¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io
  1. VARA-MODEM
  2. Messages
Expanded Topics Messages Polls
Date
Re: recommendation for HF rig

 

Mike AE4ML,

I have both the IC-7300 (Winlink Hybrid HF Station) and the FT-991A 'shack in a box' in my go kit.? If you are considering only HF operations the ICom option is my personal recommendation.? Some ops have commented that they find the 'clicking relay' objectionable but I'm old school.? I've the audio level set just high enough that with the relay and the audio I subliminally know the station is functioning normally.? As others have commented, Yaesu dedicated the "normal" 9k6 pin in the accessory dataport to RTTY and the work around has been described earlier.? Note too that a couple of the menu items speak to a "DAKY" option.? It's not described specifically in the manual but it controls but you need it selected so that the radio switches between SSB voice and SSB Data properly (e.g front panel or ACC port).? used to carry a short adapter cable that did the conversion from a "standard" mini-Din-6 cable to the Yaesu config.
Ian VA3QT
Re: Collision avoidance?

 

It really matters where you are. High speed digital networks are great in urban areas. In south Texas we have Houston, San Antonio, and Austin as major metro areas and high speed networks are used. In other parts of STX we have counties with populations of just a few thousand. It makes a huge difference in what one can do.

Get
On Jul 28, 2023, at 9:00 PM, Mark Davis <markad7ef@...> wrote:

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 02:44 PM, Tadd KA2DEW in NC wrote:
VARA FM sounds great and I¡¯d love to have something like it that we can build a real-time network out of. ?I wonder how long it will be before one could get a licensed copy in a device that costs under $200 or so, in order that one could build a bunch of multi-port network stations.
Being able to use existing VHF/UHF radios certainly has advantages, but they are voice radios, with audio bandwidths in the 6KHz - 7Khz range, when set for "9600bps data". With this limitation, physics gets in the way of moving enough data for a workable data network, particularly with the challenges of terrain, and foliage (particularly on UHF bands)

It's a different approach than you're proposing, but AREDN is absolutely terrific for building a real-time, high speed (TCP/IP), amateur radio network over large regional areas. It is a true mesh-topology network that is distributed, with substantial redundancy. It is really highly developed in Southern California, and we're rapidly moving in that direction here in the Oregon Willamette Valley (check out?

While this is a data-only network, it does a great job of supporting voice communications through VOIP phones. Using the email and "post office" facilities of the Winlink are a snap, through a Telnet Winlink connection.

The buy-in, including an AREDN transceiver, antenna and mounting hardware, is probably 3 - 4 times the entry point you'd like to see. Another constraint is that anyone who wants to implement a node needs at least one genuine line-of-sight path to another existing, active node. From the standpoint of mesh-network redundancy, a line-of-sight path to two or more nodes is preferred.

I know that both in Southern California and in our local region, the amateur radio EMCOMM community has convinced served agencies of the value of these networks, and have received substantial financial assistance from those served agencies.

Mark - AD7EF
Re: Collision avoidance?

 
Edited

On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 05:46 PM, Stephen W9SK wrote:
I don't think Steve was suggesting compatibility with VARA. Just an alternative functional equivalent with certain suggested advantages.
Stephen;

You're right! ?I was responding to Steve in the context of Tadd KA2DEW's post (#6278), where he said "I¡¯m partial to the Raspberry PI as a computing platform, but we¡¯ll see how the market for VARA FM compatible embedded solutions develops.".?

Regarding a standalone "software-defined (radio) modem" that isn't "VARA compatible", however... with the success of VARA HF and VARA FM in the Winlink "radio email" community, and the growing "radio chat" community, I simply don't see a compelling case for adopting a competing-technology standalone "software-defined (radio) modem" over the well-entrenched PC-software + USB sound-card solution offered by VARA HF and VARA FM.

