Author Archive
Sivan’s Wonder Loop
September 8th, 2010 | 
Author:
It's always good to hear when something one does or writes inspires somebody else to try it and they are pleased with the outcome. Sivan, 4X6IZ, made a version of my portable Wonder Loop and found that "it works as advertised." He has put some information and pictures of it and another loop he made on a website. His idea of using polyethylene coated aluminium pipe to make a fixed frequency loop and tuning capacitor is particularly interesting if you always operate close to a particular frequency such as for QRP CW, PSK31 etc. If I had space in my attic for another magnetic loop I could dedicate for HF APRS use I would definitely make one of these.
I'm sure you'll find it worth reading about Sivan's magnetic loop antennas.
I'm sure you'll find it worth reading about Sivan's magnetic loop antennas.
Undecodable mode alert
If you're operating the PSK digimode on the weekend of 18th-19th September and suddenly find your screen full of PSK63 signals that you can't decode, don't be worried that there is something wrong with your radio or your computer. You are hearing the 7th CIS DX QPSK63 Contest 2010. Yes, it's QPSK63, that mode you've seen on your menu and never been able to get a reply to when you tried it. If you were ever frustrated by this, now's your chance to get satisfaction!
Starting at 1200UTC on the Saturday and continuing until 1200UTC the following day, the object is to make as many contacts as possible using QPSK63 (and only QPSK63) between stations in the Commonwealth of Independent States (known to many of us as the Former Soviet Union) and stations who are somewhere else. For more information see the contest website.
If you prefer SSB to digimodes, look for the upcoming 1st DX Esperanto Contest. It's a contest for phone operators, where all the contacts must be made using Esperanto.
Starting at 1200UTC on the Saturday and continuing until 1200UTC the following day, the object is to make as many contacts as possible using QPSK63 (and only QPSK63) between stations in the Commonwealth of Independent States (known to many of us as the Former Soviet Union) and stations who are somewhere else. For more information see the contest website.
If you prefer SSB to digimodes, look for the upcoming 1st DX Esperanto Contest. It's a contest for phone operators, where all the contacts must be made using Esperanto.
Barely making contact
I was reflecting on what I wrote yesterday about the EchoLink app for Android and why I find it and similar developments disturbing. I thought it was because it made me uneasy having to face the fact that the internet and a cellphone appears to make ham radio redundant by allowing us to make the same contacts so much more easily without using the ham bands at all. Then I had a blinding revelation. Ham radio is not about making contacts. It is about not making contacts, or making them only with luck and some difficulty.
I almost stumbled across this truth a few months ago after I sold my first VX-8R to do APRS on a smartphone using Lynn KJ4ERJ's excellent APRSISCE software. It worked far better than the 2m radio, allowing me to be tracked and exchange messages in places where there was no 2m signal. But I went back to using RF for precisely that reason. The smartphone didn't provide the interest of allowing me to see how VHF RF propagates around the local terrain. The disappointment of not being tracked as I slogged up the mountain was balanced by my surprise when a beacon was gated from a location I wouldn't have thought possible and the interest created in working out how it happened. There is also the technical challenge of finding ways to improve coverage and get a radio signal out of difficult locations, for which buying a smartphone is simply a cop-out.
When you look at other ham activities that remain popular or are even gaining in popularity it's obvious that the interest is not in how easy it is to make contacts, but how hard. DXing isn't about pressing the PTT and ticking another entity off the list a minute later, it's about what you have to do - buy equipment, improve your antennas, learn about propagation, develop operating skills, be patient - in order to achieve it. People boast about the DX they've worked, but what keeps them interested in DXing is the places they haven't worked and how hard it will be to work them. Dialling up a contact using an internet application has nothing to do with it.
Contesting isn't popular because it's easy to amass a winning score but because you need the best equipment, the best antennas and lots of skill to get even close. It isn't meant to be a level playing field. That's why many people dislike developments like reverse beacons and skimmers that take away some of the skill required.
QRP pursuits like WSPR or MEPT beaconing aren't about making contacts at all, but just about seeing how far a whiff of RF can go. The excitement isn't in being received by someone for the nth time, it's that first barely detectable trace on the screen of someone or somewhere new that makes you punch the air (if QRPers go in for such QRO expressions of emotion.)
