email login information...trust me, it'll be fine." methodology. :D

                    Though a lot of this discussion is about point-to-point comms, there is a real value to a network and this is where WL2K shines.  If part of your state has a lot of VHF RMS Gateways they can get emails to the network and they end up on the MPS servers that can be polled via HF by central locations.  Pretty smart stuff.




                    ---In linuxham@yahoogroups.com, <hfradiopro@...> wrote :

                    Something like this, perhaps?  http://pskmail.wikispaces.com

                    -- 
                    Dave Wright
                    K3DCW


                     
                  • Dave Wright
                    No, I haven’t used it. I was just responding to the “something like an email client/something like WinLink/something cross-platform” bend in the
                    Message 9 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                    • 0 Attachment
                      No, I haven’t used it. I was just responding to the “something like an email client/something like WinLink/something cross-platform” bend in the conversation. 

                      73

                      Dave


                      -- 
                      Dave Wright
                      K3DCW

                      “Real radio bounces off the sky"

                      On Monday, June 30, 2014 at 18:11, mitchwinkle@... [linuxham] wrote:

                       

                      Have you tried it Dave?  I have had nothing but frustration with it and there's no network outside Europe to speak of.  Though you could do point to point I suppose, the GUI is slow and choppy.  While I am a HUGE Java fan, and spent many years writing code in it, as a GUI, it lacks a lot.  It is much better suited to web apps and console apps.


                      I also don't like the "Send me your email login information...trust me, it'll be fine." methodology. :D

                      Though a lot of this discussion is about point-to-point comms, there is a real value to a network and this is where WL2K shines.  If part of your state has a lot of VHF RMS Gateways they can get emails to the network and they end up on the MPS servers that can be polled via HF by central locations.  Pretty smart stuff.




                      ---In linuxham@yahoogroups.com, <hfradiopro@...> wrote :

                      Something like this, perhaps?  http://pskmail.wikispaces.com

                      -- 
                      Dave Wright
                      K3DCW


                       


                    • mitchwinkle
                      ... It’s a bit of a pet peeve of mine, because I see people simply not wanting to learn the skills to operate sophisticated hardware and software. Emergency
                      Message 10 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                      • 0 Attachment

                        ...
                        It’s a bit of a pet peeve of mine, because I see people simply not wanting to learn the skills to operate sophisticated hardware and software. Emergency operations are a whole lot more than just wearing a green vest and an sporting a HT....
                        - 73 Mike N3LI -

                        Understood, and agreed to a point.  While I am all for competency, there has to be some thought given to making something SMART too.  Work SMART not HARD, right?

                        I don't have to do it the hard way to prove a point (not that this is what you are suggesting).  I think of this as a natural evolution to a phenomenal set of tools we use today.
                      • Larry Jennings
                        Mike, I appreciate your comments on getting people trained up on fldigi and its associated software. It has been my experience, however, that when an emergency
                        Message 11 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Mike, I appreciate your comments on getting people trained up on fldigi and
                          its associated software.
                          It has been my experience, however, that when an emergency situation occurs,
                          Murphy also appears to
                          screw up things worse. Therefore, you have to assume the worst case
                          situation, i.e. all of your trained
                          personnell are on vacation, out of town, not available, or otherwise unable
                          to do their jobs, or maybe
                          there just aren't enough of them available. Then what you have available
                          are untrained and perhaps new
                          hams that haven't much experience anyway. A saying I heard once sums it all
                          up: "Expect the worst, hope
                          for the best, and settle for anything in between."
                          One of the reasons that one of Ham Radio's best
                          mottos is: "When all else fails, ham radio." Our recent field day exercise
                          is something most hams
                          participate in at least once, and most have done field day several times.
                          That training may be the
                          reason why hams seem to be able to communicate when others cannot. I think
                          that what I've proposed
                          is simply a "belt and suspenders" approach. If trained people are
                          available, fine, but if they are
                          not available, then at least give the poor, untrained guys a chance by
                          making everything as simple
                          and understandable as possible.
                          de Larry, WB5IZL

