Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mj04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A613A380000AF; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 11:27:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UDGlO-0000I5-Q3 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 16:00:18 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UDGlO-0000Hw-Ch for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 16:00:18 +0000 Received: from out1.ip02ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.238]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UDGlM-0007Vh-S4 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 16:00:17 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApQBANpmN1ECZMUt/2dsb2JhbAANN4gjvCKBcIMdAQEBAQMjDwEFTQQLCQgEAQEBAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAT0IEwYCAQGxbnGSboEjjCiBNhIGEIIXgRMDlkuTeIFy X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,795,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="420687385" Received: from host-2-100-197-45.as13285.net (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([2.100.197.45]) by out1.ip02ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 06 Mar 2013 15:59:55 +0000 Message-ID: <513767FA.9040505@psk31.plus.com> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:59:54 +0000 From: g3zjo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <51371E11.6020502@psk31.plus.com> <513746F3.7090508@psk31.plus.com> <84B77AD08F5F42849E6492B9048EC349@IBM7FFA209F07C> <51375C40.6050501@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <513761CD.8070107@psk31.plus.com> In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130306-0, 06/03/2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 06/03/2013 15:50, Minto Witteveen wrote: > I am currently resticted to modes I can program myself in the PIC... > AMTOR should be easy (I just have to find the encoding protocoll, but > it seems very simple) > I have not yet found a protocoll description of MFSK mode(s), i.e. how > to generate these. > > If I need to use fldigi I have to reassemble my old 500 KHz > transverter, that one uses my ft817 to drive it. > > 73's Minto pa3bca > > > > > > Ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse > Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Scan-Signature: 290c8768709872f914a4ca71ad6bfe49 Subject: Re: LF: Re: RTTY vs. AMTOR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d7b9851376e8e3a7c X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none On 06/03/2013 15:50, Minto Witteveen wrote: > I am currently resticted to modes I can program myself in the PIC... > AMTOR should be easy (I just have to find the encoding protocoll, but > it seems very simple) > I have not yet found a protocoll description of MFSK mode(s), i.e. how > to generate these. > > If I need to use fldigi I have to reassemble my old 500 KHz > transverter, that one uses my ft817 to drive it. > > 73's Minto pa3bca > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse > -----Original Message----- From: g3zjo > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 16:33 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: RTTY vs. AMTOR > > Hi Stefan > > On 06/03/2013 15:09, Stefan Schäfer wrote: >> Eddie, Gary, Chris, Minto, MF, >> >> I've read a bit about RTTY and AMTOR in Wikipedia. Maybe AMTOR would >> help us a bit more, even when not used in that ARQ mode but also in >> beacon stile, due to the FEC? >> > MultiPSK has AMTOR with FEC, yes we don't want ARQ do we. I have run it, > same width as RTTY the FEC may help but its just as fast it is QSO mode. > > Again I will ask the question, why is MFSK not being considered I am > running it at the moment on 478.200. MFSK4 is on Fldigi can you try it > now.? > > Eddie >> Eddie, what was the name of the program that offers that mode for >> free? I cannot find your recent email where you already mentioned it. >> >> 73, Stefan >> >> > > >