Date   

Re: Tolt Dam False Alarm

rn.noodle@...
 

If I recall correctly, it’s a little over an 1 hr (according to SPU).

 

Rob Noonan

KJ7GIG

 

 

 

From: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io <snovarc@snovarc.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jackson Beard
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2020 2:27 PM
To: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SnoVARC] Tolt Dam False Alarm

 

We dont need to guess. There's a comprehensive study in the possession of seattle water, and both fire districts. 

 

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020, 14:22 Paul Zoba <pezoba@...> wrote:

Man, sorry you had to go through that! That must have been scary!

 

I understand the dam is about 16 miles from Carnation. Has anyone ever guessed how long the water would take to get there? I suppose it depends on how big of a failure.

 

Best,

 

Paul, W7PEZ

 


On Jul 29, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Rick Burns <kb7cin@...> wrote:



Boy…we sure know. Just a few comments on my experience. Traffic was bad in our quiet sleepy town. First thought was to grab my radio equipment but actually forgot to grab cell phone (lesson #1.5 learned). Headed out the door…wife said in 6 minutes. Went north but turned toward Carnation Farm, I didn’t want to be stuck in the lineup to get passed the slide area near Stillwater Store. At that point a very fast trip toward the farm then I pulled into the elevated spot by the truck scale. Seemed to have bad reception and transmission in that spot. Heard some activity about the incident from a 2m repeater on Cougar Mtn. By now many more cars pull in behind us. I heard the following information, it was a false alarm and there was no police presence in town. But I did see King Cty heading down Hwy 203 from the north so I think they were getting into place. This might be a lesson learned for King Cty to take action immediately to head to the main intersection when it happens again which we hope is never. Like a fire drill it was good practice as we now know what to expect…God forbid the real one hits. Lastly I was giving some status to people up on the rise…”it was a false alarm per ham radio operators out there”. I don’t think they were taking my information seriously because they all seemed to be more engaged sharing, back and forth, information they were getting from their smart phones. I guess that’s okay this time but they’ll be shocked then next time when their phone service is completely down.

 

Rick

Kb7cin

From: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io [mailto:snovarc@snovarc.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rowland
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 1:01 PM
To: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io
Subject: [SnoVARC] Tolt Dam False Alarm

 

As some of you may know the Tolt Dam alarm went off this morning letting people know the dam had failed and to evacuate immediately. Luckily it was a false alarm but there was a lot of confusion of local Carnation residents on what was the alarm about and what were they suppose to do,  Hopefully the city of Carnation will arrange for some more info to be publish to the locals and this is also a golden opportunity for SnoVARC to talk about what our reaction should be to something like this.

 

This morning Paul, Shawn and myself were on the radio during this episode. We discussed it and I let them know it was a false alarm once I heard it from Kathy and SPU.

 

Hopefully this will turn into a great learning process for all concerned.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Rowland

 


Re: Tolt Dam False Alarm

Jackson Beard
 

We dont need to guess. There's a comprehensive study in the possession of seattle water, and both fire districts. 


On Wed, Jul 29, 2020, 14:22 Paul Zoba <pezoba@...> wrote:
Man, sorry you had to go through that! That must have been scary!

I understand the dam is about 16 miles from Carnation. Has anyone ever guessed how long the water would take to get there? I suppose it depends on how big of a failure.

Best,

Paul, W7PEZ


On Jul 29, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Rick Burns <kb7cin@...> wrote:



Boy…we sure know. Just a few comments on my experience. Traffic was bad in our quiet sleepy town. First thought was to grab my radio equipment but actually forgot to grab cell phone (lesson #1.5 learned). Headed out the door…wife said in 6 minutes. Went north but turned toward Carnation Farm, I didn’t want to be stuck in the lineup to get passed the slide area near Stillwater Store. At that point a very fast trip toward the farm then I pulled into the elevated spot by the truck scale. Seemed to have bad reception and transmission in that spot. Heard some activity about the incident from a 2m repeater on Cougar Mtn. By now many more cars pull in behind us. I heard the following information, it was a false alarm and there was no police presence in town. But I did see King Cty heading down Hwy 203 from the north so I think they were getting into place. This might be a lesson learned for King Cty to take action immediately to head to the main intersection when it happens again which we hope is never. Like a fire drill it was good practice as we now know what to expect…God forbid the real one hits. Lastly I was giving some status to people up on the rise…”it was a false alarm per ham radio operators out there”. I don’t think they were taking my information seriously because they all seemed to be more engaged sharing, back and forth, information they were getting from their smart phones. I guess that’s okay this time but they’ll be shocked then next time when their phone service is completely down.

