okay.
I wasn't sure when I was going threw the garden west tapes I heard him 
mention some sort of data packet transmition and I wasn't sure if what he 
was refering to was the pSK31
thanks
hank
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:00 PM
Subject: Re: New Frequencies


> that's on the HF bands, with a tech license, you don't have any HF
> privileges. Most of the activity I know of is on 40 and 20
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "hank smith" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:56 PM
> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
>
>
>> can you do pSK31 with a tech license? I forget if so what equipment do I
>> need to join in?
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 5:41 PM
>> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
>>
>>
>>> it takes some doing, but you can do PSK31, digital can be worked with to
>>> work, and that's an accessible PSK31 program that is self voicing,
>>> problem
>>> is, the voice goes out on the air though I have played with a few things
>>> and
>>> made it useable. Also, the one for sighted people, digipan, you can work
>>> with that one, I've done it. the problem is, you need 2 sound cards. I
>>> have
>>> an external sound card on my radio desk computer, used to have the
>>> echolink
>>> link interface plugged in to it but I guess since that's down for now, I
>>> might use it for the digital modes for a bit. It is doable. Pactor and
>>> stuff
>>> like that you can do, I haven't tried them all but I think we can pretty
>>> much do any of them. Probably not the TV modes but so far, anything else
>>> seems possible. I'll play with it over the winter and fill people in as 
>>> I
>>> work with things. I'm single this winter so have all that time I was 
>>> with
>>> my
>>> gf last year, to play radio. She had every second last winter.
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Dan" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
>>>
>>>
>>>> Speaking of PSK31, or any digital mode like that, is most o of the
>>>> software
>>>> for that accessible?  Like will screenreaders be able to read what is 
>>>> on
>>>> the
>>>> screen?
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: For blind ham radio operators
>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>>> On Behalf Of Colin McDonald
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 19:39
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
>>>>
>>>> I guess that makes me a chicken bander.
>>>> I never new until now.
>>>> That attitude is what is making ham radio an antiquated, excentric
>>>> non-progressive hobby in many places.
>>>> Who wants to learn to communicate using a bunch of short and long beeps
>>>> when
>>>> you can talk, or use digital modes using computers.
>>>> Learning CW has to be the most awcward thing imaginable at first. 
>>>> Until
>>>> you
>>>> become really good at it, its slow, tedious and takes much more time to
>>>> convey a thought then simply speaking it or sending it via pSK31 or
>>>> other
>>>> digital modes.
>>>> And the idea that CW is the one and only method of communication that
>>>> can
>>>> get through when nothing else can is also a very outdated theory.
>>>> Any digital mode will accomplish the same task, and offen with much
>>>> lower
>>>> error rate then a typical CW operater who is attempting to pull a 
>>>> signal
>>>> out
>>>> of the noise, or below the noise floor.
>>>> Using PSK31, you offten can't even hear the signal, but the computer 
>>>> can
>>>> and
>>>> puts it out to the screen as text.
>>>> So the idea that not learning some antiquated form of communicated just
>>>> for
>>>> the sake of doing so, and therefore getting a free ride because you
>>>> didn't
>>>> have to learn it is a very narow minded and outdated point of view.
>>>>
>>>> Now, all that said, i think CW is a very important aspect of amateur
>>>> radio
>>>> below 30MHZ and that it certainly has its place and usage.  I don't
>>>> begrudge
>>>> anyone their decision to use any mode of communication on any amateur
>>>> frequency.
>>>> However, i really don't believe anyone mode should be chosen over all
>>>> the
>>>> rest as one that a person must have near to absolute  perficiency in in
>>>> order to communicate below 30MHZ.
>>>>
>>>> Naturally, the arguement that CW transmitters and receivers are some of
>>>> the
>>>> simplest and easy to setup and operate when compared to voice or 
>>>> digital
>>>> stations always comes up.  It comes up in the context of emergency
>>>> measures
>>>> or emergency communications.
>>>> If that arguement is made, then the argument must also be made to
>>>> include
>>>> vastly more emergency training aspects to the general class or extra
>>>> class
>>>> licensing examinations.
>>>> If you are going to force someone to learn CW because there just might
>>>> be
>>>> a
>>>> once in a life time situation where they absolutely must use it, then 
>>>> it
>>>> should also be required for those same individuals to learn vast 
>>>> amounts
>>>> of
>>>> procedural knoledge regarding emergency communications and procedures.
>>>>
>>>> Its a great mode, but its not the most important anymore.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Colin, V A6BKX
>>>>
>>>
>>> __________ NOD32 1.1803 (20061013) Information __________
>>>
>>> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> __________ NOD32 1.1803 (20061013) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>