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: linuxham@yahoogroups.com [mailto:linuxham@yahoogroups.com]
                          Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:43 PM
                          To: linuxham@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: Re: [linuxham] The Missing Link


                          On Jun 30, 2014, at 5:05 PM, 'Larry Jennings' jenninle2@... [linuxham]
                          <linuxham@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                          >
                          > Good ideas there. You should also assume that the operators in an
                          emergency situation will not be familiar with any of the fldigi software,
                          and that if they have ANY computer expericence at all, it will be with (ugh)
                          Windows.


                          Abandon all hope then. The roof is falling in, the water is rising; life,
                          limb and property is in grave danger, and the untrained person is going to
                          be reading the instruction manual? That dog don't hunt.

                          I have become intimately familiar with fldigi on all of the big three.
                          Pretty darn close in operation, at least as close as programs can be when
                          dealing with different directories. But it takes experience and practice.

                          Do not cater to the lowest common denominator , or as Einstein noted, "We
                          should make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler."

                          At some point, some way, some how, we have to get to the point where the
                          radio operator is not considered to be someone just picked out of a crowd.
                          At some point, we have to have the self respect to consider ourselves
                          professional, if not in name, at least approach. At some point, the emcomm
                          operator needs to know they have to learn a valuable skill. We need people
                          who read the manual.

                          It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine, because I see people simply not wanting
                          to learn the skills to operate sophisticated hardware and software.
                          Emergency operations are a whole lot more than just wearing a green vest and
                          an sporting a HT.

                          It's like the soundcard classes I am teaching. The technical guys show up
                          all the time. But altogether way too many of the emcomm oriented guys figure
                          they are going to hold their HT up to the computer speakers to pass
                          messages.

                          I've already put everyone on notice that when we start the nets, we will not
                          be troubleshooting basic setups.

                          And as you might suspect, I've p****d off a few people. But if someone gets
                          through my classes successfully, their first emergency won't be the first
                          time they've looked at the setup

                          - 73 Mike N3LI -





                          ------------------------------------

                          ------------------------------------


                          ------------------------------------

                          Yahoo Groups Links
                        • Charles Brabham
                          I do not see any particular point or value in a large-scale point-to-point network for emcom, as moving the data 100-200 miles or so gets you to
                          Message 12 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I do not see any particular point or value in a large-scale
                            point-to-point network for emcom, as moving the data 100-200 miles or so
                            gets you to still-functioning internet access, which is all that is
                            really necessary.

                            NVIS HF NBEMS will get you 400-500 miles, which is more than sufficient
                            for that.

                            There is no reasonable or actual need for transcontinental emcom links,
                            or email interfaces. If that was so great, we wouldn't be getting these
                            heated requests for FL capability that Winlink lacks.

                            My 30m SGARN HF transmissions in MT63-500L originating near the Big Bend
                            national park are regularly picked up 100% in NC on the east coast for
                            example and guess what? I run 35 watts into an inverted-V at 18 feet.

                            Fact is that high quality ( horizontally polarized ) VHF MT63 provides
                            enough range ( and speed ) for practical and actual use in a real
                            emergency. The document handling capability of the FL suite is
                            light-years ahead of email services for practical use in real situations.

                            What we are seeing here is the monthly pitch by some Winlinker or
                            another for the FL suite to be incorporated into Winlink. The rationale
                            varies ( to some small extent ) month to month, but the basic pitch is
                            always the same. - It's always presented as an exciting, fresh new
                            brainstorm that somebody just had!!

                            Over and over, etc.. for more than a few years now. ( Yawn )

                            Give me a break.

