Date   
Re: training

Gilbert Kauffmann
 

I ran training for those who were interested.
Most of the people running the nets today spent a lot of time with
me on the keyboard..

If I can get some help I maybe able to get back together again on FLdigi.

de Skip  K3CC

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Frank N3FLL
 

Try  DuckDuckGo instead of Google. 

73,
Frank N3FLL   

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

frank n3fll
 

Try  DuckDuckgo instead of Google 

73, 
Frank N3FLL 

Re: ICOM 9700 and FLRIG in Linux

Chris E.
 

Here's the flrig side of it, running on Debian "Bullseye" with the latest flrig compiled.  It was working with the distro pkg as well.

I had to fiddle around back and forth a number of times to get it to finally "click" with regard to the CI-V address taking properly.

It is a bit buggy so when you close it, just check your mic gain as it sets it to 0 after you close it and occasionally it will set the power to 100W which if you use FM is not ideal, so double check that stuff after using it.

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:05 PM Brian T Schmidt <schmidtbt73@...> wrote:
Has anyone gotten the ICOM 9700 to work with FLRIG in Linux.

I am running Mint and FLRIG 1.3.49. Can't get FLRIG to reconize the radio. I have checked the port speen and also tried the Silicon Lab port and ttyUSB0.

thanks
Ni0P
Brian



--
73  de Chris -- KC2RGW
Are you on DMR yet?
------------------------------------------------------------
˙dn ǝpıs ʇɥƃıɹ ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ
ǝsɐǝןd 'sıɥʇ ƃuıpɐǝɹ ǝɹɐ noʎ ɟı

ICOM 9700 and FLRIG in Linux

Brian T Schmidt
 

Has anyone gotten the ICOM 9700 to work with FLRIG in Linux.

I am running Mint and FLRIG 1.3.49. Can't get FLRIG to reconize the radio. I have checked the port speen and also tried the Silicon Lab port and ttyUSB0.

thanks
Ni0P
Brian

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Ken Downs
 

Dave,
No good answers for nets with wide-area coverage.

Solution 1  Teach everyone (as many as possible)  to type and go full-time digital when
                   traffic volume warrants;
Solution 2  Use 160 and/or 60 meters, where voice and data ARE allowed on the same freq;
Solution 3  VHF/UHF perhaps with repeaters/digipeaters

As stated, no good answers. As in real estate, the deciding factors could be location, location, location.
  Of those presented, #1 is probably the most realistic. A work-around for reluctant typists would
be a county/area/regional "gateway" digital station which can transfer messages between 
state/wide area digital and local area voice net. Somewhat personnel intensive to be efficient.
Number two suffers from propagation and bandwidth issues;
Number three could require a lot of infrastructure.Remember the old state-wide packet network?

Solution 4 ?? Join MARS/SHARES/xyz and be an unpaid federal/state worker.

W1KRT

On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 08:24:51 -0400, "Dave Colter" <dbcolter@...> wrote:

Thanks to all who answered. I’m surprised my own search didn’t pick up the emissions chart John posted. Gotta love Google ads clogging up search results. After looking at the charts on w1hkj.com,  and the Part 97 definition of image modes, I found that none of the modes in Fldigi qualify as image modes. Oh well.

 

The reason for the question had to do with nets. On SHARES nets (government frequencies) we are able to send digital messages on the voice net frequency (we use MT63-1K-L), which improves the efficiency of the net. There is no repeated moving off to a new frequency, retuning, etc.. The thought is that if a legal “image” mode can effectively send forms and documents, just like a fax machine, we can move the messages in-net as long as it’s low volume. We would do this until the traffic volume increased to the point where it’s more efficient to move to an all-digital net for traffic.

 

Back to the drawing board!

73,

Dave Colter WA1ZCN

ASEC, Training - NH-ARES

www.nh-ares.org

Hamshack Hotline: Ext. 4806

SHARES Voice: NNA1DC

 

 

 

 

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Michael WA7SKG
 

A declared emergency has no impact on the rules. There are basically two exceptions from the established rules. In an actual (not training or preparation) life or death situation when *no other means of communication are available* limited communications may be made by any means to seek assistance. The FCC intent on this rule was in cases of exceeding one's license class, e.g. a Technician Class operating on 20 meters to get help. The other rule exception is in the form of an STA (Special Temporary Authorization) requested through the FCC authorizing something special. For instance, several STAs were issued after Hurricane Katrina allowing certain ham stations to interface with local broadcast stations for dissemination of emergency information. The declared emergency was the justification for the request.

