TNC Nostalgia
Charles Brabham (N5PVL)
on
January 6, 2007
View comments about this article!
I think the day of the TNC in a box is just about over.
Who wants to shell out hundreds of dollars when some free software and the soundcard included with their computer can give them so much more, and never becomes obsolete since it is so easy to upgrade the software?
In this day and age, the only digital modes that are not available for free soundcard systems are the proprietary TOR modes, which are inefficient, expensive, controversial bandwidth hogs in the first place. Who needs them?
Is there really any justification for using enough bandwidth for fifteen PSK31 QSO's ( PACTOR III ) in order to chat and exchange brag files or email? Aren't we supposed to be figuring out how to put more, not less amateurs on HF these days?
How about spectral efficiency? Aren't we supposed to be pursuing good engineering practice as amateur radio operators?
I have a stack of old style TNC's and multimode controllers here in my shack, including two PK-232MBX's that are nice doorstops but never see any use because anything that is really worth doing digitally on HF these days can be done so much better with soundcard software and an inexpensive interface.
For me, the ease and convenience of a waterfall display is light-years ahead of squinting at a row of LED's and hoping that I can turn the radio's tuning knob in a small enough increment to tune in a signal properly. Contrast this laborious and inaccurate process with one simple mouse-click for absolutely accurate tuning in less than a second and you'll see what I mean. The TNC's and multimode controllers in a box are on their way out, already obsolete.
For remote digital node locations, industrial single-board PC's ( PC-104 form ) are inexpensive, designed to work in harsh environments, use flash drives so they have no moving parts, run on 5 volts and are about 4 1/2 inches square by one inch thick.
For home use and many networking applications, you can find old used PC's that will handle the digital soundcard modes for free, or close to it. Contrast this with the hundreds of dollars asked for multimode controllers, and you are looking at the last nail in the TNC box's coffin.
I don't have anything against somebody using one of these boxes if they have one, but, a word to the wise, I will warn those users that the resale value of such equipment has only one way to go.
The TNCs and multimode controllers in a box were a great boon to the amateur radio service, introducing many of us to digital HF long before soundcard digital software and modern computers were available. The main reason I keep my PK-88, PK-96, DPK-96 and PK-232's around is for pure TNC nostalgia.
They remind me of the good old days, and every now and then I hook one of them up to remind myself why I no longer seriously try to use that kind of equipment any more.
Charles Brabham, N5PVL
USPacket.Org
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by NS6Y_ on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well, this equipment is like dot-matrix printers. At the time, they were a Godsend because the average home user could not afford a DECwriter. So everyone got these cheap dot-matrix jobs and they worked well enough. They ate ribbons, they were noisy as hell, and driving those motors like crazy probably made them power hogs too. But at the time, they were the only game in town.
Now my laser printer sleeps silently here, when I want to print something I hit apple-P, it wakes up, warms up, prints, and that's that. I print a fair amount, and am still on the original toner that came with it almost 2 years ago. It's hard to imagine anyone using a horrible old dot-matrix job, but at the time, that's all there was.
So, is this article to talk about how awful all the old skool digital stuff was? I could never afford it so the only digital I know is dit and dah.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N4CQR on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I still enjoy using a TNC, KAM+ or my favorite, the PK-232. For RTTY I have never been satisfied with anything other the PK-232. A pure tank..
As far as dot matrix printers.. I can assure you they are still used heavly in the commercial and industrial markets. And primarly Okidata machines.
Nice thread
J C S
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KG6TT on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My first commercial TNC was a a Packet controller on a Commodore Vic computer back around 1982. There have been many other TNCs in the shack since then... and not just from 'Nostalgia' either as I have found by experience that I have a practical need for both software derived modulators/demodulators and those made from hardware.
On the software side I use mostly MTTY, Winwarber, and PSK31 Deluxe, but there are numerous 'other' soundcard applications in the wings. Coupled with Delta sound cards these applications are great. However, I also have a PK-96, Kam 98 and two PK-232MBX TNCs (one with DSP installed the other modified for low internal noise). Of course I use my TNCs for Packet (yes, I have Packet available for local communications and emergency preparedness) but in everyday use the KAM 98 and PK-232s are used most often for Morse Code receive (increasing Tennitus makes it harder to copy by ear) where I find the TNCs (especially the AEA ones) significantly superior to applications such as CWGet with the only trick getting them on frequency... but for that I use a 'Son of Zerobeat' and all is well. I also use my TNCs for RTTY and basic Pactor operation.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N0IU on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Not too long ago, I bid a fond farewell to my Kam+. I may have made a handful of AMTOR contacts when I first got it but PACTOR contacts were actually pretty common "back in the day". I can probably count on one hand the number of G-TOR contacts I made with it. On the VHF side, I used to maintain a packet station and people used to digipeat through me quite often because of my location at the time. And then there was the local packet cluster. This was in the days before Al Gore invented the Internet so this was how we got DX spots. I found this to actually be more useful than today's Internet DX spotting networks because the packet cluster was local and spotted stations that could actually be heard by ops in my area. This was also in the days when receiving an email meant the LED on the front panel was flashing and someone had left me a message on my BBS.
The Kam+ replaced my dear old AEA CP-1 and Commodore VIC-20. Those were relegated to the dust bin back in the early 90's.
I was dragged kicking and screaming into the late 21st century when my new computer would no longer run my beloved WF1B RTTY contesting program no matter what I did including "crippling" it with the MoSlo porgram. I now run MMTTY in FSK mode and there is no looking back!
