Discussion:
[M0FOX] SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot
(too old to reply)
M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
2016-11-24 01:43:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
M0FOX Ham Radio Site

///////////////////////////////////////////
SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot

Posted: 23 Nov 2016 08:06 AM PST
http://hamradio.org.uk/sharkrf-openspot-dmrfusiond-star-hotspot/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss


openSPOT is a standalone digital radio IP gateway / hotspot Supports DMR
(Brandmeister, DMRplus), D-Star (DCS, REF/DPlus, XRF/DExtra, XLX), System
Fusion (FCS, YSFReflector) networks. More supported networks and features
will be available with new firmware releases. Supports cross modem modes.
Talk with your C4FM radio on DMR, and with your DMR radio on System Fusion
[]

The post SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot appeared first on M0FOX
Ham Radio Site.
Spike
2016-11-24 08:40:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
///////////////////////////////////////////
SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot
Posted: 23 Nov 2016 08:06 AM PST
http://hamradio.org.uk/sharkrf-openspot-dmrfusiond-star-hotspot/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss
openSPOT is a standalone digital radio IP gateway / hotspot Supports DMR
(Brandmeister, DMRplus), D-Star (DCS, REF/DPlus, XRF/DExtra, XLX),
System Fusion (FCS, YSFReflector) networks. More supported networks and
features will be available with new firmware releases. Supports cross
modem modes. Talk with your C4FM radio on DMR, and with your DMR radio
on System Fusion []
Am I the only one who thinks that things have got out of hand?

I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
--
Spike

We are not only our brother's keeper; in countless large and small ways,
we are our brother's maker.
lordgnome
2016-11-24 10:22:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
I have to agree. I will be interested to see if some of these wonderful
(and expensive) 'do all modes' rigs will stay in production for very long.

Les.
Ian Jackson
2016-11-24 11:15:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <o16ev7$nuk$***@dont-email.me>, lordgnome <***@nospam.null>
writes
Post by lordgnome
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
I have to agree. I will be interested to see if some of these wonderful
(and expensive) 'do all modes' rigs will stay in production for very long.
When I were a lad, ordinary radio amateurs were often capable of
designing and constructing, from basic bits and pieces, state-of-the-art
- and even 'leading edge' - equipment.

This is no longer the case. Most of the latest technology involves the
use of a computer, with a few additional pieces of peripheral electronic
hardware tacked on.

While this might offer an opportunity to explore pastures previously
undreamt of, it represents a considerable departure from what we
understood as traditional basic radio communications and electronics. I
can't help feeling that fewer and fewer amateurs will be able to
understand the new technology - and while in the past most they had a
fair understanding of (say) what went on inside a modern transceiver
(even if they didn't build it), modern equipment is going to become even
more a black box than it used to be.

It may be argued that that there is no reason why amateurs can't
continue to engage in the old traditions (for example, building and
using relatively simple old-fashioned gear) - but there is probably less
incentive to do so these days. Yes, you can maybe still make a
two-transistor QRP CW transceiver for 40m, and get great satisfaction
from it, but such traditional modes are gradually being squeezed out by
modern, much more complicated stuff.

