Hello, I moved temporarily to a new grid block. How do I change it so my
channel selection is based on the new grid block?

开云体育

Are any of the modes that the KAM+ are capable of even still in use anymore? I was planning to use it on both HF and VHF packet since it has the two ports, I wouldn't have to swap connections back and forth with a soundcard interface (that's what I was thinking).

Theoretically yes.? In practice, no? The KAMs are radio modems intended primarily to be used in a command-line mode from an ASCII terminal or terminal app on a computer. You switch from the VHF to the HF side and back with a typed stream-switch command.? (Note that there is no actual physical switch on the front panel to select between VHF and HF ports.)?? On receive, data from both sides comes out the same serial port -- it's up to the application on the computer to sort out the two streams.???

Classic terminal applications for the KAM would have a three-way split screen with separate windows for VHF receive and HF receive.? A third window was used to compose outgoing messages for both bands. A typed "stream-switch" command would determine which side the transmit should go to. Some Kantronics-oriented comms programs would use two function keys on the PC keyboard to determine which side should send your message.?

When you say "use it on both HF and VHF packet", what activities did you have in mind????? Winlink radio email?? BBS access??? APRS?? Each of these will require different applications with differing abilities to deal with the KAM's quirky stream switching commands. ??

Given that today's dominant HF modes (the various MFSK variants, the proprietary SCS Systems high-speed Pactor 4 modems, VARA) can't be done on a KAM but rather require sound card apps (or proprietary hardware in the case of Pactor 4).? Compared to today's data modes, packet on HF is awful - very slow and unreliable.?

[When the KAM devices were born over 30 years ago, packet was in it's heyday as the dominant data mode on both VHF and HF.? One of the attractions was that the KAMs could do cross-band digipeating between the VHF and HF sides, standalone. Today, that is more-or-less history. Today the main use of the KAM would be the same as for a KPC3 -- for 1200-baud VHF packet. ] ?

Today, using two sound cards, one for VHF and one for HF makes far more sense so you can use all the modern modes at will on both bands.

Since I now have a 101MP that runs data modes off the USB port that's not quite as much of a concern but I'd still need an interface for the 300 I guess. I don't suppose that there's any using the KAM+ for anything other than packet? Amtor is dead

Correct.? The main use for AMTOR today is it's commercial variant SITOR used on HF for receiving marine weather forecasts on the high seas. (There are commercial apps that can use the AMTOR/SITOR/NAVTEX mode of the KAM to receive marine weather charts.)

Pactor, not sure if that has any use with VARA?

Huh??? Pactor and VARA are totally different unrelated data transmission modes.? You can't do one with the other!? Some top-level applications, such as radio email can be setup to use either,? but the station at the other end has to be using the same mode.?

VARA is exclusively a sound-card-based "software modem" while classic packet can be done with either hardware devices like the KAM or sound-card "soft TNCs" like the UZ7HO Soundmodem or DireWolf. ?? [Note that the soundcard TNCs, on both VHF and HF,? VASTLY outperform the classic hardware TNCs on weak noisy signals plagued with QRM, selective fading or multipath phase distortion.]

As for VHF FM data, packet and VARA FM is about all you can do, right??

Again, two completely different data transmission modes not compatible with each other.? Again, top level applications for messaging, radio email, APRS position reporting, BBS access, etc can use either? --but --? the station at the other end has to be using the same mode.?

Once more, VARA is exclusively a soundcard-based "soft modem" -- the KAM can't do this mode, period.

Actually many other modes can and are used on VHF. Typically these are the multiple modes (RTTY, various MFSK and MT-2000 variants, etc)? generated by FLdigi, along with SSTV (also a soundcard mode). The FLdigi suite of soundcard programs (the main modem program FLdigi, FLmessage, FLamp, etc) are very widely used by emergency comms a.k.a. "EMCOMMS" groups.?

