Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
Kyle Yoksh (K0KN)
on
August 18, 2007
View comments about this article!
I would like to know if there is anyone else interested in working on a project to emulate the Icom HM 98 and HM 133 hand microphones?
The HM98 is the powerful remote-control mic found in such radios as the Icom 207, 2100, 2200, 2820, 2710, and allows operation of nearly every function of the radio from the microphone.
I am interested in reverse-engineering the data protocol so that these radios can (finally!) be computer controlled. This will also allow users to program memories (including repeater offset, PL tones, etc) similar to the EXPENSIVE system offered by Icom that involves removing the control head.
Once this data protocol is known, a whole bunch of additional features and capabilities will be available on the 207 and similar radios.
For example, how about working FM satellites with just one radio? Doppler tuning and RX/TX frequency control could easily be handled by a laptop in your vehicle (dual band models only). Single band models can participate as an uplink OR downlink radio.
How about a simple circuit to automatically tune your radio to the NOAA weather channel in your area when an alert tone is broadcast?
Software could be also developed to increase or decrease the RF output as needed to work near or distant stations, such as when working packet. Only use the higher power levels when necessary, such as when contacting a regional gateway.
The sky is the limit once the initial work is done, so I'd like to know if anyone else would like to team up on this?
The HM98 mic includes a NEC uPD7564A, a 4-bit Single Chip Microcomputer. I've read that this CPU operates at 600 KHz, although I've no way to verify that.
Anyone with experience with embedded processors, PIC processors, or serial data communication would be a great help to this project.
Please contact me directly if interested, or join my Icom 207 group on Yahoo at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ic207group
Thanks and 73,
Kyle Yoksh
K0KN
Olathe, Kansas
k0kn at amsat dot org
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by ICR71A on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
No disrespect to the poster, but this is hardly an "article." A query such as this properly belongs in the forums, perhaps under the "Elmers" board.
An article should endeavor to share some sort of knowledge with the reader, not ask for help in gaining knowledge for the writer...
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by W3LK on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Agreed.
Where is the editorial staff that should be reviewing submissions and weeding out the "chaff" before allowing it to be posted?
73,
Lon - W3LK
Naugatuck, Connecticut
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I have to agree with the other posters. This doesn't belong here. Also, the author as much as admits he wants to get at proprietary information. I don't think this should have even been posted, let alone here.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by W6TH on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
.
Should a hand key, bug or something to key a rig for cw, I could be of some help, but for microphones, count me out, microphones are limited knowledge to me.
Sorry, no help here.
CW for ever.
.:
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KB4QAA on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree this belongs on the Elmer board.
Nonetheless, one starting point would be to tap in between the mic and txcvr, connecting to the DB9 or DB25 serial port on a PC and try monitoring the command packets with HyperTerminal or a similar emulation program to see if they are readable.
If so, one could then build a command library empirically by working thru each radio function and recording the observed command.
Bill.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K0KN on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> Nonetheless, one starting point would be to tap in > between the mic and txcvr, connecting to the DB9 or > DB25 serial port on a PC and try monitoring the
> command packets with HyperTerminal or a similar
> emulation program to see if they are readable.
> If so, one could then build a command library
> empirically by working thru each radio function and > recording the observed command.
> Bill.
Hello Bill,
We think alike!
The data between the mic and radio is a proprietary serial protocol, and operates at 2.5 volts. I've successfully converted this data to TTL levels, then converted again to RS-232 using a MAX232 chip.
So, at this point, I am able to observe the data on my oscilloscope, and/or read the data in real time on my PC screen. However, the data is garbage until we can learn more about the protocol.
I'm sure that there are many others that are more knowledgeable about data protocols than I, so hopefully between a small group of us we can discover the secret(s).
As I mentioned before, this information is the key to making some great radios more useful..
With this information, we will be able to contribute to the ham community's wealth of knowledge, in our own little way.. Maybe not everyone's cup of tea, but that's one great thing about this hobby - there's something for everyone..
73,
Kyle
K0KN
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by W6TH on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
.