The thing about VHF FM activity is that for the most part it isn't about the achievement of the contact at all. It's just about being able to converse with people. When I was first licensed, before mobile phones and inclusive call packages, chatting on 2m FM was actually the best and certainly the cheapest way of keeping in contact with my local ham friends. But things have changed over the last 35 years and I haven't been paying attention. I'm the dinosaur who wouldn't disclose his mobile number to the radio club database because I felt that if someone wanted to talk to me about radio they could wait until they can contact me on the radio. But I suspect that everyone else has moved on. If they want to speak with one of their ham buddies they pick up the phone. Which may partly explain why the VHF bands these days are almost dead. Or even the development of D-Star, which provides some of the convenience of calling someone on the phone without totally abandoning use of the ham bands.
In only a handful of pursuits like SOTA and WOTA where the point is to make a contact direct using radio is 2m FM still used in what I would call a traditional manner. People will struggle to hear their signal report even if the activator is right down in the noise and get a feeling of having accomplished something when they are successful.
So EchoLink on a smartphone really doesn't change anything. It already changed. Whether hams call one another on the phone using their phone number or their EchoLink node number really makes no difference. It has just been blinkered thinking on my part to have felt that if people hold ham radio licenses they ought to talk to each other using ham radio even if it isn't the most convenient way of doing so.
I almost stumbled across this truth a few months ago after I sold my first VX-8R to do APRS on a smartphone using Lynn KJ4ERJ's excellent APRSISCE software. It worked far better than the 2m radio, allowing me to be tracked and exchange messages in places where there was no 2m signal. But I went back to using RF for precisely that reason. The smartphone didn't provide the interest of allowing me to see how VHF RF propagates around the local terrain. The disappointment of not being tracked as I slogged up the mountain was balanced by my surprise when a beacon was gated from a location I wouldn't have thought possible and the interest created in working out how it happened. There is also the technical challenge of finding ways to improve coverage and get a radio signal out of difficult locations, for which buying a smartphone is simply a cop-out.
When you look at other ham activities that remain popular or are even gaining in popularity it's obvious that the interest is not in how easy it is to make contacts, but how hard. DXing isn't about pressing the PTT and ticking another entity off the list a minute later, it's about what you have to do - buy equipment, improve your antennas, learn about propagation, develop operating skills, be patient - in order to achieve it. People boast about the DX they've worked, but what keeps them interested in DXing is the places they haven't worked and how hard it will be to work them. Dialling up a contact using an internet application has nothing to do with it.
Contesting isn't popular because it's easy to amass a winning score but because you need the best equipment, the best antennas and lots of skill to get even close. It isn't meant to be a level playing field. That's why many people dislike developments like reverse beacons and skimmers that take away some of the skill required.
QRP pursuits like WSPR or MEPT beaconing aren't about making contacts at all, but just about seeing how far a whiff of RF can go. The excitement isn't in being received by someone for the nth time, it's that first barely detectable trace on the screen of someone or somewhere new that makes you punch the air (if QRPers go in for such QRO expressions of emotion.)
The thing about VHF FM activity is that for the most part it isn't about the achievement of the contact at all. It's just about being able to converse with people. When I was first licensed, before mobile phones and inclusive call packages, chatting on 2m FM was actually the best and certainly the cheapest way of keeping in contact with my local ham friends. But things have changed over the last 35 years and I haven't been paying attention. I'm the dinosaur who wouldn't disclose his mobile number to the radio club database because I felt that if someone wanted to talk to me about radio they could wait until they can contact me on the radio. But I suspect that everyone else has moved on. If they want to speak with one of their ham buddies they pick up the phone. Which may partly explain why the VHF bands these days are almost dead. Or even the development of D-Star, which provides some of the convenience of calling someone on the phone without totally abandoning use of the ham bands.
In only a handful of pursuits like SOTA and WOTA where the point is to make a contact direct using radio is 2m FM still used in what I would call a traditional manner. People will struggle to hear their signal report even if the activator is right down in the noise and get a feeling of having accomplished something when they are successful.
So EchoLink on a smartphone really doesn't change anything. It already changed. Whether hams call one another on the phone using their phone number or their EchoLink node number really makes no difference. It has just been blinkered thinking on my part to have felt that if people hold ham radio licenses they ought to talk to each other using ham radio even if it isn't the most convenient way of doing so.
