Comments on: QRSS: Radio amateurs’ slow-speed narrowband

By: Bud Plourd

Bud Plourd — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:50:55 +0000

I just wanted to call out how great your writing skills are ;-)

By: Kriss

Kriss — Mon, 25 May 2009 11:27:51 +0000

black cyber-shot t200 digital still cameraanddigital cameras raw formatand17-22 samsung digital cameraandcamera digital dscp10 sony ukandhow to paint aluminum pool deckandhow to hack a mmoandhow to write a commentaryand

By: Mastablubba

Mastablubba — Thu, 21 May 2009 20:05:38 +0000

Hellow yo

just found this wanton prat Shaking Video on youtube…

check it out!

May you can share something similar.

happy watching
mastablubba

By: Mardhanaya

Mardhanaya — Mon, 11 May 2009 03:53:10 +0000

I love your blog. I am trying to get into modelling, do you have any good tips for me?

By: Kenneth Finnegan, W6KWF

Kenneth Finnegan, W6KWF — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 02:28:57 +0000

As for kits to build your own radio, I have heard nothing but good things about the rockmite kit.
http://www.smallwonderlabs.com/Rockmite.htm
But like all of them, notice that you’re going to need an amateur radio license. The first level would be enough to get on 7MHz and 3.5MHz Morse code only, and it is really easy to get (35 multiple choice questions, highest theory is along ohm’s law)

By: colecoman1982

colecoman1982 — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 23:51:12 +0000

@qdos: It’s not a matter of someone “owning” part of the spectrum in the traditional sense, though major broadcast corporations like to talk about it that way, it’s about controlling access to a limited resource so that it remains useful to _anyone_. There are only so much bandwidth available. If there was no regulation, radio transition of information would be impossible because everyone would be fighting to “yell louder” than everyone else in order to be heard. We already see this in some bands such as Wi-Fi and cordless phones when used in densely urban environments. This is most important when it comes to emergency bands that can mean life or death if they become unusable.

By: fartface

fartface — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:27:40 +0000

@joe57005 That’s great. too bad all us Ham Radio operators have done this stuff at even higher data rates for decades.

the Point is that he’s pulling a signal out of the noise floor very effectively. but when the Poop hit’s the fan, ham radio saves the day. not the govt, or police. Katrina Hams had a stable and working comms net for weeks before the police and feds pulled their heads out of the sand. It’s been that way for decades and will continue to be that way for at least another 300 years.

By: Oren Beck

Oren Beck — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:52:33 +0000

We need to have these projects coordinate with the “Whitespace” radio standards teams to prevent a tragic decimation of utility. These sub-QRP projects seem doomed to fall below “Listen before Transmit” protocols ability to detect. Decades ago I saw a demo of 150-190 Kc gear with ERP of <1 w communicate from Chicago to Detroit in loopback mode. Heavily amplified receive antennas and DEEP notch preselectors were part of the set up The details were a bit sketchy as explained by the presenter. But to my memory- it worked by having a transmitter at one end of that segment repeated by one at the opposite band end. Keying rate was not even considered as this was a way pre DSP project unless you call a 567 PLL a DSP device. Imagine making a repeater chain of devices operating in unlicensed modes by cross banding. Respecting of course the no RF modification rules. Just acoustic audio coupling with solenoids to press transmit buttons… With the amusing replication of QRSS like data rates by the accumulated delays.

By: dan

dan — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:26:53 +0000

>>It don’t seem right that one person or organization can own the a part of the electromagnetic spectrum, its like someone owning the clouds.

The EM spectrum isn’t the Internet. If you don’t want to listen to someone on the Internet, you just don’t listen to them. You block them. You route around them. The EM spectrum doesn’t really work that way. If you want it to work reliably, you have to agree on how it should be used.
An extreme example would be operating a high-power broadband transmitter in the 100MHz region. No one around would be able to listen to FM radio. They can’t just not listen, it’s *there* and there’s no alternative.
Another reason to get licensed is that it’s *so* incredibly easy, that the drag of getting fined (or getting beat up by your neighbors) is just not worth it.
Also, no one has found a reason to fight over the clouds yet. Just give ‘em time.

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 15:05:52 +0000

My first thought was – since this is a low bandwidth trade for reliability – what could be sent nowadays to make it useful. Then it occurred to me:

Twitter!

By: qdos

qdos — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:22:42 +0000

I have been into radio for a good long time I have a few hf radios and quite often have a listen to mid Atlantic aircraft, shipping etc…

There is an underground network of radio operators called free banders who use frequencies they call ‘echo charlie’ who operate mainly on 6670khz LSB.

I often thought it would be great to create some calling channels across the frequency spectrum from HF to UHF for free banders.

It don’t seem right that one person or organization can own the a part of the electromagnetic spectrum, its like someone owning the clouds.

By: David

David — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:55:40 +0000

@Kelly, you said…

“One particular kit that I’ve heard a lot about is the softrock, although I understand that they can be a lot of effort to get working. http://www.softrockradio.org/”

I’ve built half a dozen variants of the Softrock radios. The smallest single band receivers take a few hours to build. I’ve never had one fail to work as expected. The most complex transceivers may take a day or two to build and configure with your software defined radio software.

If you run into trouble there is a very active Yahoo Group for the softrock radios at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/

See this page for a very detailed tutorial with photos on building one of the transceiver softrock versions:

http://golddredgervideo.com/kc0wox/softrock/index.htm

Regards, David

By: Kelly Martin

Kelly Martin — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:47:20 +0000

btw, regarding licensing, the question pools in the US aren’t written by or published by the fcc. they’re developed and published by the national committee of volunteer examiners, or NCVEC; see http://ncvec.org

i’ve put together mnemosyne decks for all three question pools (technician, general, and extra); see my blog for more information. http://nonbovine-ruminations.blogspot.com/2009/01/mnemosyne-study-decks-for-fcc-amateur.html

the techniques being discussed in this article pretty much require (in the US) at least a general license; technicians have extremely limited access to HF (frequencies below 30 MHz capable of worldwide propagation). for those in countries other than the US, consult your national telecommunication ministry or amateur radio society.

By: Kelly Martin

Kelly Martin — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:27:45 +0000

@yoss: search google for “QRP transmitter”; you’ll find lots of designs for various transmitters. QRP is an old signal code meaning “low power” (which in the ham world means anything under 5 watts).

One particular kit that I’ve heard a lot about is the softrock, although I understand that they can be a lot of effort to get working. http://www.softrockradio.org/

By: dan

dan — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:10:47 +0000

Here’s the info on how to build the transmitter,

http://www.arrl.org/qex/2007/09/campanella.pdf

but you might look into getting a ham license first (relatively easy)

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/ead/classes.html

Also, somewhere on the net you can find all the possible questions and answers to the test published by the FCC.