This post belongs here and from the info from KB4QAA and K0KN I find it very helpful.
After readings of K0KN bio, I now wonder why I stayed so long on HF. I gave up 2 1/2 meters because of the 2 meter change and repeater addition.
Thinking of giving up my extra class and ask the FCC for a vanity tech class. :)
.:
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by W8LGZ on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"I am interested in reverse-engineering the data protocol so that these radios can (finally!) be computer controlled"
I would be careful "reverse-engineering" Icom's data protocol. If Icom has not released it to public knowledge, you "could" be breaking some copyright laws. I'm not saying it will happen but, some companies get their panties in a bunch over such things. You may want to contact them to "c.y.a." Who knows, they may even send you the data protocol to get you started!
Jim - W8LGZ
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K0KN on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> I would be careful "reverse-engineering" Icom's
> data protocol. If Icom has not released it to
> public knowledge, you "could" be breaking some
> copyright laws. I'm not saying it will happen but, > some companies get their panties in a bunch over
> such things. You may want to contact them
> to "c.y.a." Who knows, they may even send you the
> data protocol to get you started!
> Jim - W8LGZ
Hi Jim,
I contacted Icom's Technical Support a while back. Their answer was "We don't have access to engineering data". I asked if they'd pass my request up the chain. The guy I talked to said that he would, but he was not too excited about it. He mentioned that such requests are almost NEVER granted.
Hopefully Icom understands that most hams are experimenters, and I am looking to make a great radio even more useful. After all, it was the Amateur line that got Icom started in the first place...
73,
Kyle
K0KN
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by ONAIR on August 18, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
What we really should be working on is voice recognition software that allows us hams to "tell" the radio exactly what we want it to do. This pushing buttons and menus stuff is becoming way too primitive for this day and age.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by W4CBL on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Nothing at all wrong with "reverse-engineering" the protocol.... as long as you don't try to make $$$$$ from it.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K0BG on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
All of this is for naught. Call Icom and purchase the Repair Manual for the radio. If you know how to read schematics, you'll soon discover the fallacy in your quest. No, I won't give it away!
Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KE3WD on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hyperterminal is a poor software choice for attempting to decipher ascii on screen as the binary being sent because Hypetterminal filters some characters in the ascii set.
If you see blocks throughout the readout, that would be the filtering.
Some characters I remember offhand that are filtered by Hyperterminal and printed as square blocks are the four ascii symbol characters that represent the suits of the standard playing cards, Heart, Club, Spade, Diamond. There are others.
Older terminal softwares and those designed to let the full ascii character set through are advisable then, and should be tested by loopback to be certain that the entire ascii character set will indeed show up onscreen before getting too involved with such.
Then, of course, you must convert each ascii string seen into binary to make sense of it.
KE3WD
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Nothing at all wrong with "reverse-engineering" the protocol.... as long as you don't try to make $$$$$ from it."
True, but consider this: In todays world, if the data were passed around and it got back to Icom somehow, the originator may be facing a lawsuit for doing what he is doing even though he didn't make a $$$ profit from it. Icom might argue that the profit for the ham community was the avoidance of purchasing the Icom interface.
Most companies take a very dim view of proprietary info being put into the public domain.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by WA9SVD on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Not sure I agree this is really in the correct place, but to start:
1. Service manual for the radio.
2. Data sheet and application notes for the processor used. If it's a custom made processor, you won't be able to get that from the manufacturer. (Most likely the case.) Also data sheets for any interface chips used in conjunction with the processor in the mic.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KC8YKU on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You will want to consult a competent attorney with a specialization in Intellectual Property law, but I can speak of a recent anecdote in my personal experience that might be helpful.
I work for a technology company who is working on a custom application to integrate an LDAP directory with a series of copiers. I questioned whether or not we could sniff the network traffic between the administrative software tool running on a PC and the copier. From our sources on our project, we determined that since we were sniffing network traffic that was unencrypted on the wire, there really isn't a legal precedent or statue to prevent us from doing so. In fact, it will help this particular manufacturer sell more devices... ;-)
What makes this situation unique is the need to intercept traffic going between the microphone and the radio. Would the microphone be considered an integral part of the unit and therefore working inside the "black box", rather than observing changes from the outside.
