yeh hopefully they can get a tower back up and a station going so they can
get ham link back up and running from the CNIB or somewhere.
73
Colin, V A6BKX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Kwan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: echolink connections


> Well give it a try and find out if it can be controlled. I think it would
be
> difficult. I actually can't understand how hf could be worked threw the pc
> this way. When you're on echolink as you've noticed, you're waiting for
the
> carrier to drop when you're in qso, whether it's a direct station or
> repeater, you can't transmit until the carrier is dropped. Well, with hf
> that doesn't happen. I can't understand how some would break in very well.
> The people on the other end would have to shut up long enough for the
> echolink to key up. Now on ham link, which is basically hf by phone, you
> press a touch toan key to activate the tx. I haven't used hamlink for
years.
> The one here in Toronto is down temporarily. I used to use it to look at
my
> signal on different bands. Others use it for hf access.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 11:05 PM
> Subject: Re: echolink connections
>
>
> i think it was some kind of net....guess 14.300 is a fairly well used
> frequency for nets...not sure which net it was because i couldn't hear net
> control due to the extreme noise level....
> it seemed to say something about control through the chat window or
> something...wonder if that means one can control the receiver by issuing
> commands in the chat window.
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX
>