ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
esc to dismiss
|
|
Associated Radio has cables for kantronics tnc’s and others, many are listed on eBay.
Jim KI0BK
|
Hi Lee, That was me. Les, WY0GTR owns Ham Made Parts. Has been making me TNC cables for years with no problems.
https://hammadeparts.com/
73 de Chris ww2bsa
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: Lee - WB4QOJ <wb4qoj@...> Date: 6/4/24 10:49 PM (GMT-05:00) Subject: [network105] TNC to Radio cables
If I remember correctly a while back someone posted that there is someone that makes cables to order for TNC to Radio. i.e. Kantronics, MFJ and so on. ? Who is that does anyone have the info and experience with the quality. thanks Lee WB4QOJ?
|
|
|
Quality is 1st rate. I have purchased several cables and have been very pleased.?
Mark
N2UEM
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jun 4, 2024, at 9:49?PM, Lee - WB4QOJ <wb4qoj@...> wrote:
If I remember correctly a while back someone posted that there is someone that makes cables to order for TNC to Radio. i.e. Kantronics, MFJ and so on.
? Who is that does anyone have the info and experience with the quality.
thanks Lee WB4QOJ?
If I remember correctly a while back someone posted that there is someone that makes cables to order for TNC to Radio. i.e. Kantronics, MFJ and so on.
? Who is that does anyone have the info and experience with the quality.
thanks Lee WB4QOJ?
|
Just a question on MFJ 1278BDSP
? ?Has anyone ever used a MFJ- 1278BDSP for Multiple Modes...including Packet. The DSP model may be better not sure. ? ?I have used 1270-B-C and 1274 models all did well even as stand alone nodes with TheNet Chips.
? ?Just curious.
73 Lee WB4QOJ Network105
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Thanks all!
I think this is where we begin to loose interest by the "younger" generations. I do not see anywhere in the definition and purpose of amateur radio that we continue to do things the same way as years before. This includes only accepting person to person contact. Most of us just do not have time to hang around mike's and keyboard's anymore waiting for that perfect contact.
Why is a QSO not acceptable if I connect to a packet system via RF, leave a message on that system for a valid user of that system, and then get a return message (or ACK that the message was received)? This is totally via radio, and the other station can reply to that message when they desire.
I understand digipeating being borderline, but message drop off and retrieval later? I do not think that is cheating as long as it uses radio.
Thanks all for your opinions, I really do appreciate and value, even if I do not totally agree.
de Chris
KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Why not? If I can log a FT4, FT8, RTTY, or any other digital QSO on HF and get credit for it on my WAC or any other award, then why can't I log a PKT QSO?
Chris ww2bsa?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: Bill - AC0VC <wjburek@...> Date: 5/27/24 4:05 PM (GMT-05:00) Subject: Re: [network105] Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
No one has ever logged a packet contact in the past. Keeping a log of paths and nodes maybe.? On May 27, 2024, at 10:46?AM, Chris Lance WW2BSA via groups.io <ww2bsa@...> wrote:
? #5 only. Think of keyboard to keyboard like a voice QSO.
In my early days, I made a DX contact on 10 meters FM via a 440 link through? a 10 meter repeater. Didn't count as it wasn't direct. The repeater did all the hard work. Lol.
So, you can log ANY contact on paper or your favorite logging software, for person pleasure, reference, sentimental reasons, etc. But if you want your packet QSO to count towards WAS, WAC, or whatever award you're working on,? it should be direct.?
My 2 cents.
Prof. Chris Lance www.ww2bsa.org www.EastNetPacket.com www.Network105.org www.DEPN.net Radio Station Manager Mount Allamuchy Scout Reservation ARRL Life Member
-------- Original message -------- From: Christopher Molnar KO4YAW <cmolnar65@...> Date: 5/26/24 9:07 PM (GMT-05:00) Subject: [network105] Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Well,?
Being an Old Fart Operator,
I would consider, that only a Direct Keyboard to Keyboard
Connect (no Digipeating), whereas? you have an actual QSO, with an actual signal report, as a log worthy contact.
I may be wrong (probably), but that is just the crusty old fart in me... :-)
-- Randy, WR0RR
(ex: KA0UYL, N0GMX).