EchoLink on Android
An EchoLink app has recently been released for Android mobile phones. That makes two smartphone platforms - Android and iPhone - that can now be used to access EchoLink. Is this really a good idea?
Let me make it clear from the start: I like EchoLink. What I like about it is that it can be used to link repeaters in different parts of the country or the world, and even allows individual operators like myself to set up simplex voice nodes without the technical complications, expense and licensing issues of running a repeater, the aim being simply to get some interesting activity on what may otherwise be a more or less dead band.
I realize that contacts made using EchoLink are not traditional amateur radio point to point contacts, so I don't want to start up the old "it's not ham radio" argument again. But I don't think the point of most contacts made on VHF FM is that you worked direct and exchange QSLs afterwards. They are just conversations between hams. The fact that the transmission went most of the way over the internet is of no more significance than if you used a conventional repeater. However it does matter to me that radios are used at each end, otherwise it's internet chat not a radio contact in any shape or form. So far, that seems to be the case with most of the EchoLink contacts I have made, but for how long?
The trouble with EchoLink apps for smartphones is that they are VoIP apps pure and simple. They encourage the use of EchoLink as a VoIP chat mode. Smartphones are so popular now that I'm afraid this could become the dominant way of using the system. It could even replace ham radio handhelds. Users are going to ask themselves: Why bother carrying this goofy looking radio about when I can just use my phone? One more nail in the coffin of amateur radio?
Let me make it clear from the start: I like EchoLink. What I like about it is that it can be used to link repeaters in different parts of the country or the world, and even allows individual operators like myself to set up simplex voice nodes without the technical complications, expense and licensing issues of running a repeater, the aim being simply to get some interesting activity on what may otherwise be a more or less dead band.
I realize that contacts made using EchoLink are not traditional amateur radio point to point contacts, so I don't want to start up the old "it's not ham radio" argument again. But I don't think the point of most contacts made on VHF FM is that you worked direct and exchange QSLs afterwards. They are just conversations between hams. The fact that the transmission went most of the way over the internet is of no more significance than if you used a conventional repeater. However it does matter to me that radios are used at each end, otherwise it's internet chat not a radio contact in any shape or form. So far, that seems to be the case with most of the EchoLink contacts I have made, but for how long?
The trouble with EchoLink apps for smartphones is that they are VoIP apps pure and simple. They encourage the use of EchoLink as a VoIP chat mode. Smartphones are so popular now that I'm afraid this could become the dominant way of using the system. It could even replace ham radio handhelds. Users are going to ask themselves: Why bother carrying this goofy looking radio about when I can just use my phone? One more nail in the coffin of amateur radio?
Making my position clear
Observant readers may have noticed a change in the "strapline" in the header logo of my blog. It now reads "My position on amateur radio."
The new strapline reflects more accurately what the blog is currently about. If you haven't already realized, it is also a play on words. "My position" alludes to my present interest in APRS which is the subject of many of my postings. But it also makes it clear that this is an opinion blog; that I use this blog to express my thoughts on various ham radio related matters, to give my point of view without any obligation on my part for that view to be fair, balanced or uncontroversial.
So don't expect any changes to the content, other than a gradual evolution as my interests move from one thing to another. I expect that I will still occasionally write on topics related to stealth ham radio operation, but I feel I have probably pushed things about as far as they can go in my present situation. Now it's just a matter of waiting and hoping that I don't experience the Final QRN that puts paid to my radio activities for good.
The new strapline reflects more accurately what the blog is currently about. If you haven't already realized, it is also a play on words. "My position" alludes to my present interest in APRS which is the subject of many of my postings. But it also makes it clear that this is an opinion blog; that I use this blog to express my thoughts on various ham radio related matters, to give my point of view without any obligation on my part for that view to be fair, balanced or uncontroversial.
So don't expect any changes to the content, other than a gradual evolution as my interests move from one thing to another. I expect that I will still occasionally write on topics related to stealth ham radio operation, but I feel I have probably pushed things about as far as they can go in my present situation. Now it's just a matter of waiting and hoping that I don't experience the Final QRN that puts paid to my radio activities for good.
Open digital voice codec released
David Rowe has released an early version of his low bit rate open source digital voice codec. Whilst this is certainly a significant achievement, I can't get very excited about it for two reasons. First, it is incompatible with the AMBE codec used by Icom in D-Star, so it is never going to be able to work with existing D-Star equipment and it is not all that likely that it will be incorporated in future versions. And second, I still don't see what benefits digital voice offers us as radio hams in the real world.
