grog at piratelabs.com
grog at piratelabs.com
Tue Feb 23 05:33:34 UTC 2010
Nils... you're worried about a dead carrier after the packet is transmitted? Why?
grog at pirate.org
On Feb 22, 2010, at 9:08 PM, nils at shkoo.com wrote:
> I did not yet attempt to get the vox mode working on the pg777. It works on my vx8r fine.
> It'd be nice to detect existing transmissions, but I'm not sure how effective it'd be. They're pretty short, so the 0.5 second minimum vox delay that I have on the vx8r means that there's a big window for the race condition. I don't know if the vox delay is less on the pg777.
> I guess the other way to do it would be to have an external signal detector that activates the PTT; I think you should just need a diode, a resistor, a capacitor, and a transistor. (The values of which would have to be worked out)
> See attached for a screenshot of me driving over the bay bridge hitting my transmit button every couple minutes. :) (or http://aprs.fi/?call=KF7FWZ-3 if you get to it before it expires)
> I would really prefer to figure out some way to activate the PTT without having to wait for the VOX to kick in, and having to transmit a period of dead-air afterwards.
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Mikolaj Habryn wrote:
>> 2-way communication does open some possibilities, but nothing that I
>> think we'll be ready to use for the next launch. Getting a solid
>> downlink is going to be much more useful in the short term - and you
>> should let the list know about this, too; I suspect people will be
>> Oh, and I take it vox mode (?) on the radio works as advertised?
>> (another stray thought - rather than doing full decode of incoming,
>> you could maybe just FFT a few milliseconds of audio to look for 1200
>> baud tones to detect in-progress transmissions?)
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:03 AM, <nils at shkoo.com> wrote:
>>> Yes. Here's the aprs specification if you're interested:
>>> The '@' format that I got working is the easy-to-encode one. :)
>>> I'm now working on encoding using the "mic-e" format now which is
>>> significantly shorter. It's a real pain to encode, but it increases the
>>> chances of successful transmission if the communications channel is iffy.
>>> The hardware is probably capable of receiving packets too. Let me know if
>>> you can think of any really good uses for that and maybe I'll work on
>>> implementating that half too.
>>> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Mikolaj Habryn wrote:
>>>> That's seriously fantastic :) Congratulations! I take it you can send
>>>> arbitrary packet types?
>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 11:40 PM, <nils at shkoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Rock on:
>>>>> I apparently wasn't sending enough gard data after the packet and it
>>>>> all making it out or something. I'll fine tune it later I guess
> Space mailing list
> Space at lists.noisebridge.net
More information about the Space