About Us

February 4th 04, 10:54 AM

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

It's been something like twelve years since the first of the piles of
nocodes hit the bands 30Mhz. Mayber it's happened and I missed it but
I have yet to see or hear of a single example of a nocode
experimenting with a new wide mode. For that matter none of the Extra
"wideband digigeeks"who have bleated the same refrain have done
anything but talk either.

Some have amassed almost 80 countries on old-fashioned SSB, though. But that
was when we had some sunspots.

Worn out transparent old smokescreen, all of it.

As is this "bandwidtj based frequency plan" thing. Note that it would
essentially
knock AM and NFM off much of amateur HF. Note also that besides drastically
widening the 'phone subbands, it cuts down the incentive to get an Extra.

Most of all, note the unsubstantiated statements like 'by 2010, 30% will be
Novice operators' and '80% of hams on HF radiate a medium bandwidth signal' and
such. Where do these numbers come from? No response.

One type of amateur HF wideband "experimentation" I know of is some folks
fooling around with "enhanced SSB", which is plain old SSB with the frequency
range widenend to up to 9 kHz. Some call it "single wideband". There's also
some digital voice experimentation going on, but the added complexity doesn't
seem to give addded results. Yet.

And to answer your question: Yes, you can put a voice signal (digitized)
through a 500 Hz pass band. You just need a modulation scheme meant for that
application, and the tradeoff will come in the form of needing a really good
S/N and/or more than real-time to send the message.

73 de Jim, N2EY

February 4th 04, 08:37 PM

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message
.com...
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
om...

There's virtually NO new-mode experimentation going on anywhere in any
ham bands. We have high bands where all sorts of "multimedia" wideband
ops are already quite legal. But all we hear is the talk, the walk
simply isn't happening. Why would it be any different on the HF
bands??

Usually this mantra pops up by some of the no code faction who
has tried to promote the idea that "experimenters" in new mode
technologies would somehow come out of the woodwork IF there was
no code test to keep them off of 20M phone.

Go figure!

It's been something like twelve years since the first of the piles of
nocodes hit the bands 30Mhz. Mayber it's happened and I missed it but
I have yet to see or hear of a single example of a nocode
experimenting with a new wide mode. For that matter none of the Extra
"wideband digigeeks"who have bleated the same refrain have done
anything but talk either.

Is PSK31 chopped liver? :-)

When did a 31 Hz wide mode become "wideband"?

Martinez' innovation comes from scaling current wideband data
communications at high rates to the slow, real-time rates of
amateur radio environments. That involved some good application
of Information Theory and other things, not in being spoon-fed
How To Do It from the pages of QST.

Maybe you don't recognize Peter Martinez, G3PLX?

I musta missed this one too, when did the FCC start passing out Extras
to Brits??

"Brits?" The FCC has no jurisdiction to citizen-residents of the
United Kingdom. Did you miss out on geography and civics
classes olde-tymer?

He was experimenting with polyphase shifting networks for SSB
back in 1973.

(a) When did bench-futzing SSB transmitter circuitry have anything to
do with putting a wideband signal on the air?

"Bench-futzing" (as you so quaintly put it in tuff-guy phillytalk) is
essentially necessary to test and confirm a concept in hardware
on the bench.

Since you are unaquainted with radio-electronics design work, I may
have to explain it further for your education. "Bench-futzing" is how
all your ready-made, designed-by-others radio toys get developed.
Those don't spring into existance the moment you wave a plastic
card around in an HRO.

Define "wideband."

The narrowbanders on HF have very old concepts of "wideband"
considering they inhabit rather narrowband pieces of spectrum and
thinking that voice bandwidths of maximum 3 KHz are "wide."

(b) When did SSB become "wideband"?

From Day One of SSB on radio. 12 KHz straight from Type C
Carrier equipment developed for Long Lines. Commercial. All
it needed was the RF end to replace the wires.

