Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1391 – April 8, 2004
CB NEWS: VK CB TELNET NODES ON THE AIR Some interesting news about C-B -- Citizens Band radio -- down-under. Unlike the United States where C-B operation is hap-hazard with no structure, Australia has a CB Packet Radio System that ***rivals anything that ham radio has ever set up. And now, it is being linked over the Internet to C-B operations in other nations including many Europe. This is making it possible for Australian C-B'ers to connect with numerous other C-B stations throughout the world using radio and Telnet. Q-News Graham Kemp, VK4BB, has the nodes and the frequencies: -- AUS002 Warren reports in Australia there are so far several CB Packet Radio Nodes and BBS's. These are AU4BNE Node 27.225 Usb Brisbane Q'ld, AUS011 BBS 27.225 Usb Brisbane, AU6PER Node 476.950 Fm Perth W.A and AU6BBS BBS 476.950 Fm Perth. For the Amateur Radio Newsline, In Graham Kemp, VK4BB, of Q-News Australia. -- So if you are scanning the 11 meter Citizens Band and hear digital signals, now you know exactly what they are. (Q-News) |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
William wrote:
From: Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1391 – April 8, 2004 CB NEWS: VK CB TELNET NODES ON THE AIR Some interesting news about C-B -- Citizens Band radio -- down-under. Unlike the United States where C-B operation is hap-hazard with no structure, Australia has a CB Packet Radio System that ***rivals anything that ham radio has ever set up. And now, it is being linked over the Internet to C-B operations in other nations including many Europe. This is making it possible for Australian C-B'ers to connect with numerous other C-B stations throughout the world using radio and Telnet. Q-News Graham Kemp, VK4BB, has the nodes and the frequencies: -- AUS002 Warren reports in Australia there are so far several CB Packet Radio Nodes and BBS's. These are AU4BNE Node 27.225 Usb Brisbane Q'ld, AUS011 BBS 27.225 Usb Brisbane, AU6PER Node 476.950 Fm Perth W.A and AU6BBS BBS 476.950 Fm Perth. For the Amateur Radio Newsline, In Graham Kemp, VK4BB, of Q-News Australia. -- So if you are scanning the 11 meter Citizens Band and hear digital signals, now you know exactly what they are. (Q-News) I thought Packet was dead? - mike KB3EIA - |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
William wrote: From: Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1391 – April 8, 2004 CB NEWS: VK CB TELNET NODES ON THE AIR Some interesting news about C-B -- Citizens Band radio -- down-under. Unlike the United States where C-B operation is hap-hazard with no structure, Australia has a CB Packet Radio System that ***rivals anything that ham radio has ever set up. And now, it is being linked over the Internet to C-B operations in other nations including many Europe. This is making it possible for Australian C-B'ers to connect with numerous other C-B stations throughout the world using radio and Telnet. Q-News Graham Kemp, VK4BB, has the nodes and the frequencies: -- AUS002 Warren reports in Australia there are so far several CB Packet Radio Nodes and BBS's. These are AU4BNE Node 27.225 Usb Brisbane Q'ld, AUS011 BBS 27.225 Usb Brisbane, AU6PER Node 476.950 Fm Perth W.A and AU6BBS BBS 476.950 Fm Perth. For the Amateur Radio Newsline, In Graham Kemp, VK4BB, of Q-News Australia. -- So if you are scanning the 11 meter Citizens Band and hear digital signals, now you know exactly what they are. (Q-News) I thought Packet was dead? "The reports of its demise are greatly exaggerated..." [paraphrase of Mark Twain's comment on his alleged obituary]] Neither Packet nor BBSs [Bulletin Board Systems] are "dead." They have simply evolved, changed slightly from their original practice. Note that Australia is a whole other continent and somewhat far from your neighborhood. It is not a good thing to evaluate anything in terms of your own experience and what is familiar to you...and certainly not in terms of what you, yourself, particularly desire. LHA / WMD |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: William wrote: From: Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1391 – April 8, 2004 CB NEWS: VK CB TELNET NODES ON THE AIR Some interesting news about C-B -- Citizens Band radio -- down-under. Unlike the United States where C-B operation is hap-hazard with no structure, Australia has a CB Packet Radio System that ***rivals anything that ham radio has ever set up. And now, it is being linked over the Internet to C-B operations in other nations including many Europe. This is making it possible for Australian C-B'ers to connect with numerous other C-B stations throughout the world using