Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability...
 

John Smith I wrote:
Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data
communications, strange ...

Seems like in a REAL disaster, the need to xmit satellite maps of flood
areas, earthquake damage to bridges, structures, fires, hostiles?,
technical docs, medical documents/instructions/directions, signs, plans,
email, web data, etc. would be most appreciated if not desperately needed.

While VHF+ (satellite comms would be good!) may be suitable for some
flat terrain and moderate distances, availability of HF communications,
surely, would be a requirement in many situations

A laptop consumes VERY LITTLE power and can turn any xceiver into a VERY
powerful data transmission tool; most today would consider it a
requirement rather than a luxury.

However, PSK is highly unsuitable and the development of REAL tools
remains for the future ... new minds with up-to-date technology, methods
and skills will accomplishing this.

The future is coming ... like it or not.

JS

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 18, 9:26?pm, John Smith I wrote:
John Smith I wrote:

Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data
communications, strange ...

Seems like in a REAL disaster, the need to xmit satellite maps of flood
areas, earthquake damage to bridges, structures, fires, hostiles?,
technical docs, medical documents/instructions/directions, signs, plans,
email, web data, etc. would be most appreciated if not desperately needed.

Perhaps, JS, perhaps, but don't rule out the established
infrastructure. Right after the 17 Jan 94 Northridge earthquake
here, FEMA folks brought in a bunch of equipment doing
pictures (in high speed, BTW) via satellite relay. One of those
uses was a revolving pan around messages shown in video
from way out of town...written in their own handwriting/printing.

HF ham bands have typical TOTAL bandwidths of 500 down to
100 KHz. Unless you've got some "4th dimension" gizmotchy
(as yet unknown to the rest of technical mankind), ya just
ain't gonna get much "high speed" on HF. The bandwidth
just does NOT exist for what you want.

Now, if you have such a marvelous ultra-minimal bandwidth
"high-speed" modulator for HF, run, do not walk to the
nearest California Auxiliary Communications Service office
and offer it to them. It ain't all that far from Stockton to
Sacramento. The ACS considers *all* forms of
communications for disasters, big or small, and will be
eager for input on miracle methods. Dinna wurra, laddie,
if ya win the Nobel Prize for it, I will volunteer to write
your acceptance speech in Swedish to deliver to KIng
Gustav and all the others in Stockholm. [a pronunciation
guide will cost extra, though]

Until then, amateur HF still has 60 to 300 WPM text data
to send teleprinter communications, even en masse via
packet. That DOES fit into the narrow confines of HF.
What is left of the telephone network after a major, major
disaster can send limited-frame-speed video like what
was done from Kuwait-Iraq in 1991, all over the low-
resolution, narrow-band circuits on the telephone system.

73, Len AF6AY



While VHF+ (satellite comms would be good!) may be suitable for some
flat terrain and moderate distances, availability of HF communications,
surely, would be a requirement in many situations

A laptop consumes VERY LITTLE power and can turn any xceiver into a VERY
powerful data transmission tool; most today would consider it a
requirement rather than a luxury.

However, PSK is highly unsuitable and the development of REAL tools
remains for the future ... new minds with up-to-date technology, methods
and skills will accomplishing this.

The future is coming ... like it or not.

JS

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability...
 

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 1:26 am, John Smith I wrote:
John Smith I wrote:

Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data
communications, strange ...
debate I call it whing maybe you are being polite


The future is coming ... like it or not.

ready or not too

JS

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 7:45?am, "an_old_friend" wrote:
On Mar 19, 1:26 am, John Smith I wrote: John Smith I wrote:

Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data
communications, strange ...

debate I call it whing maybe you are being polite

Not "whining." It's a technical barrier to reach "high speed"
approaching T1 rates on small slices of bandwidth. ALL radio
services face that same problem.

If at least 1 MHz of the 10m band could be used - at the
expense of ALL users of that portion of EM spectra, there
would be a chance for at least NVIS propagation at high
rates. That is NOT likely to happen for a minority of High
Speed fans to go against the overwhelming majority.

Mere resistance to the establishment is NOT a "just cause."
One MUST justify that resistance in order to begin changing
things. That justification is what the Students Wildly
Indignant about Nearly Everything (SWINE) usually overlook.

For "high speed" (really medium-low speed), the commercial
side of communications has developed the 56 KBPS modem
that works on a 3 KHz bandwidth. That is starting to bump
up against Shannon's Law, an extremely real technical
barrier. [it doesn't exceed it but it is close enough to almost
reach out and touch it...]