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message --------
From: Christopher Molnar KO4YAW <cmolnar65@...>
Date: 5/26/24 20:07 (GMT-06:00)
Subject: [network105] Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
No one has ever logged a packet contact in the past. Keeping a log of paths and nodes maybe.?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On May 27, 2024, at 10:46?AM, Chris Lance WW2BSA via groups.io <ww2bsa@...> wrote:
? #5 only. Think of keyboard to keyboard like a voice QSO.
In my early days, I made a DX contact on 10 meters FM via a 440 link through? a 10 meter repeater. Didn't count as it wasn't direct. The repeater did all the hard work. Lol.
So, you can log ANY contact on paper or your favorite logging software, for person pleasure, reference, sentimental reasons, etc. But if you want your packet QSO to count towards WAS, WAC, or whatever award you're working on,? it should be direct.?
My 2 cents.
Prof. Chris Lance www.ww2bsa.org www.EastNetPacket.com www.Network105.org www.DEPN.net Radio Station Manager Mount Allamuchy Scout Reservation ARRL Life Member
-------- Original message -------- From: Christopher Molnar KO4YAW <cmolnar65@...> Date: 5/26/24 9:07 PM (GMT-05:00) Subject: [network105] Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
#5 only. Think of keyboard to keyboard like a voice QSO.
In my early days, I made a DX contact on 10 meters FM via a 440 link through? a 10 meter repeater. Didn't count as it wasn't direct. The repeater did all the hard work. Lol.
So, you can log ANY contact on paper or your favorite logging software, for person pleasure, reference, sentimental reasons, etc. But if you want your packet QSO to count towards WAS, WAC, or whatever award you're working on,? it should be direct.?
My 2 cents.
Prof. Chris Lance www.ww2bsa.org www.EastNetPacket.com www.Network105.org www.DEPN.net Radio Station Manager Mount Allamuchy Scout Reservation ARRL Life Member
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: Christopher Molnar KO4YAW <cmolnar65@...> Date: 5/26/24 9:07 PM (GMT-05:00) Subject: [network105] Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
? #5 – good advice. ? Joseph D. Yuna
Joseph D. Yuna (LCDR USN/ret.) 1006 River Hills Rd. Beavercreek, OH 45430-1124 United States of America Primary:? +617.943.2635 W4JDY1953@... ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Scott VE3QBZ via groups.io
Sent: Monday, 27 May, 2024 10:24
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [network105] Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?? I only log #5.? If I used an intermediary station, I add that to the notes so I know what path I used to get the log entry. ? -Scott ?? On 2024-05-26 21:07, Christopher Molnar KO4YAW via groups.io wrote: Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes? examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Correct, but someone needs to tell the ARRL staff about this for US Licensed operators: ? Full Title: ?Elimination of logging requirements in the Amateur Radio Service Document Type: ?Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Bureau(s): ?Managing Director No Bureau DA/FCC #: ?FCC-82-456 Docket No: ?82-726 Federal Register Citation: ?47 FR 50726 (11/09/1982) ? ARRL states: “Legally, a log of your transmissions would be invaluable in proving your innocence in an interference complaint.” However, that will not hold up in a court room unless the logs are signed and dated and witnessed, as these logs can be forged/edited/items omitted. ? Best bet is to use a integrated program like HRD and avoid the hassle if and when it occurs. ? Also, despite the ARRL adoption of the rather RFI Self-Certification process for amateur radio stations (having done with as a tech, officer and engineer within the DoD), and noting it is a bit over the top whereas a simple RF Sniffer would do far better than a tabular analysis sheet (I use an old but sensitive Midland SWR meter with a small whip antenna in my shack to ensure I have no stray RF birds flying around my shack when transmitting). ? My suggestion now after 51 years of private, military and defense work here and overseas with allied nations is to use a log – not only for your own protection in times where too many people are in the US as foreign operatives, but in case one has to prove one’s skills in times of a national emergency w/o going into further discussions as to what I mean as a certified voluntary FEMA operator. ? I still collect QSL cards and use their .jpg images in a library out of respect for those who take their time to communicate, not just operate. FT8 – I am not talking to a flesh and blood operator sadly, hence no skill required in a plug-and-play mode. But for the CW and voice modes (inc. digital) and even Packet/Pactor/RTTY/… like the log, it helps me to remind myself what a wonderful world we have despite cultural and political differences we Hams seem to have properly put into perspective. Better than the Masons, so to speak w/o being secretive about nothing tangible. ? Note:? I am about to sell two PK-232MBX modems one fully equipped but its tuning pot needing replacement and the other complete but w/o the full add-ins along with three S/W manuals at the end of this month. Look for the sale on QRZ and eBay. I have two quality maritime modems so the need for these outstanding legacy modems is no longer needed. I used LanLink and another terminal program to talk to both with some macros/scripts for pre-programmed commands eliminating the use of the archaic DOS-based software. I am deleting all of these program as I fail to see their utility as compared to the terminal programs freely D/L and only requiring the operator to do a little digging and playing with the modem commands. ? Again though, w/o logging a contact it is like not having a diary that sadly when you get older, memories fade with time. ? ? Joseph D. Yuna
Joseph D. Yuna (LCDR USN/ret.) 1006 River Hills Rd. Beavercreek, OH 45430-1124 United States of America Primary:? +617.943.2635 W4JDY1953@... ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Christopher Molnar KO4YAW via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, 26 May, 2024 21:07
To: [email protected]
Subject: [network105] Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?? Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes? examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
I only log #5.? If I used an intermediary station, I add that to
the notes so I know what path I used to get the log entry.
