Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Practical messaging on UHF/VHF?  (Read 5289 times)
NEVBEN
Member

Posts: 102




Ignore
« on: October 17, 2017, 11:54:59 AM »

I'm interested to hear what features are practical for messaging on 2 meter or 70cm.

Normally I lean toward the idea that amateur radio isn't just a consumer product or service that one buys and uses, but I'm going to be in need of practical coms this winter and 2m fits the bill.  It is likely I will cease to have a cell phone and I will be working on a 10,000' mountain where cellular service is poor or unavailable anyway.  The mountain does have 2m repeaters for amateurs on the summit and my wife and home are in the valley below.  I will probably be working on the face that is 90 degrees to the valley so simplex could work or it might not.

I have a 2m mobile with 5/8 vertical and a no-nonsense 2m HT.  I'm thinking of putting another mobile in the house for a base and 3x5/8 vertical on the roof (Diamond F23).  My wife has a Technician's license.

At the moment I'm expecting to just use phone, but looking into messaging.  I played around with APRS for a few years but didn't really do anything with it other than send GPS coordinates to internet gateways to make tracking maps.  I know there are dozens of ways to message from a PC at home, but the only practical thing for me would be done via an HT.  I looked into APRS messaging via HT and it looks incredibly lame.  This is the screen from a FT2DR:



Most HT's don't even have touchscreens and so there is just the numeric keypad or dial wheels to encode text.

So do I understand right that this is the current situation and there's really no better option for radio messaging without lugging around some kind of TNC with a keyboard?

If simplex doesn't work out, I won't be able to continuously listen to all the repeater traffic.  I have a job to do.  The repeater is already using PL.  Is there a way I can layer an additional CTCSS or DCS tone using an HT so only my wife's transmissions through the repeater open my HT's squelch?
Logged
K5LXP
Member

Posts: 5330


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2017, 09:15:20 PM »

Selective signaling seems to be what you'd want, but make sure whatever scheme you choose (read: brand specific) make sure it can be used/enabled at the same time as PL/CTCSS.  I know on less capable radios you only get to pick one, and if you need to go through a repeater with PL you'll need to encode PL *and* transmit your selective call code/tone.  The least common denominator scheme would be DTMF, but sometimes repeaters will mute DTMF so you'd have to test it on the repeater you'll use.

Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM
Logged
W4KYR
Member

Posts: 1602




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2017, 11:41:27 AM »

NEVBEN, you might be interested in reading my article that I that was published here on eham on May 6 2015....


Are Today’s HT's Still Behind The Times?

http://www.eham.net/articles/34177


Quote
"Are today's HT's still behind the times?

The reason for the article is because while today's HT's are technologically advanced than they were 20 or 30 years ago. They are still missing some key features that would come in great use for times of emergency or very helpful in search and rescue or just some ham related event.

If one wanted to get information out from one area to another with photos of a flood, aftermath of a tornado or an ice storm and the cell towers are down and so is the Internet. Important information still needs to get out. Having the ability to send send lists of items needed, photos or even maps with an HT would not only be useful. But potentially lifesaving. This is the reason and the basis for the article. An HT with built in text messaging, file transfer and image sending and receiving could end to saving lives or property. I think, in my opinion that these features should be included in all new HT's. Not for photos selfies or transferring music, but valuable data in times of an emergency.

Despite all the great exciting new digital radios that hit the market. Why is it that we still cannot buy an HT that has the same ordinary features like a $50 Smartphone has?

Why is it in 2015 we still require outboard camera mics, equipment, software, adapters, interfaces, PC's or tablets to connect to our HT's to send text, photos, videos or send files like a simple $50 Smartphone does.

Yaesu's FT1DR HT can send pictures with the optional camera mic . Great, right? Well not really. You cannot view the photo someone sent from their FT1DR to your FT1DR. Adding to frustration and expense is the extra $129 cost of this accessory. Why did they make an HT where you can send pictures but cannot receive with it?

With Icom's ID51A HT you can send photos, videos, do text, send files. That is if you cough up the extra $70 for the optional OPC-2350LU cable and then have an Android Tablet. And (according to Icom's literature) you need the newer 50th Anniversary Edition or the "Plus" edition.

Why couldn't Icom or Yaesu include a camera built in their latest radios and added a touch display like a smartphone has?

Here is where I think they missed the boat. Icom and Yaesu both could have exploited and capitalized on their different digital offerings by including a built in touch keyboard, camera and common USB output. Hams who might have been on the fence with either D-STAR or Fusion HT's probably would have opted for the HT with built in handy features such as text and photo sending. Just like their Smartphones in 2015.