You might have more success, legally, examining the comms of the Icom interface with the unit or the comms of the Icom software with the external interface.
But again, I am not a lawyer and would ask that you defer on this matter to a lawyer who knows IP law.
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KC2RGW on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
We as hams really need to start letting it be known that we won't buy products with closed protocols. It goes completely against the premise of the hobby.
Things have gone well into firmware/software run devices that can't be tinkered with any other way than by understanding the various control protocols and interfaces to the 'operating systems' contained. We need to demand that the market supply these pieces of critical information as part of the product for which we have paid.
Unfortunately I believe that Flex Radio might be the only rig vendor that makes any information of this nature freely available. I may be wrong here but from reading rig control projects' info, it seems the big three and even Ten-Tec, don't cooperate with details of what their rig control protocols are.
The key would be for one major manufacturer to break stride and make the protocols for full rig control public for all their gear. They would do a fine volume of business with current hams just from this attribute alone.
As was already mentioned, by opening the specs for things of this nature, they open themselves to a world wide team of tinkerers that could easily contribute fixes and information back to the original product.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"We as hams really need to start letting it be known that we won't buy products with closed protocols. It goes completely against the premise of the hobby.
Things have gone well into firmware/software run devices that can't be tinkered with any other way than by understanding the various control protocols and interfaces to the 'operating systems' contained. We need to demand that the market supply these pieces of critical information as part of the product for which we have paid......."
Chris, I can see what you're saying and I agree with it.....to a point. It does not, however, 'go completely against the premise of the hobby.' We do pay for the rigs and the features, but we do not actually pay for the rights to the protocols, just for the use of them. A good example of this is the computer software industry itself. Most programs are licensed to an end user. That is, only the right for the use of the program are sold, not the program itself. That is the main reason a lot of hams usually prefer linux instead of windows. A lot of the more popular ham programs are still written for windows, however.
Likewise, we purchase the right to use the protocol with the rigs, but we aren't entitled to the protocol itself. It isn't necessary to have that software code to use the rig, just as it isn't necessary to have the source code for Internet explorer to be able to use that. Consider, what would Microsoft say if you demanded the code and protocols for Windows? Do you think they would even give you the courtesy of a reply?
Manufacturers of rigs aren't going to let out those company protocols if they've got sales of other auxiliary equipment depending on keeping them out of the public domain. That is what Kyle is trying to do--get the protocols so he doesn't have to buy the interface, just build his own.
I can just see it now--Icom lets out the proprietary information on its D-star system to the public domain. Everybody--including Icom's competitors-starts making equipment to emulate the protocols and interact with the D-star system. Although Icom will still make good money with its sales, it will obviously NOT make the amount it would have if the protocol rights were sold and equipment manufacturing licensed.
Icom might get the accolades of the ham community, but those can't be distributed to Icom's shareholders and investors, neither can they be used to pay Icom's employees. Face it, that's the way business is done these days. We may not like it, but we have to live with it.
Look at it another way--what if you were the one of the ones who would be laid off if the protocols were made public? Would you appreciate losing your job because the company decided to give away its secrets? Somehow I doubt it.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K0KN on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> Manufacturers of rigs aren't going to let out those > company protocols if they've got sales of other
> auxiliary equipment depending on keeping them out
> of the public domain. That is what Kyle is trying
> to do--get the protocols so he doesn't have to buy > the interface, just build his own.
There's just one problem with your statement.. Icom doesn't make the interface I'm dreaming of. To my knowledge, nobody does. So, if anyone thinks I'm being a cheap skate rather than being an experimenter,
you're certainly entitled to your opinion, I guess..
I do have the microphone that comes with the rig, and the PC interface that Icom DOES make, but it only programs memory channels when the radio is in programming mode. To use this interface, you must remove the faceplate, and the radio cannot be operated.