Michael WA7SKG

Wayne Santos wrote on 3/29/20 9:40 AM:

What about during a declared emergency?
Wayne
Wayne W. Santos
N1CKM
SEC
NH ARES
n1ckm@... <mailto:n1ckm@...>
n1ckm78sec@... <mailto:n1ckm78sec@...>
603-856-5459
Twitter: #n1ckm78
www.nh-ares.org <http://www.nh-ares.org>
On Sun, Mar 29, 2020, 8:24 AM Dave Colter <dbcolter@... <mailto:dbcolter@...>> wrote:
Thanks to all who answered. I’m surprised my own search didn’t pick
up the emissions chart John posted. Gotta love Google ads clogging
up search results. After looking at the charts on w1hkj.com
<http://w1hkj.com>,  and the Part 97 definition of image modes, I
found that none of the modes in Fldigi qualify as image modes. Oh
well.____
__ __
The reason for the question had to do with nets. On SHARES nets
(government frequencies) we are able to send digital messages on the
voice net frequency (we use MT63-1K-L), which improves the
efficiency of the net. There is no repeated moving off to a new
frequency, retuning, etc.. The thought is that if a legal “image”
mode can effectively send forms and documents, just like a fax
machine, we can move the messages in-net as long as it’s low volume.
We would do this until the traffic volume increased to the point
where it’s more efficient to move to an all-digital net for traffic.____
__ __
Back to the drawing board!____
73,____
Dave Colter WA1ZCN____
ASEC, Training - NH-ARES____
www.nh-ares.org <http://www.nh-ares.org/>____
Hamshack Hotline: Ext. 4806____
SHARES Voice: NNA1DC____
__ __

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Wayne Santos
 

What about during a declared emergency?

Wayne

Wayne W. Santos
N1CKM
SEC
NH ARES
n1ckm@...
n1ckm78sec@...
603-856-5459
Twitter: #n1ckm78
www.nh-ares.org


On Sun, Mar 29, 2020, 8:24 AM Dave Colter <dbcolter@...> wrote:

Thanks to all who answered. I’m surprised my own search didn’t pick up the emissions chart John posted. Gotta love Google ads clogging up search results. After looking at the charts on w1hkj.com,  and the Part 97 definition of image modes, I found that none of the modes in Fldigi qualify as image modes. Oh well.

 

The reason for the question had to do with nets. On SHARES nets (government frequencies) we are able to send digital messages on the voice net frequency (we use MT63-1K-L), which improves the efficiency of the net. There is no repeated moving off to a new frequency, retuning, etc.. The thought is that if a legal “image” mode can effectively send forms and documents, just like a fax machine, we can move the messages in-net as long as it’s low volume. We would do this until the traffic volume increased to the point where it’s more efficient to move to an all-digital net for traffic.

 

Back to the drawing board!

73,

Dave Colter WA1ZCN

ASEC, Training - NH-ARES

www.nh-ares.org

Hamshack Hotline: Ext. 4806

SHARES Voice: NNA1DC

 

 

 

 

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Michael WA7SKG
 

We have a number of groups in our area who mix voice and digital on the same frequency, usually 2 meters. They typically use SSTV and MT63, though some use Olivia. I believe they use flamp to assist in message processing. In the exercises, the mix works well as the message traffic serves accurate and efficient record traffic for shelter status, weather, etc. while SSTV is very useful for damage assessment.

In the non-ham world, this was actually quite common. Not only with MARS, SHARES, etc. but in the commercial arena. There were a few business that used to use HF between their facilities that I would occasionally monitor for fun. They would make voice contact, then send data of some type. Of course now everything is satellite and Internet, and HF sees very little use. One of the companies I used to listen to had a big tri-band beam and several dipoles on their roof, all gone now.

Michael WA7SKG


Dave Colter wrote on 3/29/20 5:24 AM:

Thanks to all who answered. I’m surprised my own search didn’t pick up the emissions chart John posted. Gotta love Google ads clogging up search results. After looking at the charts on w1hkj.com,  and the Part 97 definition of image modes, I found that none of the modes in Fldigi qualify as image modes. Oh well.
The reason for the question had to do with nets. On SHARES nets (government frequencies) we are able to send digital messages on the voice net frequency (we use MT63-1K-L), which improves the efficiency of the net. There is no repeated moving off to a new frequency, retuning, etc.. The thought is that if a legal “image” mode can effectively send forms and documents, just like a fax machine, we can move the messages in-net as long as it’s low volume. We would do this until the traffic volume increased to the point where it’s more efficient to move to an all-digital net for traffic.
Back to the drawing board!
73,
Dave Colter WA1ZCN
ASEC, Training - NH-ARES
www.nh-ares.org <http://www.nh-ares.org/>
Hamshack Hotline: Ext. 4806
SHARES Voice: NNA1DC

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Chris E.
 