                            73 DE Charles, N5PVL
                          • Larry Levesque
                            --#3 brings up an interesting side question.... What F-L modes are comparable to P3 and P4 in speed and robustness? Nothing, and how many ham operators can
                            Message 13 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --#3 brings up an interesting side question...."What F-L modes are comparable to
                              P3 and P4 in speed and robustness?"

                              Nothing, and how many ham operators can afford the PROPRIETARY license and Modem those modes require?

                              In my opinion, those modes should not be allowed on the amateur bands as you cannot decode them without purchasing a license.....




                              On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 02:59:02PM -0700, mitchwinkle@... [linuxham] wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Charles, I am not the world's biggest fan of Winlink, but I can recognize a few
                              > very valuable things it has to offer.
                              >
                              > 1. FOCUS - move an "email" from one point to another by multiple modes or even
                              > the 'net
                              > 2. REDUNDANCY - lots of redundant RF network nodes worldwide and internet links
                              > to fill in the blanks
                              > 3. High Speed and robust HF data modes like Pactor 3 and Pactor 4.
                              >
                              > #1 is what I am talking about in this discussion
                              > #2 is what WE provide as operators point to point, which again, is the
                              > direction that much of the WL2K crowd is heading now.
                              > #3 brings up an interesting side question...."What F-L modes are comparable to
                              > P3 and P4 in speed and robustness?"
                              >
                              > All that said there are a few "cons" as well.
                              > 1. Effectively Windows only support and buggy and/or overly complicated
                              > software.
                              > 2. P3 and P4 modems are stupid costly for the average EmComm volunteer.
                              > 3. On the lighter side....a bit of a stuffy crowd, really. :D
                              >
                              > As far as no email being required, don't misunderstand me. I am fully aware
                              > that it can and IS done routinely now with NBEMS. It can also ALWAYS be done
                              > better and more efficiently. That's why folks write software to begin with!
                              >
                              > Bring a 21 year old new Technician Class into the room and he's going to take
                              > to an email-styled interface in about 15 seconds and be productive. That's a
                              > positive development.
                              >
                              --
                              Larry Levesque
                              KA1VGM
                              www.digitalhamradio.org
                            • Geoff NW7GM
                              One thing that hasn t been mentioned here regarding volunteers is that most served agencies will not allow a volunteer to work for them if they haven t been
                              Message 14 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                              • 0 Attachment
                                One thing that hasn't been mentioned here regarding volunteers is that most served agencies will not allow a volunteer to work for them if they haven't been credentialed in some way, and most will host training sessions on their preferred software/procedures. So, that takes care of most of the 'untrained' volunteers. 

                                On Monday, June 30, 2014, 'Larry Jennings' jenninle2@... [linuxham] <linuxham@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                 

                                Mike, I appreciate your comments on getting people trained up on fldigi and
                                its associated software.
                                It has been my experience, however, that when an emergency situation occurs,
                                Murphy also appears to
                                screw up things worse. Therefore, you have to assume the worst case
                                situation, i.e. all of your trained
                                personnell are on vacation, out of town, not available, or otherwise unable
                                to do their jobs, or maybe
                                there just aren't enough of them available. Then what you have available
                                are untrained and perhaps new
                                hams that haven't much experience anyway. A saying I heard once sums it all
                                up: "Expect the worst, hope
                                for the best, and settle for anything in between."
                                One of the reasons that one of Ham Radio's best
                                mottos is: "When all else fails, ham radio." Our recent field day exercise
                                is something most hams
                                participate in at least once, and most have done field day several times.
                                That training may be the
                                reason why hams seem to be able to communicate when others cannot. I think
                                that what I've proposed
                                is simply a "belt and suspenders" approach. If trained people are
                                available, fine, but if they are
                                not available, then at least give the poor, untrained guys a chance by
                                making everything as simple
                                and understandable as possible.
                                de Larry, WB5IZL

                                -----Original Message-----
                                From: linuxham@yahoogroups.com [mailto:linuxham@yahoogroups.com]
                                Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:43 PM
                                To: linuxham@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: Re: [linuxham] The Missing Link

                                On Jun 30, 2014, at 5:05 PM, 'Larry Jennings' jenninle2@... [linuxham]
                                <linuxham@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                >
                                > Good ideas there. You should also assume that the operators in an
                                emergency situation will not be familiar with any of the fldigi software,
                                and that if they have ANY computer expericence at all, it will be with (ugh)
                                Windows.

