Re: PNW digital network
Tom Hayward <esarfl@...>
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 4:05 PM, flightresq@...
<flightresq@...> wrote: Not really sure what this has to do with the current thread, but... P25 Phase I is 4800 symbols per second - where each symbol encodes two bits of data for a raw bit rate of 9600 bps. Phase II is 6000 symbols per second where each symbol encodes two bits of data for a raw bit rate of 12000 bps. Tom KD7LXL
|
||
|
||
Re: PNW digital network
"flightresq@..." <flightresq@...>
From: ve7dhm@... ; To: ; Subject: [UniversalDigitalRadio] PNW digital network Sent: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 10:17:30 PM
|
||
|
||
Re: PNW digital network
Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
So, hopefully 440 will be the high speed data backbone answer.Have you seen HamWAN? http://www.hamwan.org There are some differences of vision here but in general the HamWAN folks are doing a heroic job. That said, I'm hoping to see a robust wide area ad-hoc system evolve from the new functionality that UDR-X will bring. I can wait for NWDigital to put out a quality productNot me - I want it yesterday... Paul VE7DHMBill, WA7NWP
|
||
|
||
Re: PNW digital network
Don Poaps <va7dgp@...>
I'm waiting too.. I'm trying to setup a BBS in New Westminister, BC. I'm having issues with TNC not wanting to talk to BPQ. Issue with com ports on windows XP. Not know Linux. I'll need all the help I can get.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Don va7dgp
On Monday, March 17, 2014, <ve7dhm@...> wrote:
-- Don Poaps
New Westminster, BC
VA7DGP
|
||
|
||
PNW digital network
ve7dhm@...
Back in the mid 90s, when packet radio was well established in the
PNW, Vancouver Island, the B.C. mainland, and the Puget Sound area was well served by a network of nodes and BBSs. The 1200 baud network used 2 meter, 220, and 440 frequencies to link node stacks such as VIC, SPR, PTN, SKAGIT, NMSL, BRMRTN etc. That network moved a lot of information around for the multiple BBSs in the area. Most of that network is now gone along with the BBSs which used that network for information distribution to hams. VHF packet radio is still alive and well on Southern Vancouver Island where it is used to support local authorities in times of disaster when infrastructure fails ( 13 municipalities and 7 districts surrounding the Greater Victoria area. ) As well, Pactor 3 / 4 is used for long distance information exchange for EMBC, PSC and CFARS. It is my hope that with the UDR-X that a version of that former network can be established as a point to multi-point "when all else fails" backup for internet infrastructure which is so now embedded in operations by local authorities. That is where my interest is dedicated in using the UDR-X and in support of that interest I have 7 UDR-Xs on order. 1200 baud is fine for text messaging and text emails. 1200 baud does not support picture and data base file transfers. It has been a long time coming for hardware that can provide a dramatic jump in data speed for the Amateur Radio Service. I had high hopes for the Icom ID-1 but with high feedline loss, line of sight propagation issues in the area, and high cost it did not become popular for use in my area. I did setup a trial where it was used in the Swiftsure boat race several years ago and many megabits of data...still pictures and 15 second videos were sent from several boats to a land based server...the weather, especially fog, decreased received signal to unusable levels...not really good for TCP/IP nets! So, hopefully 440 will be the high speed data backbone answer. I can wait for NWDigital to put out a quality product complete with end user apps for those that don't or can't roll their own. Keep up the good work NWDigital Team and looking forward to receiving my order and start building the PNW Network. Paul VE7DHM
|
||
|
||
Re: SAW Filter limitations
"John D. Hays" <john@...>
Hi Steve, Currently, the only DD network implementation is 128 kbps on 23 cm from Icom (ID-1 terminals, and RP-2D access point) and is half duplex (no repeaters). The UDRX will change this, as it will permit DD at data rates from 4.8k to the top data rate (estimated to reach 100k+) of the radio using 70cm band(s). In the US we are limited to a 100 kHz channel.
In the Icom architecture DD is always a separate band module. With the UDRX we have the potential to run both DD and DV on the same module (at 4800bps). It may also be possible to build a repeater having 100 kHz channels using the UDRX. (Either bonding 4 adjacent 25 kHz channels at 440 band or using a split in the 430 band.)
DV (which includes a slow data subchannel) is typically simplex, repeated, or simplex access point (hotspot). This is a 6.25 kHz channel (or repeater pair). In the US DV repeaters usually are following the local band plan. Here in Western Washington (State) we use high in/low out for our repeater pairs and the bandplan has 12.5kHz and 25kHz pairs.
