Date   
Icom IC-7000 PL Issue

Ron
 

Hi Everyone, strange problem alert :-)

We have an NBEMS net on a local 2 meter repeater that has a PL to bring up the repeater. One of the members has an Icom IC-7000 with a Signalink using the 6 pin data connector. He can bring up the repeater using voice but when he tries to check in with Fldigi he doesn't bring up the repeater. He monitors the repeater input with another radio and the audio sounds fine. I can't imagine there is a setting that would stop the PL when using the 6 pin data connector.

73, Ron NY3J

Re: May 23 ARRL/ARC Exercise

W. T. Jones <wn3lif@...>
 

Guess they encompassed parts of the Atlantic Division that did not include EPA.

So be it.

Hope it was a success for them.

Regards,

WT
Real heroes do not wear capes. They wear dog tags, turnout gear, and badges!


On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:06 PM Steve Hansen <shansen@...> wrote:

Checked with our SEC; the exercise was to encompass the New England, Hudson, Atlantic and Roanoke Divisions.

73, Steve KB1TCE

On 5/27/19 10:35 AM, W. T. Jones wrote:
Heard vague rumors about it but apparently Eastern PA was not included.

Regards,

WT
Real heroes do not wear capes. They wear dog tags, turnout gear, and badges!


On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 4:19 PM John <fritzejohn@...> wrote:
ENY Section used NBEMS with 100% copy both for the practice and the actual event.  Look at Eastern New York Section ARES on Face Book for pictures and details.

On Sun, May 26, 2019, 3:15 PM Steve Hansen <shansen@...> wrote:
I'm curious if any other members of this group participated in the May 23 ARRL/Red Cross exercise. This "infrastructure-free" exercise involved the participation of portable stations around the eastern US to send flmsg forms (standard flmsg form 5739) to Newington. Newington would then relay the received messages to a stations set up at the Red Cross in Baltimore. Participating sections included those in the northeast (New England and New York) and perhaps several other sections further down the coast. Net ops were on SSB voice and the flmsg forms were sent on the digital portions of the bands (80/40/20) using MT63-1000S.

We had 3 groups in Maine participating. Having net control on voice made things difficult as copy was very poor to non-existent. My group did copy some of the call up and checked in but it's not clear it was acknowledged. We and one other group never sent anything although we copied digital traffic from MA and the other Maine team. Having the mode/frequency split between net ops and file transfer worked against us.

73, Steve KB1TCE

Re: May 23 ARRL/ARC Exercise

Steve Hansen
 

Checked with our SEC; the exercise was to encompass the New England, Hudson, Atlantic and Roanoke Divisions.

73, Steve KB1TCE

On 5/27/19 10:35 AM, W. T. Jones wrote:
Heard vague rumors about it but apparently Eastern PA was not included.

Regards,

WT
Real heroes do not wear capes. They wear dog tags, turnout gear, and badges!


On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 4:19 PM John <fritzejohn@...> wrote:
ENY Section used NBEMS with 100% copy both for the practice and the actual event.  Look at Eastern New York Section ARES on Face Book for pictures and details.

On Sun, May 26, 2019, 3:15 PM Steve Hansen <shansen@...> wrote:
I'm curious if any other members of this group participated in the May 23 ARRL/Red Cross exercise. This "infrastructure-free" exercise involved the participation of portable stations around the eastern US to send flmsg forms (standard flmsg form 5739) to Newington. Newington would then relay the received messages to a stations set up at the Red Cross in Baltimore. Participating sections included those in the northeast (New England and New York) and perhaps several other sections further down the coast. Net ops were on SSB voice and the flmsg forms were sent on the digital portions of the bands (80/40/20) using MT63-1000S.

We had 3 groups in Maine participating. Having net control on voice made things difficult as copy was very poor to non-existent. My group did copy some of the call up and checked in but it's not clear it was acknowledged. We and one other group never sent anything although we copied digital traffic from MA and the other Maine team. Having the mode/frequency split between net ops and file transfer worked against us.