If the new "software-defined (radio) modem" could accommodate some effective mesh networking functionaliy, that's another significant use-case, as Tadd KA2DEW suggests. I don't see a way to accomplish that, though, given the audio-bandwidth limitations (7 KHZ maximum) of FM transceivers configured in "9600bps data" mode. Another constraint is that the full-throughput 22Kbps data rate of (licensed) VARA FM WIDE is dependent on the channel being almost 100% utilized between only two stations.

Mark - AD7EF
Re: Collision avoidance?

 

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 02:44 PM, Tadd KA2DEW in NC wrote:
VARA FM sounds great and I¡¯d love to have something like it that we can build a real-time network out of. ?I wonder how long it will be before one could get a licensed copy in a device that costs under $200 or so, in order that one could build a bunch of multi-port network stations.
Being able to use existing VHF/UHF radios certainly has advantages, but they are voice radios, with audio bandwidths in the 6KHz - 7Khz range, when set for "9600bps data". With this limitation, physics gets in the way of moving enough data for a workable data network, particularly with the challenges of terrain, and foliage (particularly on UHF bands)

It's a different approach than you're proposing, but AREDN is absolutely terrific for building a real-time, high speed (TCP/IP), amateur radio network over large regional areas. It is a true mesh-topology network that is distributed, with substantial redundancy. It is really highly developed in Southern California, and we're rapidly moving in that direction here in the Oregon Willamette Valley (check out?

While this is a data-only network, it does a great job of supporting voice communications through VOIP phones. Using the email and "post office" facilities of the Winlink are a snap, through a Telnet Winlink connection.

The buy-in, including an AREDN transceiver, antenna and mounting hardware, is probably 3 - 4 times the entry point you'd like to see. Another constraint is that anyone who wants to implement a node needs at least one genuine line-of-sight path to another existing, active node. From the standpoint of mesh-network redundancy, a line-of-sight path to two or more nodes is preferred.

I know that both in Southern California and in our local region, the amateur radio EMCOMM community has convinced served agencies of the value of these networks, and have received substantial financial assistance from those served agencies.

Mark - AD7EF
Re: Collision avoidance?

 

I just moved to Waynesville NC from western WA.? In Western WA I participated in building/supporting the HamWAN network there, a robust high speed IP over 3GHz ham freqs that has instigated the build out of similar networks in FL, MI, and Memphis TN.? Used for analog and digital ham repeater linking, emcomm apps inc Winlink data linking, and small local mesh networks, the low cost of client hardware helps fuel it, which starts at abt $50.? Sector node hardware is of course a bit more but still more affordable than the typical Ubiquiti et all gear.


FWIW, Stephen W9SK


On July 28, 2023 6:23:09 PM "Tadd KA2DEW in NC via groups.io" <tadd@...> wrote:


On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 06:03 PM, Orv Beach wrote:

Wow, that's pretty ugly, Tadd.

NCPACKET is not so bad when you consider it in terms of a Maker-space hands-on? project.? The network has to follow procedures that are brought down to the level of the least-common ham.? While the sophistication level of AX.25 is pretty high for somebody who has never cared about digital data at all, the diagnostic tools make it pretty easy to follow.? Every ham can visit any site (digitally over the ham-radio-only network) and inspect plus run the diagnostics tools.? When all the links are working (about 80% of the time) we can do a 35-person live chat across the entire 9 county network.?

There is a huge divide between running WinLink and VARA FM on 2m from home, compared to building microwave links at a locked remote site.?

I tried to drum up interest in financing a (free) 600' location in Raleigh on a commercial tower for a Ubiquiti based system and, while there was quite a bit of interest, there weren't enough people willing to pony up to buy the remote hardware and an insufficiency of the interested hams would have been in range of that one site.? I was hoping to use it as a stepping stone to link to other remote sites using 3.3Ghz.? (that was before the 3.3Ghz ham allocation changes) ? I think ARDENmesh must be having its success in places with higher hills, drier climates, and sparser trees.?