                                Abandon all hope then. The roof is falling in, the water is rising; life,
                                limb and property is in grave danger, and the untrained person is going to
                                be reading the instruction manual? That dog don't hunt.

                                I have become intimately familiar with fldigi on all of the big three.
                                Pretty darn close in operation, at least as close as programs can be when
                                dealing with different directories. But it takes experience and practice.

                                Do not cater to the lowest common denominator , or as Einstein noted, "We
                                should make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler."

                                At some point, some way, some how, we have to get to the point where the
                                radio operator is not considered to be someone just picked out of a crowd.
                                At some point, we have to have the self respect to consider ourselves
                                professional, if not in name, at least approach. At some point, the emcomm
                                operator needs to know they have to learn a valuable skill. We need people
                                who read the manual.

                                It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine, because I see people simply not wanting
                                to learn the skills to operate sophisticated hardware and software.
                                Emergency operations are a whole lot more than just wearing a green vest and
                                an sporting a HT.

                                It's like the soundcard classes I am teaching. The technical guys show up
                                all the time. But altogether way too many of the emcomm oriented guys figure
                                they are going to hold their HT up to the computer speakers to pass
                                messages.

                                I've already put everyone on notice that when we start the nets, we will not
                                be troubleshooting basic setups.

                                And as you might suspect, I've p****d off a few people. But if someone gets
                                through my classes successfully, their first emergency won't be the first
                                time they've looked at the setup

                                - 73 Mike N3LI -

                                ------------------------------------

                                ------------------------------------

                                ------------------------------------

                                Yahoo Groups Links



                                --
                                Geoff, NW7GM
                                Seattle, WA
                                CN87tr

                              • Dave Wright
                                Well, some of the multi-channel Fldigi modes (like PSK63RC32) can pass about 1760 WPM within a bandwidth of 2775kHz. Yup, that’s wider than Pactor III or
                                Message 15 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Well, some of the multi-channel Fldigi modes (like PSK63RC32) can pass about 1760 WPM within a bandwidth of 2775kHz.  Yup, that’s wider than Pactor III or IV.  32 channels of PSK63R with each channel running 63 baud.  PSK125RC16 is basically the same speed in 2750Hz of bandwidth, with 16 channels of 125bd PSK.  PSK500RC4 is about the same speed in 2600Hz of bandwidth consisting of 4 channels of 500bd PSK. 

                                  I’m not sure what the WPM rate of Pactor III is, but these are fairly competitive in terms of throughput, I believe.  

                                  -- 
                                  Dave Wright
                                  K3DCW

                                  “Real radio bounces off the sky"

                                  On Monday, June 30, 2014 at 21:03, Larry Levesque ka1vgm@... [linuxham] wrote:

                                   

                                  --#3 brings up an interesting side question...."What F-L modes are comparable to
                                  P3 and P4 in speed and robustness?"

                                  Nothing, and how many ham operators can afford the PROPRIETARY license and Modem those modes require?

                                  In my opinion, those modes should not be allowed on the amateur bands as you cannot decode them without purchasing a license.....