73, Steve KB1TCE

Re: May 23 ARRL/ARC Exercise

W. T. Jones <wn3lif@...>
 

Heard vague rumors about it but apparently Eastern PA was not included.

Regards,

WT
Real heroes do not wear capes. They wear dog tags, turnout gear, and badges!


On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 4:19 PM John <fritzejohn@...> wrote:
ENY Section used NBEMS with 100% copy both for the practice and the actual event.  Look at Eastern New York Section ARES on Face Book for pictures and details.

On Sun, May 26, 2019, 3:15 PM Steve Hansen <shansen@...> wrote:
I'm curious if any other members of this group participated in the May 23 ARRL/Red Cross exercise. This "infrastructure-free" exercise involved the participation of portable stations around the eastern US to send flmsg forms (standard flmsg form 5739) to Newington. Newington would then relay the received messages to a stations set up at the Red Cross in Baltimore. Participating sections included those in the northeast (New England and New York) and perhaps several other sections further down the coast. Net ops were on SSB voice and the flmsg forms were sent on the digital portions of the bands (80/40/20) using MT63-1000S.

We had 3 groups in Maine participating. Having net control on voice made things difficult as copy was very poor to non-existent. My group did copy some of the call up and checked in but it's not clear it was acknowledged. We and one other group never sent anything although we copied digital traffic from MA and the other Maine team. Having the mode/frequency split between net ops and file transfer worked against us.

73, Steve KB1TCE

Re: May 23 ARRL/ARC Exercise

John
 

ENY Section used NBEMS with 100% copy both for the practice and the actual event.  Look at Eastern New York Section ARES on Face Book for pictures and details.


On Sun, May 26, 2019, 3:15 PM Steve Hansen <shansen@...> wrote:
I'm curious if any other members of this group participated in the May 23 ARRL/Red Cross exercise. This "infrastructure-free" exercise involved the participation of portable stations around the eastern US to send flmsg forms (standard flmsg form 5739) to Newington. Newington would then relay the received messages to a stations set up at the Red Cross in Baltimore. Participating sections included those in the northeast (New England and New York) and perhaps several other sections further down the coast. Net ops were on SSB voice and the flmsg forms were sent on the digital portions of the bands (80/40/20) using MT63-1000S.

We had 3 groups in Maine participating. Having net control on voice made things difficult as copy was very poor to non-existent. My group did copy some of the call up and checked in but it's not clear it was acknowledged. We and one other group never sent anything although we copied digital traffic from MA and the other Maine team. Having the mode/frequency split between net ops and file transfer worked against us.

73, Steve KB1TCE

Re: May 23 ARRL/ARC Exercise

Bruce Bohannon WA1YZN
 

Steve, never heard a thing about it.

Bruce WA1YZN

Swanzey, NH

On 5/26/2019 3:14 PM, Steve Hansen wrote:
I'm curious if any other members of this group participated in the May 23 ARRL/Red Cross exercise. This "infrastructure-free" exercise involved the participation of portable stations around the eastern US to send flmsg forms (standard flmsg form 5739) to Newington. Newington would then relay the received messages to a stations set up at the Red Cross in Baltimore. Participating sections included those in the northeast (New England and New York) and perhaps several other sections further down the coast. Net ops were on SSB voice and the flmsg forms were sent on the digital portions of the bands (80/40/20) using MT63-1000S.

We had 3 groups in Maine participating. Having net control on voice made things difficult as copy was very poor to non-existent. My group did copy some of the call up and checked in but it's not clear it was acknowledged. We and one other group never sent anything although we copied digital traffic from MA and the other Maine team. Having the mode/frequency split between net ops and file transfer worked against us.

73, Steve KB1TCE

May 23 ARRL/ARC Exercise

Steve Hansen
 

I'm curious if any other members of this group participated in the May 23 ARRL/Red Cross exercise. This "infrastructure-free" exercise involved the participation of portable stations around the eastern US to send flmsg forms (standard flmsg form 5739) to Newington. Newington would then relay the received messages to a stations set up at the Red Cross in Baltimore. Participating sections included those in the northeast (New England and New York) and perhaps several other sections further down the coast. Net ops were on SSB voice and the flmsg forms were sent on the digital portions of the bands (80/40/20) using MT63-1000S.

