| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 08.07.09 01:26l 1148 Lines 43039 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 49214-CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V4 325
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<DK0WUE<SP7MGD<CX2SA
Sent: 090707/2321Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:49214 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:49214-CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Send AMSAT-BB mailing list submissions to
amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
amsat-bb-request@xxxxx.xxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
amsat-bb-owner@xxxxx.xxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of AMSAT-BB digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: FT-736R won't send CW (R. Chastain)
2. Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WASRe:Re:dream)
(Roger Kolakowski)
3. Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:
dream) (Dave)
4. From The Twisted Pair (!). (John Hackett)
5. Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:
Re:dream) (kd8bxp@xxx.xxxx
6. Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
(Roger Kolakowski)
7. Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
(John B. Stephensen)
8. Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:Re:dream)
(kd8bxp@xxx.xxxx
9. missing a drop cord (John Price)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 10:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "R. Chastain" <suenrod@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: FT-736R won't send CW
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <321135.4502.qm@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I know it's a simple anwser but make sure the CW plug is wired the same.
It might be a stereo plug and wired differently for the 736R and the 767.
73's
RoD
--- On Tue, 7/7/09, Allen Vinegar <tokens@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> From: Allen Vinegar <tokens@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] FT-736R won't send CW
> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Date: Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 10:26 AM
> I posted this to the 736R forum but
> have not received any good answers. I know I must be missing
> something obvious but I can't get my FT-736R to work in CW
> mode. I plug in the same key I use with my FT-767GX, press
> the CW button, turn on the VOX, press down the key and
> nothing happens. Rig works fine on SSB and FM. Before I open
> up the case and dig in, what am I missing??
>
> Thanks!
>
> Al W8KHP
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx.
> Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 13:59:57 -0400
From: "Roger Kolakowski" <rogerkola@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers
(WASRe:Re:dream)
To: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>, "W4ART Arthur Feller" <afeller@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <00e301c9ff2c$bec07e60$0300a8c0@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Listen to the MANY years of experience here on the forum and approach the
FCC with nothing except an appeal for a previous decision you don't agree
with.
We have been told to, and allowed the privilege to "police" ourselves...a
privilege extended to very few "services."
Asking the FCC for the "Right Way" only forces them to choose a "Right Way"
even though the differences between alternatives may be miniscule.
FCC rules were established to protect "commercial interests" thus no
broadcasting, no music, no advertisements and before phone calls were so
cheap, no inter LATA phone patch on repeaters.
Phone patch was self regulated, and it solved itself...paging can be self
regulated, and, now that paging companies have been killed (except in the
Medical sector) the problem will solve itself.
We have been self regulated for 75+ years...lets leave it that way.
Roger
WA1KAT
----- Original Message -----
From: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>
To: "W4ART Arthur Feller" <afeller@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:28 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers
(WASRe:Re:dream)
> Wow I am honestly surprised by this attiude. This is the 2nd email that I
have seen saying don't ask the FCC anything
>
> I the rules are vauge at best - why else would so many people disagree
about what can and can not be done
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27 -0600
From: "Dave" <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re: Re: dream)
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>, "'Bob Bruninga '" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <924C565143EF4B2E9AE6A900FE2499DD@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense of
the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe...
Dave
DM78qd // KA0SWT
If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be
eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Bob Bruninga
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM
To: Ben Jackson
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:
dream)
>> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any
>> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up
>> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly
>> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications
>> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the
>> tool box.
>
> Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager
> transmissions to an individual are illegal under ?97.111(b), as it is
> a "one way"
> transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal"
> list.
Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only
under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all
kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses
different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds
of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and
the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day?
When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one way,
until the person gets his system going and responds.
In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is
NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY
TWO-WAY amateur network.
There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way) to
the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think everyone
can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one
nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking
initiative to better their use of the radio art.
>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do
>> than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful
>> applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user
>> device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio
>> communications system.
>
> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond QSTs,
> telemetry, or "necessary"
> emergency communications. Could I get away with setting up such a
> system? Likely. Do I foot to stand on when my local OO comes knocking?
> Not so much.
Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution...
>> An amateur satellite would make a great downlink to these pagers.
>> Again, the goal should simply be, any message, any time, anywhere
>> using any device to any user by callsign alone.
Bob, WB4APR
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 15:22:42 +0200
From: John Hackett <archie.hackett@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] From The Twisted Pair (!).