                                  On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 02:59:02PM -0700, mitchwinkle@... [linuxham] wrote:
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Charles, I am not the world's biggest fan of Winlink, but I can recognize a few
                                  > very valuable things it has to offer.
                                  >
                                  > 1. FOCUS - move an "email" from one point to another by multiple modes or even
                                  > the 'net
                                  > 2. REDUNDANCY - lots of redundant RF network nodes worldwide and internet links
                                  > to fill in the blanks
                                  > 3. High Speed and robust HF data modes like Pactor 3 and Pactor 4.
                                  >
                                  > #1 is what I am talking about in this discussion
                                  > #2 is what WE provide as operators point to point, which again, is the
                                  > direction that much of the WL2K crowd is heading now.
                                  > #3 brings up an interesting side question...."What F-L modes are comparable to
                                  > P3 and P4 in speed and robustness?"
                                  >
                                  > All that said there are a few "cons" as well.
                                  > 1. Effectively Windows only support and buggy and/or overly complicated
                                  > software.
                                  > 2. P3 and P4 modems are stupid costly for the average EmComm volunteer.
                                  > 3. On the lighter side....a bit of a stuffy crowd, really. :D
                                  >
                                  > As far as no email being required, don't misunderstand me. I am fully aware
                                  > that it can and IS done routinely now with NBEMS. It can also ALWAYS be done
                                  > better and more efficiently. That's why folks write software to begin with!
                                  >
                                  > Bring a 21 year old new Technician Class into the room and he's going to take
                                  > to an email-styled interface in about 15 seconds and be productive. That's a
                                  > positive development.
                                  >
                                  --
                                  Larry Levesque
                                  KA1VGM
                                  www.digitalhamradio.org


                                • qrv@kd4e.com
                                  FreeDV may be part of the solution. It is non-proprietary, requires no special training - talk into the mic & it converts to digital mode to overcome poor
                                  Message 16 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    FreeDV may be part of the solution.

                                    It is non-proprietary, requires no special training - talk into the
                                    mic & it converts to digital mode to overcome poor conditions -
                                    then listen.

                                    Channelizing won't work for Hams but some way to seek & link-up
                                    with same-mode (perhaps with ID-search as well) digital modes
                                    would be nice.

                                    The solution must be 100% non-proprietary & free (or real cheap)
                                    if we want fast & wide adoption (decentralized with lots of
                                    redundancy to overcome unavailable ops when needed), must work
                                    with most existing HF gear, & must not require a complicated user-interface.

                                    IMHO, YMMV ... David KD4E


                                    > I was pondering the "camps" in digital databfor EmComm such as
                                    > packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast
                                    > light suite and integrate them into an email-styled client that shows
                                    > the messages in a logical format. RMS Express does this fairly well
                                    > and AirMail does it a bit better but neither support the Linux
                                    > community. So what I am proposing is something like this: 1. An email
                                    > type interface 2. An inbox for newly received messages 3. An outbox
                                    > for queued messages 4. User creatable folders 5. Typical Sent, Trash,
                                    > etc. Folders 6. Radio--centric configuration for mode of operation,
                                    > wrap, compress, etc. Obviously fldigi is the engine for comms and
                                    > there is already so much in the way of port integration. So I
                                    > suppose, in a sentence, "Why not create a messaging client to
                                    > integrate the key components of the fast light suite for the benefit
                                    > of EmComm users?" I understand that FLARQ has some folder monitoring
                                    > capabilities, yet this is not standardized and would be difficult to
                                    > train. Not having to teach users how to find files and how to
                                    > decipher them on disk would be a real boon.


                                    --

                                    David Colburn, KD4E - Nevils, Georgia USA

                                    Safe & Secure Search Engine: duckduckgo.com

                                    Android for Hams: groups.yahoo.com/group/hamdroid
                                    Creative Tech: groups.yahoo.com/group/ham-macguyver
                                    Raspi Alternative: groups.yahoo.com/group/beagleboneblack/

                                    Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
                                  • Charles Brabham
                                    Maybe digital voice modes could incorporate something similar to the RSID system to recognize and tune into other DV signals. 73 DE Charles, N5PVL
                                    Message 17 of 27 , Jun 30, 2014
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Maybe digital voice modes could incorporate something similar to the RSID system to recognize and tune into other DV signals.