We had 3 groups in Maine participating. Having net control on voice made things difficult as copy was very poor to non-existent. My group did copy some of the call up and checked in but it's not clear it was acknowledged. We and one other group never sent anything although we copied digital traffic from MA and the other Maine team. Having the mode/frequency split between net ops and file transfer worked against us.

73, Steve KB1TCE

Re: Setting audio / power level proceedure

David Ranch
 


Agreed.  This method gets you the cleanest RF signal but you need to watch your soundcard levels carefully across reboots, OS upgrades, etc.  If your soundcard's audio output level gets reset to 100%, your radio and man other fellow HAMs on your band of choice will hate you until you discover you're splattering.  :-)

Here is a PPT I put together back in 2016 about the topic:

   http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/index-ham.html#hf-dig-modes-101

--David
KI6ZHD


On 05/23/2019 12:07 PM, k4pwo wrote:
The power level at maximum and adjust audio level for 25 to 50 watts for a 100 watt radio is the correct method.  With my TS-480HX 200 watt radio I can get up to 100 watts output without ALC action.

Perry K4PWO 



Re: Setting audio / power level proceedure

Curly Frazier <w7lpn.ham@...>
 

I use the second example as well, watching the ALC continuously. It seems to be effective.


On Thu, May 23, 2019, 10:48 Al Womelsdorf via Groups.Io <ahw609=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:
After reviewing the fldigi manual a few times, I am still a little confused about the best method to set the audio output (and hence the actual output power) level.

In one spot it describes a technique of setting the audio level until the ALC level just starts moving, then set your output power via the radio control (I assume). This seems similar to the technique described for WSJTX as well.

An alternate method recommends setting your maximum output power to the highest value your radio allows, then use the audio level to set the actual output power, never to exceed 50% of the radios max capabilities! - presumably by using either the output power meter on your radio, or a peak-hold external power meter. At this point you should never see any movement in your ALC at all.

Personally, I have been using the second method, and typically run between 25 and 40 watts of power. I have also tried setting the power level of the radio to something specific (say 25W), then adjusting the audio level until I see that power level on the external meter. If I do it this way however, my ALC is reaching mid-scale, which would be typical for SSB, but perhaps not the most desirable for this mode. Also it would seem to me that whatever the best method is, it would apply equally to any of these "audio" modes like fldigi, and wsjtx. I also see a decided interaction between the set power level and the ALC, which makes perfect sense to me.

Exact equipment is Fedora Linux, FT-DX3000, Daiwa CN-901 SWR/Power meter, and cat cable used for both rig control and audio. Radio is in Data/USB mode. Latest alpha versions of the software.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

73's.

Al
KD2PNR

Re: Setting audio / power level proceedure

P C Andy Anderson
 

This is the method I use with the TT Jupiter and the SignaLink USB. Works good and lasts a long time.
Andy...W3LI


From: nbems@groups.io <nbems@groups.io> on behalf of k4pwo <k4pwo@...>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 3:07 PM
To: nbems@groups.io
Subject: Re: [nbems] Setting audio / power level proceedure
 
The power level at maximum and adjust audio level for 25 to 50 watts for a 100 watt radio is the correct method.  With my TS-480HX 200 watt radio I can get up to 100 watts output without ALC action.

Perry K4PWO 



Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S10+.

-------- Original message --------
From: "Al Womelsdorf via Groups.Io" <ahw609@...>
Date: 5/23/19 11:48 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: nbems@groups.io
Subject: [nbems] Setting audio / power level proceedure

After reviewing the fldigi manual a few times, I am still a little confused about the best method to set the audio output (and hence the actual output power) level.

In one spot it describes a technique of setting the audio level until the ALC level just starts moving, then set your output power via the radio control (I assume). This seems similar to the technique described for WSJTX as well.