You could do flamp to xfer the files I would think but I don't have a lot of experience as to the best modes to use with it.


It has checksums to verify complete transfer.

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 8:24 AM Dave Colter <dbcolter@...> wrote:

Thanks to all who answered. I’m surprised my own search didn’t pick up the emissions chart John posted. Gotta love Google ads clogging up search results. After looking at the charts on w1hkj.com,  and the Part 97 definition of image modes, I found that none of the modes in Fldigi qualify as image modes. Oh well.

 

The reason for the question had to do with nets. On SHARES nets (government frequencies) we are able to send digital messages on the voice net frequency (we use MT63-1K-L), which improves the efficiency of the net. There is no repeated moving off to a new frequency, retuning, etc.. The thought is that if a legal “image” mode can effectively send forms and documents, just like a fax machine, we can move the messages in-net as long as it’s low volume. We would do this until the traffic volume increased to the point where it’s more efficient to move to an all-digital net for traffic.

 

Back to the drawing board!

73,

Dave Colter WA1ZCN

ASEC, Training - NH-ARES

www.nh-ares.org

Hamshack Hotline: Ext. 4806

SHARES Voice: NNA1DC

 

 

 

 



--
73  de Chris -- KC2RGW
Are you on DMR yet?
------------------------------------------------------------
˙dn ǝpıs ʇɥƃıɹ ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ
ǝsɐǝןd 'sıɥʇ ƃuıpɐǝɹ ǝɹɐ noʎ ɟı

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Dave Colter WA1ZCN
 

Thanks to all who answered. I’m surprised my own search didn’t pick up the emissions chart John posted. Gotta love Google ads clogging up search results. After looking at the charts on w1hkj.com,  and the Part 97 definition of image modes, I found that none of the modes in Fldigi qualify as image modes. Oh well.

 

The reason for the question had to do with nets. On SHARES nets (government frequencies) we are able to send digital messages on the voice net frequency (we use MT63-1K-L), which improves the efficiency of the net. There is no repeated moving off to a new frequency, retuning, etc.. The thought is that if a legal “image” mode can effectively send forms and documents, just like a fax machine, we can move the messages in-net as long as it’s low volume. We would do this until the traffic volume increased to the point where it’s more efficient to move to an all-digital net for traffic.

 

Back to the drawing board!

73,

Dave Colter WA1ZCN

ASEC, Training - NH-ARES

www.nh-ares.org

Hamshack Hotline: Ext. 4806

SHARES Voice: NNA1DC

 

 

 

 

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Chris E.
 

Thanks, yes did not compute that, had never seen it before.


On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:44 AM Bob Cameron <bob3bob3@...> wrote:

Chris/Dave/John

I don't know if this is relevant to your post, but be aware that MFSK image mode is not the same as data mode. There may be different bandwidths/rates involved. I stopped using it for images some time ago, finding THOR or IFKP gave a better quality image. That particular mode has a frame start tone well below the usual data bandwidth.

Cheers/73

Bob VK2YQA

On 29/3/20 11:20 am, Chris E. wrote:
I believe it is legal to use anywhere, but the sub-band areas for digital are almost desolate most of the time aside from the FT8 sprawl and PSK on 20m and a tiny bit on 40m.  There's so much space to use, putting it on phone segments will just get people going insane.

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:55 PM JOHN UNRATH <unrath@...> wrote:
Got this from the FLDIGI site ...




On Saturday, March 28, 2020, 5:47:47 PM MDT, Dave Colter <dbcolter@...> wrote:


Does anyone know what MFSK16’s precise bandwidth is? Or its official emissions designator? I’m wondering if it qualifies as an image emission under FCC rules, thus legal to use in the phone sub-bands.