At present, there are still a lot of amateurs who mainly want to fire up
their (often extremely expensive) talk-box, and have a chat with
fellow-amateurs - and although I don't want appear to be discouraging or
dismissing all this 'clever modern stuff', I hope that this is what
sufficient of us will continue to do for the foreseeable future.
--
Ian
Roger Hayter
2016-11-24 12:45:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
writes
Post by lordgnome
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
I have to agree. I will be interested to see if some of these wonderful
(and expensive) 'do all modes' rigs will stay in production for very long.
When I were a lad, ordinary radio amateurs were often capable of
designing and constructing, from basic bits and pieces, state-of-the-art
- and even 'leading edge' - equipment.
This is no longer the case. Most of the latest technology involves the
use of a computer, with a few additional pieces of peripheral electronic
hardware tacked on.
While this might offer an opportunity to explore pastures previously
undreamt of, it represents a considerable departure from what we
understood as traditional basic radio communications and electronics. I
can't help feeling that fewer and fewer amateurs will be able to
understand the new technology - and while in the past most they had a
fair understanding of (say) what went on inside a modern transceiver
(even if they didn't build it), modern equipment is going to become even
more a black box than it used to be.
It may be argued that that there is no reason why amateurs can't
continue to engage in the old traditions (for example, building and
using relatively simple old-fashioned gear) - but there is probably less
incentive to do so these days. Yes, you can maybe still make a
two-transistor QRP CW transceiver for 40m, and get great satisfaction
from it, but such traditional modes are gradually being squeezed out by
modern, much more complicated stuff.
At present, there are still a lot of amateurs who mainly want to fire up
their (often extremely expensive) talk-box, and have a chat with
fellow-amateurs - and although I don't want appear to be discouraging or
dismissing all this 'clever modern stuff', I hope that this is what
sufficient of us will continue to do for the foreseeable future.
I think you are much too pessimistic. I think the signal processing and
software side of thngs is very much in the amateur tradition, and some
radio amateurs are developing expertise in it. It is actually much
easier and cheaper to get involved in this (perhaps with quite cheap and
basic hardware) than it has been to make amateur versions of the last
generation of hardware, between the obsolescence of WW2 surplus and the
development of modern SDRs.
--
Roger Hayter
Jim GM4DHJ ...
2016-11-24 16:59:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
writes
Post by lordgnome
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
I have to agree. I will be interested to see if some of these wonderful
(and expensive) 'do all modes' rigs will stay in production for very long.
When I were a lad, ordinary radio amateurs were often capable of designing
and constructing, from basic bits and pieces, state-of-the-art - and even
'leading edge' - equipment.
This is no longer the case. Most of the latest technology involves the use
of a computer, with a few additional pieces of peripheral electronic
hardware tacked on.
While this might offer an opportunity to explore pastures previously
undreamt of, it represents a considerable departure from what we
understood as traditional basic radio communications and electronics. I
can't help feeling that fewer and fewer amateurs will be able to
understand the new technology - and while in the past most they had a fair
understanding of (say) what went on inside a modern transceiver (even if
they didn't build it), moder?n equipment is going to become even more a
black box than it used to be.
It may be argued that that there is no reason why amateurs can't continue
to engage in the old traditions (for example, building and using
relatively simple old-fashioned gear) - but there is probably less
incentive to do so these days. Yes, you can maybe still make a
two-transistor QRP CW transceiver for 40m, and get great satisfaction from
it, but such traditional modes are gradually being squeezed out by modern,
much more complicated stuff.
At present, there are still a lot of amateurs who mainly want to fire up
their (often extremely expensive) talk-box, and have a chat with
fellow-amateurs - and although I don't want appear to be discouraging or
dismissing all this 'clever modern stuff', I hope that this is what
sufficient of us will continue to do for the foreseeable future.
agreed...did I ever say the world is fecked ....?
Jim GM4DHJ ...
2016-11-24 17:07:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by lordgnome
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
I have to agree. I will be interested to see if some of these wonderful
(and expensive) 'do all modes' rigs will stay in production for very long.
Les.
be like BSB and sky...beta and VHS ...one has to go I hope it id
DSTAR.....fusion seems OK .....
Brian Reay
2016-11-24 10:50:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
///////////////////////////////////////////
SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot
Posted: 23 Nov 2016 08:06 AM PST
http://hamradio.org.uk/sharkrf-openspot-dmrfusiond-star-hotspot/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss
openSPOT is a standalone digital radio IP gateway / hotspot Supports DMR
(Brandmeister, DMRplus), D-Star (DCS, REF/DPlus, XRF/DExtra, XLX),
System Fusion (FCS, YSFReflector) networks. More supported networks and
features will be available with new firmware releases. Supports cross
modem modes. Talk with your C4FM radio on DMR, and with your DMR radio
on System Fusion []
Am I the only one who thinks that things have got out of hand?
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
There is no reason why those who want to experiment with, or even just
use, the more complex techniques shouldn't, anymore than those who want
to focus on more traditional techniques and 'squeezing' every bit of
performance from them shouldn't.

If you want to join the latter group, get a licence and do so but you
have no right to impose your narrow minded, limited views, on others.
--
Suspect someone is claiming a benefit under false pretences? Incapacity
Benefit or Personal Independence Payment when they don't need it? They are
depriving those in real need!

https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud
Spike
2016-11-24 19:44:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian Reay
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
///////////////////////////////////////////
SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot
Posted: 23 Nov 2016 08:06 AM PST
http://hamradio.org.uk/sharkrf-openspot-dmrfusiond-star-hotspot/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss
openSPOT is a standalone digital radio IP gateway / hotspot Supports DMR
(Brandmeister, DMRplus), D-Star (DCS, REF/DPlus, XRF/DExtra, XLX),
System Fusion (FCS, YSFReflector) networks. More supported networks and
features will be available with new firmware releases. Supports cross
modem modes. Talk with your C4FM radio on DMR, and with your DMR radio
on System Fusion []
Am I the only one who thinks that things have got out of hand?
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
There is no reason why those who want to experiment with, or even just
use, the more complex techniques shouldn't, anymore than those who want
to focus on more traditional techniques and 'squeezing' every bit of
performance from them shouldn't.
Quite. I'm putting forward the view that many Amateurs can't see beyond
the bench they are working on. It's the RA equivalent of the
schoolchild's mistake of working to too many decimal places unjustified
by the accuracy of the measurements made. The statement that "My
RPi-based VNA can measure return loss to 0.01dB" begs the question "What
else in the system justifies that?".
Post by Brian Reay
If you want to join the latter group, get a licence and do so but you
have no right to impose your narrow minded, limited views, on others.
Neither have you.

