albert.alexander at gmail.com
Fri Mar 19 06:47:17 UTC 2010
Sounds right to me, but I'll defer to Nils. I know they do not transmit
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 8:44 PM, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com>wrote:
> I think the idea we had was that they were each sending at the same
> interval. If they maintain even reasonably good clocks and aren't aligned,
> they shouldn't ever overlap. I think their duty cycle is low enough that
> this wouldn't be a problem.
> (I'm assuming that you mean amateur radio, not an actual walkie-talkie,
> "We also briefly discussed having officers replaced by very small shell
> scripts." -- Noisebridge meeting notes 2008-06-17
> The outer bounds is only the beginning.
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Albert Alexander <
> albert.alexander at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Nope, they transmit at separate times. We could use a fet to switch
>> sources but that's more parts and wires.
>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Greg Stramback <grog at piratelabs.com>wrote:
>>> I'm making the assumption that we're expecting a certain percentage of
>>> garbled / unreadable packets due to two audio sources being combined?
>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Albert Alexander <
>>> albert.alexander at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The walkie-talkie is getting audio from two sources. I suggested using a
>>>> splitter to combine the sources, but this will load down the output
>>>> transistors unless we add two resistors in series before the splitter. 10k
>>>> is fine. This will attenuate the current of each signal. We could use a
>>>> summing amp if we want to avoid the attenuation, or we could just turn up
>>>> the volume.
>>>> Will test G1 audio out AC coupling tonight after 5moF
>>>> Space mailing list
>>>> Space at lists.noisebridge.net
>> Space mailing list
>> Space at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Space