As a sidebar, I do think we had better digi mode operators back then. I think it is because you really had to be committed to RTTY back then because you had to shell out some serious cash. In addition to the Kam+ controller itself, I also had a Timewave 59+ outboard DSP unit since my rig at the time did not have internal IF DSP filtering. Between those two units, I know I spent over $500 - just to do RTTY! Before coming up with that kind of scratch, you really had to be sure this was something you wanted to do. In my case as I am sure with most others of my generation, I saw someone else doing RTTY. They had upgraded to computers after using a converted mechanical TTY machine - a Model 19 I think. While there were "brag tapes" and later brag files, they were used sparingly. It was all about making the contact and actually communicating with the op on the other end.
Nowadays, you can get on RTTY, PSK31, MFSK16, Olivia, Throb, SSTV and Hellschreiber (to name just a few) without the benefit of having seen it being used anywhere by anyone. Today, the best RTTY software is free as are many other programs for other digi modes. Although a commercially made soundcard interface can run into some major dollars, you can toss together a workable interface with a DB-9 connector, a transistor, 2 resistors and 2 diodes if you just want to try it out. Minimalistic brag tapes or files have now been replaced with lengthy macros which in some cases have entirely replaced live conversation.
Ahhhh... the old days. This used to be a radio hobby that used computers, but now it is a computer hobby that uses radios. My New Years resolution is to get over myself and just let the past go. If this is what it takes to get newcomers interested in amateur radio, then I should be thankful they are interested at all and do whatever I can to help them along the way. Now where did I put my blood pressure medication?
Scott N0IU
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N2QGV on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Can help me get a packet mail box using AGW. My 1992 vintage KPC3 allows for a mail box, which is very handy with our packet EmCom network here in FL. (SEDAN)
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by NA4IT on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have to agree with Charles, with two exceptions...
(1) I still like a TNC better for packet node operation..
(2) The TNC-X with USB option does seem to be more robust for APRS than sound card mode.
Good post Charles!
Scott NA4IT
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by W1XZ on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Thanks to KG6TT for reminding me about the VIC 20 and packet. The glow of the old black and white portable TV and loading the program from a cassette tape player with a home brew A/D converter everytime I shut the thing off. What did we get...3 lines of text before it went off the screen? Boy didn't that 64 look sweet after that!
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KR4WM on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I cut my teeth on an Atari 800 and Kantronics "The Interface". I fondly remember copying foreign RTTY press feeds on shortwave. They were much more vivid in their details than the sanitized U.S. news. Then my next box was an MFJ-1278 that I "blueprinted" (tuned properly) because it was out-of-spec right out of the box, and was soon spoiled by watching NAVTEX harbor weather feeds, being able to do packet, RTTY, SSTV, and all sorts of cool stuff! It also saw duty sending CW practice in MCW mode on the local repeaters to new novices, performed as a beacon transmitter keyer on 10M for short time periods from time to time, and was an all-around workhorse. I still have it! Some of my friends and I set up mailbox forwarding systems using PaKeT and WinPack from time to time, and one guy even set up a packet network that used HTML and had "web pages" just like the internet! Packet is cool stuff, and it's still doing duty as the SEDAN network along the coast here in South Carolina, although I'm no longer active using that mode. -KR4WM
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia and Heave Ho!
|
|
|
by AI2IA on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Good for N5PVL!
I don't see this at all as TNC "Nostalgia."
Out with the old. In with the new.
This is communications. Efficiency is king!
This is a good healthy attitude.
I would like to see this applied to all HF equipment, and just save the old, obsolete stuff for Nostalgia Days or the scrap heap.
Besides this, new folks coming in are more likely to adapt this attitude than wanting to put old junk on a pedestal.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by PE1NPG on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I did like microprocessor technology, but the soundcard technology even better. I'm working with LabVIEW data acquisition software for studying soundcard technology, its great fun. Thanks to MMsoft, MixW, Digipan and HRD developers for super software as free and shareware!
73 de Jean-Pierre
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by W0IPL on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If you can ever get the sound card modes to do the turn-around times required for proper data transfer, then TNCs will slowly go away. Most (all that I know of) do very slow turn-around and are not usable for reasonable error correction (PACKET is anything but reasonable).
I keep hearing a lot of people whine about PACTOR being so inefficient. Try doing a demo for DHS to show them how quickly you can have an E-mail "on their desk" 2/3rds of the way across the US and you see how well it does work. The only people using PACTOR-III are those willing to pay $800 to $1200 for their TNC (eliminates the majority of ECom operators).
If you want to whine about bandwidth, try talking with those that run Broadcast Quality AM transmissions.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N0NB on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I bought my first TNC, a KPC-2, back in late 1987. What fun I had with that box! Looking back, I'm sure I funded W0XI's retirement by buying new firmware upgrade chips for it. I was pretty much a no-show on the local repeaters as my only VHF rig was tied to packet for a while and I too had a good location and was a useful link as a digi/KA-NODE.
In 1993 I bought a KAM and soon upgraded it likewise. I enjoyed RTTY and PacTOR and I tried G-TOR a time or two. Actually, I found G-TOR to work better on a 300 mile 80m nighttime path than PacTOR. I thought AMTOR was too brutal on my TS-830S T/R relay.
Now the KAM sits silent as does the KPC-2. It is ready to go should I get the urge to fire it up for the local VHF packet net or get something locally going with APRS (there is no APRS in the area now). I've had a couple of MFJ-1270B models for nodes and they are silent now (one was stolen and the other may become an APRS digi).