                                      73 DE Charles, N5PVL

                                      On 6/30/2014 8:33 PM, 'qrv@...' qrv@... [linuxham] wrote:
                                       

                                      FreeDV may be part of the solution.

                                      It is non-proprietary, requires no special training - talk into the
                                      mic & it converts to digital mode to overcome poor conditions -
                                      then listen.

                                      Channelizing won't work for Hams but some way to seek & link-up
                                      with same-mode (perhaps with ID-search as well) digital modes
                                      would be nice.

                                      The solution must be 100% non-proprietary & free (or real cheap)
                                      if we want fast & wide adoption (decentralized with lots of
                                      redundancy to overcome unavailable ops when needed), must work
                                      with most existing HF gear, & must not require a complicated user-interface.

                                      IMHO, YMMV ... David KD4E

                                      > I was pondering the "camps" in digital databfor EmComm such as
                                      > packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast
                                      > light suite and integrate them into an email-styled client that shows
                                      > the messages in a logical format. RMS Express does this fairly well
                                      > and AirMail does it a bit better but neither support the Linux
                                      > community. So what I am proposing is something like this: 1. An email
                                      > type interface 2. An inbox for newly received messages 3. An outbox
                                      > for queued messages 4. User creatable folders 5. Typical Sent, Trash,
                                      > etc. Folders 6. Radio--centric configuration for mode of operation,
                                      > wrap, compress, etc. Obviously fldigi is the engine for comms and
                                      > there is already so much in the way of port integration. So I
                                      > suppose, in a sentence, "Why not create a messaging client to
                                      > integrate the key components of the fast light suite for the benefit
                                      > of EmComm users?" I understand that FLARQ has some folder monitoring
                                      > capabilities, yet this is not standardized and would be difficult to
                                      > train. Not having to teach users how to find files and how to
                                      > decipher them on disk would be a real boon.

                                      --

                                      David Colburn, KD4E - Nevils, Georgia USA

                                      Safe & Secure Search Engine: duckduckgo.com

                                      Android for Hams: groups.yahoo.com/group/hamdroid
                                      Creative Tech: groups.yahoo.com/group/ham-macguyver
                                      Raspi Alternative: groups.yahoo.com/group/beagleboneblack/

                                      Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22


                                    • Rein Couperus
                                      http://www.pskmail.org Rein PA0R I was pondering the camps in digital databfor EmComm such as packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of
                                      Message 18 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        http://www.pskmail.org
                                         
                                        Rein PA0R
                                         


                                        I was pondering the "camps" in digital databfor EmComm such as packet, NBEMS and WL2K. Why not take the necessary pieces of the fast light suite and integrate them into an email-styled client that shows the messages in a logical format. RMS Express does this fairly well and AirMail does it a bit better but neither support the Linux community. So what I am proposing is something like this: 1. An email type interface 2. An inbox for newly received messages 3. An outbox for queued messages 4. User creatable folders 5. Typical Sent, Trash, etc. Folders 6. Radio--centric configuration for mode of operation, wrap, compress, etc. Obviously fldigi is the engine for comms and there is already so much in the way of port integration. So I suppose, in a sentence, "Why not create a messaging client to integrate the key components of the fast light suite for the benefit of EmComm users?" I understand that FLARQ has some folder monitoring capabilities, yet this is not standardized and would be difficult to train. Not having to teach users how to find files and how to decipher them on disk would be a real boon.
                                         