 

Rick

Kb7cin

From: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io [mailto:snovarc@snovarc.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rowland
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 1:01 PM
To: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io
Subject: [SnoVARC] Tolt Dam False Alarm

 

As some of you may know the Tolt Dam alarm went off this morning letting people know the dam had failed and to evacuate immediately. Luckily it was a false alarm but there was a lot of confusion of local Carnation residents on what was the alarm about and what were they suppose to do,  Hopefully the city of Carnation will arrange for some more info to be publish to the locals and this is also a golden opportunity for SnoVARC to talk about what our reaction should be to something like this.

 

This morning Paul, Shawn and myself were on the radio during this episode. We discussed it and I let them know it was a false alarm once I heard it from Kathy and SPU.

 

Hopefully this will turn into a great learning process for all concerned.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Rowland

 


Re: Tolt Dam False Alarm

Paul Zoba
 

Man, sorry you had to go through that! That must have been scary!

I understand the dam is about 16 miles from Carnation. Has anyone ever guessed how long the water would take to get there? I suppose it depends on how big of a failure.

Best,

Paul, W7PEZ


On Jul 29, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Rick Burns <kb7cin@...> wrote:



Boy…we sure know. Just a few comments on my experience. Traffic was bad in our quiet sleepy town. First thought was to grab my radio equipment but actually forgot to grab cell phone (lesson #1.5 learned). Headed out the door…wife said in 6 minutes. Went north but turned toward Carnation Farm, I didn’t want to be stuck in the lineup to get passed the slide area near Stillwater Store. At that point a very fast trip toward the farm then I pulled into the elevated spot by the truck scale. Seemed to have bad reception and transmission in that spot. Heard some activity about the incident from a 2m repeater on Cougar Mtn. By now many more cars pull in behind us. I heard the following information, it was a false alarm and there was no police presence in town. But I did see King Cty heading down Hwy 203 from the north so I think they were getting into place. This might be a lesson learned for King Cty to take action immediately to head to the main intersection when it happens again which we hope is never. Like a fire drill it was good practice as we now know what to expect…God forbid the real one hits. Lastly I was giving some status to people up on the rise…”it was a false alarm per ham radio operators out there”. I don’t think they were taking my information seriously because they all seemed to be more engaged sharing, back and forth, information they were getting from their smart phones. I guess that’s okay this time but they’ll be shocked then next time when their phone service is completely down.

 

Rick

Kb7cin

From: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io [mailto:snovarc@snovarc.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rowland
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 1:01 PM
To: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io
Subject: [SnoVARC] Tolt Dam False Alarm

 

As some of you may know the Tolt Dam alarm went off this morning letting people know the dam had failed and to evacuate immediately. Luckily it was a false alarm but there was a lot of confusion of local Carnation residents on what was the alarm about and what were they suppose to do,  Hopefully the city of Carnation will arrange for some more info to be publish to the locals and this is also a golden opportunity for SnoVARC to talk about what our reaction should be to something like this.

 

This morning Paul, Shawn and myself were on the radio during this episode. We discussed it and I let them know it was a false alarm once I heard it from Kathy and SPU.

 

Hopefully this will turn into a great learning process for all concerned.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Rowland

 


Re: Tolt Dam False Alarm

Rick Burns <kb7cin@...>
 

Boy…we sure know. Just a few comments on my experience. Traffic was bad in our quiet sleepy town. First thought was to grab my radio equipment but actually forgot to grab cell phone (lesson #1.5 learned). Headed out the door…wife said in 6 minutes. Went north but turned toward Carnation Farm, I didn’t want to be stuck in the lineup to get passed the slide area near Stillwater Store. At that point a very fast trip toward the farm then I pulled into the elevated spot by the truck scale. Seemed to have bad reception and transmission in that spot. Heard some activity about the incident from a 2m repeater on Cougar Mtn. By now many more cars pull in behind us. I heard the following information, it was a false alarm and there was no police presence in town. But I did see King Cty heading down Hwy 203 from the north so I think they were getting into place. This might be a lesson learned for King Cty to take action immediately to head to the main intersection when it happens again which we hope is never. Like a fire drill it was good practice as we now know what to expect…God forbid the real one hits. Lastly I was giving some status to people up on the rise…”it was a false alarm per ham radio operators out there”. I don’t think they were taking my information seriously because they all seemed to be more engaged sharing, back and forth, information they were getting from their smart phones. I guess that’s okay this time but they’ll be shocked then next time when their phone service is completely down.

