Date   

Re: Advance Notice: D-STAR DV

"flightresq@..." <flightresq@...>
 

Does this work with project 25

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android



From: bhhoyer@... ;
To: ;
Subject: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Advance Notice: D-STAR DV
Sent: Thu, Mar 20, 2014 4:56:39 PM

 

We have changed the configuration of our DV3000 add-on board to use the same 26 pin header as the Raspberry Pi. The boards are working in the lab now and are headed off for application integration. Two thirds of our pre-orders expressed interest in D-STAR and half of those would like the add-on board as well.


The AMBE3000 chip only requires the Mini-UART interface, leaving the Pi's I2C and SPI interfaces available for other purposes. RESET is on IO18 and RTS is on 1O17 (There is no CTS).

If you're a Pi developer and have interest, we may have a few units available for early access.
Send an email to support@... and tell us how you would use it and what open source software you would port or write.

Bryan K7UDR


Advance Notice: D-STAR DV

bhhoyer@...
 

We have changed the configuration of our DV3000 add-on board to use the same 26 pin header as the Raspberry Pi. The boards are working in the lab now and are headed off for application integration. Two thirds of our pre-orders expressed interest in D-STAR and half of those would like the add-on board as well.

The AMBE3000 chip only requires the Mini-UART interface, leaving the Pi's I2C and SPI interfaces available for other purposes. RESET is on IO18 and RTS is on 1O17 (There is no CTS).

If you're a Pi developer and have interest, we may have a few units available for early access.
Send an email to support@... and tell us how you would use it and what open source software you would port or write.

Bryan K7UDR


Re: PNW digital network

Tom Hayward <esarfl@...>
 

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:07 AM, siegfried jackstien
<siegfried.jackstien@...> wrote:

Seems the same thing (or nearly) like the "hamnet" we have here in europe

Tcpip based high speed network
Yes, very similar. The significant difference I see (and maybe this is
just due to my inability to read German) is that HamWAN attempts to
research and provide specifications for similar networks.

Our network design includes PtP links between sites and an array of 3
PtMP sectors for links to end-users. All of the hardware used in the
system has gone through our test lab. A lot of hardware, specifically
120 sector antennas, was rejected for failing to meet the advertised
specifications. The antenna we selected measured 98 degree beamwidth
at -3dB. Others tested were significantly narrower or had horrible
front-to-back ratio. These results are published on the website so
that others building similar networks can benefit from the research.

In addition to the publication of specifications, we're building a
network in western Washington. Findings from operating this network
will feed back into the specifications. This network forms a great
backbone between our mountain-top radio sites, but I don't think we'll
ever have enough density for mobile 5.9 GHz coverage. For mobile, I
think a low-speed (100+ Kbps) TCP/IP radio in the UHF band will fill
the gaps in 5.9 GHz coverage. This is my interest in the UDR. I would
like to see many low-speed UHF cells around the area that connect to
the high-speed backbone, giving users with no 5.9 GHz coverage a way
to connect to the network.

Tom KD7LXL


Re: SAW Filter limitations

kdcarlso@...
 

Is it possible to use two narrower filters switched for the high and low end of the band?

 

Dave

KA2OQZ


Re: SAW Filter limitations

bhhoyer@...
 

Thanks to all who contributed.

We have a couple of inquiries in for custom filters, the NRE looks reasonable.

In the mean time we'll move forward with the current design and plan on a UDRX-430 for region 1 and 3.

Cheer,
Bryan K7UDR


AW: SAW Filter limitations

"siegfried jackstien" <siegfried.jackstien@...>
 

What about using a highpass with about 400 megs?!?

Dg9bfc

Sigi

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
[mailto:UniversalDigitalRadio@...] Im Auftrag von
@K7UDR
Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. März 2014 14:20
An: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
Betreff: RE: [UniversalDigitalRadio] SAW Filter limitations



The filter is required to suppress carrier feedthru on the TX side in the
350-380 range (Fc-IF). On the receive side it's a nice to have.

We are working towards commercial certification, so some of our internal
design goals are tighter than what is typically found in Ham gear.


Re: SAW Filter limitations

bhhoyer@...
 

The filter is required to suppress carrier feedthru on the TX side in the 350-380 range (Fc-IF). On the receive side it's a nice to have.

We are working towards commercial certification, so some of our internal design goals are tighter than what is typically found in Ham gear.


