Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mj05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 7142B3800009A; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 10:51:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UDGcj-0008VU-6m for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:51:21 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UDGci-0008VL-Ic for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:51:20 +0000 Received: from mail-ee0-f42.google.com ([74.125.83.42]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UDGch-0007Rr-0X for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:51:19 +0000 Received: by mail-ee0-f42.google.com with SMTP id b47so5974715eek.29 for ; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 07:50:58 -0800 (PST) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority :x-msmail-priority:importance:x-mailer:x-mimeole; bh=aypQu+HaG3j+8lCmlj8pTg+e6Jz+62oGdy13EltXjJw=; b=lhiGGkPbvW++2u7FhueC+zdzHBuIiqk2+0ozEhxEFPBSmP7jI+cPw+W8ubXUkgKVNu b8DVcRrNxVBpN6KKvJPdEI+tk1XpWdWgkl/L/ZK9AZ/bIpI6SgEpZkjqUEbRRXSoxTlb NP/VTZe/sm+W8adGRuQRCBmIcwVHaLbP+5csiMnQAvtmRE8oo+Fd6LeYVZb8K7hgLWyF ASB0BBVyMrjA9VuPC8+RwX6WRdk6A2mZil8MjOcp4mqXmxhWd+OvLf31yrmjgO2Cn2oV atuSWkJ7Qo/Wv2n+MVd8Wj0+7FTHFIgfreOZZCkPTQOjjoNeQPw8nHSqrOqQqLXdNJqR Go3w== X-Received: by 10.14.175.129 with SMTP id z1mr83767828eel.7.1362585058172; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 07:50:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from PcMinto (dhcp-077-248-065-057.chello.nl. [77.248.65.57]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m46sm43168705eeo.16.2013.03.06.07.50.56 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Mar 2013 07:50:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: From: Minto Witteveen To: 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: <513761CD.8070107@psk31.plus.com> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 16:50:55 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: 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. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [74.125.83.42 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (minto.witteveen[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 33d261536bb1467bb13d5764461d5ec4 Subject: LF: Re: RTTY vs. AMTOR Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=response 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=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-mj05.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : gmail.com DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d7b99513766127c47 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none 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 > >