Militaries soon picked up on the commercial technique and ran
with that. Four voice-bandwidth channels over one transmitter.
Could easily handle eight TTY circuits and two voice circuits.
All on HF which "CW" (Conventional Wisdom) said couldn't be
done in 1990s even though it was running fine on HF in 1930s.

(c) You might note that phasing schemes for generating ssb signals
have about as much applicability to ham radio today as you have ever
had.

Not only generating them but receiving them, olde-tymer.

Do you recognize the name Dan Tayloe? U.S. Amateur Extra.
Inventor of the Tayloe Mixer, ideally applicable to direct-
conversion receivers with excellent unwanted sideband rejection
if used with a following four-quadrature-phase network. In terms
of your great life experience longevity, an invention that was fairly
recent.

If you bother to look around at the rest of the radio environment,
you might - if mental eyesight is still possible - see some startling
new developments in radio communications that happened in the
last half century. Even as you get red in the face reading this,
there are a hundred million little cellular telephones in use in just
the United States...little full-duplex HTs operating at about 1 GHz,
small enough to easily hold in one hand. Those didn't exist that
tiny, light, or as high in frequency three decades ago. Not an
amateur radio innovation yet it has become a part of worldwide
social culture.

Cordless telephones operate on up to the 5 GHz band now, are
priced affordable for most in consumer electronics stores. Almost
the size of cell phones and include caller ID while operating full-
duplex. You won't recognize the leap in frequency increase
because your radio world stops abruptly at 29.7 MHz and I doubt
you can envision the uniqueness of solid-state RF circuitry, up to
and including very high power solid-state that can be made
modular with hot-swapping replacement of modules while operating
(now the norm in high-power MF to UHF commercial transmitters).
None of it was an amateur radio innovation or invention.

You have, in the past, sneered and scoffed at automatic antenna
tuners yet Collins Radio designed that into the USMC-contract
T-195 that became operational in 1955. First widespread use of the
Bruene Detector for forward-reverse wave detection on HF. Hughes
Aircraft at a Ground Division designed the AN/PRC-104 for the U.S.
military, the basic manpack 20 W HF transceiver that featured an
automatic antenna tuner in a battery-powered rig, operational in
1986. It has higher-powered versions for vehicular installation, still
operational. Imagine that...auto antenna tuning in a portable unit!
Not an amateur radio innovation or invention.

There's still testing going on with digital modulation of short-wave
(HF spectrum) broadcasting but all indications are that it is a
success after four years of such tests. The "CW" (Conventional
Wisdom) pundits kept saying "it won't work, can't work on HF!"
even though it did. Takes no more bandwidth than conventional
AM yet offers more. All due to some innovation and invention by
the "bench-futzers" who applied various techniques and Information
Theory very cleverly. Several different ways are under investigation
as to which one is best on the air. Not from amateur radio.

A quarter million manpack and vehicular radios have been made
and fielded for 30 to 80 MHz use since 1989. Those feature 10
hops per second FHSS with digital voice or data and include
built-in encryption/decryption secure mode in real-time. New versions
are half the size of the old, the old being the same size/weight of
the PRC-104. Not from amateur radio.

The number of handheld transceivers and mobile radios at VHF
and higher in the commercial-government-military world easily
outnumbers those HTs used by amateurs on amateur bands. The
one reason that amateur VHF-and-up equipment is available at low
relative cost is that base market in the non-amateur radio field. Of
course your amateur world doesn't extend above above HF so that
isn't "real" amateur radio.

The Global Positioning Satellite System has become a reality, first
tested in airborne reception in 1971 as NAVSTAR. Now it is a
consumer item in electronics stores, useful to hikers, boaters,
vehicle drivers of many kinds, farmers, among many who don't intend
to drop big boom things (such as ICBMs) on nasties. It's also good
for super-accurate time reference since each of the 24 GPS sats
has a rubidium "atomic clock." Not an amateur radio development.