The NCPACKET network is also built out of people's houses in an area where the highest mountain is only 1000' above average terrain and most of the region the network is built in doesn't even have that big of a hill.? 900Mhz is almost a lost cause here because of the big trees, high humidity and lack of high places to run from.? 2.4Ghz is much worse.? To do a 5 mile wide 2.4Ghz network in the northern suburbs of Raleigh, where I live, would take about a dozen participants.? From what I've seen, 2.4Ghz radios and antennas are quite different from 2m and 75m radios and antennas. Any ham can start, build, and operate a TARPN network.? They could get a 40 mile wide network with no towers or hills for about $3000 in a thick forest of 100' trees.? In the NCPACKET network, walk-up servicing is available with no security arrangements even in the time of a national emergency but almost all of the nodes are at the house of the operator, so no walking is even required.?? All of this is run with FM transceivers between 51 and 450Mhz. ??

It's a different world, doing things in people's houses where the users own the network.?

So my curiosity, and? the reason I watch this email reflector, is that I am hoping to see VARA-FM evolve into something our local data network can take advantage of.? I think it will as the cost of embedded PCs comes down.? I bought a used Intel NUC at the Shelby hamfest for $75 and the guy had several of them.? MSWindows10, 32GB SSD and 2GB of RAM.? It's a pathetic MSWindows10 computer, but are we getting close??

--KA2DEW?


Re: Collision avoidance?

 

I don't think Steve was suggesting compatibility with VARA. Just an alternative functional equivalent with certain suggested advantages.

Stephen W9SK


On July 28, 2023 4:27:35 PM "Mark Davis" <markad7ef@...> wrote:

On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 07:31 AM, Steve Stroh wrote:
Check this sub-article in my newsletter Zero Retries -?
Hi Steve;

I'm a Zero Retries subscriber... keep up the good work! ?

I apparently overlooked the "Mercury software-defined modem" item.

I checked out the git-hub site, and looked for other references on the 'net. Very interesting, and somewhat promising.

I can see where (with a considerable amount of further development) the Mercury software designed modem might result in a low-cost "VHF/UHF FM radio-modem "appliance" that could compete with VARA FM. However, I believe there needs to be a good deal more "machinery" to make it an effective HF modem.

In either case, though, it's very unlikely that either a 'VHF/UHF FM' version or 'HF' version would be compatible with the corresponding VARA system.

Mark - AD7EF

Re: Collision avoidance?

 


On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 06:03 PM, Orv Beach wrote:

Wow, that's pretty ugly, Tadd.

NCPACKET is not so bad when you consider it in terms of a Maker-space hands-on? project.? The network has to follow procedures that are brought down to the level of the least-common ham.? While the sophistication level of AX.25 is pretty high for somebody who has never cared about digital data at all, the diagnostic tools make it pretty easy to follow.? Every ham can visit any site (digitally over the ham-radio-only network) and inspect plus run the diagnostics tools.? When all the links are working (about 80% of the time) we can do a 35-person live chat across the entire 9 county network.?

There is a huge divide between running WinLink and VARA FM on 2m from home, compared to building microwave links at a locked remote site.?

I tried to drum up interest in financing a (free) 600' location in Raleigh on a commercial tower for a Ubiquiti based system and, while there was quite a bit of interest, there weren't enough people willing to pony up to buy the remote hardware and an insufficiency of the interested hams would have been in range of that one site.? I was hoping to use it as a stepping stone to link to other remote sites using 3.3Ghz.? (that was before the 3.3Ghz ham allocation changes) ? I think ARDENmesh must be having its success in places with higher hills, drier climates, and sparser trees.?

The NCPACKET network is also built out of people's houses in an area where the highest mountain is only 1000' above average terrain and most of the region the network is built in doesn't even have that big of a hill.? 900Mhz is almost a lost cause here because of the big trees, high humidity and lack of high places to run from.? 2.4Ghz is much worse.? To do a 5 mile wide 2.4Ghz network in the northern suburbs of Raleigh, where I live, would take about a dozen participants.? From what I've seen, 2.4Ghz radios and antennas are quite different from 2m and 75m radios and antennas. Any ham can start, build, and operate a TARPN network.? They could get a 40 mile wide network with no towers or hills for about $3000 in a thick forest of 100' trees.? In the NCPACKET network, walk-up servicing is available with no security arrangements even in the time of a national emergency but almost all of the nodes are at the house of the operator, so no walking is even required.?? All of this is run with FM transceivers between 51 and 450Mhz. ??