To: <zait007@xxxxxxx.xx>
Cc: UA0ZS Sergey <ua0zs@xxxxx.xx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx rd3tbg@xxxx.xxx
eu-amsat@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <BLU141-W15B609493788BC602CBD8491280@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
For those who don't read 'OBSERVATIONS' ... (you should !!!, it's FREE).
73 John. <la2qaa@xxxxx.xxx>
Joint Observations
07 July 2009
GM1SXX & LA2QAA
The problem
with Space Stations... and a possible Opportunity.
When the
International Space Station is scrapped.... probably in the 2015-2018 time
frame, a valuable space asset will be lost. It needn't have been that way,
and the Russians have wakened up to a new possibility, one that was sadly
missed
on the ISS.
ISS is built
around MIR-2 hardware. The core, the Zvezda module, is essentially
unchanged from the old MIR design, a tubular cylindrical living area with
solar
arrays attached to a docking 'ball' with five docking ports available.
Once Zveda becomes life-expired, the whole assembly is useless. A
more practical approach would have been to fly a 'passive' six-port docking
ball, to which active modules can be docked. In this way, station elements
could
be detached and discarded as they reached the end of their design lives while
the docking ball remains a 'permanent fixture' in space.
Enter 'Orbitalniy
Pilotiruemyi Eksperimentalniy Kompleks', OPSEK, or the 'Orbital Manned
Assembly and Experiment Complex' This is a plan for a future space
station unveiled by the Russians in 2007, and documented by Anatoly Zak on his
web-pages. It centres around the use of a passive 4 ton 'docking ball'
with six ports, to which additional modules can be attached.
Such a docking
ball in LEO would have the primary purpose of 'tying a space station
together', by providing passive docking ports, but it could equally well serve
as a
long-lived platform for a 'parasite radio package' in the same way that the
old
RS10/11 and RS12/13 'satellites' worked. For those not old enough to know,
these were 'parasite' transponder packages attached to spacecraft that were
powered from the main craft. So long as the packages antenna(s) could be
mounted on the ball's -Z axis, it could serve as a useful radio relay
(transponder) in LEO. Such a package would have a fairly small physical
footprint and would require very little driving power from the 'mother-ship'
or
solar panels (if fitted). It would obviously be desirable to derive power from
the mother-ship in the interests of simplicity and longevity.
With launches
becoming increasingly difficult to find on cost grounds, this would be one
possible way to provide a future new transponder in LEO. If the package
was small and light enough, it could possibly be carried to the (new) space
station by a progress cargo vehicle as freight, and attached to the docking
ball
structure during a space walk. What is more, it could function for a long
time, limited only by the overall life of the space complex.
Several people in
the UK already have a track record in building space-rated hardware in
addition
to another amateur in Holland, who has built space qualified hardware
including
the backup transponder for HM-1 AKA VUSAT, as well as a new linear
'Pico-Transponder'. They know who they are... you don't need to know, at least
not right now :-) The expertise already exists to supply space rated
hardware to fly on such a mission. and we do feel that the possibility of
flying
such a mission should not be passed over. I'm sure there are people in
Russia (from the old RS satellite team) who would be just as keen to see this
idea fly.
73 AL & John
GM1SXX & LA2QAA
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:05:33 +0000
From: kd8bxp@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re: Re:dream)
To: dave@xxxxxx.xxxx AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx "'Bob Bruninga '"
<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<158459792-1246989929-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-
126985583-@xxxxxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xx.xxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Good afternoon to all -
On the subject of amatuer paging
While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call)
I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly legal
in the ham bands
Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network up
and running :-)
I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe off a
bit
There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie
Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered
POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to use
it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered
The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part 97
limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it specifically
say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do. I can't remember
all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie are trying to make a
QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national emergancy, dx reports,
would fit without question into the telemetery area - each can be set on its
own capcode and every amateur pager can have those cap codes programmed into
it - However
Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting all
of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not
recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal
capcode is legal to use -
We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I said I
am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have to
establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use it to
establish a QSO -
So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up now
"KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z"
I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about the
techonolgy of it being a oneway device
LeRoy, KD8BXP
http://www.HamOhio.com
Sent on the Now Network? from my Sprint? BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "Dave" <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27
To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; 'Bob Bruninga '<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:
dream)
Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense of
the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe...
Dave
DM78qd // KA0SWT
If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be
eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Bob Bruninga
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM
To: Ben Jackson
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re: Re:
dream)
>> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any
>> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up
>> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly
>> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications
>> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the
>> tool box.