Speaking of accurate time, there's all sorts (over 30 brands) of "radio
clocks" in consumer electronic stores that update themselves auto-
matically to WWVB every day/night and display the results (including
calendar info) on LCDs. Battery powered, under $30 off-the-shelf.
Definitely not an amateur radio innovation-invention...very narrowband
at 1 Hz digital data rate. :-)

Amateurs nowadays have HF transceivers that display operating
frequency down to 10 Hz increments with "rock-solid" stability.
It is taken for granted as if it was always so, yet only a couple of
decades ago (slightly more) HF transceivers were of the VFO
variety without the most stable rocks in the box. Very few hams
have bothered to know anything but what the acronyms PLL and
DDS mean, couldn't describe the frequency control system if their
DXCC results depended on it. All brought about by commercial
designer "bench-futzes" working with microprocessors and micro-
controllers. May have been amateur radio related although such
frequency control was also incorporated in commercial HF radio
at the same market time.

Log-periodic antennas have been around for a half century, fine
for HF, extremely broadband, useful for when new HF ham bands
are allocated every quarter century or so (last big band increase
was in 1979, latest in 2003). Numerical Electromagnetic Code and
Method-of-Moments E-H Field Theory has been present for over a
dozen years yet amateurs aren't jumping at the chance to use such
computer programs to tailor them to their QTHs. Development
funded by the USN, source code is free.

Well, I have to stand corrected. There just isn't that much innovation
and invention IN amateur radio or BY amateur radio...and hasn't been
for about the last half century.

Sunnavagun!

You keep on beeping, Kellie, tawkin tuff, and praising hum radio
for raising the technical standards and leading the way in radio.
CW gets through when everything else will, therefore it needs to be
kept in the ham testing forever and ever.

LHA / WMD

February 4th 04, 09:47 PM

(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

It's been something like twelve years since the first of the piles of
nocodes hit the bands 30Mhz. Mayber it's happened and I missed it but
I have yet to see or hear of a single example of a nocode
experimenting with a new wide mode. For that matter none of the Extra
"wideband digigeeks"who have bleated the same refrain have done
anything but talk either.

Some have amassed almost 80 countries on old-fashioned SSB, though. But that
was when we had some sunspots.

.. . . pfft . . !

Worn out transparent old smokescreen, all of it.

As is this "bandwidtj based frequency plan" thing. Note that it would
essentially
knock AM and NFM off much of amateur HF. Note also that besides drastically
widening the 'phone subbands, it cuts down the incentive to get an Extra.

It's just plain goofy. She's advocating a new structure to "fix" the
current structure which ain't broke.

So is the ARRL by the way. They have a committee beavering away on a
similar propsal which is even *worse* than Bonnie's.

Most of all, note the unsubstantiated statements like 'by 2010, 30% will be
Novice operators' and '80% of hams on HF radiate a medium bandwidth signal' and
such. Where do these numbers come from? No response.

What "Novices" with HF phone privs?? Mindless leap ahead. She's
playing ham politician but she's no good at the art.

One type of amateur HF wideband "experimentation" I know of is some folks
fooling around with "enhanced SSB", which is plain old SSB with the frequency
range widenend to up to 9 kHz. Some call it "single wideband".

That garbage is simply ssb with tweeters, "hi-fi ssb", as if. Has
nothing to do with wideband digital ops. This kind of nonsense
periodically comes and goes, there have been at least a couple passes
at "supermodulation" schemes. They silently died and nobody went to
the funerals.

There's also
some digital voice experimentation going on, but the added complexity doesn't
seem to give addded results. Yet.

The broadcasters have been putting an experimental 10 Khz wide AM mode
called "DRM"on the air for a year or so. Runs data, text & "hi-fi"
audio, no image or video so even at 10Khz wide it isn't a true
multimedia mode. Existing AM/FM, swl and ham rcvrs will not process
DRM signals without extensive mods and a 'puter *or* a
built-to-purpose rcvr the way I understand it. So as has usually been
the case with the introduction of innovations in recent decades the
commercials are already there at least on an experimental basis. It'll
be interesting to see how well DRM flies, it just might work well for
all I know but it's gotta survive the costs then the crud in the swl
bands.

