Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old December 15th 04, 04:45 AM
Charles Brabham
 
Posts: n/a
Default Plan A

What we've been doing wrong with digital ham radio - and how to get back on
track.

http://www.uspacket.org/plan_a.htm

Charles, N5PVL


  #2   Report Post  
Old December 15th 04, 05:40 AM
Mike Coslo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Charles Brabham wrote:

What we've been doing wrong with digital ham radio - and how to get back on
track.

http://www.uspacket.org/plan_a.htm



Interesting link, Charles.

Initial thoughts are that it is a very interesting concept, and should
probably work well. I'm going to have another read tomorrow morning when
I'm not dead tired, and comment again.

After all, PSK does rule yaknow! ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

  #3   Report Post  
Old December 15th 04, 09:41 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Charles Brabham wrote:
What we've been doing wrong with digital ham radio - and how to get

back on
track.

http://www.uspacket.org/plan_a.htm


Nice piece Charles, you obviously put a lot of thought and effort into
it.

However I'll be very surprised if any of it gets off the ground for
several reasons. First it would be in competition with the Internet
which has all but killed wide-area ("long range") VHF packet
"multicasting" a decade ago. What you're actually proposing is an HF
version of the same basic technical approach which already died. I
dunno . . !

Another one is the very dicey reliability of long-range HF comms due to
the vagaries of propagation vs. the volume of QRM which would be
involved particularly when the spots count is down. We don't need any
more unmanned Pactor-style mailboxes chirping away on the bands.

A problem I have with it might just be me but what sort of content
would be involved? What files about what would get shipped around for
what puposes? Who would get what out of it that they can't get by
existing means? Successful implementations of new ham radio HF digital
comms is not just about the technology, it would also have be accepted
and used by the general market too. Particularly since what you're
propsing will require a significant number of collaborators to pull
off. What are the marketing plans?

Charles, N5PVL


w3rv

  #4   Report Post  
Old December 15th 04, 10:28 PM
bb
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chuck, computers? soundcards? If it doesn't involve twitching two
pieces of bare copper wire together...

But seriously, who has stated such a need? If the OF's that seem to
have everything locked up only want to implement CW nets...

Your idea has obvious utility in emcomms, but how do you get the
data/info out of the affected area?

Or did I miss something?

Please point me to some other sites WRT the streaming, multichannel
PSK. I'd like to know more.

Thanks, bb

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
We Need a BANDWIDTH-BASED Frequency Plan - NOT Mode-Based. Expeditionradio Policy 43 February 8th 04 09:47 PM
New Article: A BANDWIDTH-BASED Frequency Plan N2EY Policy 1 February 6th 04 11:57 PM
BETTER HF FREQUENCY PLAN for AMATEUR RADIO Expeditionradio Policy 3 January 27th 04 11:50 PM
The Plan Steve Robeson, K4CAP Policy 5 July 30th 03 02:21 PM
Bush plan to turn Medicare over to the greedy. LongBeach General 0 July 1st 03 02:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:52 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017