Well how long have cell phones been able to 'on the fly' text? A quick Google search shows the late 1990's. What about Camera Phones? Wiki says since 1997. It used to be that ham radio was considered to be the forefront of technological advances. In this case, we are 18 years late to the game, if not longer.

Modern Smart Phones have been around since 2007 maybe earlier. However Techhive cites smart phones being around a lot longer, since 1993.

http://www.techhive.com/article/199243/a_brief_history_of_smartphones.htmlor

Now there have been some earlier attempts by Kenwood to go in this direction. Kenwood introduced the Visual Communicator VC-H1 about 1998. It was an expensive add on SSTV unit for Kenwood radios.

Kenwood was also the head of the game with HT's with USB on their THD72A model. And for Packet Radio? Kenwood has several of their HT's have built in packet and been out since the 1990's.

Well what can we do in the meantime? How about an all in one compact device could be made that would make the "Rube Goldberg" approach much less tacky and simplistic without wires and adapters hanging all over the place.

The solution might be an inexpensive Raspberry Pi device with built in small QWERTY keyboard, built in camera, Smartphone screen with software that can take ANY HT and enable it to send and receive text, send, receive and view pictures, send and receive files with any HT Analog or Digital.

Make it compact enough to slide any HT onto the side of the unit and make it an all in one device that could be carried anywhere.

Your thoughts? "

Logged

The internet and cellphone networks are great until they go down, what then? Find out here. 
https://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,111948.0.html

Using Windows 98 For Packet...
KG5AHC
Member

Posts: 83




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2017, 07:39:40 PM »

Mesh Network for messaging like goTenna, openmarket, etc Problem might be isolation... not enough people in the area to support the mesh.

and then there is messaging via satellites http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/business/30novel.html  Probably expensive but most reliable I think.

Good luck and stay safe out there!
Logged
KI7PLD
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2017, 08:08:14 AM »

Wouldn't one of the digital modes solve this?

Not sure what the available repeaters support....
Logged
WD9EWK
Member

Posts: 507


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2017, 11:03:07 AM »

Wouldn't one of the digital modes solve this?

DMR has a messaging function. D-Star will let you set up a short text string that goes out when you transmit; other than that, I don't think D-Star has that functionality like DMR.

APRS messaging is probably the closest we have to what the original poster was asking about, with the limitations on being a line of text and entered on the front panels and/or microphone keypads of APRS-ready radios. The Kenwood APRS-ready radios have the option to be connected to a computer/phone/tablet for other software to use the TNCs, but not the Yaesu APRS-ready radios.

APRS messages sent to recipients via call sign need to have something on to receive the message - an APRS-ready radio, or possibly some software/app on a computer or phone/tablet connected into the APRS network. The APRS network will attempt to locate the call sign of the intended recipient, and route the message over RF and - if needed - Internet to where the intended recipient's call sign last appeared. It isn't a store-and-forward system. I have sent and received APRS messages with other hams around the USA, and also with hams overseas.

I also use APRS messages to work other stations using orbiting packet digipeaters (ISS, NO-84, FalconSat-3, and NO-44 when operational). Most APRS-ready radios allow for prepared messages (sometimes referred to as "phrases") to be stored in the radio, and called up when you want to send them out. I keep a few messages ready to go to make these exchanges with other stations, but could also use them to send APRS messages if I needed to send updates to someone else - something I did a lot last year during ARRL's NPOTA activity, either through the terrestrial APRS network or through the orbiting digipeaters.

A very small e-mail message can also be sent from an APRS-ready radio, as long as the Internet gateway that receives the APRS message allows for e-mail messages to go to the Internet (some do, and some don't). Receiving very short e-mails from the Internet to your APRS-ready radio is possible, but requires some setup by the ham to allow e-mails from the Internet to enter the APRS network through a gateway.

To send more than small pictures, we need to have radios that get away from analog FM or the digital modes we currently use with limited data bandwidth. These radios would probably need to operate somewhere other than the traditional 2m or 70cm bands, where bandwidth is available. Icom's ID-1 1.2 GHz D-Star radio had 128kbps data capability and an Ethernet socket on the radio, and some D-Star systems include 1.2 GHz data to take advantage of that. But this was in a mobile radio, as opposed to a form factor like an HT. Is there any market for this functionality in HTs? Maybe. Then again, many are going toward the cheap Chinese-made FM HTs, and complain about the prices for HTs with more functionality like the TH-D74. The Chinese-made DMR radios may be trying to change that trend, but I'd rather not buy so many radios to try all of these modes. SDR may take care of this in the future, but someone has to bring the radio to market... a really small worldwide market for radios.

73!
Logged

Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/ - Twitter: @WD9EWK
N8EKT
Member

Posts: 593




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2017, 02:40:17 PM »

Since the average person can talk at well over 200 words
per minute, you are hard pressed to beat that efficiency in most digital modes used by hams.