73

Dave WA1ZCN



--



--
73  de Chris -- KC2RGW
Are you on DMR yet?
------------------------------------------------------------
˙dn ǝpıs ʇɥƃıɹ ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ
ǝsɐǝןd 'sıɥʇ ƃuıpɐǝɹ ǝɹɐ noʎ ɟı

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Bob Cameron
 

Chris/Dave/John

I don't know if this is relevant to your post, but be aware that MFSK image mode is not the same as data mode. There may be different bandwidths/rates involved. I stopped using it for images some time ago, finding THOR or IFKP gave a better quality image. That particular mode has a frame start tone well below the usual data bandwidth.

Cheers/73

Bob VK2YQA

On 29/3/20 11:20 am, Chris E. wrote:
I believe it is legal to use anywhere, but the sub-band areas for digital are almost desolate most of the time aside from the FT8 sprawl and PSK on 20m and a tiny bit on 40m.  There's so much space to use, putting it on phone segments will just get people going insane.

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:55 PM JOHN UNRATH <unrath@...> wrote:
Got this from the FLDIGI site ...




On Saturday, March 28, 2020, 5:47:47 PM MDT, Dave Colter <dbcolter@...> wrote:


Does anyone know what MFSK16’s precise bandwidth is? Or its official emissions designator? I’m wondering if it qualifies as an image emission under FCC rules, thus legal to use in the phone sub-bands.

73

Dave WA1ZCN



--

Re: fldigi 4.1.09.27 posted

Dave, KI7VLV
 

Roger that, sir. I have all that set, checked, and working in .08. No mode association button in .09.

In .09 the CW identifier will sound using the panes of Fldigi itself using macros (TX >|), but will not end with a CW ID when sending with flmsg, nor flamp.

Thank you so much for your hard work.

73, Dave

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

Chris E.
 

I believe it is legal to use anywhere, but the sub-band areas for digital are almost desolate most of the time aside from the FT8 sprawl and PSK on 20m and a tiny bit on 40m.  There's so much space to use, putting it on phone segments will just get people going insane.


On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:55 PM JOHN UNRATH <unrath@...> wrote:
Got this from the FLDIGI site ...
Inline image



On Saturday, March 28, 2020, 5:47:47 PM MDT, Dave Colter <dbcolter@...> wrote:


Does anyone know what MFSK16’s precise bandwidth is? Or its official emissions designator? I’m wondering if it qualifies as an image emission under FCC rules, thus legal to use in the phone sub-bands.

73

Dave WA1ZCN



--
73  de Chris -- KC2RGW
Are you on DMR yet?
------------------------------------------------------------
˙dn ǝpıs ʇɥƃıɹ ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ
ǝsɐǝןd 'sıɥʇ ƃuıpɐǝɹ ǝɹɐ noʎ ɟı

Re: MFSK16 bandwidth?

JOHN UNRATH
 

Got this from the FLDIGI site ...
Inline image



On Saturday, March 28, 2020, 5:47:47 PM MDT, Dave Colter <dbcolter@...> wrote:


Does anyone know what MFSK16’s precise bandwidth is? Or its official emissions designator? I’m wondering if it qualifies as an image emission under FCC rules, thus legal to use in the phone sub-bands.

73

Dave WA1ZCN

MFSK16 bandwidth?

Dave Colter WA1ZCN
 

Does anyone know what MFSK16’s precise bandwidth is? Or its official emissions designator? I’m wondering if it qualifies as an image emission under FCC rules, thus legal to use in the phone sub-bands.

73

Dave WA1ZCN

New alpha versions posted for fldigi and flrig

Dave
 

Re: fldigi 4.1.09.27 posted

Dave
 

I see you're asking about setting which modes be associated with the CW identifier.

I'll check the code base.

73, David, W1HKJ

On 3/28/20 2:41 PM, Dave wrote:

fldigi only transmits a station CW identification at the end of each transmission.  Enable that with the "Transmit callsign" check box on the IDs/CW panel.

A mode identifier can be transmitted as waterfall video text.  Look on the IDs/Video panel.

73, David, W1HKJ

On 3/28/20 2:16 PM, Dave, KI7VLV wrote:

Good day,

I was wondering why the CW ID modes button/functionality was removed from .09 under ID -> CW ?

Re: fldigi 4.1.09.27 posted

Dave
 

fldigi only transmits a station CW identification at the end of each transmission.  Enable that with the "Transmit callsign" check box on the IDs/CW panel.

A mode identifier can be transmitted as waterfall video text.  Look on the IDs/Video panel.

73, David, W1HKJ

On 3/28/20 2:16 PM, Dave, KI7VLV wrote:

Good day,

I was wondering why the CW ID modes button/functionality was removed from .09 under ID -> CW ?