Last year I picked up a Rig Blaster and I'm slowly picking up on some of the new HF digital modes. Digital voice intrigues me and being able to do it with software and the Rig Blaster has more appeal than an expensive outboard box. The inexpensive PC and soundcard combo has been a boon to modern amateur radio.
The box makers like Kantronics made a lot of money in the late '80s and early '90s, but they haven't seemed to be able to progress into the new era. But, then, I'm not sure what they could offer that isn't already freely available.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by AA4PB on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree that the waterfall makes a convienient way to "click" and select a station to copy. The down side is that it lets in a whole bunch of stations. Get a couple of strong stations in the waterfall and the weaker ones dissapear. That's why you hear all the griping about people running power or having a good antenna on PSK31. It would be like having a filter in your SSB rig that covered the whole 20M band! There are trade offs. You gain one thing and you have to give up something else.
Sound cards are inexpensive but they can have issues too. The Windows operating system won't permit the quick turn-around times needed for the typical ARQ modes so it is difficult (and slow) to do full error correction. This is where a TNC with its dedicated processor really shines.
I agree however, that TNCs are on their way out - more of a cost issue than improved performance.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K8DXX on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Good thread but doesn't go back far enough :-).
TNCs, PCs and dot matrix printers seemed almost like appliances when they came on the scene in (I estimate) the late 70's. What I grew up on were home brew terminal units or "TUs" that connected between the TX or RX frequency shift keying circuits and a surplus Bell 19 or 28 teletype machine. The teletype units used real paper, inked ribbons and made tons of noise while in operation. The TUs contained several sharp crystal filters and oscillators, all of which had to be precisely aligned and stable in order to work correctly. Without digital frequency counters, going from work bench to operation took lots of playing around.
I'm only 55 years old. I'm sure that there are others who can go farther back than I can.
73
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KC2HTV on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Wow! Thank you Charles for a topic near and dear to my heart... Anything or anymode digital... I run a full time APRS/Weather station here (FN-32) NY... Yes, I could run with a software TNC (AGW), but it is not as reliable as my PK-96/100 or MFJ 1278... As the cost of a Kenwood with built in TNC is astronomical the TNC will be hard to replace...
My last observation is: BBS via VHF is another area where an easy to up-grade PK-232MBS dinosaur is hard to beat... Each mode and band are great fun to my 8 year old son and myself... I wish that he could have seen me dial in my TTY on HF Trans-Atlantic in the P-3B Orion back in the day but that is fond memory best left to retirement...
I sinceerly love to work the sound card HF modes but have fallen to the ease and beauty of Ham Radio Delux... Mix and a host of other PSK software are a bit of chore to register and pay for... Some are also a bit of hassel if you want to change radio brands for diversity... Either way its all good... Thank you again for the great thread...
Rick Jacker USN ret.
KC2HTV
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by AI2A on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I remember my several TNC products. (MFJ1278, PK900, M7000 and others). Each provided me with a simple interface to drive a dumb terminal - rather than a full blown computer. Ahhhh, but that was long ago.
Yes, there are several software products that work very nicely with the audio sound card. And keeping up with the latest encoding/decoding methodologies is a bunch easier with software than hardware.
To be fair, I still have the TNC's and use them regularly on both the ham and SWL bands. I suppose that I will retire them at the first malfunction encountered. But until then, I still enjoy the simple hardware solutions.
Best Regards,
David Clark, Ai2A,
Greenwood, IN 46143
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K1CJS on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
On the lighter side of this discussion,
"Good thread but doesn't go back far enough....."
Wait a minute, it doesn't? Well, from E-hams home page comes this:
"N5PVL recalls the beginning of digital era and how things have changed."
It seems to me the beginning of the digital era was morse code, the first digital mode. You know, on or off, zero or one, however you want to say it.
Seems it goes back far enough--to the beginning, as a matter of fact! ;-))
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K0BG on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
At nearly 67 years of age, I guess I'm getting too old! I've never smoked marijuana or used dope, and the only digital mode I've ever used is CW. Is there a connection here?
Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by NS6Y_ on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
AA4PB - PSK31 is in its infancy, maybe people will eventually be happy to pay for a dedicated TNC to do it, after all, they're paying $400 for some of the interfaces.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N9ESH on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I still have and use my old PK-64 and Commorodore 128 computer. Both still work fine. I also have a newer PK-232 DSP tnc, but it’s much harder to use. The older PK-64 can do almost as much as the PK-232 except no Pactor. Not bad for a 25 year old technology.
Jim/N9ESH
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N7UQA on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Now while having a computer to do all the work with todays digital modes is nice, there is still something to be said for 'stand alone' equipment like TNC's. There are times I do not want yet another computer in the shack doing mundane tasks. Not just from a power consumption issue, but from an RFI stand point. Most 'consumer grade' computers are inherently noisy, and there is the need to accommodate yet another keyboard, mouse and monitor.
Why use a computer to decode and send CW, RTTY or PSK31 when a simple stand alone device like a multi mode TNC will do. You benefit from a device that consumes a fraction of the power (most can be powered off wall warts) and can be used with something as simple as a dumb terminal, or even a serial connected 4x40 or 8x40 line LCD display. Or you can use a old Sun box (Sparcstation or Ultra 1) via a RS-232 connection like I do. Simple, elegant and LOW RFI.
Craig - N7UQA
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KA8OCN on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have a dot matrix printer printing as I type this.
I have to have at least one connected to my computer up here at the cabin so I can call in and use our ordering system at our stores. Its paid for and works every time.