Digital audio gives you clear "fully quieting" audio up until the signal starts to be lost, when it quickly breaks up and you get nothing. Analogue audio experiences a gradual degradation as the signal gets weaker. Those who have used the two report that an analogue signal is usably copyable about 15 - 20% further out than a digital signal. I can understand that for some professional services nothing but clear copy will do. But we are amateurs who are supposed to be good at digging weak signals out of the noise. Is this really "progress", in the context of what ham radio is used for?
The other reason for my antipathy to digital voice is that I question whether we need another voice mode at a time when VHF analogue voice operation itself seems to be in decline. Surely it would be better to be making more use of existing technologies like Echolink to create more activity for users of existing equipment than to introduce new digital modes that will have an even smaller number of users. I've seen D-Star radios up for sale because the original purchaser found there was hardly anyone to talk to, and D-Star has now been around for several years. I don't see the availability of an open source digital voice codec changing that situation somehow.
Digital audio gives you clear "fully quieting" audio up until the signal starts to be lost, when it quickly breaks up and you get nothing. Analogue audio experiences a gradual degradation as the signal gets weaker. Those who have used the two report that an analogue signal is usably copyable about 15 - 20% further out than a digital signal. I can understand that for some professional services nothing but clear copy will do. But we are amateurs who are supposed to be good at digging weak signals out of the noise. Is this really "progress", in the context of what ham radio is used for?
The other reason for my antipathy to digital voice is that I question whether we need another voice mode at a time when VHF analogue voice operation itself seems to be in decline. Surely it would be better to be making more use of existing technologies like Echolink to create more activity for users of existing equipment than to introduce new digital modes that will have an even smaller number of users. I've seen D-Star radios up for sale because the original purchaser found there was hardly anyone to talk to, and D-Star has now been around for several years. I don't see the availability of an open source digital voice codec changing that situation somehow.
The best cheap sound card for digimodes
The popularity of web videos and podcasts means that most ham radio enthusiasts who want to use sound card digital modes no longer want to dedicate their computer's built-in sound card for that purpose. The usual solution is to buy a purpose made interface such as a RigExpert or SignaLink (expensive but highly recommended by all who own one) or an external USB sound card. However a great many people claim that the cheapest USB sound card "dongle" costing just 99p on eBay is good enough. Take it from me, it isn't.
I have had several online discussions bordering on arguments with self proclaimed experts who claim that the sound chip in these cheapo "dongles" is exactly the same as the one in a £100 SignaLink USB interface so the £1 dongle must be just as good. I have no idea if they are right about the chip. What I do know is that when I played back a recording of very weak CW using one of these devices all I could hear was noise. And when I tried to use one of these devices to decode a fast digital mode such as packet, I decoded nothing at all, not a single packet, even though I could see the signal loud and clear on the waterfall.
I have tried a number of these cheap devices. I bought two of the cheap thumb sized "dongles". One I threw away after seeing the noise it introduced on the waterfall. The second I bought thinking it would be good enough for computer audio, which it was, but had to throw it away when it failed after a week. I also spent a bit more on a slightly fancier sound card "dongle" which I currently use for computer audio, but which still displayed the inadequacies on weak signals and fast data modes that I have mentioned.
Finally I tried the device pictured above. It doesn't have a brand name but can be readily identified from the picture and is advertised on eBay as something like "USB 6 Channel 5.1 External Sound Audio Card For Laptop". It costs around £8.50 including postage from China. It comes in a small extruded aluminium case, has connections for SP/DIF input and supports sample rates of up to 48kHz so it would probably be suitable for basic SDR use. It has decoded every digital mode I have so far tried it with. And it's small enough to build into your own box to make a DIY SignaLink.
It comes with a mini-CD containing a Windows driver. This installs a small mixer/control panel application that loads in the task bar and provides the usual control over the various sound effects. I used one of the start-up program managers (Autoruns) to remove it and find that it works perfectly well for my purposes without it, just using the standard Windows mixer settings. This is certainly preferable to the Creative SoundBlaster USB device that some people recommend which allegedly installs 200MB of junk on your hard drive.