 

Rick

Kb7cin

From: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io [mailto:snovarc@snovarc.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rowland
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 1:01 PM
To: snovarc@snovarc.groups.io
Subject: [SnoVARC] Tolt Dam False Alarm

 

As some of you may know the Tolt Dam alarm went off this morning letting people know the dam had failed and to evacuate immediately. Luckily it was a false alarm but there was a lot of confusion of local Carnation residents on what was the alarm about and what were they suppose to do,  Hopefully the city of Carnation will arrange for some more info to be publish to the locals and this is also a golden opportunity for SnoVARC to talk about what our reaction should be to something like this.

 

This morning Paul, Shawn and myself were on the radio during this episode. We discussed it and I let them know it was a false alarm once I heard it from Kathy and SPU.

 

Hopefully this will turn into a great learning process for all concerned.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Rowland

 


Virtual Ham Expo

Rowland
 

Have you signed up for the Virtual Ham Expo for the weekend of August 8th and 9th?  It is free to participate and there are a lot of great presentations that will be made.


Take a look at the speakers list: https://www.qsotodayhamexpo.com/speakers.html

If you have any friends that would like to attend please let them know!


Thanks,

Rowland


Tolt Dam False Alarm

Rowland
 

As some of you may know the Tolt Dam alarm went off this morning letting people know the dam had failed and to evacuate immediately. Luckily it was a false alarm but there was a lot of confusion of local Carnation residents on what was the alarm about and what were they suppose to do,  Hopefully the city of Carnation will arrange for some more info to be publish to the locals and this is also a golden opportunity for SnoVARC to talk about what our reaction should be to something like this.

This morning Paul, Shawn and myself were on the radio during this episode. We discussed it and I let them know it was a false alarm once I heard it from Kathy and SPU.

Hopefully this will turn into a great learning process for all concerned.


Thanks,

Rowland


Re: Link to SnoVarc Anytone DMR special price

Robin WA7CPA
 


Link to SnoVarc Anytone DMR special price

Robin WA7CPA
 

All SnoVarcians:

Jamie Hughes is adding SnoVarc to the drop down list at bottom of website clicking on Friends and Supporters at the website he set up to promote DMR use in our region. This means you can buy the Anytone HT (portable) for $179 and the mobile for $350 by filling out your request. I already have the mobile set up as a desktop and I am ordering an HT to use with a little hotspot. Fun stuff. Quite a savings.

73,
Robin, WA7CPA 


Re: Have you bought from Quick Silver Radio?

Rowland
 


Jesse is out of town now and will not order till he gets back 


On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 9:18 PM Howard E. Mahran / WA1HEM <wa1hem@...> wrote:
Hey Rowland,

I decided to buy my LMR400uf and LMR240 from DXEngineering since Quick Silver doesnt appear to carry the ultra flex version of LMR400. The Ultra Flex is more expensive than the solid core ~ $1.35 vs $1.85 per foot.  I'll be placing my order in the next few days.


--
*************************
Howard E. Mahran
WA1HEM
(425) 864 - 5104
*************************

--
Thanks,
Rowland


Re: Have you bought from Quick Silver Radio?

Howard E. Mahran / WA1HEM
 

Hey Rowland,

I decided to buy my LMR400uf and LMR240 from DXEngineering since Quick Silver doesnt appear to carry the ultra flex version of LMR400. The Ultra Flex is more expensive than the solid core ~ $1.35 vs $1.85 per foot.  I'll be placing my order in the next few days.


--
*************************
Howard E. Mahran
WA1HEM
(425) 864 - 5104
*************************


Re: VARA and Winlink

Paul Zoba
 

I would be interested in going in on a 10 pack purchase.

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:21 AM Howard E. Mahran / WA1HEM <wa1hem@...> wrote:
Really nice synopsis Paul.