I still use a PK-88 at home for Packet on 2 meters, I have a sound card interface (RIGblaster pro) and I love it and use it daily on psk31 but I never could get the 2 packet working good on 2 meters adn I did not want to dedicate it just for 2 meter packet. I only look at it when the message light is flashing.
I remember using a Model 19 and then a Model 28 teletype machines, I had one of the HUGE ones in my living room when I was first licensed a LOOONG time ago. Using paper tape to store pictures, that was a blast! And I miss the wake up call of the 60 mill high voltage loop that used to get my attention when I got careless.
Does anyone have any information of the Digial voice I see a unit available for like 500$ for HF SSB, Is that getting any use? Is that something a person wants to be thinking about or will it just be an expensive a hardware setting on my shelf with my other Multi Mode interfaces?
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N5YPJ on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
The TNC brought new hamming excitement to many. I had always wondered about using the computer's own sound card, that is once we had a sound card; I began operating packet with a CoCo 64. After a three year absence from hamming I discovered the sound card modes; gosh I knew from my first moment that my TNC & multimode controller were history. Sound card modes are fantastic. I only wish VHF and above packet would see more activity it has tremendous potential. Thank you Charles for efforts to keep packet alive.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K3WVU on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Actually, I use a dedicated TNC for some modes and my sound card interface for others. I use the TNC for ham and non-ham communications in ARQ, FEC, RTTY and sometimes even packet (when there's activity---which isn't often), and the soundcard for PSK and MT63. Haven't seen any decent soundcard software for ARQ. I always have to laugh when someone comes out and announces the demise of some aspect of ham radio. Just lighten up and enjoy whatever part of the hobby that turns you on...and don't forget....it's a HOBBY.
73
Dwight
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N5EAT on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I'm not sure that today we even need packet software. I'ts been years and years since anything other than junk was being bounced around on packet. The modes most used for actual communication appear to be rtty and psk31. However - I purchased an MFJ 1278 multi-mode controller in 1988. It worked all of it's modes really well. I found the LED tuning very nice. I like the software waterfall as well. It was fun for about a year - then packet went into unattended store and forward mode. Same thing happened to APRS. 99 percent of all the stuff zinging around on packet and APRS could go directly into the recycle bin. I'm starting to get a "Hamsexy" attitude toward all the "critical" stuff happening with digital. Where's the beef?
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by SWANMAN on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Quote: "It seems to me the beginning of the digital era was morse code, the first digital mode. You know, on or off, zero or one, however you want to say it."
Morse is NOT a digital mode. It does NOT consist of any type of binary computer codes whatsoever. You know...no zeros and ones exclusively. If it were, Morse would only have TWO characters...a zero and a one and be connected to a computer. Try taking a 'bug' to a Digital Symposium meeting and see what happens. CW is simply turning on/off a transmitter in rapid succession. Is sending Morse via a flashlight to your buddy down the street a 'digital mode?' I rest my case.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by W3WN on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hmmm. Let's see here. 'Swanman' argues that Morse is not a digital mode... and then, a short paragraph later, says CW is "turning a transmitter ON or OFF in rapid succession"
Thus, he agrees that CW transmissions consist of a transmitter carrier in one of two states: ON or OFF. Which is a binary mode, aka a digital mode. [And let us not forget that "1" & "0" also represent "True" & "False," or "Yes" & "No," or even "On" & "Off." I don't remember much from my PDP-8/e and PRIME 1 assembler classes, but that I remember!]
Guess it is a digital mode after all... I rest my case!
73
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by W4AMP on January 6, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Great article Charles. I still have fond memories of my ax25 vhf packet four port bbs with mail forwarding. It ran in 1991-1994 in the Atlanta area using a Commodore 64. The TNC was actually a TNC emulator. It came in kit form and was called a Digicom64, and plugged into the commodore's serial port. I bought it from N4ZCV, he had already built the little board. I had a real blast with that setup. There were so many packet stations on in those days you could digipeat up or down the east coast of the US as far as you wanted to go. I just found my old 300 baud modem for the 64 the other day. I just read Hitachi is releasing a 1 TB hard drive. Time flies.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by W0IPL on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"SWANMAN on January 6, 2007
Morse is NOT a digital mode."
And what are those things at the end of your hands?
Aren't those digits?
From the dictionary:
dig-it n. (L digitus) 1. a finger or toe
dig-it-al adj. 3. performed with the finger
Humm - sounds like CW -IS- a digital mode.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by W3TUA on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I remember what W3AMP was talking about when he mentioned being able to digi up and down the East coast. At it's peak in North Carolina, I remember being fascinated when I could connect to a BBS from Fayetteville, NC all the way into Canada. Those were fun times. I even helped set up some of the digipeater sites across the state that made some of that happen.
It was great fun while it lasted!
73,
Korey
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N4CQR on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Tune to 14.105 LSB and listen in. There is quiet a bit of activity, that is not junk. Keyboard to keyboard QSOs are pretty much a daily occurence.
J C S
N5EAT - "I'm not sure that today we even need packet software. I'ts been years and years since anything other than junk was being bounced around on packet."
|
| |
|
Just an anti-TNC diatribe...
|
|
|
by WB4M on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You start out with a nostalgic title, then go on an anti-TNC rant. You bash TNCs in every paragraph and the modes they run. Then end up by saying you like to use them once in a while to remind yourself why you don't use them! WTF kind of statement is that? Do you need to actively try to dig up something to gripe about? And what's wrong about sending brag files? I personally like to see what kind of equipment other hams are using and discuss them in a QSO. Maybe to you manually typing that same info over and over makes more sense... I guess next you will want to have QSO Police to decide what we can talk about in a QSO.