An alternate method recommends setting your maximum output power to the highest value your radio allows, then use the audio level to set the actual output power, never to exceed 50% of the radios max capabilities! - presumably by using either the output power meter on your radio, or a peak-hold external power meter. At this point you should never see any movement in your ALC at all.

Personally, I have been using the second method, and typically run between 25 and 40 watts of power. I have also tried setting the power level of the radio to something specific (say 25W), then adjusting the audio level until I see that power level on the external meter. If I do it this way however, my ALC is reaching mid-scale, which would be typical for SSB, but perhaps not the most desirable for this mode. Also it would seem to me that whatever the best method is, it would apply equally to any of these "audio" modes like fldigi, and wsjtx. I also see a decided interaction between the set power level and the ALC, which makes perfect sense to me.

Exact equipment is Fedora Linux, FT-DX3000, Daiwa CN-901 SWR/Power meter, and cat cable used for both rig control and audio. Radio is in Data/USB mode. Latest alpha versions of the software.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

73's.

Al
KD2PNR

Re: Setting audio / power level proceedure

k4pwo <k4pwo@...>
 

The power level at maximum and adjust audio level for 25 to 50 watts for a 100 watt radio is the correct method.  With my TS-480HX 200 watt radio I can get up to 100 watts output without ALC action.

Perry K4PWO 



Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S10+.

-------- Original message --------
From: "Al Womelsdorf via Groups.Io" <ahw609@...>
Date: 5/23/19 11:48 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: nbems@groups.io
Subject: [nbems] Setting audio / power level proceedure

After reviewing the fldigi manual a few times, I am still a little confused about the best method to set the audio output (and hence the actual output power) level.

In one spot it describes a technique of setting the audio level until the ALC level just starts moving, then set your output power via the radio control (I assume). This seems similar to the technique described for WSJTX as well.

An alternate method recommends setting your maximum output power to the highest value your radio allows, then use the audio level to set the actual output power, never to exceed 50% of the radios max capabilities! - presumably by using either the output power meter on your radio, or a peak-hold external power meter. At this point you should never see any movement in your ALC at all.

Personally, I have been using the second method, and typically run between 25 and 40 watts of power. I have also tried setting the power level of the radio to something specific (say 25W), then adjusting the audio level until I see that power level on the external meter. If I do it this way however, my ALC is reaching mid-scale, which would be typical for SSB, but perhaps not the most desirable for this mode. Also it would seem to me that whatever the best method is, it would apply equally to any of these "audio" modes like fldigi, and wsjtx. I also see a decided interaction between the set power level and the ALC, which makes perfect sense to me.

Exact equipment is Fedora Linux, FT-DX3000, Daiwa CN-901 SWR/Power meter, and cat cable used for both rig control and audio. Radio is in Data/USB mode. Latest alpha versions of the software.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

73's.

Al
KD2PNR

Re: NBEMS application version scheme

Al Womelsdorf
 

I think I might be the only one messed up here, so I hope I don't cause needless confusion. Personally, I get enough of that during normal life!

Here are the versions of software that I have and use:

-rw-rw-r--. 1 al al  518374 Mar  8 22:10 flamp-2.2.05.12.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r--. 1 al al 3916571 Mar  8 21:48 fldigi-4.1.02.10.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r--. 1 al al 4682834 Apr 24 08:55 fldigi-4.1.04.02.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r--. 1 al al 4695048 May 23 08:38 fldigi-4.1.04.11.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r--. 1 al al  912144 Mar  8 22:10 flmsg-4.0.8.04.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r--. 1 al al  912265 Apr 24 08:56 flmsg-4.0.9.03.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r--. 1 al al  200807 Mar  2 15:48 flwrap-1.3.5.tar.gz

I am current and correct on most, but flamp appear to be way ahead of schedule. I know I got all of these off the website (alpha), so what have I done, and more importantly, what should I do about it?

Thanks.  73's.