I plan to mimic the NEC microprocessor in the microphone to allow a PIC or PC to control the radio in real time.
I suppose Icom could object on some grounds, and some trial lawyers could argue for a year or two and line their pockets.. Nothing new about that..
73,
Kyle
K0KN
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KE3WD on August 19, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You can't get blood from a stone.
About the worse I can foresee happening to you would be a cease and desist letter, then you cease and done deal.
"It is far better to beg forgiveness than ask permission."
KE3WD
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KC2RGW on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>"Chris, I can see what you're saying and I agree with >it.....to a point. It does not, however, 'go completely >against the premise of the hobby.' We do pay for the rigs
>and the features, but we do not actually pay for the >rights to the protocols, just for the use of them"
I understand where you are coming from with this. However, I really feel we have only been trained to believe this. A culture shift has occurred where the consumer has become a lessee of what at one time would have been his own property.
This isn't specific to ham gear of course. Almost any media format is in a similar state and almost nobody can even work on their own car in the driveway now without paying huge money for a proprietary code diagnostic reader.
The car situation is very similar to the ham radio issue. If the codes to understand how to maintain and even operate the gear that I paid for were a known, I would be free to use my property as I choose. Instead I'm merely a lessee at the mercy of the manufacturer that has their hand in my pocket. As soon as they decide to stop maintaining the firmware at my expense I now own a brick with no function.
I'm a linux user myself, almost exclusively now since 1995. Though there is a lot of great ham software for linux, there would indeed be more if the hamlib project had a quick and direct path to the rig control protocols.
I don't want anything for free...but if I pay for something, it is mine and I expect full control of what I own.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by W3WN on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K1CJS said on August 19, 2007:
<snip>
I can just see it now--Icom lets out the proprietary information on its D-star system to the public domain. Everybody--including Icom's competitors-starts making equipment to emulate the protocols and interact with the D-star system. Although Icom will still make good money with its sales, it will obviously NOT make the amount it would have if the protocol rights were sold and equipment manufacturing licensed.
Icom might get the accolades of the ham community, but those can't be distributed to Icom's shareholders and investors, neither can they be used to pay Icom's employees. Face it, that's the way business is done these days. We may not like it, but we have to live with it.
<snip>
Only D-Star is not an ICOM proprietary system. It was developed by the JARL as an open protocol. So if you're interested in doing D-STAR development, you'd talk to the JARL, not ICOM.
Having said that... the other side of the coin:
Let's say that someone develops a product, on the lines of the mic interface that started this thread, something that the manufacturer has no plans to market -- thus not costing them any shekels in lost profit. The manufacturer might turn a blind eye and ignore it (and not support it); or change future versions of their product to be incompatible; or take legal action to prevent the product from being marketed due to allegedly unauthorized or illegal reverse engineering. Or... the product developer can work something out with the manufacturer, perhaps by arranging for something akin to a licensing fee, thus providing the manufacturer with new revenue streams for their product. Or a hundred other scenarios.
Those pursuing this project know or should know the risks. If they continue to pursue the project with the risks in mind, more power to them. We need not hinder their efforts, they'll have enough landmines ahead of them as it is!
73
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KB1OCC on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Another approach?
Tackle this from the front end. Program a chip to close the contacts on the key pad instead...
You're still keep ICOM's secrets secret.
Just my 2 cents...
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"If the codes to understand how to maintain and even operate the gear that I paid for were a known, I would be free to use my property as I choose. Instead I'm merely a lessee at the mercy of the manufacturer that has their hand in my pocket. As soon as they decide to stop maintaining the firmware at my expense I now own a brick with no function."
No, you own a radio that will still operate. Thats one of the points--you don't HAVE TO know the protocols to use the product. You are still free to use the property as you choose, you can even "reverse-engineer" it if you wish. What I'm saying is the company may well come after you if you do--and the word gets around.