I purchased Vara HF earlier before realizing that there was a discount on 10 purchases - darn - 

As far as paying for software - I have two opinions on that.  I totally appreciate the open-source community where a package is made available for free (with or without donation requests) and maintained by "volunteer" programmers. Updates and bug fixes all maintained by the community. Much good comes from freely sharing and modifying code in that way. Its like evolution - small changes by many folks create new products and improved capabilities sometimes with different branches of code going in different directions. I will continue to support open-source in all its forms. With that said, I also totally appreciate the effort and costs that go into creating "closed" software too. It's not a free effort to create or maintain and it doesn't bother me by someone trying to profit from their work. Minimally it costs time and intellectual effort. After all - we live in a (generally) free enterprise, a market-driven society that works pretty well (yes, there are flaws, but it's still a really good system) - you buy if you find value, you don't if you don't. For those that have created something unique or significantly better, if the software solves a problem that I can't solve myself or can't find an equivalent solution for, I'm willing to pay for the effort. Vara HF is one of those pieces of software, in my opinion. There is a free version of Vara HF to use that maintains the spirit of the community - so I am ok with the 2 options. 

73,

Howard

--
*************************
Howard E. Mahran
WA1HEM
(425) 864 - 5104
*************************


Re: VARA and Winlink

Howard E. Mahran / WA1HEM
 

Really nice synopsis Paul.

I purchased Vara HF earlier before realizing that there was a discount on 10 purchases - darn - 

As far as paying for software - I have two opinions on that.  I totally appreciate the open-source community where a package is made available for free (with or without donation requests) and maintained by "volunteer" programmers. Updates and bug fixes all maintained by the community. Much good comes from freely sharing and modifying code in that way. Its like evolution - small changes by many folks create new products and improved capabilities sometimes with different branches of code going in different directions. I will continue to support open-source in all its forms. With that said, I also totally appreciate the effort and costs that go into creating "closed" software too. It's not a free effort to create or maintain and it doesn't bother me by someone trying to profit from their work. Minimally it costs time and intellectual effort. After all - we live in a (generally) free enterprise, a market-driven society that works pretty well (yes, there are flaws, but it's still a really good system) - you buy if you find value, you don't if you don't. For those that have created something unique or significantly better, if the software solves a problem that I can't solve myself or can't find an equivalent solution for, I'm willing to pay for the effort. Vara HF is one of those pieces of software, in my opinion. There is a free version of Vara HF to use that maintains the spirit of the community - so I am ok with the 2 options. 

73,

Howard

--
*************************
Howard E. Mahran
WA1HEM
(425) 864 - 5104
*************************


Re: VARA and Winlink

Rowland
 

I just checked with the FB Winlink group about ARDOP and they said it is not going anywhere. 


Thanks,

Rowland



On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 7:16 AM Paul Butzi (W7PFB) <w7pfb@...> wrote:
My understanding, supported by what I’ve seen on the Winlink site, is that ARDOP will be the Winlink supported protocol going forward, with WINMOR being abandoned over time.

So ARDOP will not go away.

Vara is developed and supported by Jose Alberto Nieto Ros, EA5HK, the same fellow who created the ROS digital mode.  As far as I can tell he’s the entire team.There’s a reasonable discussion to be had about whether $70 is the appropriate price point for the upgrade from the nagware version but when you compare the $70 to the $1200+ price for a Farallon/SCS TNC that will do PACTOR I think Jose’s product is an incredible value.

The VARA software is not like, for instance, Direwolf and the UZ7HO soundmodem which implement already engineered protocols.  Jose has done the considerable work of developing a protocol AND the software and is doing continuing development and support.  Maybe I’m wrong but at $70 bucks a pop, I don’t think Jose is getting rich off this. 

 On top of that, if you put together a group of ten folks who want licenses, the price is $50 a pop. I suspect that SNOVARC could round up 10 hams who want VARA licenses with not much trouble.

This morning I stumbled across the following article on the Winlnk website, detailing the results of some testing of the speed of WINMOR, ARDOP, VARA, and PACTOR under various conditions including noise, fade, and various levels of multipath.  It’s interesting reading but also very useful even if you do nothing beyond scroll thru and look at the graphs.  Of particular interest is the part at the end about how VARA FM performs compared to AX.25 and FX.25 packet.  