Re: SAW Filter limitations

"Michael E Fox - N6MEF" <n6mef@...>
 

Also, I’m an “appliance operator” so I don’t understand the purpose of the
filter. But I wonder why the radio would have a limitation that other
amateur radios in the 440 band don’t have. Is this limitation necessary?



Our existing 440 radios are supplemented with cavity filters at sites where
that is needed, just like any radio would be expected to have. One site, in
particular, will probably require the two port version so an isolator can
also be used, just like any repeater would be expected to use. This is
required regardless of how well the radio rejects out-of-band stuff because
we must operate near (physically and frequency-wise) other amateur radios.



Michael

N6MEF





In Northern California, packet and other data activity is in the 433, 434
and 438 range, with wideband channels in the upper of those two ranges.
This is where we would intend to use the device.

http://ncpa.n0ary.org/ncpabandplan.html

Michael

N6MEF



From: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
[mailto:UniversalDigitalRadio@...] On Behalf Of
bhhoyer@...
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 10:27 AM
To: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] SAW Filter limitations



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: PNW digital network

gary.k7ek@yahoo.com <gary.k7ek@...>
 


SAW filters

James D Steventon <ve7ept@...>
 

In Canada, band starts at 430mhz.

Doug, ve7ept


AW: PNW digital network

"siegfried jackstien" <siegfried.jackstien@...>
 

Seems the same thing (or nearly) like the "hamnet" we have here in europe

Tcpip based high speed network

Dg9bfc

Sigi

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
[mailto:UniversalDigitalRadio@...] Im Auftrag von Bill Vodall
Gesendet: Montag, 17. März 2014 22:39
An: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
Betreff: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] PNW digital network



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 product
Not me - I want it yesterday...

Paul VE7DHM
Bill, WA7NWP



Re: SAW Filter limitations

Steve Stroh N8GNJ <steve.n8gnj@...>
 

This view is probably heretical, but here goes.

The US band plan is largely an accident of a lot of spectrum chasing a small use base, adopted in a very different time, assuming very different technology. Thus, allocation of multiple 6 MHz channels that go unused in most of the US.

And, of course, Line A, which I seem to be forever cursed to live North of... in my latest location, less than a few miles, which rules out 420-430 in parts of the US.

And in a few really rare locations like San Diego and Atlanta, interference from our US Government spectrum landlords.

So, maximum spectrum flexibility within 420 - 450 would be best.

My point is to assume very little about historical uses of 420-450 MHz, especially given that 100 KHz channels will be used - I think it's safe to assume that there will be demand in much of the US (South of Line A) that will want to be using 420-430 MHz, so plan on that variant of the UDRX.

Thanks,

Steve




On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 8:50 AM, <bhhoyer@...> wrote:
 

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



Re: SAW Filter limitations

"Michael E Fox - N6MEF" <n6mef@...>
 

In Northern California, packet and other data activity is in the 433, 434 and 438 range, with wideband channels in the upper of those two ranges.  This is where we would intend to use the device.

 

http://ncpa.n0ary.org/ncpabandplan.html

 

Michael

N6MEF

 

 

From: UniversalDigitalRadio@... [mailto:UniversalDigitalRadio@...] On Behalf Of bhhoyer@...
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 10:27 AM
To: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] SAW Filter limitations

 

 

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: PNW digital network

"flightresq@..." <flightresq@...>
 

What does equate to as far as hertz

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android



From: flightresq@... <flightresq@...>;
To: UniversalDigitalRadio@... ;
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] PNW digital network
Sent: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 11:05:03 PM

 

Does anyone know the baud rate or hertz for project 25?

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android



From: ve7dhm@... ;
To: ;
Subject: [UniversalDigitalRadio] PNW digital network
Sent: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 10:17:30 PM

 

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: PNW digital network

Tom Hayward <esarfl@...>
 

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 4:05 PM, flightresq@...
<flightresq@...> wrote:

Does anyone know the baud rate or hertz for project 25?
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@...>
 

Does anyone know the baud rate or hertz for project 25?

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android



From: ve7dhm@... ;
To: ;
Subject: [UniversalDigitalRadio] PNW digital network
Sent: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 10:17:30 PM

 

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: 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 product
Not me - I want it yesterday...


Paul VE7DHM
Bill, 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.

Don va7dgp


On Monday, March 17, 2014, <ve7dhm@...> wrote:
 

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 



--
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. 


John D. Hays
K7VE
PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 
  






On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Steve <yahoo-udr@...> wrote:
 

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?

Steve