I think this is probably the cheapest external sound device that is worth using for sound card digital modes. I'd be interested to know of alternatives, but please don't recommend something unless you have actually done A/B comparisons with a known good sound card using weak signals, fast modes and different software packages. I hate to think of the frustration some people must have experienced following the advice of the self proclaimed experts, buying one of the £1 "dongles" and wondering why they can see a trace on the waterfall and can't decode it.
I have had several online discussions bordering on arguments with self proclaimed experts who claim that the sound chip in these cheapo "dongles" is exactly the same as the one in a £100 SignaLink USB interface so the £1 dongle must be just as good. I have no idea if they are right about the chip. What I do know is that when I played back a recording of very weak CW using one of these devices all I could hear was noise. And when I tried to use one of these devices to decode a fast digital mode such as packet, I decoded nothing at all, not a single packet, even though I could see the signal loud and clear on the waterfall.
Finally I tried the device pictured above. It doesn't have a brand name but can be readily identified from the picture and is advertised on eBay as something like "USB 6 Channel 5.1 External Sound Audio Card For Laptop". It costs around £8.50 including postage from China. It comes in a small extruded aluminium case, has connections for SP/DIF input and supports sample rates of up to 48kHz so it would probably be suitable for basic SDR use. It has decoded every digital mode I have so far tried it with. And it's small enough to build into your own box to make a DIY SignaLink.
It comes with a mini-CD containing a Windows driver. This installs a small mixer/control panel application that loads in the task bar and provides the usual control over the various sound effects. I used one of the start-up program managers (Autoruns) to remove it and find that it works perfectly well for my purposes without it, just using the standard Windows mixer settings. This is certainly preferable to the Creative SoundBlaster USB device that some people recommend which allegedly installs 200MB of junk on your hard drive.
I think this is probably the cheapest external sound device that is worth using for sound card digital modes. I'd be interested to know of alternatives, but please don't recommend something unless you have actually done A/B comparisons with a known good sound card using weak signals, fast modes and different software packages. I hate to think of the frustration some people must have experienced following the advice of the self proclaimed experts, buying one of the £1 "dongles" and wondering why they can see a trace on the waterfall and can't decode it.
WOTA success
I think it's fair to say the Wainwrights On The Air (WOTA) scheme has become a big success. At the start it was probably true that the main participants were existing Summits On The Air (SOTA) enthusiasts who appreciated the opportunity to make more of their Lake District excursions by activating the hills they would otherwise have walked past on their way to a SOTA summit. But recently several local amateurs have got started specifically in WOTA chasing and activating. There has even been a request for a list of the easiest Wainwrights to climb! There isn't an award for that, but it does suggest that WOTA is encouraging people to get out on the hills who were not previously enthusiastic fellwalkers and I think that is one of the best possible outcomes for the scheme.It's a pity, though, that no-one offered to design a nice award certificate for the scheme, which the Workington Radio Club was then going to get professionally printed. The ones I made using a free online certificate maker and print on our cheapo HP multifunction printer (with expensivo ink cartridges) look a poor reward for all the time and sweat that has been expended earning them. I always have a fight getting them to print correctly anyway, so having some professionally printed certificates would have saved me a lot of hassle.
APRS Chat
It has been a while since I wrote about the new APRS client for Windows and Windows Mobile being developed by Lynn, KJ4ERJ and known as APRSISCE/32 but it has been coming on apace with new versions being released almost every day. Many of the improvements probably won't mean much to anyone who doesn't know anything about APRS. But one of the more recent and quite revolutionary developments has been the chat window, which allows you to carry out a two-way text chat conversation with another APRS user.
Instead of the primitive edit box found in most APRS clients in which you would have to type your messages in 64-character chunks due to the limitations of APRS messaging you can now type just what you want and APRSISCE/32 will split it up and send it as separate messages transparently. It also takes care of ensuring the parts are displayed in the right order at the other end. You can also view the entire conversation in its own window - useful if you are having conversations with two or more people when you are tired late at night and lose track of what you are saying to whom!
You can chat with anyone, anywhere in the world. True, at the moment most of these conversations are being conveyed over the internet not RF, which will inevitably incur the complaints that "it's not ham radio." But they could just as easily use RF. The only problem is that for most of us an adequate APRS RF infrastructure to support worldwide messaging doesn't exist. But the more people are attracted to the mode - and even the hobby - by cool developments like this, the more likely it is that an effective infrastructure will be built. In many parts of the world you could certainly link up across town on VHF like this.