Logged
KD2HPQ
Member

Posts: 13




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: November 03, 2017, 01:30:16 PM »

"Behind the times" is a gross understatement. "In the stone age" is more appropriate.

We've had bluetooth since 1997, touchscreens since the 1970s, and ubiquitous color monitors since the late 1980s. Where are these features on handhelds? Saw a review of the latest and greatest big-brand UHF/VHF handheld the other day and the company rep was gushing over the fact that you could hook the radio up to a tablet via a cable (through software which, according to everyone who's reviewed this HT, doesn't work). "Well, no the radio doesn't have bluetooth." Who the heck wants to lug around a tablet anyway, especially one that's cabled?

These are commodity technologies, throw-aways that cost pennies to implement.

We need to plunk down serious bucks for special cables and software just to program these things, then learn the software, then fumble with SD cards. WHY???

Battery life is pathetic on HTs. Do any HT manufacturers offer a AAA or AA option that doesn't involve lugging another (cabled) box around?

I've heard every lame excuse imaginable for not including SSB on UHF/VHF mobiles. "It costs the same as an HF rig," "Get an HF rig," "there's no action on 2m sideband," to which I say BS.

Let's face it, this hobby is still dominated by do-it-yourselfers and individuals stuck in the 1970s or worse, the 1940s. I'm a geezer myself so I know of what I speak.

We should show the HT manufacturers what we want by NOT BUYING their stuff. Anyone who plunks down hundreds of dollars for the same old crap is crazy.
Logged
W4KYR
Member

Posts: 1602




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2017, 06:35:07 AM »

"Behind the times" is a gross understatement. "In the stone age" is more appropriate.

We've had bluetooth since 1997, touchscreens since the 1970s, and ubiquitous color monitors since the late 1980s. Where are these features on handhelds? Saw a review of the latest and greatest big-brand UHF/VHF handheld the other day and the company rep was gushing over the fact that you could hook the radio up to a tablet via a cable (through software which, according to everyone who's reviewed this HT, doesn't work). "Well, no the radio doesn't have bluetooth." Who the heck wants to lug around a tablet anyway, especially one that's cabled?

These are commodity technologies, throw-aways that cost pennies to implement.

We need to plunk down serious bucks for special cables and software just to program these things, then learn the software, then fumble with SD cards. WHY???

Battery life is pathetic on HTs. Do any HT manufacturers offer a AAA or AA option that doesn't involve lugging another (cabled) box around?

I've heard every lame excuse imaginable for not including SSB on UHF/VHF mobiles. "It costs the same as an HF rig," "Get an HF rig," "there's no action on 2m sideband," to which I say BS.

Let's face it, this hobby is still dominated by do-it-yourselfers and individuals stuck in the 1970s or worse, the 1940s. I'm a geezer myself so I know of what I speak.

We should show the HT manufacturers what we want by NOT BUYING their stuff. Anyone who plunks down hundreds of dollars for the same old crap is crazy.

Excellent Post
Logged

The internet and cellphone networks are great until they go down, what then? Find out here. 
https://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,111948.0.html

Using Windows 98 For Packet...
K5LXP
Member

Posts: 5330


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #9 on: November 04, 2017, 09:56:34 AM »

The other side of the story to the brain dead HT premise is the brain dead user base.    How many posts do you see in online forums by hams confused and bewildered by the most rudimentary of radio features?   Programming in a PL or saving a memory is a traumatic experience.  So as a manufacturer, do you create a groundbreaking innovative product for a user base that can barely work ON-OFF?  It's not technology that's stuck, it's the users.    Billions and billions of dollars have been spent on cell phone development, because there's millions of users there that will spend real money.   Hams are cheap, with a short attention span.  I feel grateful enough there are those out there like K1JT that donate their time and talent to give us modes and capabilities that are even moderately technically contemporary.  The future of radio is a DC-daylight ADC and an open source back end.  From there all bands, all modes and all protocols are possible.  That's where the rest of the world is going, and with any luck someone will repurpose or introduce hardware that (some) hams can use and develop going forward.

Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM
Logged
W4KYR
Member

Posts: 1602




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: November 04, 2017, 11:11:30 AM »

The other side of the story to the brain dead HT premise is the brain dead user base.    How many posts do you see in online forums by hams confused and bewildered by the most rudimentary of radio features?   Programming in a PL or saving a memory is a traumatic experience.  So as a manufacturer, do you create a groundbreaking innovative product for a user base that can barely work ON-OFF? 
Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM

It is possible...

Build an HT with a smart screen, that operates much like a $50 smart phone. Instead of two inch thick operating manuals, and 'required' RT Systems software. And long endless threads on ham radio forums...We could have a built in smart screen with easily recognizable Icons (like the iPhone uses).