It's a different world, doing things in people's houses where the users own the network.?

So my curiosity, and? the reason I watch this email reflector, is that I am hoping to see VARA-FM evolve into something our local data network can take advantage of.? I think it will as the cost of embedded PCs comes down.? I bought a used Intel NUC at the Shelby hamfest for $75 and the guy had several of them.? MSWindows10, 32GB SSD and 2GB of RAM.? It's a pathetic MSWindows10 computer, but are we getting close??

--KA2DEW?

Re: Collision avoidance?

 

On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 07:31 AM, Steve Stroh wrote:
Check this sub-article in my newsletter Zero Retries -?
Hi Steve;

I'm a Zero Retries subscriber... keep up the good work! ?

I apparently overlooked the "Mercury software-defined modem" item.

I checked out the git-hub site, and looked for other references on the 'net. Very interesting, and somewhat promising.

I can see where (with a considerable amount of further development) the Mercury software designed modem might result in a low-cost "VHF/UHF FM radio-modem "appliance" that could compete with VARA FM. However, I believe there needs to be a good deal more "machinery" to make it an effective HF modem.

In either case, though, it's very unlikely that either a 'VHF/UHF FM' version or 'HF' version would be compatible with the corresponding VARA system.

Mark - AD7EF
Re: recommendation for HF rig

 

Jim W8SNSI said:

> Mark - AD7EF,
> I have used a Kenwood TS-480SAT with a Signalink¡­

Jim;

I¡¯m not sure why you responded specifically to me. I haven¡¯t posted anything on this topic that would indicate you¡¯d have any issues with a TS-480SAT and SignaLink.

Are you using that setup for VARA HF?

Mark - AD7EF
Re: recommendation for HF rig

 

Mark - AD7EF,
I have used a Kenwood TS-480SAT with a Signalink and it has never given me any trouble. My computer is a Dell Latitude. There are two usb cords needed. One goes to the signalink (for audio) and the other runs through a Pluggable USB-Serial converter that plugs in to the db9 port on the radio.
--

73 de w8nsi Jim
ts-480, ft-857, 75m loop. efhw [40-10], 4btv
ft-818nd, mfj efhw [40-10] for portable
registered Winlink and Vara-modem user
Re: Collision avoidance?

 

Mark:

I wouldn¡¯t abandon hope on such a system just yet. Check this sub-article in my newsletter Zero Retries -?


Steve Stroh N8GNJ
Re: Frustrated, can't get WinLink Vara to talk to IC 7300

 

Dick,

If the VARA modem app is showing in the task bar, that implies that the session window started the VARA modem. Is the session window also showing in the task bar? If so, maybe it is off-screen.

If this is the case, try moving the session window back to the main screen by:

Shift + right-click the icon on your taskbar and click ¡°Move¡±
With the window now selected, use the arrow keys to adjust its position

Ralph
Re: Frustrated, can't get WinLink Vara to talk to IC 7300

 

In the open session window you need to select settings/radio to select the radio type.
VS: [VARA-MODEM] Collision avoidance?

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Packet is using Carrier Sense Multiple Access, CSMA.

?

(CDMA is Code Division Multiple Access, a form of spread spectrum)

VARA HF or VARA FM is not CSMA system since the channel is reserved for one QSO at one time. In practice this is the only way to use adaptive modems. Sharing the channel in packet radio fashion ?would allow the channel to change too much between transmissions.

?

CSMA packet radio would work well only if all stations can copy each other. Google for ¡±hidden terminal¡± and ¡±exposed terminal¡± problems.

?

73, Ilkka OH3NJC

?

?

L?hett?j?: Dan Croskrey
L?hetetty: perjantai 28. hein?kuuta 2023 3:13
Vastaanottaja: [email protected]
Aihe: Re: [VARA-MODEM] Collision avoidance?