All electronics and radio works by the same Laws of Physics.
Those Laws are immune to the feelings, emotions, and
general imprecations of mankind. One MUST learn those
Laws and work WITH them in order to get them to work FOR
you.

73, Len AF6AY

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability...
 

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 1:26 am, John Smith I wrote:
John Smith I wrote:

Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data
communications, strange ...

Seems like in a REAL disaster, the need to xmit satellite maps of flood
areas, earthquake damage to bridges, structures, fires, hostiles?,
technical docs, medical documents/instructions/directions, signs, plans,
email, web data, etc. would be most appreciated if not desperately needed.


You are overlooking the digital modes already available, for example,
SSTV and Fax for images. Although not fast, how many pictures of the
same item do you really need immediately for example? It is not going
to be a hardship if it takes a couple of minutes for the image to
transfer rather than a couple of seconds.

Text data (documents, instructions, directions, etc) are easily
handled by error correcting modes now available. Granted these modes
aren't used much but all the sender and recipient have to do is agree
on which mode.


While VHF+ (satellite comms would be good!) may be suitable for some
flat terrain and moderate distances, availability of HF communications,
surely, would be a requirement in many situations

A laptop consumes VERY LITTLE power and can turn any xceiver into a VERY
powerful data transmission tool; most today would consider it a
requirement rather than a luxury.


Depends on how hard up for power you are. In some cases, no problem.
In other cases, power will be so limited that you would only send the
most urgent of messages.

However, PSK is highly unsuitable and the development of REAL tools
remains for the future ... new minds with up-to-date technology, methods
and skills will accomplishing this.


There are tools that will meet these needs today. They are not as
fast as you would like them to be but they do work.

The future is coming ... like it or not.

JS

To shape the future, we need to understand the abilities of the
present. I'd suggest getting out there and working SSTV (ATV on UHF),
packet, RTTY, PSK31, AMTOR, PACTOR (I, II, and III), Hellschreiber and
the rest of the myriad "flavors" of digital out there. There is even a
variant of PSK that includes some error checking. Learn first hand
their strengths and weaknesses. Without this background, a developer
will be handicapped in coming up with something better. If he is not
knowledgeable on what is out there, he may end up "re-inventing the
wheel." If he is not knowledgeable about the strengths and weaknesses
of current modes, his new mode may end up having some of the same
issues.

One can't just wave a magic wand and say "let it be so."

Dee, N8UZE

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability...
 

Dee Flint wrote:

...
You are overlooking the digital modes already available, for example,
SSTV and Fax for images. Although not fast, how many pictures of the
same item do you really need immediately for example? It is not going
to be a hardship if it takes a couple of minutes for the image to
transfer rather than a couple of seconds.

Text data (documents, instructions, directions, etc) are easily
handled by error correcting modes now available. Granted these modes
aren't used much but all the sender and recipient have to do is agree
on which mode.

Yes, like the "Model A" built by Ford, time to move up to new standards!
Surely time for the "Model B" anyway!

Depends on how hard up for power you are. In some cases, no problem.
In other cases, power will be so limited that you would only send the
most urgent of messages.

Well if you are that hardup for power, you darn well are NOT going to
let some waste it hammering out CW for EXTENDED periods of time,
transmitting data at LOW speeds or attempting to use voice and wasting
BOTH time AND power!


There are tools that will meet these needs today. They are not as
fast as you would like them to be but they do work.

There are still horses around but I'd rather drive a car ...

To shape the future, we need to understand the abilities of the
present. I'd suggest getting out there and working SSTV (ATV on UHF),

To shape the future we need progressive people to deal with it, the old,
the lame, the outdated, the slow, etc. must be moved aside. However,
when it comes to "antique people" they can be quite stubborn and
difficult to move aside! Gentle force must be applied ...

One can't just wave a magic wand and say "let it be so."

No, and we are working on the changes ... well, some are just arguing
that all is impossible, not worth doing, or is a waste of time ... but
what doesn't have its' "Nay Sayers?"

The future comes ... today it seems one day closer ...

JS

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 2:41 pm, John Smith I wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:


[snip]

To shape the future, we need to understand the abilities of the
present. I'd suggest getting out there and working SSTV (ATV on UHF),


To shape the future we need progressive people to deal with it, the old,
the lame, the outdated, the slow, etc. must be moved aside. However,
when it comes to "antique people" they can be quite stubborn and
difficult to move aside! Gentle force must be applied ...


