[GreenKeys] Re: SELCAL - auto start proposed

[John Burch]

Why not 60 WPM?  Many of us still have the gear....  (pun intended)

73 de John
..

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Camp" <ham@cq.nu>

> You can count me in as well.
> 
> How do we address the sort of thing that pretty much killed both the 
> VHF and HF nets I used to run on? Everything was ok as long as 60 wpm 5 
> level code was king. 100 wpm (as in model 28's) started to make people 
> itchy. As soon as 300 baud and ASCII came along you started to get lots 
> of junk printouts .... made things a bit of a mess.
> 
> A couple of possible options:
> 
> 1) Just define it from the start as 100 wpm five level and that's the 
> way it's going to be. Model 33's will have to be happy sitting on the 
> side lines or run eight level to five level converters.
> 2) Go with 110 baud ASCII and do five level to eight level conversion.
> 3) Go with something truly weird and convert to what ever you need 
> (like run PSK modulation ....)
> 
> My vote would be for five level code at 100 wpm with 170 shift FSK as 
> the modulation. That way we can run the good old stuff if we want to. 
> I'd be happy if the group decided on 60 wpm to let the 15's and 19's 
> participate. I only have 28's at this point ....
> 
> As far as SELCAL goes I would suggest a a slight departure from the 
> past. I would *enable* the ability to use a solid state gizmo to read 
> off the SELCAL and then fire up the model 28 using a solid state relay. 
> Receive operation would be more like a VHF net in that respect. More or 
> less send the magic words three or more times then follow with CR and 
> LTRS combo's to let give the receiving machines time to get up to 
> speed. The only need to send it all would be at the start of a QSO.  
> It's a little bit more of a delay than a "normal" hf net but a lot less 
> wear and tear on the machines.
> 
> I have a novel proposal as far as bands are concerned - modern HF seems 
> to be hung up on adaptive link stuff. There's no reason why we can't do 
> more or less the same thing. Receivers aren't the big deal they once 
> where. Why not do something like define the band based on the time of 
> day. If it's mid day the net is on 20 meters. If it's early evening 
> it's on 40 and it's on 80 at night. Poor mans ALE ... We'd need a 
> definition of who's morning noon and night we were talking about but 
> that's pretty easy. Heck put it all in a spread sheet and post it. The 
> only odd part would be deciding when to shift a QSO in progress.
> 
> One thing we do need - a net control who's willing and able to send the 
> daily bulletin. That's what defines on frequency and proves that you 
> can or can't bring up the machine correctly.
> 
> Take Care!
> 
> Bob Camp
> KB8TQ