Regular digital modes are fun. But is there any reason why the only way to have a contact is for two people to have sole occupancy of a frequency and one sends to the other, then the other replies back, repeat until finished, the way contacts have been made ever since Marconi first picked up a morse key?
You can chat with anyone, anywhere in the world. True, at the moment most of these conversations are being conveyed over the internet not RF, which will inevitably incur the complaints that "it's not ham radio." But they could just as easily use RF. The only problem is that for most of us an adequate APRS RF infrastructure to support worldwide messaging doesn't exist. But the more people are attracted to the mode - and even the hobby - by cool developments like this, the more likely it is that an effective infrastructure will be built. In many parts of the world you could certainly link up across town on VHF like this.
Regular digital modes are fun. But is there any reason why the only way to have a contact is for two people to have sole occupancy of a frequency and one sends to the other, then the other replies back, repeat until finished, the way contacts have been made ever since Marconi first picked up a morse key?
Interference on 30m
I was in the shack making a few adjustments to the Echolink software configuration. The K3 was on 30m APRS with the speaker volume turned down to almost inaudible. Suddenly, at about 1410 UTC, I heard a buzzing type of interference. I looked at the TrueTTY waterfall and saw there were interference bars every 50Hz right across the screen, strong enough to prevent anything from being decoded.
50Hz is the mains frequency here in the UK. With a sinking feeling my immediate thought was that one of the neighbours had discovered a new way to make the HF bands unusable. Then I remembered that Lynn, KJ4ERJ had posted a screenshot of similar interference only the day before in an APRS forum. I checked back, and sure enough the interference Lynn had seen in Florida was exactly the same.
I don't know what it is, but I don't think even my neighbours are capable of generating interference that could be heard across the Atlantic. It's still going strong 30 minutes later. I haven't seen an HF band wiped out like this since the Woodpecker fell silent back in the '80s. Well, at least I've got Echolink!
I don't know what it is, but I don't think even my neighbours are capable of generating interference that could be heard across the Atlantic. It's still going strong 30 minutes later. I haven't seen an HF band wiped out like this since the Woodpecker fell silent back in the '80s. Well, at least I've got Echolink!
The mystery of the failing filters
A couple of months ago I acquired a Kenwood TM-D710 dual band FM transceiver with APRS as it was the best solution to the problem of how to operate an APRS gateway without losing the ability to monitor for voice contacts on 2m when you do not have the space for two widely separated antennas. I have been quite pleased with the radio but rather alarmed at the number of reports of loss of sensitivity due to the failure of one or more of the IF filters. I asked on the Kenwood Yahoo group whether this was just a faulty batch of filters affecting radios of a certain age or a generic problem that was likely to affect any TM-D710 eventually and was directed to this explanation in the blog of Tasos, SV8YM.
It has been a long time since I read such a well written explanation of a technical phenomenon and I'm sure you'll find it interesting, especially if you own a VHF radio with 455kHz IF filters. In fact I'm sure many of you will find other articles of interest in this blog. I've added it to my regular reading list.
It has been a long time since I read such a well written explanation of a technical phenomenon and I'm sure you'll find it interesting, especially if you own a VHF radio with 455kHz IF filters. In fact I'm sure many of you will find other articles of interest in this blog. I've added it to my regular reading list.
The death of VHF
Olga and I have returned from a long weekend in London. I took my VX-8GR along, hoping to see some APRS activity or even make some contacts. But I heard absolutely nothing, nada, zilch, not a braap on the APRS frequency nor any signs of life on the simplex or repeater frequencies.
Twenty years ago I lived in London, in Charlton SE7 and I seem to recall that in those days there were four London repeaters on 2m and plenty of activity. I also seem to recall that some of the repeaters were plagued with abuse. Last weeked even a kerchunker or a pirate playing music would have been a welcome sign that someone was using the amateur frequencies.
I took a laptop with me - the small Eee PC running Ubuntu Linux, with APRSIS32 under wine - to monitor activity and see if my RF beacons were heard. I received a greeting from G5YC via the APRS-IS internet network and that was that. What a contrast to Prague, where I was a month ago, where the APRS activity just didn't stop.