What's let you down in this exchange is that I'm expressing an opinion,
which is far removed from 'imposing a view on others'. I'm not a Little
Dictator, you see, but I've come across a few in my time, usually
failures of one sort or another.
--
Spike

We are not only our brother's keeper; in countless large and small ways,
we are our brother's maker.
Stephen Thomas Cole
2016-11-24 19:47:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Post by Brian Reay
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
///////////////////////////////////////////
SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot
Posted: 23 Nov 2016 08:06 AM PST
http://hamradio.org.uk/sharkrf-openspot-dmrfusiond-star-hotspot/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss
openSPOT is a standalone digital radio IP gateway / hotspot Supports DMR
(Brandmeister, DMRplus), D-Star (DCS, REF/DPlus, XRF/DExtra, XLX),
System Fusion (FCS, YSFReflector) networks. More supported networks and
features will be available with new firmware releases. Supports cross
modem modes. Talk with your C4FM radio on DMR, and with your DMR radio
on System Fusion []
Am I the only one who thinks that things have got out of hand?
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
There is no reason why those who want to experiment with, or even just
use, the more complex techniques shouldn't, anymore than those who want
to focus on more traditional techniques and 'squeezing' every bit of
performance from them shouldn't.
Quite. I'm putting forward the view that many Amateurs can't see beyond
the bench they are working on. It's the RA equivalent of the
schoolchild's mistake of working to too many decimal places unjustified
by the accuracy of the measurements made. The statement that "My
RPi-based VNA can measure return loss to 0.01dB" begs the question "What
else in the system justifies that?".
Post by Brian Reay
If you want to join the latter group, get a licence and do so but you
have no right to impose your narrow minded, limited views, on others.
Neither have you.
What's let you down in this exchange is that I'm expressing an opinion,
which is far removed from 'imposing a view on others'. I'm not a Little
Dictator, you see, but I've come across a few in my time, usually
failures of one sort or another.
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur
Jim GM4DHJ ...
2016-11-25 07:50:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ....
Stephen Thomas Cole
2016-11-25 08:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ....
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur
Jim GM4DHJ ...
2016-11-25 08:20:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ....
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
no it is you...you keep repeating questions like an old women with dementia
.....
Spike
2016-11-25 08:49:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
early onset dementia? ....
Perhaps there's a family history? I wonder if he has checked up?
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
no it is you...you keep repeating questions like an old woman with dementia
Perhaps that's why he lives in a vapour-world - the one of a thousand
pounds a day income, living near millionaires, a trip to the US this
year, thinks he's a proper Radio Amateur....
--
Spike

We are not only our brother's keeper; in countless large and small ways,
we are our brother's maker.
Jim GM4DHJ ...
2016-11-25 08:53:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
early onset dementia? ....
Perhaps there's a family history? I wonder if he has checked up?
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
no it is you...you keep repeating questions like an old woman with dementia
Perhaps that's why he lives in a vapour-world - the one of a thousand
pounds a day income, living near millionaires, a trip to the US this year,
thinks he's a proper Radio Amateur....
shoosh don't burst his bubble .....
Stephen Thomas Troll
2016-11-26 00:35:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
early onset dementia? ....
Perhaps there's a family history? I wonder if he has checked up?
Don't let him knob your sandy-snatch, Burt!