-Scott
??
On 2024-05-26 21:07, Christopher Molnar
KO4YAW via groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so
logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in
other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be
logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave
a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station
and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator
via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect
via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
I would clarify a bit by the purpose of the “log”. ?Personally, I log all activity, band, power, mode, etc. ?This helps me if there are ever interference complaints, etc. ?I do this whether there’s actual contact or exchange with a signal report or not.?
Then there is the “log” for contact which may or may not be used toward an award or contest. ?Those have their own rules and requirements. ?Or, if there’s an actual QSL card exchanged in the future, it’s useful to have that contact in the log to reciprocate.
I log all first time packet connections just so that I remember who I was able to reach and when. ?It also serves as a reminder to connect again in the future to check in for messages etc.
73,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On May 26, 2024, at 9:22?PM, Ben Kuhn - KU0HN via groups.io <ku0hn@...> wrote:
?I don't know that there is a right or wrong answer. I only log 5 since that's a two-way contact with another ham. 1-4 are a two-way contact with an automatically controlled digital station or message forwarding system so I don't log them. 73, Ben KU0HN -------- Original Message -------- On May 26, 2024, 8:07?PM, Christopher Molnar KO4YAW < cmolnar65@...> wrote:
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
--
Jesse Bertier, N1UGK
https://n1ugk.com
|
Re: Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
I don't know that there is a right or wrong answer. I only log 5 since that's a two-way contact with another ham.
1-4 are a two-way contact with an automatically controlled digital station or message forwarding system so I don't log them.
73,
Ben KU0HN
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original Message -------- On May 26, 2024, 8:07?PM, Christopher Molnar KO4YAW < cmolnar65@...> wrote:
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Packet - what do you consider a "logable" contact?
Good Evening Net105'rs!
(Before I ask this question I want to clarify I am in the US so logging is not required by the FCC - just in case this is see in other countries.)
In your opinion what do you consider a contact that can be logged in packet modes?
examples:
1) A new user logs into a packet BBS via RF
2) A packet user leaves you a message on your BBS and you reply
3) You successfully connect to another packet station and leave a message
4) You read a message someone left for you on another station and reply to it
5) You have a keyboard to keyboard chat with another operator via HF
6) You hear another stations beacon
In my opinion:
2-5 should be a logged contact
6 - nah, I can't see that as logged
1 - I sort of think this is a valid contact, they did connect via RF and used the BBS to setup an account.
What are your thoughts?