Tim, G4VXE, posted yesterday about creating APRS objects for repeaters using OpenAPRS.net. I commented that it was all very well, but these internet created objects are never transmitted on RF so they never fulfil the intended purpose of the mode which is to inform visiting mobiles of the local repeater frequencies. Unfortunately with the lack of radio activity here in the UK one cannot deny that APRS works much better as an internet application than it does over RF. Anyone who has a computer can call up aprs.fi and see the local picture - if anyone has taken the trouble to create the objects. If they were transmitted on RF, would anyone hear them?
I could say much the same about 2m FM. If I'd had an iPhone I could have made some contacts using the newly released Echolink app, which again is more than I was able to do using my Yaesu. What has happened to ham radio that one can't find any activity even in the UK's biggest city? It seems to me that we have all decided that cellphones are a much better tool for contacting our ham buddies. If we lost the use of the VHF and UHF bands would anyone actually notice?
Twenty years ago I lived in London, in Charlton SE7 and I seem to recall that in those days there were four London repeaters on 2m and plenty of activity. I also seem to recall that some of the repeaters were plagued with abuse. Last weeked even a kerchunker or a pirate playing music would have been a welcome sign that someone was using the amateur frequencies.
I took a laptop with me - the small Eee PC running Ubuntu Linux, with APRSIS32 under wine - to monitor activity and see if my RF beacons were heard. I received a greeting from G5YC via the APRS-IS internet network and that was that. What a contrast to Prague, where I was a month ago, where the APRS activity just didn't stop.
Tim, G4VXE, posted yesterday about creating APRS objects for repeaters using OpenAPRS.net. I commented that it was all very well, but these internet created objects are never transmitted on RF so they never fulfil the intended purpose of the mode which is to inform visiting mobiles of the local repeater frequencies. Unfortunately with the lack of radio activity here in the UK one cannot deny that APRS works much better as an internet application than it does over RF. Anyone who has a computer can call up aprs.fi and see the local picture - if anyone has taken the trouble to create the objects. If they were transmitted on RF, would anyone hear them?
I could say much the same about 2m FM. If I'd had an iPhone I could have made some contacts using the newly released Echolink app, which again is more than I was able to do using my Yaesu. What has happened to ham radio that one can't find any activity even in the UK's biggest city? It seems to me that we have all decided that cellphones are a much better tool for contacting our ham buddies. If we lost the use of the VHF and UHF bands would anyone actually notice?
Screenshots and copyright
Yesterday I received a comment in the site guestbook from Murray Greenman, ZL1BPU, which says: "While I appreciate your ad-hoc publicity for ZL2AFP CMSK, it would have been much better if you had asked permission to use my screen-shot on your blog site! While web pictures and text are widely plagiarized, that doesn't make it right to do so. Copyright still applies and the image is still mine." I have removed the image and inserted a comment directing the reader to this posting in its place.
Since I am on holiday at the moment and did not intend making any blog postings I will leave it to readers of the blog to lead the discussion on this issue. But I would just like to say that part of my career has been made publicizing software. I have always found software authors to be glad of the publicity and have never, until today, received a complaint about using their own images to this end. It is not always possible to take your own screenshots. In this case, I was unable to try the software on the air because of its insistence on using the default soundcard and I thought that it was more interesting to readers to see the live screenshot made by ZL1BPU than a blank one made by me.
As to the question of whether I should have asked permission first, I wonder if ZL1BPU understands what blogging is about? Part of the motivation for writing about some new development in a blog is to be one of the first, and if you have got to write an email asking permission and wait for a reply then it's likely that others will pip you to the post. It's not like writing an article, which may take several days to prepare and where time is not of the essence. Blogging is a bit like tweeting, but more verbose.
Finally I would argue that a screenshot is not an original work of art. I'm not depriving anyone of earned revenue by using it. Anyone can install the software and obtain one that is pretty similar. So why make an issue out of copying someone's screenshot, particularly when the purpose of doing so is to give publicity to the software not to use it with any adverse intent?
I shall certainly think twice about giving publicity to any more new ham radio programs in my blog in future. Perhaps all of you bloggers who happily copy people's QSL cards and shack photos to illustrate your stories about contacts should pause for thought as well. Ought this not to count as "reasonable use" - the clause in copyright laws that allows you to quote part of an article when referring to it?