To get anything like DRM running in the ham bands it'll have to
impress large numbers of hams enough on a performance basis to
convince them (us) to adopt a new mode which is completely
incompatible with the existing equipment hams use. Historically that
trick has never worked.

And to answer your question: Yes, you can put a voice signal (digitized)
through a 500 Hz pass band. You just need a modulation scheme meant for that
application, and the tradeoff will come in the form of needing a really good
S/N and/or more than real-time to send the message.

A requirement to have very good S/N ratios in the HF ham bands is two
strikes against a mode like this right out of the box. Dealing with
the realtime issue is probably survivable.

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv

February 4th 04, 09:51 PM

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

I have yet to see or hear of a single example of a nocode
experimenting with a new wide mode. For that matter none of the Extra
"wideband digigeeks"who have bleated the same refrain have done
anything but talk either.

Is PSK31 chopped liver? :-)

When did a 31 Hz wide mode become "wideband"?

Martinez' innovation comes from scaling current wideband data
communications at high rates to the slow, real-time rates of
amateur radio environments. That involved some good application
of Information Theory and other things, not in being spoon-fed
How To Do It from the pages of QST.

I noted that you didn't really provide an answer to the question. A
comment was made about wide band modes. You responded with something
about PSK-31. Now you go into what Peter Martinez scaled. You haven't
address the comment on wide band modes.

I snipped the rest of your lecture since it didn't really deal with what
was asked.

Dave K8MN

February 5th 04, 12:05 AM

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Please refer to the new updated color chart of the frequency plan.

Did that. For one your "30M bandplan" would require both ITU and FCC
approval to implement. Good luck with that one Bonnie.

And that's just the beginning.

Right: I haven't rummaged thru it in real depth and I don't intend to
but I'll just betcha there are more similar instances of conflicts
with the ITU regs.

Not a big problem at all, most of ITU doesn't really care anyway.

If you can use technology to shoehorn a voice into 500Hz,
then
you can transmit it anywhere in the band. You may laugh, but my
experience
working with commercial DSP digital modulation systems proves to me that
it
can happen in Amateur Radio.

I poked around, she's apparently big on "pack radio", using digital
military HF "tactical" gear is one piece of it. She doesn't seem to
understand the collections of "differences" . . ?

Obviously not.

Of course it can. But will it? If the 'phone bands are as
drastically widened as
proposed, why should anyone bother with 500 Hz processed voice
when they have so much room for regular SSB?

Is it even possible to compress digitized voice down to 500Hz?

In theory, yes. There are tradeoffs, of course.

And practice is another thing entirely.

Violation of Shannon's Law?

Not at all. But Shannon forces tradeoffs.

Here's one way to do it....

You're familar with PSK-31, which at the most basic level is a form of
amplitude and phase shift keying. (the amplitude part involves carefully
shutting off the carrier during phase transitions to reduce the bandwidth).

Anyway, with the basic PSK-31 signal you get a certain number of bits
in a 31.5 Hz wide channel. If you use BPSK, the bit rate is the same as
the baud rate. BPSK (binary phase shift keying) simply means the
system recognizes two phase states - 0 and 180 degrees.

But by adding more phase states, we can send more bits in the same
bandwidth. With four states (0, 90, 180, 270), we can send twice as
many bits in the same bandwidth. You can theoretically just keep on
adding phase states and send more bits.

Now since one PSK-31 signal needs only 31.5 Hz, you could in theory fit
about 16 of them in a 500 Hz channel, giving you 16 times as many bits.