radio and Telnet. Q-News Graham Kemp, VK4BB, has the nodes and the frequencies: -- AUS002 Warren reports in Australia there are so far several CB Packet Radio Nodes and BBS's. These are AU4BNE Node 27.225 Usb Brisbane Q'ld, AUS011 BBS 27.225 Usb Brisbane, AU6PER Node 476.950 Fm Perth W.A and AU6BBS BBS 476.950 Fm Perth. For the Amateur Radio Newsline, In Graham Kemp, VK4BB, of Q-News Australia. -- So if you are scanning the 11 meter Citizens Band and hear digital signals, now you know exactly what they are. (Q-News) I thought Packet was dead? "The reports of its demise are greatly exaggerated..." [paraphrase of Mark Twain's comment on his alleged obituary]] Neither Packet nor BBSs [Bulletin Board Systems] are "dead." They have simply evolved, changed slightly from their original practice. Note that Australia is a whole other continent and somewhat far from your neighborhood. It is not a good thing to evaluate anything in terms of your own experience and what is familiar to you...and certainly not in terms of what you, yourself, particularly desire. What do I desire as far as packet operations go? - Mike KB3EIA - |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Coslo wrote:
I thought Packet was dead? Looks like I'll be the first with the wisecrack "Now that it's on CB, packet IS dead!" :-) |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Coslo wrote:
What do I desire as far as packet operations go? One thing I used to desire was essentially usenews without the bad words and spam. But 1200 baud just doesn't cut it anymore. Slower as there is a lot of dead time. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Robert Casey
writes: Mike Coslo wrote: What do I desire as far as packet operations go? One thing I used to desire was essentially usenews without the bad words and spam. But 1200 baud just doesn't cut it anymore. Slower as there is a lot of dead time. "1200 baud" (actually 1200 bits per second) is about equivalent to 1200 words per minute as by: 1200 bps = 120 characters per second at 10 bits per character in the ASCII 8-level character coding commonly used now. 120 characters per second = 7200 characters per minute. If one "word" consists of 5 text characters plus a space character (a common measure of throughput in telegraphy the century before the last one), then 7200 char/min = 1200 words/min. If the average "fast" radiotelegraphy rate is 20 words/minute, then "1200 baud" is SIX HUNDRED TIMES FASTER than average "CW." Given the two vastly different communication rates, which one is the "slow" one? LHA / WMD |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
Note that Australia is a whole other continent and somewhat far from your neighborhood. It is not a good thing to evaluate anything in terms of your own experience and what is familiar to you...and certainly not in terms of what you, yourself, particularly desire. What do I desire as far as packet operations go? You said you thought packet was "dead." When I wrote (after the ellipsis) "certainly not in terms of what you, yourself, particularly desire" then that does not say you "desire" anything in regards to "packet operations," does it? If you don't find "packet operations" in your ham neighborhood, then you are certainly free to think it is "dead" but only for that radio neighborhood you frequent. It is incorrect, reqardless of another 2-land schoolmaster-cum-moderator's "correctness" opinions to make absolute statements when there is obvious evidence that packet operations are continuing on another large continent far away from the USA...and reported on the Amateur Radio Newsline. You are free to explore who uses packet radio methods at www.tapr.org, the website of Tucson Amateur Packet Radio. LHA / WMD statements |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Len,
I doubt anyone can read 120 characters per *second*. The need for more and more speed is being pushed by the desire to send more visually 'appealing' information. What once was typed into a memo and posted on a bulletin board ("come celebrate Dave's 30 years with the company") in a couple of minutes has now evolved into a 30 minute or more procedure with the word processor and all the pretty graphics. It is then passed to the employees as a 100K file (maybe 500K if Dave's picture is included) via intranet within the company. This might be nice enough, but is unnecessary information. This gets much more interesting when someone passes along a virus alert - which gets forwarded and forwarded ... you get the idea ![]() warnings over the company computer about forwarding such stuff. Mostly, the great advances in communication have resulted in more visual information being passed. At times, porn is involved. I'm not suggesting that the higher speed is bad, it certainly isn't. I am suggesting that a lot of communication going on now might well be described as "bloatware". Come to think of it, one is safer if you've set your reader to 'text only' for receive. I wonder why ... ![]() (ps - it is also a good idea to send only plain text. If only plain text were sent, 1200 baud would be a darn good clip.) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA "Len Over 21" wrote in message ... "1200 baud" (actually 1200 bits per second) is about equivalent to 1200 words per minute as by: 1200 bps = 120 characters per second at 10 bits per character in the ASCII 8-level character coding commonly used now. 120 characters per second = 7200 characters per minute. If one "word" consists of 5 text characters plus a space character (a common measure of throughput in telegraphy the century before the last one), then 7200 char/min = 1200 words/min. If the average "fast" radiotelegraphy rate is 20 words/minute, then "1200 baud" is SIX HUNDRED TIMES FASTER than average "CW." Given the two vastly different communication rates, which one is the "slow" one? LHA / WMD --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/04 |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , "Jim Hampton"
writes: Len, I doubt anyone can read 120 characters per *second*. The need for more and more speed is being pushed by the desire to send more visually 'appealing' information. I was referring to PACKET type of data. Internet material goes through faster over a POTS with "attractiveness." Generic packet transmission goes as "packets of data" along with sync and system-housekeeping data. That slows down the data rate in the long run. However, even at half the maximum possible, data can go zinging through at 60 characters per second or 600 "words" per minute. If the packet stuff was interrupted badly and required resends such that the maximum rate was dropped to ten percent, the throughput would be 120 "words" per minute or about equal to slow speech rate. Packet can sustain throughput as long as the circuit holds up. Mostly, the great advances in communication have resulted in more visual information being passed. At times, porn is involved. I'm not suggesting that the higher speed is bad, it certainly isn't. I am suggesting that a lot of communication going on now might well be described as "bloatware". In that case, newspapers with advertisements have been "bloatware" for centuries. One person's "bloat" is another person's gourmet delicacy. The longest fiber-optic communications line is one that goes from the UK, through the Med, under-around the Indian Ocean, around Southeast Asia, and to Japan. Two 4 Gigabit per second optical fibers, pumped at a light wavelength for amplification. No active devices IN the cable for repeatering. Think about it...4,000,000,000 bits per second. And that's not the fastest comm carrier using fiber. Come to think of it, one is safer if you've set your reader to 'text only' for receive. I wonder why ... ![]() (ps - it is also a good idea to send only plain text. If only plain text were sent, 1200 baud would be a darn good clip.) This dial-up POTS (Plain Old Telephone System) I connect on indicates a normal rate prompt of 49333 bps most of the time. Downloads and uploads go at about 1/10th that rate or roughly three times faster than 1200 bps data. I'm satisfied with that. Not bad for a POTS that's only supposed to have a 3 KHz BW and some folks still saying "it can't possibly send data that fast!!!" But, it does anyway. :-) Back a half-century ago, I was keeping SSB transmitters going that were handling two voice channels and 12 TTY circuits, all simultaneously in a 12 KHz bandwidth...and that was already two decades old in radio communications. Back then hams were bragging up a storm about how they could go "faster" than 20 words per minute. They still do, but the data rates have gone up far more. Manual "CW" maximum rate is still the same as it was a half century ago. If you want to call anything faster than 40 wpm as "bloatware," fine. Your choice. You might also think about why a half million Teletype terminals were made and how all those tele- printer things displaced the old landline telegraphy operators long ago with all that 60 and 100 wpm "bloatware" text copy. LHA / WMD |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
22 echoirlp nodes installed by ian g0hlj | Dx | |||
22 echoirlp nodes installed by ian g0hlj | Dx | |||
22 echoirlp nodes installed by ian g0hlj | Digital | |||
22 echoirlp nodes installed by ian g0hlj | Digital | |||
22 echoirlp nodes installed by ian g0hlj | General |