Since I am on holiday at the moment and did not intend making any blog postings I will leave it to readers of the blog to lead the discussion on this issue. But I would just like to say that part of my career has been made publicizing software. I have always found software authors to be glad of the publicity and have never, until today, received a complaint about using their own images to this end. It is not always possible to take your own screenshots. In this case, I was unable to try the software on the air because of its insistence on using the default soundcard and I thought that it was more interesting to readers to see the live screenshot made by ZL1BPU than a blank one made by me.
As to the question of whether I should have asked permission first, I wonder if ZL1BPU understands what blogging is about? Part of the motivation for writing about some new development in a blog is to be one of the first, and if you have got to write an email asking permission and wait for a reply then it's likely that others will pip you to the post. It's not like writing an article, which may take several days to prepare and where time is not of the essence. Blogging is a bit like tweeting, but more verbose.
Finally I would argue that a screenshot is not an original work of art. I'm not depriving anyone of earned revenue by using it. Anyone can install the software and obtain one that is pretty similar. So why make an issue out of copying someone's screenshot, particularly when the purpose of doing so is to give publicity to the software not to use it with any adverse intent?
I shall certainly think twice about giving publicity to any more new ham radio programs in my blog in future. Perhaps all of you bloggers who happily copy people's QSL cards and shack photos to illustrate your stories about contacts should pause for thought as well. Ought this not to count as "reasonable use" - the clause in copyright laws that allows you to quote part of an article when referring to it?
Hacking a USB GPS
As regular readers will know, I've been playing about with APRS quite a lot in recent weeks and I'm starting to get the urge to build something APRS related. I'm planning to order one of the inexpensive FoxTrak kits, which lets you use a standard VHF FM radio to transmit position reports. To do that you also need a serial GPS and on searching eBay I became aware that serial GPSes seem to be rather more expensive than USB or even Bluetooth devices. This led me to wonder whether it would be possible to hack a USB GPS to use with a tracker like the FoxTrak. My investigations led me to this article by Primiano Tucci on GPS Hacking.
This post is basically an un-loseable bookmark to myself, since it will probably be a few weeks before I get around to working on this and by then I'll have lost the article and never be able to find it again. But it might be of interest to someone else or provoke some interesting comments.
Although I'll probably build the the FoxTrak as-is and test it with one of my 2m rigs I'm really interested in trying HF APRS on the move without having to buy an expensive TNC or lug a laptop around me so I can use AGWPE to generate the 300baud audio. So I'd also be interested to know whether anyone has modified the FoxTrak (or the TinyTrak which I believe is very similar) for the 300baud tones? I know the OpenTracker+ from Argent Data does 300baud "out of the box" but it's quite a bit more expensive, enough more expensive to attract the punitive import fees that will almost double the price.
This post is basically an un-loseable bookmark to myself, since it will probably be a few weeks before I get around to working on this and by then I'll have lost the article and never be able to find it again. But it might be of interest to someone else or provoke some interesting comments.
Although I'll probably build the the FoxTrak as-is and test it with one of my 2m rigs I'm really interested in trying HF APRS on the move without having to buy an expensive TNC or lug a laptop around me so I can use AGWPE to generate the 300baud audio. So I'd also be interested to know whether anyone has modified the FoxTrak (or the TinyTrak which I believe is very similar) for the 300baud tones? I know the OpenTracker+ from Argent Data does 300baud "out of the box" but it's quite a bit more expensive, enough more expensive to attract the punitive import fees that will almost double the price.
Cut the quotes, please
Why do some people find it necessary to put some irrelevant quote after their signature in forum and mailing list postings? When you see posts from these people several times a day it becomes incredibly irritating.
One person whose posts I seem to encounter frequently has two quotes after his signature: "Whoever said nothing is impossible never tried slamming a revolving door!" and "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."
I can't say I ever found the first one very funny but it has got very old after the 100th viewing. And I didn't join a ham radio mailing list to learn about people's political opinions, whether or not I agree with them. So please, just stop doing it.
One person whose posts I seem to encounter frequently has two quotes after his signature: "Whoever said nothing is impossible never tried slamming a revolving door!" and "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."
I can't say I ever found the first one very funny but it has got very old after the 100th viewing. And I didn't join a ham radio mailing list to learn about people's political opinions, whether or not I agree with them. So please, just stop doing it.