Of course anybody who's done real engineering knows that there's
always a tradeoff. And the tradeoff is signal to noise ratio. In the case
of PSK, adding phase states increases the susceptibility to any phase jitter
or noise in the system - receiver, transmitter or path, be it wire or radio or
fiber.

In our present mode-based system in USA, we have a lot of nearly-dormant
band segments.

On HF? Where are they?

There really are a bunch of underutilized spaces in the 160, 80, 15 &
10M bands James. "Spectrum banks for future expansions . . "

Where?

What is not conjecture is the fact that there is no statistical
evidence which indicates that simply having a license to operate HF
somehow equates to those with any new "giveaway" HF ticket actually
putting together HF stations and getting 'em on the air on a 1:1 new
license privs/band occupancy ratio.

BINGO!

And that's not going to change much.

If anything the ratio will get worse. I've seen too many examples of
new-wave 5wpm ex-Tech Extras who have yet to make the first move
toward putting an HF station on the air to believe otherwise.

Also ex-Tech Generals.

I'm not
at all convinced that expanded HF privs is all that much of an
incentive to upgrade these days vs. earlier days. Prolly has more to
do today with the incentive to acquire bragging rights vs. anything to
do with actually operating.

Maybe. Or maybe the license is the easy part and the station is the tough
part.

Quite the opposite is being demonstrated in fact. We already have tons
of experience with, for example, the recent huge increase in the
number of Extra Class licensees which fell out of the reduction in the
code test speed for Extras.

And the reduction in written testing for Extra.

It's all one disgusting big dumbed-down bag of worms.

Which isn't going to change much anytime soon.

I tune the Extra 75/40/20M phone setasides today and the recently
enfranchised don't seem to be there. In volume. If anything the
overall activity level in those setasides is noticeably down from what
it was long before the code test speed was dropped.

Don't forget sunspots.

I'm talking about the much longer term thru the highs and the lows. In
years gone by there was always chatter in the Extra phone setasides,
not with just sunspot-affected dx, but with."locals". After the last
FD I decided to dredge up a ragchew in the 20 phone setaside before I
tore down. Usta be no sweat. I had to tune around for ten minutes
until w3bv came on the air and we yakked for 45 minutes via ground
path.. Mid day, the spots were middling and the dx was there. The only
w's in the space were a small group of 8s & 9s and Alan (keeper of the
k3jh pole) and I. All of us were old 1 x 2s. Message there.

Part of that is simply exhaustion after FD. Often brought about by folks
who don't know how to pace themselves. There's also the few who work
themselves into the ground for the benefit of the sidewalk superintendent
group...

. . The dead spectrum problem has far more to do
with getting the HF-enabled of all flavors off the Internet, off their
dead butts, geting the radios, actually putting the HF antennas up and
getting on the air than it does with any "bandwidth-based frequency
plan" sorts of things.

HEAR HEAR

And *THAT'S* where the problem really is! Fiddling with licenses is
only going to have a minor effect on that, if any. License changes
aren't going to fix anybody's CC&Rs, or suddenly improve the
sunspot number, or empower vast numbers of existing hams to
figure out how to end feed a wire and actually get on the air.

Perfect example of the results of dumbing-down.

Bonnie also dumped her Master Plan into QRZ.com. Bad move. Those guys
make us RRAPers look like wilted lilly nice guys in comparison. Check
it out.

I did.

I notice that she hasn't gone back at anybody with a single rebuttal.

That's changed, but it's basically a preaching session.

73 de Jim, N2EY

February 5th 04, 01:54 AM

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

It's been something like twelve years since the first of the piles of
nocodes hit the bands 30Mhz. Mayber it's happened and I missed it but
I have yet to see or hear of a single example of a nocode
experimenting with a new wide mode. For that matter none of the Extra
"wideband digigeeks"who have bleated the same refrain have done
anything but talk either.

Some have amassed almost 80 countries on old-fashioned SSB, though. But
that was when we had some sunspots.

. . . pfft . . !

Real DXers don't need sunspots....