                                      • mitchwinkle
                                        Please don t read my comments as something like Winlink . I don t really care for Winlink yet they do some things well. This suggestion is not meant to
                                        Message 19 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Please don't read my comments as "something like Winlink". I don't really care for Winlink yet they do some things well. This suggestion is not meant to suggest that the NBEMS suite model itself after anything.The idea is to take something great and make it even more useful by adding a logically designed message handling client.
                                        • mitchwinkle
                                          This was a discussion about digital data, not voice.
                                          Message 20 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            This was a discussion about digital data, not voice.
                                          • mitchwinkle
                                            Sounds competitive to me!
                                            Message 21 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Sounds competitive to me!
                                            • mitchwinkle
                                              What a hateful attitude Charles. You obviously didn t bother to actually read the posts. You couldn t be further from the mark. Consider yourself broken. LOL!
                                              Message 22 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                What a hateful attitude Charles.You obviously didn't bother to actually read the posts. You couldn't be further from the mark.Consider yourself broken. LOL!
                                              • Michael Coslo
                                                What do you want to see? Do you think the present message handling is illogical? I donÆt ask these questions to be rude, I just parse that you donÆt like
                                                Message 23 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  What do you want to see? Do you think the present message handling is illogical?

                                                  I don’t ask these questions to be rude, I just parse that you don’t like what exists now, so I suspect you might have valuable input, and maybe would want to birth a logical system.

                                                  - 73 Mike N3LI -


                                                  On Jul 1, 2014, at 10:56 AM, mitchwinkle@... [linuxham] <linuxham@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                                  > Please don't read my comments as "something like Winlink". I don't really care for Winlink yet they do some things well. This suggestion is not meant to suggest that the NBEMS suite model itself after anything. The idea is to take something great and make it even more useful by adding a logically designed message handling client.
                                                • mitchwinkle
                                                  Perhaps a more specific example of what I am seeing ... I see flmsg as a modal dialog to create and send messages as part of a messaging client that organizes
                                                  Message 24 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Perhaps a more specific example of what I am "seeing"...I see flmsg as a modal dialog to create and send messages as part of a messaging client that organizes all of the messages in one place on the screen.How anyone can turn that into a call for FLWinlink is beyond me.
                                                  • Charles Brabham
                                                    So now we have the victim making personal attacks. 73 DE Charles, N5PVL
                                                    Message 25 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      So now we have the 'victim' making personal attacks.

                                                      73 DE Charles, N5PVL

                                                      On 7/1/2014 10:40 AM, mitchwinkle@... [linuxham] wrote:
                                                       

                                                      Perhaps a more specific example of what I am "seeing"... I see flmsg as a modal dialog to create and send messages as part of a messaging client that organizes all of the messages in one place on the screen. How anyone can turn that into a call for FLWinlink is beyond me.


                                                    • mitchwinkle
                                                      Mike, Its really just being able to see what seems to me to be the next logical step in aggregating things. FLARQ and FLMSG handle making receiving and
                                                      Message 26 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        Mike,Its really just being able to see what seems to me to be the next logical step in aggregating things.FLARQ and FLMSG handle making receiving and recognizing their files nicely already. If one thinks about actually dealing with the files on the file system this can become a stumbling block for some and is more difficult to train to.My thought process is simply that a message client that actually shows the contents of the message folders would be very helpful because training a user to see one program with sub-dialogs is way easier than explaining where the file went and how to find it in 4 flavors of Windows, 12 flavors of Linux and OS-X.In other words, it "acts" like an email client, but no POP3 and SMTP headaches (unless you wanted to implement those linkages which would actually be helpful if stationed in an EOC which had email on the local LAN). Copy and paste to a real email client would be an option to move it the last "mile".It just seems like all the nuts and bolts are there and a message client would be a great way to aggregate them into a really trainable client in a format that most people are already comfortable with. As I sataed above, I envision much ofof the current FLMSG as modal dialogs to susuch a client. The main program displays all messages in their folders and then a " Compose" menu might be similar to what is in FLMSG now to select the form. The the r ESF is similar to what happens now. The user is returned to their list of messages. Incoming messages hit the "Inbox", ...you get the idea.
                                                      • mitchwinkle
                                                        It was a joke Charles. Lighten up man!
                                                        Message 27 of 27 , Jul 1, 2014
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          It was a joke Charles. Lighten up man!
                                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.