And sorry to burst your bubble, but I still have and use my HAL DXP38 daily, and it will sometimes out-perform my soundcard programs on RTTY and allow me to keep in contact with my Clover buddies.
I got started in RTTY back in 1981 with a Robot 800 keyboard and small black and white monitor. I later went the Commodore 64 route and used several TNCs and then on to PCs. Like most hams today I have several digital programs and enjoy using ALL modes, not just PSK. I will still use and enjoy Pactor, Amtor, and Clover and in doing so I do not deprive anyone else of getting on the air. I suggest you throw away your old TNCs, or better still, give them to a new ham who would put them to good use. But then again, you would not have the fun of hooking them back up so you'd have something to gripe about.
|
| |
|
RE: Just an anti-TNC diatribe...
|
|
|
by N4MJG on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I use my for tracking to anyone even me for my truck (kg4orx-1) on uiview32. i put up a good use for my IGATE (kg4orx)i never stop using tnc i keep on using them.
73
Jackie
KG4ORX
WEBSITE http://webpages.charter.net/kg4orx/
|
| |
|
RE: Just an anti-TNC diatribe...
|
|
|
by W4PC on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Funny, my TNC software sales for Pacterm and PkTerm were up last year, not down. Maybe because you get the best of both worlds (soundcard and internal modes) and with the Timewave soundcard interface in the PK-232's, you dont have to use up an extra serial port for keying. Oh and if you dont have a serial port, Timewave has a USB version of the PK-232 and has an upgrade kit for older PK-232s.
TNCs are still around and some new technology is in the works from both Kantronics and Timewave. :)
|
| |
|
RE: Just an anti-TNC diatribe...
|
|
|
by N1XBP on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My PK232 is a rugged, well built communications device that is just as useful to me today as it was the day I got it. It's HF packet and RTTY decoding are much easier to use and copy better than any of my soundcard decoders and I've used it many times for VHF packet for APRS or via satellites.
I expect it to be sitting in my rack for many more years, if not for anything than it's handy feature of being able to identify a communcations mode for me.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KX8N on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
""SWANMAN on January 6, 2007
Morse is NOT a digital mode."
And what are those things at the end of your hands?
Aren't those digits?
From the dictionary:
dig-it n. (L digitus) 1. a finger or toe
dig-it-al adj. 3. performed with the finger
Humm - sounds like CW -IS- a digital mode. "
Actually, digital is something discrete: Ones and zeros, on and off, dits and dahs.
Yeah, CW is indeed digital - as digital as binary.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K1CJS on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Keyword is COMPUTER there, sport."
No, I don't agree, the keywork here is DIGITAL. You do NOT have to have computers to have digital signalling, digital modes are not restricted to computer dependency.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N5EAT on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To N4CQR:
I was mainly referring to vhf/uhf packet. Someone mentioned connecting up the east coast. I used to do that from Birmingham. Just see how many connections I could make and issue a CQ to see if anyone was out there. Making a contact was exciting and rewarding.
I have to admit that I have not listened to 14.105 recently. I appreciate the information and would enjoy finding a reason to hook my TNC back into my antenna wire rat's nest.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KC2CT on January 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
TNC Nostalgia, eh? It seems that I remember things quite a bit different...
Yesterday... How about the dark side of the "Digital Revolution" in Amateur Radio? How about all the bickering and in-fighting that occured when TCP/IP, NETRom and ROSE networks were prevalent? How about the fighting and grabbing for spectrum and what packet activity (DX Cluster? BBS? Keyboard-to-keyboard) should be allowed to operate? How about the over-zealous BBS sysops who banned users because they did not care for the content of their posts? How about the self-proclaimed Data Experts (Nazis) who, despite everything you did, continually told you that you were overdriven, off-frequency or too aggressive? How about the "I'm not allowing your frames across my network" syndrome that eventually killed packet radio networks? No, the Internet did not kill Packet Radio, Hams did.
And Today... How about the rudeness of automatic stations firing up on an HF frequency without regard to who or what is using that particular frequency? How about the snobbishness of the Elitists who will not connect with you if you're not running a $1000.00 TNC running Pactor III?
<sigh> The dawn of the digital revolution in communications may be upon us but as communicators, we Hams still have a VERY long way to go...
|
| |
|
Tiny-2 & PK232?
|
|
|
by K4RAF on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I feel the nostalgia when I fire up my laptop with wifi built into it, connect to 1 of my access points & stream scanner audio from NJ or XRM Alternative streams with WinAmp.
The closest ham radio is coming to is the 3.4GHz radios soon to be available & that will only be infrastructure, something AX.25 lacked & capacity which it still lacks...
Move on people...
K4RAF
wifidx@gmail.com
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K6YE on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I marvel at the technology advances that have been made since I first discovered packet. One of my friends, N6RVZ, had an Apple computer, two meter handheld, and a TNC that he brought to the local club station. He had the setup configured such that when a DX spot came up, a cow bell tolled. I thought it was really a neat and inexpensive way to go!
Later the spots were given audibly over a DX club's repeater. I bought a used AEA TNC at an auction but never got into it. I was working as an engineer for Verizon and after spending ten hours with a UNIX terminal, PC, and a laptop, the last thing I wanted to do on my own time was type.
PSK31 is a great mode and I have lots of friends who really enjoy it. While I still admire it, I am still into CW (70%) and SSB/FM (30%) modes.
But that is the great thing about this hobby. There is something for everybody in it!