He probably won't even remember you in the the morning.
Stephen Thomas Cole
2016-11-25 10:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ....
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
no it is you...you keep repeating questions like an old women with dementia
.....
I'm just trying to get to the bottom of why Burt checked up on Paul, Jim.
--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur
Roger Hayter
2016-11-25 13:26:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ....
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
no it is you...you keep repeating questions like an old women with dementia
.....
I'm just trying to get to the bottom of why Burt checked up on Paul, Jim.
He never said he did. So I don't suppose he will be stupid enough to
comment just because you keep repeating the question, whether he did or
not.
--
Roger Hayter
Stephen Thomas Cole
2016-11-25 13:30:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roger Hayter
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ....
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
no it is you...you keep repeating questions like an old women with dementia
.....
I'm just trying to get to the bottom of why Burt checked up on Paul, Jim.
He never said he did.
I never said that he said that he did.
--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur
Brian Reay
2016-11-26 08:32:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Roger Hayter
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
Burt, what happened when you checked up on Paul?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ....
There's definitely something wrong with Burt, Jim, yes.
no it is you...you keep repeating questions like an old women with dementia
.....
I'm just trying to get to the bottom of why Burt checked up on Paul, Jim.
He never said he did.
I never said that he said that he did.
You need to remember that Roger has a vested interest in the truth
remaining secret.
Stephen Thomas Cole
2016-11-24 13:51:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Post by M0FOX via rec.radio.amateur.moderated Admin
M0FOX Ham Radio Site
///////////////////////////////////////////
SharkRF openSPOT DMR/FUSION/D-STAR hotspot
Posted: 23 Nov 2016 08:06 AM PST
http://hamradio.org.uk/sharkrf-openspot-dmrfusiond-star-hotspot/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss
openSPOT is a standalone digital radio IP gateway / hotspot Supports DMR
(Brandmeister, DMRplus), D-Star (DCS, REF/DPlus, XRF/DExtra, XLX),
System Fusion (FCS, YSFReflector) networks. More supported networks and
features will be available with new firmware releases. Supports cross
modem modes. Talk with your C4FM radio on DMR, and with your DMR radio
on System Fusion []
Am I the only one who thinks that things have got out of hand?
I've long thought that there is a mind-set among many Radio Amateurs
such that, if something is technically possible, it has to be done - but
with very little thought behind it as to whether 'it' is useful, or
wanted, or compatible with other systems. One thing that springs to
mind is the impetus to get the last fraction of a dB out of a VNA, then
applying that to an antenna to get the last fraction of a dB of the
return loss. Yet no-one mentions the trees or buildings or ground
conductivity that will have a far greater impact on the radiated RF
energy. A simple SWR meter or noise bridge would be sufficient for
antenna tuning. Now, with this posting above, we seem to have on hand a
'gateway' that lets incompatible systems talk to each other. It seems to
be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk over a repeater.
What happened when you checked up on Paul, Burt?
--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur
Jim GM4DHJ ...
2016-11-25 07:57:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Thomas Cole
What happened when you checked up on Paul, Burt?
STC / M0TEY /
early onset dementia? ...
Je Suis Class A
2016-11-26 10:52:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Am I the only one who thinks that things have got out of hand?
Nope. I said a long time back that every idiot with self esteem issues
has his own vanity repeater, echolink gateway etc.
Post by Spike
It seems to be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk
over a repeater.
But it's really cool Spike! Who wants to talk utter nonsense on FM when
it's possible to talk pure crap digitally?
--
The maths teacher broke down in tears at the North West Wiltshire
Magistrates’ Court
Spike
2016-11-26 10:56:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Je Suis Class A
Post by Spike
Am I the only one who thinks that things have got out of hand?
Nope. I said a long time back that every idiot with self esteem issues
has his own vanity repeater, echolink gateway etc.
Post by Spike
It seems to be digital systems gone bonkers, just to talk
over a repeater.
But it's really cool Spike! Who wants to talk utter nonsense on FM when
it's possible to talk pure crap digitally?
I understand some repeaters activity declined to near zero when
newly-licensed M-nothings appeared. Perhaps going digital is an unsubtle
way of keeping them out?
--
Spike

We are not only our brother's keeper; in countless large and small ways,
we are our brother's maker.
Je Suis Class A
2016-11-26 11:15:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Post by Je Suis Class A
But it's really cool Spike! Who wants to talk utter nonsense on FM
when it's possible to talk pure crap digitally?
I understand some repeaters activity declined to near zero when
newly-licensed M-nothings appeared. Perhaps going digital is an
unsubtle way of keeping them out?
Perhaps we should pay these M-nothings to go on a nation wide repeater
tour? It would surely do more good than harm ;-)
--
The maths teacher broke down in tears at the North West Wiltshire
Magistrates’ Court
Spike
2016-11-26 11:36:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Je Suis Class A
Post by Spike
Post by Je Suis Class A
But it's really cool Spike! Who wants to talk utter nonsense on FM
when it's possible to talk pure crap digitally?
I understand some repeaters activity declined to near zero when
newly-licensed M-nothings appeared. Perhaps going digital is an
unsubtle way of keeping them out?
Perhaps we should pay these M-nothings to go on a nation wide repeater
tour? It would surely do more good than harm ;-)
LOL!
--
Spike

We are not only our brother's keeper; in countless large and small ways,
we are our brother's maker.
d***@gmail.com
2018-03-31 01:36:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Bunch of stuck up twats !!!

Loading...