It is more productive if these progressive people understand the
present methodologies and their strengths and weaknesses. The
strengths need to be conserved and the weaknesses eliminated,
hopefully without introducing new weaknesses.

Sometimes those "antique people" have valuable insights. Shoving them
aside could actually be detrimental to the development of new modes.
They are the ones who have the experience to supply information on
what weaknesses may need to be addressed. From a less altruistic
point of view, they may be the ones to have the money to fund the
progressive people.

Dee, N8UZE

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability...
 

Dee Flint wrote:

...
It is more productive if these progressive people understand the
present methodologies and their strengths and weaknesses. The
strengths need to be conserved and the weaknesses eliminated,
hopefully without introducing new weaknesses.
...
Dee, N8UZE


Dee:

This whole stance-proposal of yours is quite ridiculous, preposterous
and obviously only formed to put forth your own personal preferences ...

SSTV is but one GLARING example, sstv is stupid in the age of .mpg,
..avi, .divx, etc. with real-time encoding ...

The least you could do is take a class or read a few good books on data
compaction of speech, text, images, movies, etc. ...

You appear as a child discussing college physics ...

Don't even attempt to BS a fellow BS'er! 8-)

Regards,
JS

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 3:28 pm, John Smith I wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:

...

It is more productive if these progressive people understand the
present methodologies and their strengths and weaknesses. The
strengths need to be conserved and the weaknesses eliminated,
hopefully without introducing new weaknesses.
...
Dee, N8UZE

Dee:

This whole stance-proposal of yours is quite ridiculous, preposterous
and obviously only formed to put forth your own personal preferences ...

SSTV is but one GLARING example, sstv is stupid in the age of .mpg,
.avi, .divx, etc. with real-time encoding ...


In this particular subpost, I am not addressing any one mode per se.
I am discussing the issue of ignoring old methods and old people
simply because they are old. Much is lost if one takes that approach.

Often the best results are obtained with a mix of the old and new and
the synergy between new peopl and old people.

You are simply denying this possiblity.

As far as personal preferences go, the digital modes are of no
interest to me. I've experimented with what's available so I can help
the beginners get started. Hopefully one of these people will go on
to develop the new and better modes that you want.

The least you could do is take a class or read a few good books on data
compaction of speech, text, images, movies, etc. ...

You appear as a child discussing college physics ...


Perhaps so. However, I do know that the compacted mpgs, avis, etc
that I download from the internet are large even when compacted and
that's for short files. Files of several megabytes take minutes even
on a high speed cable connection. I'd hate to think how that would
slow down over an HF path with all the path noise, interference,
static, etc. Afterall, error checking would be required for any
critical messages.

Don't even attempt to BS a fellow BS'er! 8-)


I can believe you're a BS'er!

You repeatedly imply or outright state that this is simple. Well
publish the software and algorithm. If you don't have the skills,
find someone who does and get them to do it. Get it out in the public
so people can give it a field trial. I'd be more than willing to try
it out.

This is an area where we would be HAPPY to be proved wrong.

The so-called "naysayers" are simply pointing out the issues that must
be considered and overcome to make this happen.

Dee, N8UZE

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability...
 

Dee Flint wrote:

... [snipped for size/time]
Dee, N8UZE


No one is advocating ignoring/dismissing/discarding "something" just
because of age ... rather, the only way I would chuck technology is if
it has outlived it usefulness ... however, a museum may be suitable for
a WHOLE BUNCH of it!

There is really NO reason to develop anything to set a standard and
start using efficient digital communications tomorrow ... as I have
pointed out, Ogg Vorbis is open source code/algorithms, it offers
excellent compression and is way more than is needed for mere speech.
In fact, many open source utilities are already open to use/modification
and suitable for adaptation to amateur needs ...

It is kind of like when Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs founded desktop
computing on a desktop sized computer--all the hardware was already
there in place, most of the software existed as examples from other HUGE
computers which were predecessors ... so is it here, set up a simple
interface from sound card output to mike or line in on an xceiver and an
interface from rig out to sound card line in, load up some software and
off you go into digital speech--no einsteins needed, you can pull most
everything off a shelf or download it from the internet (in the amateur
tradition, would be nice if you knew enough to homebrew the
interfaces!), get a high school/college programmer interested in your
project--off ya go!