Semper Fi,
Tommy - K6YE
DX IS
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N4KZ on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Interesting topic. I sold my beloved KAM Plus all-mode TNC a couple years ago to a fellow who needed it to replace his lightning-damaged unit. But for five years in the 1990s I was very active on Pactor and some Amtor and G-TOR for keyboard-to-keyboard ragchewing and DXing. It was excellent. Seldom was there a loss of copy -- most QSOs were perfect with no garbled text. Inefficient? Maybe? But I seldom, if ever, had to ask for repeats or look at garbled text on your monitor.
I eventually switched to the soundcard modes but let me tell you, those modes with ARQ ran rings around some of the soundcard modes in terms of throughput and perfect copy. And folks today sometimes rave about PSK31s ability to perform under weak-signal conditions. Well, G-TOR was fantastic. It often gave me completely error-free communications with incredibly weak signals and in terrible conditions.
I just wish versions of PSK using FEC (forward error correction) to improve transmission text accuracy would become more popular. In time, I think they will.
At this point, I don't see modes employing ARQ (handshaking) regaing any popularity.
73, Dave, N4KZ
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by W4LGH on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My first was made by AEA. Was a little black box that plugged directly into my Commodore-64. Blew a many a chip in the 64 hooking this to my SB-101! The box was interface and firmware all in one, and pretty slick actually, but could have used some isolation between it and the radio. As I remember it did CW/RTTY/AMTOR/ASCII...maybe a few others, but I got hooked on AMTOR, sure beat the hell out of the T/R relay tho.
My how things have changed!
73 de W4LGH - Alan
http://www.w4lgh.com
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KI4ABS on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I think the close integration of computers and ham radio is just a natural thing. And the incredible processing power of the computer at such a low cost is truly amazing. One can go into a local Wal-Mart and buy an eMachine computer for just over $300 that has a 3Ghz processor in it! That's WAY more than you need for basically all of the digital modes. I think it's just natural for hams to use computers because: 1) We're into electronics so computers are natural anyway and 2) Many of us are into efficiency (QRP for example) and the computer can do a lot of things cheaper and better than we could with all of the formerly required gear. It may not be cheaper, but they've already replaced our logbooks. And now, with Logbook of the World, they're going to somebody replace QSL cards. Yeah, it's change. Nobody likes to change. But, I think in this case, change is for the better. If it can be done faster, easier, and cheaper, I'm for it.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KD6NIG on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I still use, and will continue to use, a TNC on VHF packet, simply because of a few reasons:
1) Its also a node, which means its 24/7/365. Could probably do that with one of the computer dongles, but then the computer would have to stay on 24/7/365. Sure they make UPS systems for computers, but I can keep a 2m radio and a TNC running on batteries far longer for much cheaper :)
2) Also my personal mailbox is up 24/7 so my local friends can leave me a message, tell me about an upcoming event, remind me (since I forget!) etc. Again, the computer would have to stay on for this. Sure, I could use email, but RF works wether the power is on or not!
3) Though you would need a computer for portable packet, its probably easier and more reliable to run a TNC seperately from the computer. Its one less thing the laptop has to power. Also, with a TNC, all you need is a serial port, and with the TNC also, the computer can be really simple, running an old OS. You don't need a newer machine that can run a newer OS that can recognise the USB/whatever the thing is you're attaching, as well as the programs you need to run it. I have an OLD dell laptop that will only run win98 and is slow as a slug, but once booted, for packet works like a champ!
I dunno. Maybe I'm nostalgic, but I'll have a VHF packet station up till I'm the last one left. Traffic isn't too high, but it works well :)
Now for APRS, I use something like a tinytrack. Not because I don't want to use a TNC, but the fact that, size wise, you can take it, an HT, and some kind of GPS, and hide the HT and the tinytrack in a small space like a glove compartment, if well ventilated.
I guess I just like coming home and seeing that MAIL light blinking, maybe. Like I said, I will run VHF packet until nobody else does :)
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by AA4LR on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I still have a couple of TNCs, both PACCOMM units, one is a TNC-2 clone, the other is the Tiny TNC-2.
The TNC-2 clone is set up for 300 baud HF Packet, the Tiny TNC-2 is set up for 1200 baud VHF Packet.
My last HF Packet contact in the log is in 1990. No telling when the last time I used the VHF unit, but it was likely before I moved to the current QTH in 1994.
Back in the mid to late 1980s, the external TNC was the technology of choice. Consider that the typical computer of the day was a 5-16 MHz 16-bit computer. Many of these machines did not even HAVE sound capability as standard equipment. (Apple Computer was the first manufacturer to build in both sound output (1984) and sound input (1990) as standard features of their computers)
Even if you had a sound card in those days, the main CPUs did not have the processing power to perform even the most rudimentary of DSP operations. NeXT computer pioneered the inclusion of a special DSP processor as part of their machines (1988), but this did not catch on. Apple repeated this configuration in 1993 with their "AV" Macs, but it was short-lived.
In the early 1990s, Intel was busy with a number of initiatives to encourage people to upgrade their machines. One of these was the "Native Signal Processing" or NSP initiative. Intel encouraged people to develop applications, such as modems, which would require 486 or Pentium processors. (Microsoft scuttled the NSP initiative, because they didn't want Intel to get in the business of writing software)
By 1995, desktop computers had migrated to powerful processors (Pentium from Intel, PowerPC from IBM/Motorola) that had impressive floating-point performance. Performing signal processing on these chips was not only possible, but cost effective.
At the same time, the digital cellular telephone industry hit its stride, and suddenly the cost of DSP chips also came down.