Worn out transparent old smokescreen, all of it.

As is this "bandwidtj based frequency plan" thing. Note that it would
essentially
knock AM and NFM off much of amateur HF. Note also that besides drastically
widening the 'phone subbands, it cuts down the incentive to get an Extra.

It's just plain goofy. She's advocating a new structure to "fix" the
current structure which ain't broke.

That's exactly right. Extra class CW/digital subbands would be cut down to 10
kHz per band...

So is the ARRL by the way. They have a committee beavering away on a
similar propsal which is even *worse* than Bonnie's.

Where?

KQ6XA's proposal is much worse than ARRL's. Basically she takes the ARRL
proposal and
does more of many of the bad things.

Most of all, note the unsubstantiated statements like 'by 2010, 30% will be
Novice operators' and '80% of hams on HF radiate a medium bandwidth signal'
and such. Where do these numbers come from? No response.

What "Novices" with HF phone privs??

That's part of the proposal. Remember that she *starts* with the ARRL proposal
and goes
on from there, as if the ARRL proposal isn't enough.

Mindless leap ahead. She's
playing ham politician but she's no good at the art.

Don't bet the farm that somebody won't see the buzzwords rather than the
reality and think
it's a good idea.

One type of amateur HF wideband "experimentation" I know of is some folks
fooling around with "enhanced SSB", which is plain old SSB with the
frequency range widenend to up to 9 kHz. Some call it "single wideband".

That garbage is simply ssb with tweeters, "hi-fi ssb", as if. Has
nothing to do with wideband digital ops. This kind of nonsense
periodically comes and goes, there have been at least a couple passes
at "supermodulation" schemes. They silently died and nobody went to
the funerals.

That's my point exactly.

There's also
some digital voice experimentation going on, but the added complexity
doesn't seem to give addded results. Yet.

The broadcasters have been putting an experimental 10 Khz wide AM mode
called "DRM"on the air for a year or so. Runs data, text & "hi-fi"
audio, no image or video so even at 10Khz wide it isn't a true
multimedia mode. Existing AM/FM, swl and ham rcvrs will not process
DRM signals without extensive mods and a 'puter *or* a
built-to-purpose rcvr the way I understand it. So as has usually been
the case with the introduction of innovations in recent decades the
commercials are already there at least on an experimental basis. It'll
be interesting to see how well DRM flies, it just might work well for
all I know but it's gotta survive the costs then the crud in the swl
bands.

Of course. And they miss the fact that their target audience needs simple,
not complex. The developed world will listen to them via the 'net anyway.

To get anything like DRM running in the ham bands it'll have to
impress large numbers of hams enough on a performance basis to
convince them (us) to adopt a new mode which is completely
incompatible with the existing equipment hams use. Historically that
trick has never worked.

Bingo. What's needed is an innovation in digivoice like PSK-31 was
to RTTY.

And to answer your question: Yes, you can put a voice signal (digitized)
through a 500 Hz pass band. You just need a modulation scheme meant for
that application, and the tradeoff will come in the form of needing a really
good S/N and/or more than real-time to send the message.

A requirement to have very good S/N ratios in the HF ham bands is two
strikes against a mode like this right out of the box. Dealing with
the realtime issue is probably survivable.

Yup. Which is why we haven't seen it yet. The commercial/military folks
have a different game to play, of course.

73 de Jim, N2EY

February 5th 04, 05:32 AM

In article , (N2EY)
writes:

I notice that she hasn't gone back at anybody with a single rebuttal.

That's changed, but it's basically a preaching session.

Does this mean we can expect another Sermon On The Antenna Mount
soon?

Show us the Righteousness of the True Path...

LHA / WMD

February 5th 04, 05:32 AM

In article , Dave Heil male impersonator
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

I have yet to see or hear of a single example of a nocode
experimenting with a new wide mode. For that matter none of the Extra
"wideband digigeeks"who have bleated the same refrain have done
anything but talk either.