Also, when the manufacturer stops supporting the radio and the protocol, it doesn't mean the radio automatically stop working. For example, windows 98 support has ended. Did all the win 98 op systems suddenly stop working? No. In effect, Microsoft said 'It isn't worth our time to continue support for that--use it at your own risk.' So it would be for the radios.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Only D-Star is not an ICOM proprietary system. It was developed by the JARL as an open protocol. So if you're interested in doing D-STAR development, you'd talk to the JARL, not ICOM."
Point taken. However, I was using that as an example, not as fact. And, if it is an open protocol, there's no need to ask, is there? So, its use was a bad example. Oh, well.....
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"There's just one problem with your statement.. Icom doesn't make the interface I'm dreaming of. To my knowledge, nobody does. So, if anyone thinks I'm being a cheap skate rather than being an experimenter, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, I guess.."
No, I never said that--and your not being cheap in wanting to do a project like this. If anything, I'm the ultimate cheapskate--I save my used solder. (Just kidding!)
What I'm referring to is your spreading the project around on a public forum like this. True, it is the best place to get ideas, volunteers and information, but, for that very reason, I'd be surprised if an Icom representative didn't know about your plans already.
Also, Icom may not bother answering you, then when you least expect it and you're project is out in the open, you get a little letter in the mail--from Icom's attorney. I'm not trying to be cynical, but that is today's world. Anyway, good luck if you continue.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KC2RGW on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>No, you own a radio that will still operate. Thats one of the points--you don't HAVE TO know the protocols to use the product
O.k. an example
Company A has a semi-SDR type rig, one that has a substantial firmware image it needs to operate.
Your rig winds up with a corrupted firmware image and needs to be reloaded.
Company A stopped making that image available or the updater requires a version of Windows no longer around....
You now own a brick.
Take this further with today's corporate mentality...
Company A comes out with a new rig, and intentionally takes the old firmware from the previous model away so that the end user has no choice but to buy the new model if anything should happen to the volatile loaded firmware they have now.
Or.
Company A goes out of business....
As far as the Windows analogy goes, there are many firmware updaters and other software utilities, that only ran on older versions of Windows. The manufacturers have long since abandoned the support of the utilities. Items like digicams come to mind among others.
The only way to deal with these older devices is to run a now unsupported copy of Windows that you can no longer buy in any legitimate form. So you have to pirate this software and keep it around on a machine just to run a firmware or other software based utility so your device doesn't become a brick as a result.
A Kenwood TS-2000B is something that would fall into this category, given another five years of Windows evolution... There are alternate front ends to use, but the 'real' software will eventually become unsupported making this rig a brick if the user intends on 'using it as intended' with the original software.
Motorola programming software for many of their radios requires a P90 or earlier machine running DOS or it won't run....thus many of this era of radios wind up on ebay for next to nothing...they have just about become bricks.
There is a big difference between protection of intellectual property and using the court system to batter the consumer. We've descended to the latter very quickly the last decade.
One reason this is on my mind is that I just saw a whistle clean Kenwood 830 at a hamfest this weekend. Still runs like a top and would likely do so for another 15yrs easy with some minor care. I don't for a second believe there will be a legacy like this for the current rigs or similarly software dependent devices. I also believe this is by design and only because the consumers have been trained to accept it.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KB1OCC on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Tear apart the keypad and program a PIC controller to systematically close the keypad circuits based upon certain criteria.
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by N9XY on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Kyle:
Here is a link to a Yahoo group working on a similar project for the ICOM 706MKiiG
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RC706/?yguid=130630387
73
Michael
N9XY
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by N6AOT on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The fact this post is here vs elsewhere isn't that big a bother to me.
As for reverse engineering, that's fine. I did it for a business a decade ago doing power chips for cars. There are several court cases supporting reverse engineering of products. If Icom doesn't wanna release the protocol, that's their biz. If they wanna control the marketplace for mics for radios, there could be issues on their side. I do doubt there is anything patentable in here since tons of radios have keypad mics with a variety of protocols.
Now, be advised you may well not have a regular serial data protocol here (logic-level RS232, I2C, SPI, Microwire, etc.)