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Steve <yahoo-udr@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: SAW Filter limitations
Steve <yahoo-udr@...>
How does this discussion affect digital voice (DV) and digital data (DD) modes in the USA? Do DV repeater operators always enable DD capability? Or, are there separate DD repeaters? Do the repeater operators follow the ARRL or other local band plans?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Steve
---------- Original Message ----------
[ Sent by bhhoyer@... at 03/17/2014 10:27 AM ]
|
||
|
||
Re: SAW Filter limitations
bhhoyer@...
We could do a UDRX-430.
there is a 20MHz 431 Filter (421-441). Takes care of the bottom of the US Band as well It's in a different package (of course) so we'd end up building 440s in mass then reworking the filters. Might be a small upcharge of 20-25 USD Bryan K7UDR
|
||
|
||
Re: SAW Filter limitations
John Ronan <jpronans@...>
On 17/03/14 16:05, Andre wrote:
It is a similar situation here in Ireland, and I guess throughout all of IARU Region 1. Regards John EI7IG
|
||
|
||
Re: SAW Filter limitations
Andre <pe1rdw@...>
op 17-03-14 16:50, bhhoyer@...
schreef:
All 9k6 AX.25 channels in the Netherlands are between 430.400 and 431.025 and german duplex ax.25 channels have input between 430.400 and 430.5875 and output between 439.800 and 439.9875. So there would be some limitation if the 19 MHz SAW filter is used in this configuration. 73 de Andre PE1RDW
|
||
|
||
SAW Filter limitations
bhhoyer@...
The UDR has a SAW Filter in both the transmit and receive paths. We are currently using a 440MHz filter with a 19MHz BW, meaning we are 3db down at 430.5MHz and 449.5MHz.
I have been searching for 20MHz filters and have found no reasonable cost solutions. I will be traveling to China later this year to look into the cost (MOQ really) of having SAW filters made to our specification. Looking at the ARRL BandPlan for 70cm, ATV is up to 432 and the top of the band is for Voice repeaters. Many countries only go up to 440. The question for the group is, how does this affect your planned deployment? Is it a real issue for production. Thanks, Bryan K7UDR
|
||
|
||
Forum Etiquette
bhhoyer@...
To all,
The purpose of the forum is for you to ask questions about the UDR and post your thoughts on Digital Amateur Radio. In addition, we use it to gain insight into how you want to use the UDR so we can prioritize our development. To Michael E Fox, This is your second attempt to hijack one of my threads. There will not be a third. Feel free to start your own thread, where you may wax eloquently about your vision. I am not in disagreement with your technical position and there are other experimenters looking for similar functionality. Cheers, Bryan K7UDR
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
Dean Gibson AE7Q <yahoo@...>
On 2014-03-13 23:02, Bill Vodall wrote:
You are correct; accessing the Internet is normally a "means-test", to see if the amateur radio network is just a toy between three amateurs, or actually useful.However, like everyone else, I'm not getting any younger, and I've been looking at alternate solutions. Tuesday evening I bought a commercial 5.8GHz digital (eg, Ethernet) radio and 36" dish for $200 total to use with the HamWAN project. Two days later (today) I am on the air (through a 2nd story window -- .......
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
However, like everyone else, I'm not getting any younger, and I've beenI was going to get a HamWAN setup but then I took my laptop with built in wifi to McDonalds... Had an fast internet connection and downloaded some cool John Denver videos and a few wild Viking wood songs... That's working great - guess I don't need HamWAN or UDR-X... Mostly just kidding. I really didn't get any Viking songs yet. The technologies are complementary - but the Internet as it sits is an anti-goal. Doing this just to hook to the Internet - limited as it may be for ham regulations - is pretty much ho-hum. It's what we can and will do in our own side of that fence that's super cool and special So Dean - what email client did you use with your new toys to send these notes? You web site was the first to know we had a new call listed in 59454 - good job - was that hosted on the hamWAN? i'v been teasing Bruce for weeks about hooking up to Hamwan and bring it to brunch to supplement the coverage we get from his clear wire equipment. Are you going to fill in with a connection from your car and backup bruce. I've got those John Denver videos to upload to my cloud server and that would be good workout for a mobile hamWan node. I'd offer to share our UHF 9600 bandwidth but give we can't download a simple web page yet I don't think it'll help much. Still getting some pings across every hour or soo. Whether these radios supplant or replace my reservation for two UDRX radios,Hope to see you at burnch. Might bring my Groove and fire it up.. 73 Bill, WA7NWP
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
Dean Gibson AE7Q <yahoo@...>
On 2014-03-13 10:44, Michael E Fox -
N6MEF wrote:
I think part of what all of us are experiencing, is the frustration of (in many cases) made purchasing decisions (eg, not buying something else) based on a schedule that has (for speeds over 9.6k) slipped by at least a year. Some of us have also seen software products (whether free or commercial) languish for bug fixes or serious enhancements, while "software engineers" fiddle with changes for the sake of cosmetics (Thunderbird being a prime example). Like you, I hope that primary software efforts are not being delayed for "adjunct" software. Of course, most of the software effort is volunteer, and different people have different skills (I'm an embedded developer, not a GUI wizard). On the other hand, many commercial products can't survive economically without "appliance" users, or even "toy" users. Ten years ago, the number of amateur radio licensees was steadily declining; now, it is up by about 8%. Now, some will argue whether or not that's a good thing (I will argue the latter, but not here), but the fact is, most consumer products exist (at least at current prices) due to this effect. UDR has appliance purchasers lining up, and it needs them as well as "us" (meaning those that don't want any eMail software on the UDRX) for both survival and the resources to support us (there will be changes). However, like everyone else, I'm not getting any younger, and I've been looking at alternate solutions. Tuesday evening I bought a commercial 5.8GHz digital (eg, Ethernet) radio and 36" dish for $200 total to use with the HamWAN project. Two days later (today) I am on the air (through a 2nd story window -- need to move it higher) to a remote Internet connection at 1.5Mbps, for 1/2 the price of a UDRX. When I mount the antenna higher, I should get over 10Mbps. Assuming we get the UDRX with a speed of (say) 128Kbps by fall, then some of us will only have ourselves to communicate with. I'm in the Pacific NW, and I know some of the UDRX buyers: some of them will be "slow" to get a usable network up. Meanwhile, I'm on the air to others on the HamWAN network and the Internet, today. I will probably buy a second radio/antenna combo to experiment with. Whether these radios supplant or replace my reservation for two UDRX radios, I have not decided.
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
With the built-in apps, incorporating the UDRXWhat infrastructure is there? Working with the 'local' system is key and given hams, all local systems will be different. So no matter what there is out of the box - there will be local modifications... Maybe we need an "apt-get install local-system" default target so it's possible to (nearly) automatically install local requirements... Bill
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
Mark L Friedlander <marklfriedlander@...>
I'm not so sure it's productive to judge SquirrelMail based on how you found it over 5 years ago. I'm currently using it and find it as good as any other webmail software and better than some others I've used recently. Mark KV4I
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Steve Stroh N8GNJ <steve.n8gnj@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
Steve Stroh N8GNJ <steve.n8gnj@...>
Michael:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I think you make my point rather eloquently, when you conflate RAID storage and an Amateur Radio network. In my experience, if you're talking about RAID storage, such usage trends more towards the 1%... as opposed to the 99% of ordinary Amateur Radio users that I expect to buy the UDRX and want, and use, the apps that will be include in/on the UDRX. Not to mention the novel (to me) concept of "... security of the network path itself" in relation to an Amateur Radio network given the restrictions on using encryption on Amateur Radio frequencies (that literally anyone can monitor) and resulting distinct LACK of security. I have the benefit of having met the developer of the RF portion of the UDRX, and as a result have every confidence that users like you that want to bypass the built in apps and use the UDRX purely as an RF modem, yeah, "it IS in there". The amateur radio networks that I've seen that will benefit enormously from the UDRX typically have really basic computers and limited software and capabilities (such as EOCs with Winlink software talking to 1200 baud TNCs). With the built-in apps, incorporating the UDRX into such Amateur Radio networks will be easy - just use a web browser on the existing PC. But perhaps we're comparing apples and oranges - as far as I'm aware, the UDRX is designed for, will be manufactured for, and operated on Amateur Radio frequencies, by licensed Amateur Radio operators... 99% of whom probably won't be using RAID storage on their Amateur Radio systems. I think Northwest Digital Radio IS listening - to ALL the potential customers for the UDRX. Steve N8GNJ
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Michael E Fox - N6MEF <n6mef@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
"John D. Hays" <john@...>
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...> wrote:
For those who missed it - start at minute 5:15 in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0svcHERWrM
We have since reworked the whole RF section for much better performance, and have new management code.
|
||
|
||
Re: Webmail Clients
Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...>
What do you think the Node.js and Socket.io stuff that John talked about at DCC last fall is for? Besides, they had working prototypes at Dayton in 2012.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Matthew Pitts N8OHU
On March 13, 2014 1:44:35 PM EDT, Michael E Fox - N6MEF wrote:
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
|
||
|