Then nearly anyone could program it intuitively so no one would need an engineering degree to understand it...It would also have a built in USB port for easy connection to a PC too using a standard mini USB cable (Hint: Kenwood TH-D72a already does this). Throw in a QWERTY on screen keyboard (just like the $50 smart phones have). Add a built-in camera and a hardware based packet system for APRS and packet for basic store and forward functions. (The Kenwood TH-D7a/g and the TH-D72a already do this).
 





Logged

The internet and cellphone networks are great until they go down, what then? Find out here. 
https://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,111948.0.html

Using Windows 98 For Packet...
ONAIR
Member

Posts: 3536




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: November 05, 2017, 01:46:39 AM »

"Behind the times" is a gross understatement. "In the stone age" is more appropriate.

We've had bluetooth since 1997, touchscreens since the 1970s, and ubiquitous color monitors since the late 1980s. Where are these features on handhelds? Saw a review of the latest and greatest big-brand UHF/VHF handheld the other day and the company rep was gushing over the fact that you could hook the radio up to a tablet via a cable (through software which, according to everyone who's reviewed this HT, doesn't work). "Well, no the radio doesn't have bluetooth." Who the heck wants to lug around a tablet anyway, especially one that's cabled?

These are commodity technologies, throw-aways that cost pennies to implement.

We need to plunk down serious bucks for special cables and software just to program these things, then learn the software, then fumble with SD cards. WHY???

Battery life is pathetic on HTs. Do any HT manufacturers offer a AAA or AA option that doesn't involve lugging another (cabled) box around?

I've heard every lame excuse imaginable for not including SSB on UHF/VHF mobiles. "It costs the same as an HF rig," "Get an HF rig," "there's no action on 2m sideband," to which I say BS.

Let's face it, this hobby is still dominated by do-it-yourselfers and individuals stuck in the 1970s or worse, the 1940s. I'm a geezer myself so I know of what I speak.

We should show the HT manufacturers what we want by NOT BUYING their stuff. Anyone who plunks down hundreds of dollars for the same old crap is crazy.
   Good points!  There would be a lot more 2 meter SSB activity if SSB was included on 2 meter mobile rigs!
Logged
ONAIR
Member

Posts: 3536




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: November 05, 2017, 01:50:59 AM »

The other side of the story to the brain dead HT premise is the brain dead user base.    How many posts do you see in online forums by hams confused and bewildered by the most rudimentary of radio features?   Programming in a PL or saving a memory is a traumatic experience.  So as a manufacturer, do you create a groundbreaking innovative product for a user base that can barely work ON-OFF? 
Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM

It is possible...

Build an HT with a smart screen, that operates much like a $50 smart phone. Instead of two inch thick operating manuals, and 'required' RT Systems software. And long endless threads on ham radio forums...We could have a built in smart screen with easily recognizable Icons (like the iPhone uses).


Then nearly anyone could program it intuitively so no one would need an engineering degree to understand it...It would also have a built in USB port for easy connection to a PC too using a standard mini USB cable (Hint: Kenwood TH-D72a already does this). Throw in a QWERTY on screen keyboard (just like the $50 smart phones have). Add a built-in camera and a hardware based packet system for APRS and packet for basic store and forward functions. (The Kenwood TH-D7a/g and the TH-D72a already do this).
 






  Better yet, use voice recognition programs (like the smartphones have) to make programming and operating the radios a snap!
Logged
AA2UK
Member

Posts: 365




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: November 05, 2017, 04:59:35 AM »

Mark,  you said, "Billions and billions of dollars have been spent on cell phone development, because there's millions of users there that will spend real money".

That's because the majority of cell phone's are subsidized by the carriers. Amateur Radio has no subsidies there's no re-occurring revenue to be generated unlike cell phones.
Bill, AA2UK
Logged
W4KYR
Member

Posts: 1602




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: November 05, 2017, 05:37:57 AM »

Mark,  you said, "Billions and billions of dollars have been spent on cell phone development, because there's millions of users there that will spend real money".

That's because the majority of cell phone's are subsidized by the carriers. Amateur Radio has no subsidies there's no re-occurring revenue to be generated unlike cell phones.
Bill, AA2UK


True that the cell phones are subsidized... But that's not the case for all cell phones or even smart phones. Today in 2017 one could buy a $50 or a $100 smart phone from their local Kroger with no contracts or commitments.


At this point in time all that is needed is for the technology for that $50 smart phone to be incorporated into the amateur HT. 
Logged

The internet and cellphone networks are great until they go down, what then? Find out here. 
https://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,111948.0.html

Using Windows 98 For Packet...
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!