Lotsa consumer products with keypads use an ADC (analog/digital converter) to measure open vs closed resistances and work out ratios. Since cabling is involved here, a pulse train whose timing parameters (freq/duty cycle) are changed by switching in differing R and C values per keypress might well be used.
Don't start connecting up an RS232 cable with +/- 12V swing, either, or you might toast something. First order of the day is to watch the relevant lines with a scope or logic analyzer.
If you indeed have such a setup, the data rates may be fairly low (i.e, in the keypress-speed range) to send data; even if you rigged up a computer to generate such pulse trains, the conveyance of the data would likely not be too fast and at best in, say, the 100bps range.
73 DE BILL N6AOT
SAN JOSE CA USA
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Company A has a semi-SDR type rig, one that has a substantial firmware image it needs to operate.
Your rig winds up with a corrupted firmware image and needs to be reloaded.
Company A stopped making that image available or the updater requires a version of Windows no longer around....
You now own a brick.
Take this further with today's corporate mentality...
Company A comes out with a new rig, and intentionally takes the old firmware from the previous model away so that the end user has no choice but to buy the new model if anything should happen to the volatile loaded firmware they have now."
Sure, it can happen. What if you have a computer running win 98 right now? If something happens, it can still be reloaded if you have the win 98 discs. If you don't, however, you're out of luck. So, it is the same with the radios. Only, in this case, there is NO copy--so it either has to be cloned or a copy of the protocols are needed--true. It seems, however, you're saying this will happen often. It probably won't.
Anyway, anything wears out over time. Tell me, if a twenty year old rig let go today and the parts just weren't available anywhere (yes, it doubtful, but just for the sake of discussion) how would you repair it? Answer: You wouldn't. You'd probably get another rig, wouldn't you?
Hey, no offence, but just maybe I'm not the cheapest cheapskate......
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
BTW, please notice that I said you don't need the protocols to USE the radio. Repairing it is another matter. Face it, its a throw-away society we're living with. If it doesn't work, throw it away and get another. We hams try to make our equipment last, but it isn't always possible.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by NB3O on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Alan, KØBG wrote: "All of this is for naught. Call Icom and purchase the Repair Manual for the radio. If you know how to read schematics, you'll soon discover the fallacy in your quest. No, I won't give it away!"
Hi Alan, I guess they did not hear you. I'll repeat it for the benefit of those who are hearing impaired:
"ALL THIS IS FOR NAUGHT. CALL ICOM AND PURCHASE THE REPAIR MANUAL FOR THE RADIO. IF YOU KNOW HOW TO READ SCHEMATICS, YOU'LL SOON DISCOVER THE FALLACY IN YOUR QUEST...."
I tried....73
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by K0KN on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> All of this is for naught. Call Icom and purchase
> the Repair Manual for the radio. If you know how to > read schematics, you'll soon discover the fallacy
> in your quest. No, I won't give it away!
> Alan, KØBG
> www.k0bg.com
Hi Alan,
Ok, I'll bite. I've got the Service Manual for my Icom 207. I've got the schematic for my HM-98. I can read schematics. I also enjoy a good movie every now and then.. But enough about me..
I don't see your great revelation, Alan! However, without educating me as to the error in my logic,
answer me this:
If the microphone (containing the NEC uPD7564a single-chip microcomputer) can issue commands to the radio,
why can't a PIC or PC issue the same commands? For that matter, why can't I use a 7564a in MY INTERFACE?
Of course, you already know that the radio has a pin on the mic connector that is held low only when the HM98 or HM133 is connected to the radio. When this pin is high, the radio does not use the digital communication, and a common PTT circuit is used instead.
Last I heard, hams were supposed to help one another and have a spirit of good will towards one another. So far, you've contributed none of this. There's always an 'Alan' on every project.. Trick is to employ a filter, or at least how I read the schematic..