Today, most desktop computers have way more than the necessary computing power to perform complex signal processing in addition to all their other tasks. Implementing a digital mode over a audio channel radio is straightforward -- "a simple matter of software."
In their day, the TNCs made sense -- dedicated computing power and hardware to one task to offload a desktop computer. With today's computers, that's no longer the case.
--
One interesting idea that has NOT caught on is the idea of using the computer as the radio. In 1995, on the CQ-Contest mailing list, I made a prediction that future radios would be IN the computer. Since the DSP power was present in the machines, it made sense to eliminate all the hardware and replace it with signal processing software in the host computer.
Such a radio would consist of DDS and high-performance mixers for receiving and transmitting. All IF and AF processing would be done in the host computer. An external "brick" amplifier would take the RF energy up to respectable levels.
This concept has a lot of promise, especially when you consider non-audio forms of receiption. (eg decoding the entire CW subband all at the same time)
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K1LDS on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K8DXX:
Ah, yes . . .I kept my "Simon n Garfunkel: The Boxer" paper tape (you know RY RY RY, RY RY RY RY RY RY RY) for years (it disappeared in my divorce, like everything else that the former N7JVA knew held any sentimental value to me).
I'm actually going to snag another of those machines once I get planted in the place I'm buying (and have room for it), just because I miss the sound . . .those old TTYs were a mechanical work of art.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K1LDS on January 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It's 2309. It's 31.1 degrees outside. My laptop is safe and warm in the house, while the TNC in my Crown Vic is happily logging any traffic for me. I will get it in the morning when I go out, plug in my laptop and head to work.
When I'm at the office, if I drag the laptop in with me, the TNC will sit there, still at work, no matter where the computer is.
That is why I still have a TNC.
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KC7QDO on January 9, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ah yes the TNC amazing piece of hardware. The MFJ 1276
has been retired to the backup radio storage box. This was
only packet radio but it worked great.
I still remember the day that I got it going reading the book for
the dipswitch settings and setting MFJ for DOS on the 8088.
Then two weeks later when I got it right. Dirk the local bbs
owner came up and was my first contact and taught me the basics.
Then I upgraded to the 286 then a few months later to the 386
with Windows 3.x. Then I upgraded to the windows version of
the MFJ software and boy howdy that was neat.
But unfortuntatly with the advent of the Internet the people
doing the file and picture tranfers using Yapp protocol were all
but gone. I managed to only find one person to do that once
and transfered a morse code training software.
Then I got caught with the the political games between what
was radio and not radio. Since my messages would be be routed
anywhere; I had to depend on e-mail to get messages to friends
through out the world.
Then I played with APRS that was fun. Then it got boring when people
stopped talking to each other. That was when we had to use the tnc
build the gps interface and then have a lab top in a the car to go
portable. I just lost interest in that mode but it was fun non the less.
Now I do hf digital with the sound card interface. Still having fun
just switched gears.
Thanks for bringing back some fond memories when I first starting
playing with computers.
73,
Bruce
|
| |
|
TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K0RGR on January 9, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Good post!
My first "TNC" was a Model 19 reperf. I found a local stationary supply store that had a corner full of boxes filled with old teletype paper, and bought out their entire stock. I remember re-inking my only ribbon with 3-in-1 oil many times, until it finally wore out. The ST-5 TU worked great.
The 'steam RTTY' machine was replaced by a succession of Commodore computers and plug-in interfaces that did RTTY, CW, and AMTOR. Say what you will about 'TOR' modes, I think we threw out the baby with the bath water when we abandoned AMTOR. From Central California, I used to check into an AMTOR net in far northern Canada on 80 meters fairly often. The copy was always 100%.
The first real TNC was a Heathkit/TAPR kit. It was followed by several others, including the PK232 and my current MFJ multi-mode, which is gathering dust in the corner.
Yes, I can do so many modes with my soundcard, I often don't know which to do. PSK31 does an incredible job of getting through - too bad it isn't error free like AMTOR. There are new protocols that do provide full error correction capability, so I think this is just a matter of time.
I expect to see a lot of Techs trying to use their soundcards for CW on the lowbands, soon. I wish them well.
Software Defined Radios just take this a step further.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KI6LO on January 9, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Lot's of good posts and of course how could we have a eHAM post without some debate on some facet of CW. Give it a break, please.
I really have to disagree with the blanket statement that hardware TNCs are on their way out. Sure their use has dropped alot in the last few years with the advent of the soundcard driven interfaces, but the old hardware TNCs still can do stuff that a soundcard interface really isn't proper for, like running a APRS digipeater. Sure you can do it, but given the locales these systems are usually in, I'll stick with hardware TNCs. Companies that sell hardware TNCs must know something that we don't 'cause they still sell them.
Bottom line (as I see it), it doesn't matter what equipment you use so long as you enjoy using it, it operates correctly and within the regulations for bandwidth, etc. and you can afford it. I, for one, enjoy tinkering with old gear. I like to 'recycle' the older gear into reuse or into service doing something that it may not have been intended to in the first place.
For example, I have assembled a portable system using an older Hewlett Packard HP-620LX H/PC (pre-PPC device) interfaced with serial port to a KAM or KPC-3 for packet, CW, RTTY, APRS, etc. All this gear fits nicely into my callout box for ARES/RACES. I have interface cables to link up to the FT-100D in the car, my THD7A HT/TNC and other rigs. Sure I know someone will say "Well it won't do PSK31 or some other soundcard ONLY mode" and that is absolutely correct. Everything has it's limitations. But all the gear will run off 12V and with the exception of the HF gear, quite a while off a fully charged deepcycle type. And save the radio gear, it all can be had for a song in surplus.