开云体育

I keep trying to join that forum, and it must be abandoned by the admins. I'll have to check and see whether I'm already on software carrier detect, I may be. The advice to use 9600 line I will take. I was trying to reserve it for a soundcard connection, but I may just have to come up with a switch box to switch between TNC and soundcard interface later on.

Why even bother with the archaic hardware TNC?? Use the soundcard interface for everything!? I have done extensive controlled tests of hardware vs soundcard "soft TNCs" like the "UZ7HO Soundmodem" and "DireWolf". ? The soundcard soft TNCs way way outperform ANY of the common hardware-based TNCs I have tested on weak noisy signals.? This includes the KPC+, the KAM, MFDJ-127x, AEA PK-88, AEA PK232. ?

Part of this is that the soft TNCs actually try to recover signals that fail checksum tests at the receiving end. Instead of automatically rejecting the packet, they attempt recovery by brute force by inverting individual bits of the packet and recomputing the checksum. This dramatically increases the percentage of packets received successfully. This DSP processing was not practical to do with the low-power 8-bit processors running at 2-4 MHz in the vintage hardware TNCs.? It's trivial with today's 32 or 64-bit multi-GHz processors. ? The only hardware devices that use this kind of computing horsepower to decode packets are the very expensive (USD $500+) SCS Pactor modems from Germany - these devices also do convention packet with "high-horsepower" DSP chips. ?

It's a work in progress. I was just trying to get the TNC going right now rather than my usual procrastination planning process. Mostly all I'm asking here is if anyone is seeing similar behavior in their FTM-300 RX1200 line since I can't seem to get an answer from Yaesu and I can't even join the 300 group. Oh I forgot to mention also that the actual speaker jack in the back does NOT seem to have the same behavior as the RX1200 line.

The major difference between SPKR out and the "1200 baud" output of the mini-DIN port is that the din-port terminal has a fixed audio level unaffected by the volume control. It DOES have the same receive audio de-emphasis (standard FM high-frequency roll-off) as the speaker jack, and is squelched the same way as the speaker ouput.?

On the other hand, the "9600? baud" output is a direct connection to the receiver's FM discriminator, providing flat-response audio with no squelching; i.e. always on. ?

Both outputs should have an fixed audio output level at around a half volt audio - the equivalent of home stereo "LINE LEVEL".?

Note that Yaesu has "bastardized" the? industry-standard? 6-pin? mini-DIN? "data"? port (actually various forms of TX and RX audio + PTT) by combining it's pins onto a TEN-pin mini-DIN multi-purpose connector that combines the "DATA" port functions with an RS-232 serial port (an actual data port) used for radio memory programming. ? But the DATA port functions on the first 6 pins of the 10-pin jack are the same as the classic 6-pin port. ?? This now requires a "weird" proprietary forked cable, sold by Yaesu, to either use the DATA port, or program the memories.

(I have several of the FTM-6000s that I use in my multiple VHF/UHF APRS receive systems, and find this bastardized combo port a real annoyance.)

A write-up on the classic 6-pin mini-DIN "DATA" port is here on my website:

???

Unless I messed up my scope settings the speaker line is the same level (not counting the actual received signal level) whether the squelch is left turned all the way down or not on a received signal.

The squelch does not affect the audio LEVEL, but it may not reliably open on weak or marginal signals that modern soft TNCs are capable of decoding.? And the squelch may not open FAST enough, and may miss the sync bytes at the beginning of a packet.? This is why people say "run open squelch" on packet.?? Better to use the always-on "9600 pin of the mini-DIN data port.

Stephen H. Smith??? wa8lmf (at) aol.com
Skype:??????? WA8LMF
EchoLink:? Node #? 14400? [Think bottom of the 2-meter band]
Home Page:?????????

New? 30 Meter?? APRS-over VARA? Frequency
As of 1 Jan 2025.?? Details Here:
????

- APRS over VARA? --
??

"Studio B" Ham Shack on Wheels
??

-
?