The nit-picking naysayers will keep attempting to chuck a stick in the
spokes of progress, of course this does provide MAJOR HUMOR while
SERIOUSLY degrading their credibility--use "stick chucking" at your own
discretion!

Regards,
JS

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 4:26�pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
On Mar 19, 3:28 pm, John Smith I wrote:





Dee Flint wrote:

* ...

It is more productive if these progressive people understand the
present methodologies and their strengths and weaknesses. *The
strengths need to be conserved and the weaknesses eliminated,
hopefully without introducing new weaknesses.
...
Dee, N8UZE

Dee:

This whole stance-proposal of yours is quite ridiculous, preposterous
and obviously only formed to put forth your own personal preferences ...

SSTV is but one GLARING example, sstv is stupid in the age of .mpg,
.avi, .divx, etc. with real-time encoding ...

In this particular subpost, I am not addressing any one mode per se.
I am discussing the issue of ignoring old methods and old people
simply because they are old. *Much is lost if one takes that approach.

Often the best results are obtained with a mix of the old and new and
the synergy between new peopl and old people.

You are simply denying this possiblity.

As far as personal preferences go, the digital modes are of no
interest to me. *I've experimented with what's available so I can help
the beginners get started. *Hopefully one of these people will go on
to develop the new and better modes that you want.

The least you could do is take a class or read a few good books on data
compaction of speech, text, images, movies, etc. ...

You appear as a child discussing college physics ...

Perhaps so. *However, I do know that the compacted mpgs, avis, etc
that I download from the internet are large even when compacted and
that's for short files. *Files of several megabytes take minutes even
on a high speed cable connection. *I'd hate to think how that would
slow down over an HF path with all the path noise, interference,
static, etc. *Afterall, error checking would be required for any
critical messages.

Don't even attempt to BS a fellow BS'er! *8-)

I can believe you're a BS'er!

You repeatedly imply or outright state that this is simple. *Well
publish the software and algorithm. *If you don't have the skills,
find someone who does and get them to do it. *Get it out in the public
so people can give it a field trial. *I'd be more than willing to try
it out.

This is an area where we would be HAPPY to be proved wrong.

The so-called "naysayers" are simply pointing out the issues that must
be considered and overcome to make this happen.

Dee, N8UZE- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dee is an elietest bitch to put it mildly and one those that has
brought ham radio to edge of extintion where it stands now and who
willing prolonged the code wars twhile agreing NoCode victory was
certain at some point.

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 4:10 pm, John Smith I wrote:

. . . so is it here, set up a simple
interface from sound card output to mike or line in on an xceiver and an
interface from rig out to sound card line in, load up some software and
off you go into digital speech--no einsteins needed, you can pull most
everything off a shelf or download it from the internet (in the amateur
tradition, would be nice if you knew enough to homebrew the
interfaces!), get a high school/college programmer interested in your
project--off ya go!

A piece of cake eh? That's good. When do you expect to post a beta
version?

. . . .

Regards,
JS

w3rv

only in your dreams markie
 

On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:49:04 -0400, wrote:



youmst admit its prepetitious.

only in your drams markie
 

On 20 Mar 2007 10:22:28 -0700, an old friend wrote:
On Mar 20, 12:59 pm, wrote:
On Mar 19, 4:10 pm, John Smith I wrote:

. . . so is it here, set up a simple
interface from sound card output to mike or line in on an xceiver and an
interface from rig out to sound card line in, load up some software and
off you go into digital speech--no einsteins needed, you can pull most
everything off a shelf or download it from the internet (in the amateur
tradition, would be nice if you knew enough to homebrew the
interfaces!), get a high school/college programmer interested in your
project--off ya go!

A piece of cake eh? That's good. When do you expect to post a beta
version?
beta of what? it is well past a beta edtion in most case
onlyin your dreams

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

On Mar 19, 11:49�am, wrote:
On 19 Mar 2007 10:07:30 -0700, "

wrote:
On Mar 19, 7:45?am, "an_old_friend" wrote:
On Mar 19, 1:26 am, John Smith I wrote: John Smith I wrote:

Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data
communications, strange ...

debate I call it whing maybe you are being polite

* Not "whining." *It's a technical barrier to reach "high speed"
* approaching T1 rates on small slices of bandwidth. *ALL radio
* services face that same problem.

well I plead a matter dates at first it did just seem to be whing more
debate like discussion seems to ensued

Mark, please slow down on replies and try to think of
what you wrote. Now, I'm fairly good at interpreting
what was written, including intent, but that single
sentence has me baffled.