>
> Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager
> transmissions to an individual are illegal under ?97.111(b), as it is
> a "one way"
> transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal"
> list.
Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only
under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all
kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses
different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds
of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and
the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day?
When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one way,
until the person gets his system going and responds.
In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is
NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY
TWO-WAY amateur network.
There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way) to
the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think everyone
can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one
nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking
initiative to better their use of the radio art.
>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do
>> than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful
>> applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user
>> device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio
>> communications system.
>
> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond QSTs,
> telemetry, or "necessary"
> emergency communications. Could I get away with setting up such a
> system? Likely. Do I foot to stand on when my local OO comes knocking?
> Not so much.
Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution...
>> An amateur satellite would make a great downlink to these pagers.
>> Again, the goal should simply be, any message, any time, anywhere
>> using any device to any user by callsign alone.
Bob, WB4APR
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 14:58:59 -0400
From: "Roger Kolakowski" <rogerkola@xxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re:Re:dream)
To: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>, <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>, <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>, "'Bob
Bruninga '" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <003701c9ff34$fcfb9c20$0300a8c0@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Don't forget the 6 meter Model control frequencies...
Roger
WA1KAT
----- Original Message -----
From: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>
To: <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>; <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; "'Bob Bruninga '"
<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:05 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re:Re:dream)
> Good afternoon to all -
> On the subject of amatuer paging
>
> While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call)
> I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly
legal in the ham bands
>
> Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network
up and running :-)
>
> I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe
off a bit
>
> There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie
>
> Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered
> POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to
use it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered
>
> The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part
97 limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it
specifically say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do. I
can't remember all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie are
trying to make a QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national
emergancy, dx reports, would fit without question into the telemetery
area - each can be set on its own capcode and every amateur pager can have
those cap codes programmed into it - However
> Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting
all of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not
recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal
capcode is legal to use -
> We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I
said I am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have to
establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use it to
establish a QSO -
> So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up
now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z"
>
> I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about
the techonolgy of it being a oneway device
>
> LeRoy, KD8BXP
> http://www.HamOhio.com
>
> Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint? BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Dave" <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>
>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27
> To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; 'Bob Bruninga '<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:
Re:
> dream)
>
>
> Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense
of
> the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe...
>
>
> Dave
> DM78qd // KA0SWT
> If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still
be
> eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
> Behalf Of Bob Bruninga
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM
> To: Ben Jackson
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:
Re:
> dream)
>
> >> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any
> >> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up
> >> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly
> >> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications
> >> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the
> >> tool box.
> >
> > Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager
> > transmissions to an individual are illegal under ?97.111(b), as it is
> > a "one way"
> > transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal"
> > list.
>
> Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only
> under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all
> kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses
> different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds
> of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and
> the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day?
> When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one
way,
> until the person gets his system going and responds.
>
> In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is
> NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY
> TWO-WAY amateur network.
>
> There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way)
to
> the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think
everyone
> can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one
> nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking
> initiative to better their use of the radio art.
>
> >> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do
> >> than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful
> >> applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user
> >> device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio
> >> communications system.
> >
> > The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond QSTs,
> > telemetry, or "necessary"
> > emergency communications. Could I get away with setting up such a
> > system? Likely. Do I foot to stand on when my local OO comes knocking?
> > Not so much.
>
> Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution...
>
> >> An amateur satellite would make a great downlink to these pagers.
> >> Again, the goal should simply be, any message, any time, anywhere
> >> using any device to any user by callsign alone.
>
> Bob, WB4APR
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:36:52 -0000
From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re:Re:dream)
To: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>, <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>, <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>, "'Bob
Bruninga '" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <A8AD58251BA8466D9F7D686D010EC811@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
In 97.111 the following one-way transmissions are authorized:
(2) Brief transmissions necessary to establishing two-way communications
with other stations.
(6) Transmissions necessary to distribute information bulletins.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>
To: <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>; <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; "'Bob Bruninga '"
<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 18:05 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re:Re:dream)
> Good afternoon to all -
> On the subject of amatuer paging
>
> While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call)
> I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly
> legal in the ham bands
>
> Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network
> up and running :-)
>
> I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe
> off a bit
>
> There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie
>
> Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered
> POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to
> use it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered
>
> The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part
> 97 limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it
> specifically say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do.