Al Womelsdorf
KD2PNR

Setting audio / power level proceedure

Al Womelsdorf
 

After reviewing the fldigi manual a few times, I am still a little confused about the best method to set the audio output (and hence the actual output power) level.

In one spot it describes a technique of setting the audio level until the ALC level just starts moving, then set your output power via the radio control (I assume). This seems similar to the technique described for WSJTX as well.

An alternate method recommends setting your maximum output power to the highest value your radio allows, then use the audio level to set the actual output power, never to exceed 50% of the radios max capabilities! - presumably by using either the output power meter on your radio, or a peak-hold external power meter. At this point you should never see any movement in your ALC at all.

Personally, I have been using the second method, and typically run between 25 and 40 watts of power. I have also tried setting the power level of the radio to something specific (say 25W), then adjusting the audio level until I see that power level on the external meter. If I do it this way however, my ALC is reaching mid-scale, which would be typical for SSB, but perhaps not the most desirable for this mode. Also it would seem to me that whatever the best method is, it would apply equally to any of these "audio" modes like fldigi, and wsjtx. I also see a decided interaction between the set power level and the ALC, which makes perfect sense to me.

Exact equipment is Fedora Linux, FT-DX3000, Daiwa CN-901 SWR/Power meter, and cat cable used for both rig control and audio. Radio is in Data/USB mode. Latest alpha versions of the software.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

73's.

Al
KD2PNR

fldigi 4.1.04.11 posted

Dave
 

Development cycle alpha test

Date:   Mon May 20 10:24:21 2019 -0500

    main dialog title
      * force Windows to update window title when connecting to ACL

73, David, W1HKJ

FT-450 not powering on automatically?

Daniel Corwin
 

I'm having a problem where my FT-450 is not powering on when I start FLRig. If I send the appropriate commands (PS1;) it does power on. I then hit init in the transiver setup menu and I can control normally. When I close FLRig it shuts down the radio normally but it will not turn it back on.

Re: NBEMS application version scheme

Dave
 

Current distribution versions of the NBEMS suite of programs can be found at http://www.w1hkj.com/files/

Current development versions of the NBEMS suite of can be found at http://www.w1hkj.com/alpha/

Drill down to the folder named for the application of interest.

Program Distribution Version Development Version
flaa 1.0.2 1.0.2.02
flamp 2.2.04 2.2.04.13
flcluster 1.0.4 1.0.4.02
fldigi 4.1.04 4.1.04.10
fllog 1.2.6 ---
flmsg 4.0.8 4.0.8.04
flrig 1.3.44 1.3.44.07
flnet 7.3.2 7.3.2.07
flwkey 1.2.3 1.2.3.05
flwrap 1.2.5 ---
linsim 2.0.3 ---
comptext 1.0.1 ---
comptty 1.0.1 ---

73,  David, W1HKJ

NBEMS application version scheme

Dave
 

At the request of 3rd party NBEMS developers I am changing the version numbering scheme for all NBEMS applications including fldigi, flarq, flrig, fllog etc.

The current triad numbering is still in effect: primary . secondary . tertiary, ie: fldigi-4.1.04

The change only applies to development cycle numbering: primary . secondary . tertiary . quaternary.  In the past the tertiary . quarternary would have bumped the tertiary number to the next release value.  In the future the tertiary will remain at the current release value.

fldigi-4.1.04  - current release

fldigi-4.1.04.28 - 28th development cycle release post 4.1.04.

73, David, W1HKJ

Re: 8PSK on 2 meters

Dave
 

Unless the transfer is 1:1 then use flmsg with ARQ.

Dave

On 5/15/19 6:29 PM, Ron via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Klaus,

We also have an NBMES net on 2 meters and use either 8psk1000F or 8psk1200f.  Even though I have full scale at my location there still is a slight crackling noise and I don't get 100% copy. With that speed your reception has to be pretty close to full quieting. A few things to get better copy. I usually turn off digital squelch and unsquelch my radio. You get more noise text but better weak signal reception. In the PSK modem setting make sure everyone turns on the Pilot tone. If it's a repeater turn on the Pre-Signal Tone in the ID RsID setting to send a tone before your text. Make sure that your PTT delay is set. On my Signalink I have the DLY set to 12 o'clock. Of course audio setting, both transmit and receive has to be perfect. Not too low and not too high to distort the audio.