?

Not true.? Packet incorporates CDMA, carrier detect multiple access.? It deals with collisions quite well.

VARA FM, so far I know, does not listen for a clear frequency therefor does not detect collisions.



The truth is in the starlight.
Dan Croskrey, NV2Z, NNX0EM, WRBU785
Otis Orchards, WA, U.S.A.
EWA, District 9, Spokane County AEC
Winlink RMS NV2Z-10 VARA FM 145.51 MHz
Winlink RMS NV2Z-10 VARA FM 432.425 MHz
Owner YSF repeater 442.925 + Tsql 100 Hz AMS in/AMS out

On 7/27/2023 11:38, Orv Beach wrote:

I know how packet radio deals with collision avoidance: poorly. How does VARA (specifically FM) deal with it?

Orv W6BI





?

?

Virus-free.

?

7189E3A841394E1E99FFDC99B0E72107.png

Re: Collision avoidance?

 

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 02:44 PM, Tadd KA2DEW in NC wrote:
I wonder how long it will be before one could get a licensed copy in a device that costs under $200 or so, in order that one could build a bunch of multi-port network stations...
?
I¡¯m partial to the Raspberry PI as a computing platform, but we¡¯ll see how the market for VARA FM compatible embedded solutions develops.
Tadd;

As I pointed out recently on the VARA-MODEM groups.io "VARA on M1 Mac" topic:?
"The VARA HF and VARA FM radio-modem software is proprietary. It is entirely up to the developer, Jose Alberto Nieto Ros EA5HVK, whether to develop versions that run natively under operating systems other than Windows."?
?
After discussing why Jose had little impetus to develop non-Windows versions of VARA HF and VARA FM, and particularly for computers and operating systems designed around non-x86 CPU architectures (i.e. M1 Macs), I believe it's very unlikely that he's going to implement VARA HF/FM on a standalone modem device.
?
Of course, the kind of standalone device you're talking about already exists for HF applications, albeit at a much higher price point... the SCS PACTOR radio modems.
?
Last year, after reading about some powerful new Raspberry Pi systems, I got to thinking some of these devices (or the processors they're designed around) might form the basis of a high performance modem, using technologies comparable to what's being applied in VARA HF and/or VARA FM.?
?
At that time, I started an "AdvancedRadioModem" groups.io, to "explore the possibilities". There were a few early participants that agreed "the time was right", but no one had the skill-set and time to do anything about it. A couple of participants claimed to know people that could make it happen, but those people were too busy with lucrative commercial, military and governmental projects to be interested in the kind of product I envisioned. Activity on that groups.io died out after a couple of months, and I closed it.

I don't think we're going to see a VARA HF and/or VARA FM standalone modem, or a VARA- compatible device, any time in the foreseeable future.

Mark - AD7EF?
Re: Collision avoidance?

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

VARA HF sessions are the same.
if there¡¯s traffic on the channel, the operator trying to connect must click the ¡°Connect Anyway¡± button.
Additionally, if listening to radio speaker, you can usually hear 'tones' of the sending station connecting to the Gateway.

Best Regards,
Allen Bottorff / AC9EB?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Mark Davis <markad7ef@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2023 20:39
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [VARA-MODEM] Collision avoidance?
?
On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 05:13 PM, Dan Croskrey wrote:
VARA FM, so far I know, does not listen for a clear frequency therefor does not detect collisions.
Dan;

"listen for a clear frequency" isn't the same as "collision detect", in the context of CDMA.?

As I pointed out earlier on this topic; ... VARA FM supports the busy-channel detection that is implemented in the Winlink Express VARA FM session¡­ if there¡¯s traffic on the channel, the operator trying to connect must click the ¡°Connect Anyway¡± button.

This doesn't happen during ongoing sessions (as collision detection does), but it is a reasonably effective mechanism to prevent new station from interfering with on ongoing VARA FM sessions between other stations. I don't have a way to check this on VARA HF, but I'm pretty sure this functionality is also present in VARA HF and the corresponding Winlink Express VARA HF session.

