[FADCA] Re: D-Star Coordination

[Paul Toth-NA4AR]

Chuck...

You are right on target.  And with all the old MSF5000s that will be coming
available in the next couple years at Land Mobile and Public Safety switch
to narrowband and digital, the legacy stuff will continue.

The 3.3 GHz stuff is built on an Atheros chipset.  It puts out 700 mW native
off the radio board and utizes QPSK, 16QAM and 64QAM depending on what speed
you are operating at.

73 de Paul-NA4AR
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chuck Hast" <wchast at gmail.com>
To: "Paul Toth-NA4AR" <na4ar at ni4ce.org>; "FADCA" <fadca at mailman.qth.net>
Cc: "Doug Christ" <kn4yt at yahoo.com>; "Rick KN6KB" <kn6kb at winlink.org>; "Doug
Welcker WB4KGY" <wb4kgy at bellsouth.net>; "John Green WB4MOZ"
<wb4moz at adelphia.net>; "Freeman Crosby" <mail at fcrosby.com>; "Doug Ferrell
KD4MOJ" <kd4moj at kd4moj.org>; "Russell Oder N4KOX" <oderr at bellsouth.net>;
"Bud Thompson" <N0IA at arrl.net>; "Charlie N3PPC" <ccrook at cfl.rr.com>; "bud
Thompson" <budt at cfl.rr.com>; "Victor Poor" <vpoor at cfl.rr.com>; "Neil
Lauritsen" <neil at lauritsens.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 8:08 PM
Subject: [FADCA] Re: D-Star Coordination


> On 11/5/06, Paul Toth-NA4AR <ptoth1 at tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> > Chuck...
> >
> > Thanks for your comments and insight on this important subject.
> >
> > There were several comments about D-Star at the FRC Board meeting three
> > weeks ago (this was prior to the WTB's "store and forward" ruling).  FRC
is
> > worried about D-Star digital systems being disruptive to the other
analog
> > repeaters on the frequency.  Then, too, there is the bandwidth issue
D-Star
> > presents.  D-Star is a narrowband system (6.25 KHz channels) versus most
> > analog repeaters (25 KHz).  There is a notable imbalance.  Yes, FRC
could
> > view D-Star as an opportunity to modernize its coordination policies and
> > start moving Amateur Radio toward the same standards the FCC has
mandated
> > for Land Mobile and Public Safety by 1/1/2013 (Docket 04-292).  But
then, I
> > like tilting at windmills. :)
> >
> I am not sure, but being 6.25 it should allow for a 4 channel device on a
> 25Khz channel, I do not know if it allows for trunking but if it does that
would
> mean a D-Star would be a very efficient device compared to our legacy
> analogue voice repeaters, you would be able to put 4 separate users where
> you presently have one... Which is exactly what the likes of NexTel does,
> indeed in dispatch mode I think iDEN puts 8 voice channels in a 25Khz
> channel, in interconnet mode it goes to either 4 or 6/25Khz channel.
> Similar conditions hold for all of the modern trunked digital systems.
> If you want higher speeds for data you agregate channels so that you
> can move larger amounts of data, and you use interleaving to make it
> all work. Your cellphone works in somewhat the same fashion, indeed
> most cellphones will do both voice and data if you have the data cable,
> but there is not a modem in there, it just injects the computer data into
the
> data stream with the proper addressing so it will come out where it is
> supposed to.
>
> <Flame On>
>
> Funny we in amateur radio who used to be in the forfront
> of this stuff are now not even the back side of the dog we are the end of
> the tail (pointy end not the end plugged into the dog) and we fight to
keep
> this legacy junk going.. There are times I just want to quit in
frustration,
> but there will be people in the FRC who will fight to the death to keep
that
> old crap out there running. Of course all of that spectrum that they took
from
> FADCA for those junk 440 repeaters, that was where this sort of activity
> should go. But they have it tied up with stuff that puts technical retards
to
> shame...
>
> I am sorry if I am politically incorrect, but back when they pulled all of
the
> 440 freqs we had for more 440 phone patch and other worthless boxes, we
> tried to tell them but no they had to give into the crowd that treads on
the
> narrrow gray line....
>
> > I have raised the coordination issue because there is a very real chance
I
> > will need to come to FADCA or FRC in the near future to ask for
coordination
> > of up to seven (7) D-Star UHF repeaters.  Given the WTB ruling, FADCA
seems
> > the logical choice, even if D-Star is digital voice.  As you note, it
does
> > support simultaneous low speed data.  The biggest stumbling block may be
> > finding enough available frequency pairs in the UHF band.  D-Star is a
full
> > duplex technology.
> >
> We had freqs for this sort of thing but the qualifier is HAD, I think that
FRC
> has taken most of it for legacy voice junk, I may be wrong but I think
that if
> you look you will find that most of the old ARRL band plan got hoovered
up.
>
> They ought to have to give us back our frequencies but bet that will not
happen,
> indeed that one is probably seen on the rear end of a deer...
>
> > As for linking D-Star repeaters together, we are looking at the
construction
> > of a wide band microwave network built on a 3.3 GHz backbone.  The
> > technology exists.  It is affordable.  And it is capable of near T3
> > throughput at distances of up to 90 km.  That is plenty of bandwidth for
> > several VoIP circuits, hgih speed data, even videoconferencing.  This is
> > definitely not your Father's Ham Radio!
>
> What is the 3Ghz gear you are looking at?
> -- 
> Chuck Hast  -- KP4DJT --
> To paraphrase my flight instructor;
> "the only dumb question is the one you DID NOT ask resulting in my going
> out and having to identify your bits and pieces in the midst of torn
> and twisted metal."
> _______________________________________________
> FADCA mailing list
> FADCA at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca
>