My personal opinion is if a large file is being sent with high speed then Flamp is better than Flmsg because you can ask for missing blocks instead of getting errors on the Flmsg and asking for the whole thing to be resent.

73, Ron NY3J

On 5/15/19 7:09 PM, khberkner@... wrote:
We run aa small fldigi/flmsg practice net on 2 meters.  Our workhorse mode has been MT63-2000L, but we have been exploring 8PSK and have been amazed by the increased speed (recognizing we give up the  error correction of MT63).

Here's my problem:  I used to have no problem decoding 8PSK 1200F until a few weeks ago.  Now I can't decode 1200F, although usually 1000F still works (most of the time).   None of the others on the net have this problem, and they can readily decode my 1200F transmissions.

I am running fldigi 4.1.03 and flmsg 4.0.8 on Windows 10.

Sometimes I get only gibberish, other times I see the text in the yellow screen, but no "wrap" at the beginning and hence no coupling to flmsg and my browser.

This has me baffled, and any thoughts would be appreciated.

Klaus K6KHB


Re: 8PSK on 2 meters

Ron
 

Hi Klaus,

We also have an NBMES net on 2 meters and use either 8psk1000F or 8psk1200f.  Even though I have full scale at my location there still is a slight crackling noise and I don't get 100% copy. With that speed your reception has to be pretty close to full quieting. A few things to get better copy. I usually turn off digital squelch and unsquelch my radio. You get more noise text but better weak signal reception. In the PSK modem setting make sure everyone turns on the Pilot tone. If it's a repeater turn on the Pre-Signal Tone in the ID RsID setting to send a tone before your text. Make sure that your PTT delay is set. On my Signalink I have the DLY set to 12 o'clock. Of course audio setting, both transmit and receive has to be perfect. Not too low and not too high to distort the audio.

My personal opinion is if a large file is being sent with high speed then Flamp is better than Flmsg because you can ask for missing blocks instead of getting errors on the Flmsg and asking for the whole thing to be resent.

73, Ron NY3J

On 5/15/19 7:09 PM, khberkner@... wrote:
We run aa small fldigi/flmsg practice net on 2 meters.  Our workhorse mode has been MT63-2000L, but we have been exploring 8PSK and have been amazed by the increased speed (recognizing we give up the  error correction of MT63).

Here's my problem:  I used to have no problem decoding 8PSK 1200F until a few weeks ago.  Now I can't decode 1200F, although usually 1000F still works (most of the time).   None of the others on the net have this problem, and they can readily decode my 1200F transmissions.

I am running fldigi 4.1.03 and flmsg 4.0.8 on Windows 10.

Sometimes I get only gibberish, other times I see the text in the yellow screen, but no "wrap" at the beginning and hence no coupling to flmsg and my browser.

This has me baffled, and any thoughts would be appreciated.

Klaus K6KHB

8PSK on 2 meters

khberkner@...
 

We run aa small fldigi/flmsg practice net on 2 meters.  Our workhorse mode has been MT63-2000L, but we have been exploring 8PSK and have been amazed by the increased speed (recognizing we give up the  error correction of MT63).

Here's my problem:  I used to have no problem decoding 8PSK 1200F until a few weeks ago.  Now I can't decode 1200F, although usually 1000F still works (most of the time).   None of the others on the net have this problem, and they can readily decode my 1200F transmissions.

I am running fldigi 4.1.03 and flmsg 4.0.8 on Windows 10.

Sometimes I get only gibberish, other times I see the text in the yellow screen, but no "wrap" at the beginning and hence no coupling to flmsg and my browser.

This has me baffled, and any thoughts would be appreciated.

Klaus K6KHB