Is PSK31 chopped liver? :-)

When did a 31 Hz wide mode become "wideband"?

Martinez' innovation comes from scaling current wideband data
communications at high rates to the slow, real-time rates of
amateur radio environments. That involved some good application
of Information Theory and other things, not in being spoon-fed
How To Do It from the pages of QST.

I noted that you didn't really provide an answer to the question.

The question was ambiguous and did not define "wide."

Your name isn't "Kelly," sweetums. Ya gotta live near philly, eat
hoagies and buy "gaz" for da car in order to impersonate Kelly.

Got that?

A comment was made about wide band modes. You responded with something
about PSK-31. Now you go into what Peter Martinez scaled.

You wouldn't know Martinez if he had a leather suit instead of scales.

Hello? Ever hear of Shannon's Law and the relationship of data rate
versus bandwidth? It's fairly simple math and proportional. That
means it can be SCALED as in relationship of numbers.

You haven't address the comment on wide band modes.

You want an address? [I'm not available...]

How about the Gettysburg Address? "Four score and seven something."

I snipped the rest of your lecture since it didn't really deal with what
was asked.

Good, then you will quit trying to impersonate Kelly.

The foam at the mouth must have been something...you sent the same
thing to me in private mail. I snipped that. It was lower than the usual
spam in private mail.

LHA / WMD

February 5th 04, 12:38 PM

On 05 Feb 2004 05:32:30 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article , Dave Heil male impersonator
writes:

LOL, SCAOTP

OK, Len, that's it - you owe me a new keyboard for that one.....this
one's covered in coffee now, an^% jhfsd75 87t8 *^%^ 94w057y

snip

LHA / WMD

%^& 73, $%Leo ^%%6g h76347&dhgfhh

February 5th 04, 02:56 PM

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil male impersonator
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

I have yet to see or hear of a single example of a nocode
experimenting with a new wide mode. For that matter none of the Extra
"wideband digigeeks"who have bleated the same refrain have done
anything but talk either.

Is PSK31 chopped liver? :-)

When did a 31 Hz wide mode become "wideband"?

Martinez' innovation comes from scaling current wideband data
communications at high rates to the slow, real-time rates of
amateur radio environments. That involved some good application
of Information Theory and other things, not in being spoon-fed
How To Do It from the pages of QST.

I noted that you didn't really provide an answer to the question.

The question was ambiguous and did not define "wide."

Your name isn't "Kelly," sweetums. Ya gotta live near philly, eat
hoagies and buy "gaz" for da car in order to impersonate Kelly.

Got that?

I've had it all along. I never for a moment believed that I was anyone
named Kelly. The confusion is yours.

A comment was made about wide band modes. You responded with something
about PSK-31. Now you go into what Peter Martinez scaled.

You wouldn't know Martinez if he had a leather suit instead of scales.

Really? I beg to differ. At any rate, how would you be in a position
to know what I know?

Hello? Ever hear of Shannon's Law and the relationship of data rate
versus bandwidth? It's fairly simple math and proportional. That
means it can be SCALED as in relationship of numbers.

That is simply more misdirection on your part. Tell us about the new
wideband modes.

You haven't address the comment on wide band modes.

You want an address? [I'm not available...]

It is apparent that you are unavailable. You don't seem to be able to
address the question about wideband modes. Tell us about PSK-31 as a
wideband mode.

Dave K8MN

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Phase frequency Detector	Deepthi	Homebrew	48	June 3rd 04 12:01 AM
BETTER HF FREQUENCY PLAN for AMATEUR RADIO	Expeditionradio	Policy	3	January 27th 04 10:50 PM
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade	Gene Gardner	Homebrew	2	January 15th 04 02:17 AM
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade	Gene Gardner	Homebrew	0	January 13th 04 05:28 PM
Low reenlistment rate	charlesb	Policy	54	September 18th 03 01:57 PM

Menu

About Us