73,
de Chris - KO4YAW
|
Re: Seeking a Timewave PK232MBX w/ firmware 7.1 or higher
For that price, one could have bought a SCS modem. ? Joseph D. Yuna
Joseph D. Yuna (LCDR USN/ret.) 1006 River Hills Rd. Beavercreek, OH 45430-1124 United States of America Primary:? +617.943.2635 W4JDY1953@... ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of HB K4HYJ via groups.io
Sent: Friday, 22 March, 2024 11:51
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [network105] Seeking a Timewave PK232MBX w/ firmware 7.1 or higher? I just bought a new PK-232sc+ from a mom and pop ham shop in Ohio. It was $569 plus shipping. ? Maybe it was NOS.? I have a couple PK’s on the bench that I’m waiting on repair parts. ?They will be at least those specs. One has the DSP option which is nice. One has the soundcard which is really nice.? I’ll have pricing once they are repaired.? ? You are correct Tim... I gave $150 for the AEA and then sent it to Timewave and gave them $270 for the upgrades. That is over $400 in the TNC. That is two much mony.? ?BUT I am a HAM and sometimes we do irrational things when it comes to our hoby.? ?jw ------ Original Message ------ Date 3/21/2024 9:36:36 PM Subject Re: [network105] Seeking a Timewave PK232MBX w/ firmware 7.1 or higher I didn't think they make "new" AEA/Timewaves anymore, but I did see a listing on Ham Radio Outlet for one that was "out of stock." What is truth these days? From my two discussions with Randy at Timewave he said folks shouldn't pay too much. (What does that mean?) In reality that's tough to do because there really aren't many out there to begin with. I figured if someone on this forum is willing to sell one that has been substantially upgraded its probably a safer bet than ebay, or QRZ, EHam classifieds, etc. where you have to do dental surgery asking questions and ask them to send more pictures of the guts of the machine to determine condition, age and upgrades.? I just bought one from KY4JW that he substantially upgraded. It was more than what Randy at Timewave said I should pay, but I figure with everything being upside down these days that I wasn't going to do much better anytime soon and I really cannot afford to delay my project any longer looking for a "perfect" solution. Jim (KY4JW) did a lot of upgrades so its probably a very good deal all things considered. Plan B for me is Kantronics if the AEA turns into a nosebleed. I think Hank (can't recall call sign) is your best source of supply. He said in a previous Group thread he has several he is willing to sell that have been upgraded. I think he should be your point of focus in order to get a machine that has been upgraded substantially or fully if you want an upgraded AEA. Not sure I can be much more help to you, but I'll be happy to try. ? Not trying to hijack your thread Tim, but since you and Hank have had recent discussions with Timewave, would yall mind telling me the price of a new unit (assuming there was one available)? And Hank, do you have an idea of what the special order military model runs? Just curious. I started my packet journey about a year and a half ago with a single board AEA in immaculate shape and totally unmolested / unmodified. I have since bought numerous TNCs (mostly Paccom). And I am finally able to make two of them converse with one another clear across the bench! Anyways, my AEA is a versatile unit, but is plagued with the well known lockup issue when left unattended too long. I appreciate the info already provided in this thread gentlemen. ? I have 3 SCS modems and they are small but multi-model giant killers. ? Joseph D. Yuna
Joseph D. Yuna (LCDR USN/ret.) 1006 River Hills Rd. Beavercreek, OH 45430-1124 United States of America Primary:? +617.943.2635 W4JDY1953@... ? ? Thank you for your questions, but a Timewave is my requirement. I may change my requirement at some later point in time, but at this point in time my requirement is non negotiable for my specific use case. I may actually need a second in the future, but I can start my project with one. Do you have a fully functional Timewave PK232MBX you want to sell with firmware 7.1 or higher installed and no battery leakage? On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 06:00:27 PM PST, HB K4HYJ via <hbjr@...> wrote: What is making you say there is a difference?? No MBX daughterboard? Or DSP added? ? Hank K4HYJ ? ? Must be a Timewave and not an AEA. Timewave is my requirement. You either have a Timewave to sell or not. I don't appreciate anyone second guessing my requirement.
|
Re: Net 30 (or 30M Packet)
On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 07:17 AM, Steve K4RVA wrote:
10149.0 and 10149.3 center frequency, or 10147.3 USB + 1700 Hz and + 2000 Hz
It seems like that's mainly APRS traffic? I'll move to 10144 LSB + 1700 for the rest of the day. Cheers, Steve K4RVA Colorado Springs DM78pv
|
Re: Net 30 (or 30M Packet)
A couple of months ago I had heard 300bd packet activity at 10149.0 and 10149.3 center frequency, or 10147.3 USB + 1700 Hz and + 2000 Hz, but it's been a while since I've tried monitoring there. I think I will today! :)
|
Chris Lance WW2BSA
Mark Acierno
Christopher Molnar KO4YAW
W4JDY
Steve K4RVA