Mark - AD7EF

Re: Collision avoidance?

 

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 05:13 PM, Dan Croskrey wrote:
VARA FM, so far I know, does not listen for a clear frequency therefor does not detect collisions.
Dan;

"listen for a clear frequency" isn't the same as "collision detect", in the context of CDMA.?

As I pointed out earlier on this topic; ... VARA FM supports the busy-channel detection that is implemented in the Winlink Express VARA FM session¡­ if there¡¯s traffic on the channel, the operator trying to connect must click the ¡°Connect Anyway¡± button.

This doesn't happen during ongoing sessions (as collision detection does), but it is a reasonably effective mechanism to prevent new station from interfering with on ongoing VARA FM sessions between other stations. I don't have a way to check this on VARA HF, but I'm pretty sure this functionality is also present in VARA HF and the corresponding Winlink Express VARA HF session.

Mark - AD7EF
Re: Collision avoidance?

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Not true.? Packet incorporates CDMA, carrier detect multiple access.? It deals with collisions quite well.

VARA FM, so far I know, does not listen for a clear frequency therefor does not detect collisions.


 
The truth is in the starlight.
Dan Croskrey, NV2Z, NNX0EM, WRBU785
Otis Orchards, WA, U.S.A.
EWA, District 9, Spokane County AEC
Winlink RMS NV2Z-10 VARA FM 145.51 MHz
Winlink RMS NV2Z-10 VARA FM 432.425 MHz
Owner YSF repeater 442.925 + Tsql 100 Hz AMS in/AMS out
On 7/27/2023 11:38, Orv Beach wrote:
I know how packet radio deals with collision avoidance: poorly. How does VARA (specifically FM) deal with it?

Orv W6BI








Virus-free.
Re: Collision avoidance?

 

Correct. The two VARA endpoints use nearly 100% of the airtime, when in a connected state, exclusive of:
* Key-up time on each transmission
* Minor quiet times between keep alive transmissions during idle periods.

After the connected state concludes, two other endpoints may use the channel.

73,


? --Michael? WZ0C


On Thursday, July 27, 2023 at 02:53:04 PM EDT, Eric KE8GRY <ke8gry@...> wrote:


It does not. AX.25 allows for multiple users, Vara is one at a time as far as I know.

KE8GRY

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 2:38 PM Orv Beach <orv.beach@...> wrote:
I know how packet radio deals with collision avoidance: poorly. How does
VARA (specifically FM) deal with it?

Orv W6BI
Re: recommendation for HF rig

 
Edited

I want to clarify my comment about the Yaesu FT-991A being "a special case", in regards to full-throughput VARA FM WIDE operation, when the transceiver is set up with an external rig-interface device, through the radio's mini-DIN6 DATA connector.?

You can achieve full-throughput VARA FM WIDE connections with this setup. However, the radio-interface cable, and any 9600/1200 jumper inside the rig-interface device, must be in the 1200bps configuration. This is because the FT-991A deviates from the common practice of routing 1200bps receive audio (which is limited to 3KHz bandwidth and has FM de-emphasis filtering) to a different mini-DIN6 pin than where wide-bandwidth, unfiltered 9600bps audio is routed.

On the FT-991A, the 9600bps signal or the 1200bps signal are both routed only through the mini-DIN6 ¡°1200bps receive¡± pin. Inside the FT-991A,?the 9600 data / 1200 data menu selects?the source for the receive signal¡­ 9600bps - from the FM discriminator circuit, 1200bps - from the ?normal receive audio chain, before the squelch circuit.

In the simplest terms, for full-throughput VARA FM WIDE operation, the FT-991A menus must be set for 9600bps data (not 1200bps), and the radio-interface cable from the rig-interface device must be wired for 1200bps operation. Also, if there is a 1200bps/9600bps jumper inside the rig interface device, it must be set to the 1200bps position.

Mark - AD7EF
3121 - 3140 of 9336