73,
Kyle Yoksh
K0KN
Olathe, Kansas
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by N6AOT on August 20, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hi Kyle,
I think what I mentioned above, and what Alan is trying to impart [and I am only guessing, but this is what some Yaesus do and is common technique in consumer electronic keypads] - is that if you look carefully you may be able see that this is not a true serial data protocol like RS232, I2C, SPI, etc - but just a pulse-width modulated pulse stream, a simple pulse count generator (i.e, like a dial telephone!) or even various analog levels.
All such setups are of course duplicatable by appropriate programming any of a variety of microcontrollers.
Again, as I pointed out above, the data rate of this interface is probably *very* low since it only has to run at "human-punching-keys-with-thumb" speed and likely even has firmware filters to avoid rollover, keybounce and noise, thus throttling key entry speed.
The CPU in the radio box parsing this data may not be able to accept it any faster given the nature of it.
Thus, a computer interface recreating a "virtual mic keypad" thru such an interface is likely to be quite slow, on the order of 100 bits/second, max. It will not be anywhere as fast as a 9600bps interface with a real serial protocol over a real serial port.
73 DE BILL N6AOT
SAN JOSE CA USA
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KC0NIB on August 21, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have to remind people that there are lawyers out there and lots of them looking to "make a killing", and Icom is a large company with money to spend. Should someone actually be able to reverse engineer this protocol, and come up with a suitable "copy" hardware that competes with their products, no matter if it's improved upon or not, it is in direct breach of the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act).
Trust me, they will come gunnin' for you and everything you have that they can take, and then slam you into prison for an obscenely long time.
No thanks, I'll work with what is published. I have kids that I still have to get out the house. I'm waiting for that day when laws really are just, and justice moves swiftly and correctly once they abolish all lawyers. :-)
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by VA3TO on August 21, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N6AOT has it right.
The mic transmits a bit banged data steam whenever a key is pressed. It is not in any particular format or protocol.
I would start by getting myself an RJ-45 jack and plug it into the MH-133 mic connector.
Wire +8v to pin 1 and Gnd to pin 7.
Connect a storage scope or logic analyzer to Data line pin 8 with Gnd on pin 7.
Press each button and record the datastream then relate every 8 bits to a single or series of binary numbers (depending on how long each button press datastream is). i.e., if there are a maximum of 13 bits used for each key press then you would need 2 bytes to represent it.
Also observe and record the timing of the bit pattern.
Then write a program in VB (or whatever) to toggle a handshaking line on the serial port. Each on-screen button press will load the appropriate binary number(s) then call a routine to toggle the handshaking line HI or LO at the correct bit rate.
You'll need a MAX-232 coming off the computer to convert the RS-232 level to TTL then use a simple resistive divider to further reduce voltage as required by the radio. (Keep in mind, RS-232 is the spec for a physical interface, not a serial protocol like ASCII).
I did a similar thing to allow me to use the Kenwood TM-741/ 742 modules as stand-alone units way back in 1994 (QEX article "Homebrewing Black Box Style").
I used a PC initially to simulate the commands then wrote some uC code to make a fully standalone controller.
73 de Hugh VA3TO
www.va3to.com
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by N6AOT on August 21, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
VA3TO writes,
"The mic transmits a bit banged data steam
whenever a key is pressed. It is not in any
particular format or protocol."
Do be aware this may not be true 'data': that is, the pulses don't represent a conventional n-bit binary code.
Instead, a setup might use pulse count like an old dial telephone, or pulse width ("PWM") controlled by simple R/C oscillator circuit.
In fact, an XxY keypad could send a simple pulse train:
a start pulse, one of X pulse widths to indicate row and one of Y individual pulse widths to indicate column, followed by a pulse to indicate pulse stream end. The pulse widths for the start and stop markers would be distinct from possible row/column pulse widths. Thermal changes to absolute resistance and capacitance values would be moot as the row and columns would be inferred from a *ratio* of their pulse widths to the start/stop pulse's width.
For small keypads not connected via long wires (i.e, like mic cable) and not exposed to EMI/RFI, it's quite common in consumer products to just use an RC oscillator whose frequency is 'warped' by shorting out resistor network and/or capacitor network. This pulse output is then sent to a microcontroller's timer input, and an interrupt routine evalulates pulse duration.