> I can't remember all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie
> are trying to make a QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national
> emergancy, dx reports, would fit without question into the telemetery
> area - each can be set on its own capcode and every amateur pager can have
> those cap codes programmed into it - However
> Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting
> all of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not
> recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal
> capcode is legal to use -
> We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I
> said I am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have
> to establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use
> it to establish a QSO -
> So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up
> now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z"
>
> I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about
> the techonolgy of it being a oneway device
>
> LeRoy, KD8BXP
> http://www.HamOhio.com
>
> Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint? BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Dave" <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>
>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27
> To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; 'Bob Bruninga '<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:
> Re:
> dream)
>
>
> Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense
> of
> the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe...
>
>
> Dave
> DM78qd // KA0SWT
> If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still
> be
> eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
> Behalf Of Bob Bruninga
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM
> To: Ben Jackson
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:
> Re:
> dream)
>
>>> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any
>>> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up
>>> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly
>>> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications
>>> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the
>>> tool box.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager
>> transmissions to an individual are illegal under ?97.111(b), as it is
>> a "one way"
>> transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal"
>> list.
>
> Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only
> under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all
> kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses
> different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds
> of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and
> the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day?
> When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one
> way,
> until the person gets his system going and responds.
>
> In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is
> NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY
> TWO-WAY amateur network.
>
> There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way)
> to
> the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think
> everyone
> can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one
> nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking
> initiative to better their use of the radio art.
>
>>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do
>>> than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful
>>> applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user
>>> device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio
>>> communications system.
>>
>> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond QSTs,
>> telemetry, or "necessary"
>> emergency communications. Could I get away with setting up such a
>> system? Likely. Do I foot to stand on when my local OO comes knocking?
>> Not so much.
>
> Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution...
>
>>> An amateur satellite would make a great downlink to these pagers.
>>> Again, the goal should simply be, any message, any time, anywhere
>>> using any device to any user by callsign alone.
>
> Bob, WB4APR
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:40:42 +0000
From: kd8bxp@xxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re:Re:dream)
To: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx>, dave@xxxxxx.xxxx
AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxxx "'Bob Bruninga '" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<1178439158-1246992037-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-
1785827205-@xxxxxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xx.xxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
If I remember right - telemetery is specifical meantioned, and CW training is
also meantioned
I guess the wording "brief" transmission to establish a QSO could be left to
interptation - but a normal paging signal lasts less the a few seconds the
longest I have ever heard one from a comerical pagin company was about 20 to
25 seconds. I would call that brief.
I think it all about content now and now so much on the techonolgy of the
pager being a one way device
LeRoy, KD8BXP
http://www.HamOhio.com
Sent on the Now Network? from my Sprint? BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "John B. Stephensen" <kd6ozh@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:36:52
To: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>; <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>; <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; 'Bob Bruninga
'<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re:Re:dream)
In 97.111 the following one-way transmissions are authorized:
(2) Brief transmissions necessary to establishing two-way communications
with other stations.
(6) Transmissions necessary to distribute information bulletins.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: <kd8bxp@xxx.xxx>
To: <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>; <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; "'Bob Bruninga '"
<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 18:05 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS
Re:Re:dream)
> Good afternoon to all -
> On the subject of amatuer paging
>
> While in an email letter to Nigel (sorry I don't remember his call)
> I may have just convenced (sp) myself that paging is probably perfectly
> legal in the ham bands
>
> Let's see if I can follow my own logic and then let's get a paging network
> up and running :-)
>
> I am not In front of my computer and not looking at Part 97 - so I maybe
> off a bit
>
> There are a couple of parts of part 97 that applie
>
> Paging is a digital mode - YES got that covered
> POCSAG the format for paging is open and avaiable to anyone who wants to
> use it - freely avaible protocal - YES got that covered
>
> The issue comes when you think as pageing as a one way device - now Part
> 97 limits what type of one way transmittions we can do - I think it
> specifically say there are three types of one way transmittions we can do.
> I can't remember all of them - the two I do remember and I think applie
> are trying to make a QSO and the telemetery - weather, local and national
> emergancy, dx reports, would fit without question into the telemetery
> area - each can be set on its own capcode and every amateur pager can have
> those cap codes programmed into it - However
> Pagers all have a "personal" capcode - we have a choice of either setting
> all of the personal capcodes to the same one - not using personal and not
> recording the personal capcodes - OR finding the reasoning why a personal
> capcode is legal to use -
> We are allowed to make one way transmittions to establish a QSO - as I
> said I am not looking at part 97 but as I recall - it doesn't say we have
> to establish on the same band or at the same time - just that we can use
> it to establish a QSO -
> So let's say I know your personal capcode - I send to you making a call up
> now "KF8II de KD8BXP pls call on 40meter 7.100 at 2200z"
>
> I think that would be 100% legal. So it is all about content and not about
> the techonolgy of it being a oneway device
>
> LeRoy, KD8BXP
> http://www.HamOhio.com
>
> Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint? BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Dave" <dave@xxxxxx.xxx>
>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:28:27
> To: <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>; 'Bob Bruninga '<bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:
> Re:
> dream)
>
>
> Doesn't anyone know someone at the FCC to get a prelim opinion or 'sense
> of
> the commission' without a rule having to be made? A phone call maybe...