Last but not least, enjoy ham radio to it's fullest. Bring a friend into the hobby and show them what we use to have, where we are at now and where we are going in the future with application of new technologies. Who knows, they may be the one to invent the next 'thing' for ham radio.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by K4JF on January 9, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I have an MFJ-1278B (rack mounted) and would like to use it, but it came with no software and MFJ "backordered" the Windows software for it, months ago. Anybody have a source for something that will work with it?
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by N6AJR on January 9, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have a ft 1500 into a kamplus on a 100 AH battery backup here for the use of the local AES crew. It is jsut my little way of handing a little back to the Community.
I also have 2 cam 3's and a aea 232 somewhere.
Remember , he who dies with the most toys wins...
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KB9YGD on January 10, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I agree with you Charles and thanks for this article its about time someone addressed this issue.There are new hams that dont understand how well the soundcard programs work and buy a hardware tnc.i have worked a pk232 and have used mixw on hf/vhf packet and the soundcard copies better everytime.my favorite soundcard digital program is multipsk because it works so many modes well except packet.Nothing beats MIXW but the program needs a lot of work to appeal to the operator who wants to make contacts not play with the program.73,Norm.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KB2FCV on January 11, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Wow, cool article! I remember hooking up my PK-64 to my Commodore 64 and getting on our regular sunday night RTTY net on 2 meters. There was always a little fine tuning here and there to get the best copy. The software was loaded off a 5 1/4" floppy drive - took several minutes to start up. I have a PK-232 around somewhere that I never fired up. I picked it up at a hamfest and then the sound-card modes took off. It's been a Rigblaster w/software ever since. Now I can just about any mode I have software for.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KE4MOB on January 11, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I gave up digital about three years back. I would always hang around 14.077 in the evenings and catch Johnny, W2LWB (Now a SK) and we would always chat on Pactor for a while before he went to eat supper. Sometimes, there were two brothers who would pop up about once a week a couple of kcs down in AMTOR and after Johnny would sign off I would go down and do a link with one of them. Of course that was after all the RTTY stations were worked above 14.080 and propagation made copy impossible up there...
That was great fun watching the MFJ-1278B pushing data way beyond the noise floor, and me trying to stay ahead of the transmit buffer...TOR modes were so cool in keyboard to keyboard mode.
K4JF check out www.qsl.net/ke4mob. I may have something that can help you.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by KC5JK on January 15, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I realized what N5PVL said ten years ago, and dumped all my Packet gear before it became worthless. The mode remained at 300 baud on HF, and went from 300 to 9600 baud on VHF+, then stalled.
I'd enjoyed several years with an MFJ-1278 on multi-mode HF, and two TAPR-2 clones, MFJ-1270Bs with special DED firmware and German software, on two VHF bands, all intertied to provide cross-band for my BBS users.
I even built a tuning indicator like the 1278 had, for one of the 1270s. With half the parts already onhand from a big junkbox I'd cultivated over the years, and the rest at nice prices from one of the best surplus places anywhere, I still ended up spending as much as if I'd just bought the TAPR tuning meter kit to begin with. KR4WM and N5EAT brought back some memories.
And, W0IPL, that was cute about the digits. Still have my J-37 key (see at www.KC5JK.com), but no more TNCs for me.
|
| |
|
RE: TNC Nostalgia
|
|
|
by WB7ELY on January 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Funny on the packet stuff. It's cool computer networking over an audio channel, but as a ham radio hobby.... I have always been more interested the mystery and lure of the low bands. The behavior of long waves (20-40 M high) off of random wire antennas never ceases to amaze me. Running 45 Baud Teletype over audio channels with the waves bouncing between the F-1 Layer and the Earth's surface gives a fun challenge to the operators on each end as they try and find stations to contact.
Prowling around the bands, listening for the distinctive RTTY musical tone is great fun. With the room lights turned low, meters lit and pilot lights glowing, you tune around the band. The digital readout on the radio clicks off the Khz. The operator's position is a nice collection of equipment encircling you and the lights and meters look cool. Outside the window, a fifty foot "long wire antenna" stretches to a tree. The odd harmonic whistles and strange sounds that emanate from the speaker are interesting, mysterious and unusual.
You reach the lower edge of the 20M RTTY band and start back up to the other end. You tune across a station calling CQ. You know it is CQ from the distinctive "diddle-diddle" tune. You watch the oscilloscope now and fine-tune the signal. .. watching for the "crossed ovals" pattern to align. You check the computer monitor and the odd gibberish turns into readable capitals. You type a reply and wait for an answer. Will he hear you? Where on the planet might he be?
You lean forward, glancing between the CRT and the S-Meter. The S-Meter swings wildly as the F-1 layer changes height... but today you are lucky.. the meter behaves itself and you can see the essentials of the message. The guy is in Argentina and you spend the next ten minutes exchanging the weather, details of your setup and life in Seattle. You signoff with him and fill in the log entry. You sit back with a satisfying feeling. You used the equipment and your operators skill to make sense of a rough, low speed digital HF connection with someone like you far far away for just a few minutes. You really accomplished something, got the RF out and back over 6,000 miles over a system you put together, and made a friend.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
Progress
Don't Throw Away or Sell That TNC!
Landlubbers
Setting Up an Echolink Simplex Node Using Signalink USB Interface
Help Needed in Going Back!
Other Operating Articles
Safety First
My First Date with Olivia
D-STAR/Analog Interference Experience
Using Twitter During Mobile Operation
First HF Contact and Other Stuff
|