An alternative is that the keypad shorts just elements a resistor network driven by a regulated voltage, and this is fed into a microcontroller's ADC (analog->digital) input port.
73 DE BILL N6AOT
SAN JOSE CA USA
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KE7CDV on August 21, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A little perspective here: At least in the U.S., reverse engineering is generally legal for the purposes the original poster has in mind, even if he does intend to take the fruits of his labor and make money off of them by selling, e.g., computer interfaces or better microphones. About the only time it's clearly not legal in the U.S. is if you're trying to bypass encryption, as this is specifically covered by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
I'd be amazed if Icom's microphone protocol were encrypted.
Now, keep in mind -- you (or Icom) can sue anyone for anything you want. Suing someone in no way whatsoever suggests that what you're being accused of doing is illegal -- that's why we have the court system, after all. Lawsuits based on reverse engineering generally don't claim the reverse engineering itself was illegal, but rather that the illectual property discovered is patented and therefore the person has no legal right to make use of that information.
It's unlikely that Icom patented the microphone's data protocol. :-)
I think it is very much in the spirit of amateur radio to reverse engineer something like a microphone protocol. I'm truly amazed that so many people seem to buy into the idea that once you're given a "black box" you can't "poke around" at it in whatever manner you'd like -- perhaps a lot of them aren't from the U.S.?
There are plenty of relevant examples of successful reverse engineering out there:
-- One of the guys who now works at Elecraft originally did some hacking of his K2 (? -- somewhat fuzzy on the details his), observing the protocol used by its CPU to access the real time (battery-backed) clock. He wanted to add an expansion board (a DSP voice processor, I believe), and to configure it he "sniffed" the bus going to the clock and thereby was able to send commands to his expansion board(i.e., the "time" sent on, say, 1/23/01 would really go into register #23 on his board).
-- There's a company making various adapters to take, e.g., Ford car AM/FM/CD changer control radios and interfacing them to, e.g., Sony CD changers rather than the factory CD changer. I don't know if it's the same company, but there's also a box that takes commands aimed at a factory-installed XM (satellite radio) receiver and instead controls a Sirius receiver. You can bet this company did plenty of reverse engineering of the protocol.
-- Intel and AMD x86 architecture CPUs. Need I say more? Both companies have large teams of people whose jobs are nothing but reverse engineering the other's work.
---Joel Kolstad
KE7CDV
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by N0XMZ on August 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm quickly reminded of why I rarely visit eham anymore except for the forums.
I think a lot of you guys are going waaaay overboard here. I highly doubt Icom is going to waste their time and money hunting down an experimenter who just wants to emulate his microphone. I doubt it's "illegal" in the first place. And even if it is, he'd probably only get into trouble if he were to build such a device and then MARKET IT FOR SALE.
As for the topic at hand, I think the subject is facinating. I own a 207 also and I can't see how it would be terribly hard to pull this off. It seems to me that one would just emulate the codes that each button sends.
When you tire of people on eham poo-pooing your idea, drop me an email. I'd love to hear about your progress and I might even try it too.
|
| |
|
RE: Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by KC0ODK on August 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KE7CDV is spot-on concering reverse engineering, intellectual property, patents & lawsuits. Nicely written, Joel.
The mic hack is a great little project and I wish you success. Good luck, Kyle.
Lawrence
|
| |
|
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
|
|
by WA4ILO on August 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm sorry to see so many people spending the time and space suggesting the article should be in another place. Maybe it should, but it's a close call. Consider the piece on it's merits and let it go. I like the idea, but some of the subsequent posts incline me to think it's not likely to be be possible. So be it.
Jimmy Walker
Macon, GA
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
Heat Sinks for My IC-706 MkII
Hams Recruited for Border Patrol
IC-756PRO LCD Durability
Rig Woes
iMate/IC-7000
Other General Articles
eHam.net - server performance issues
USS Indianapolis CA-35 Radio Room
Lecher Wire Follow-Up
eHam Hiccup
Christmas List
|