I will repeat. RATE of information conveyed in ANY radio
or wired communications service is a function of the
comm circuit BANDWIDTH. That is a definite law of
information theory.

Except for the amateur 10m band, the bandspace on
amateur HF frequencies is LIMITED for any "high speed"
(presumably Internet-quality data) communications.
That presents a technical barrier that is immune to
human legislation, emotions, desires, whatever.

"High speed" information transfer is itself a subjective
label. An adaptation of the common 56 KBPS method
used by most modems might put such rates into US
amateur radio but right now the regulations hold it to
an equivalent 300 WPM rate. Now, to some that is
"high speed." To someone selling DSL or "better"
service it is very low speed.

Just saying "high speed" without quantifying it doesn't
make it an argument pro or con. Saying one "must have
high speed" isn't an argument or debate or discussion,
it is just a troll, a phrase looking to be a flame war
igniter.

73, Len AF6AY

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Mar 19, 11:49?am, wrote:
On 19 Mar 2007 10:07:30 -0700, "

wrote:
On Mar 19, 7:45?am, "an_old_friend" wrote:
On Mar 19, 1:26 am, John Smith I wrote:
John Smith I wrote:

Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data
communications, strange ...

debate I call it whing maybe you are being polite

Not "whining." It's a technical barrier to reach "high speed"
approaching T1 rates on small slices of bandwidth. ALL radio
services face that same problem.

well I plead a matter dates at first it did just seem to be whing more
debate like discussion seems to ensued

Mark, please slow down on replies and try to think of
what you wrote.

with the punce gotcha he wonders why I simple don't bother to ty impoving my
spelling do u hav anyting cognet two say?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability ...
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
.com...
Dee Flint wrote:

... [snipped for size/time]
Dee, N8UZE


No one is advocating ignoring/dismissing/discarding "something" just
because of age ... rather, the only way I would chuck technology is if it
has outlived it usefulness ... however, a museum may be suitable for a
WHOLE BUNCH of it!

There is really NO reason to develop anything to set a standard and start
using efficient digital communications tomorrow ... as I have pointed out,
Ogg Vorbis is open source code/algorithms, it offers excellent compression
and is way more than is needed for mere speech. In fact, many open source
utilities are already open to use/modification and suitable for adaptation
to amateur needs ...

It is kind of like when Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs founded desktop
computing on a desktop sized computer--all the hardware was already there
in place, most of the software existed as examples from other HUGE
computers which were predecessors ... so is it here, set up a simple
interface from sound card output to mike or line in on an xceiver and an
interface from rig out to sound card line in, load up some software and
off you go into digital speech--no einsteins needed, you can pull most
everything off a shelf or download it from the internet (in the amateur
tradition, would be nice if you knew enough to homebrew the interfaces!),
get a high school/college programmer interested in your project--off ya
go!

The nit-picking naysayers will keep attempting to chuck a stick in the
spokes of progress, of course this does provide MAJOR HUMOR while
SERIOUSLY degrading their credibility--use "stick chucking" at your own
discretion!

Regards,
JS
pure whine and pure BS
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

only in your dreasms markrie
 

only in your dreams woger


http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--

only in your dreams woger
 

only in your dreams woger


http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--

Policy of resistance to HS data xmission, progress, viability...
 

Dee Flint wrote:

[A WHOLE bunch ...]

Dee:

There are a few notable examples of forward thinking men. Only a fool
would NOT recognize Cecil as a GLARING example--an older gentleman with
an open mind, exploratory nature, apparently good mechanical, "present
theory", math and other skills. And, look at Roy with his program
EZNEC--a NOTABLE offering! Even Richard with his cryptic, antagonistic
and provoking posts helps spur complex thought and useful responses.

Age doesn't negate a single thing, necessarily ...

You, yourself, have at least suggested a moderate willingness to assist
and welcome newbies, you probably have an affect on others who engage
you--together, as a team, we will work this all out ... much discussion
usually takes place before meaningful advancements are accomplished.

There isn't really anything wrong with "boat-anchor maintainers" and
appliance users--often they offer interesting facts and chat--not all
here needs be dead serious, some can be enjoyed with a glass of wine ...
one can spend an enjoyable hour or two just rag-chewing ... even a
cocktail party is best when "there is someone for everyone."

Regards,
JS