>
>
> Dave
> DM78qd // KA0SWT
> If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still
> be
> eating frozen radio dinners.-- Johnny Carson
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
> Behalf Of Bob Bruninga
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:55 AM
> To: Ben Jackson
> Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers (WAS Re:
> Re:
> dream)
>
>>> Using paging devices on Amateur Radio is perfectly legal like any
>>> other radio. It all boils down to use. If you use it for setting up
>>> a one-way systemm for a pizza delivery service, it is clearly
>>> illegal. If you use it as part of your overall local communications
>>> network of amateur radio volunters it is just one more tool in the
>>> tool box.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the way Part 97 currently reads is that most pager
>> transmissions to an individual are illegal under ?97.111(b), as it is
>> a "one way"
>> transmission that, in most cases, would not qualify under the "legal"
>> list.
>
> Sorry, one can also claim that every transmission is one-way because only
> under full duplex conditions is a system truely two-way. There are all
> kinds of applications in amateur radio where one side of the link uses
> different hardware than the other return side, and once can make all kinds
> of arguments as to how much delay is involved between the transmission and
> the receiption.. 3 seconds? 10 seconds, a minute? 10 minutes? A day?
> When you make a call to a party TO ESTABLISH commmunications it is one
> way,
> until the person gets his system going and responds.
>
> In my mind a pager is just another way of making the call. THe intent is
> NOT ONE WAY, it is to provide a call-up or a message as part of a CLEARLY
> TWO-WAY amateur network.
>
> There is no reason to nit pick rules. When one is broadcasting (one way)
> to
> the general public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I think
> everyone
> can tell when it is blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC cares one
> nit about some of these debates when any one can see that hams are taking
> initiative to better their use of the radio art.
>
>>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who have nothing better to do
>>> than nit-pick ways to prevent other hams from developing useful
>>> applications of technology. A pager is simply the text-to-user
>>> device integrated into the normal local 2-way amateur radio
>>> communications system.
>>
>> The issue is that, according to Part 97, it can't be used beyond QSTs,
>> telemetry, or "necessary"
>> emergency communications. Could I get away with setting up such a
>> system? Likely. Do I foot to stand on when my local OO comes knocking?
>> Not so much.
>
> Some OO's are part of the problem, not the solution...
>
>>> An amateur satellite would make a great downlink to these pagers.
>>> Again, the goal should simply be, any message, any time, anywhere
>>> using any device to any user by callsign alone.
>
> Bob, WB4APR
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 14:54:33 -0400
From: John Price <n4qwf1@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] missing a drop cord
To: Geep Howell <geep@xxxxxx.xxx>, Bevin Alexander
<balexander@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx Perkins
<KC4D@xxxx.xxx>, Bill Wheaton <bwheaton1@xxxxxxx.xxx>, Jerry
<jfk@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, "David F. Mears" <kd4emu@xxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<8d1b8e80907071154n410dc382t481fc3e44bf8907@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Picked up my satellite station from Geep's place this afternoon. Seems
all is there except one heavy drop cord. It is black I believe and
about 25 foot long. It goes in my camper. It is #12 wire. If you have
one and don't know were it is supposed to live please let me know. If
you think of anyone else that might have had stuff to pack up please
let me know. Thanks << John
--
N4QWF Amateur Radio Operator
AO-7,AO-27,FO-29,SO-50,AO-51,VO-52,ISS
Email N4QWF@xxxxx.xxx
Echolink nodes #110903 -L #388463
http://home.comcast.net/~n4qwf/site/
Formerly KC4AHW VK3FEZ
Amsat Member #27845
DXCC #33,478
VUCC SAT #135
WAS SAT #296
51 on AO-51 #13
LON -79.256 LAT 37.459 Grid FM07il
>From the Foothills of the Blueridge
*Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly
proclaiming - "WOW, What a ride!"
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 4, Issue 325
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