-p W7PFB
73, Don’t forget to smile and have fun!

On Jul 21, 2020, at 11:54 PM, W7ABD <w7abd1@...> wrote:

I have seen many CMS HF stations now reporting they will no longer be supporting winmore after the end of July.  Also heard that ARDOP is being abandoned by winlink.  So that leaves VARA as the only current solution for email over HF. 

I too have been experimenting with VARA and agree it's quite a bit faster and more reliable than winmore was.  Even in it's reduced "evaluation" version.

I am not happy that the VARA Team has chosen to make their product commercial.  Rather than follow the winlink model, with an optional donation option.  I have supported the winlink product by donating over the years and will continue to do so, but don't think I will support VARA, as I don't like their business model.  But since the other options are going away, will use the eval version of VARA until something better comes along.

Jim
W7ABD


On 7/21/20 21:30, Rowland wrote:
I have been experimenting with VARA HF non-paid version and the connection rate is much higher than Winmor.  I do not have a lot of experience so I will be interested in hearing about your trials.  If you want me to work with you I would be delighted.


Thanks,

Rowland



On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 9:19 PM Paul Butzi (W7PFB) <w7pfb@...> wrote:
Motivated by the Weekly Net check-in via Winlink I have been experimenting with Winlink again.

In particular I was interested in what changes happen as a result of the abandoning of the Winmor connection protocol/modem/soft TNC.

The direct replacement for Winmor is ARDOP.  I have used ARDOP for a while, it is more reliable and perhaps a bit faster than Winmor but not a dramatic improvement.

So I decided to try VARA.

The downside of VARA is that if you want it to go into fast mode, and you want to avoid the nag screen, you must buy a license, which costs $70.

The upsides are:

* VARA is faster, especially in good conditions when you can run a fair bit of power on your end (most of the Winlink RMS stations seem to run pretty solid signals).  On a really solid connection, VARA is massively faster.

* In any conditions that are less than ideal VARA is dramatically more reliable and faster than any of the non PACTOR alternatives.  As PACTOR TNC’s cost more than $1k, that makes $70 a pretty good deal.  (I don’t own a PACTOR TNC so I don’t know how the various PACTOR modes stack up against VARA)

In short I can connect to more Winlink RMS stations using VARA than I can using Winmor or ARDOP.  I can connect more reliably when conditions are not optimal.  I can connect reliably using 5-15W instead of 30-70W.   And the connections are faster.

In short, I think it’s a pretty interesting piece of technology.

And that’s all on HF.

There’s a version of VARA for VHF/UHF FM which can exploit the wider audio bandwidth you get when you use the 9600 baud receive data path of a VHF/UHF radio that offers input/output for a 9600 baud packet modem.

This would get around the big problem with VHF/UHF Winlink, which is that packet radio is deadly slow.  The slow speed of packet is the flaw that makes VHF/UHF Winlink nearly useless for tactical use in an emergency.  There are other problems with VHF/UHF Winlink but the flaw that cannot be ignored is that it is just too darn slow for modern needs like moving digital photos or larger files.

I’l be ordering some hardware to allow me to exploit the wider data path you get using the 9600 baud audio path - basically a couple of wide bandwidth sound cards. 

Is anyone else interested in experimenting with experimenting with VARA on VHF/UHF FM?  If so, let me know and we can coordinate.

Also, if you’re a Winlink HF user, I urge you to check out VARA.  The evaluation copy, speed throttled as it is, is still a dramatic improvement over Winmor and ARDOP, especially in marginal conditions.






-p W7PFB
73, Don’t forget to smile and have fun!







Re: VARA and Winlink

Paul Butzi (W7PFB)
 

My understanding, supported by what I’ve seen on the Winlink site, is that ARDOP will be the Winlink supported protocol going forward, with WINMOR being abandoned over time.

So ARDOP will not go away.

Vara is developed and supported by Jose Alberto Nieto Ros, EA5HK, the same fellow who created the ROS digital mode.  As far as I can tell he’s the entire team.There’s a reasonable discussion to be had about whether $70 is the appropriate price point for the upgrade from the nagware version but when you compare the $70 to the $1200+ price for a Farallon/SCS TNC that will do PACTOR I think Jose’s product is an incredible value.

The VARA software is not like, for instance, Direwolf and the UZ7HO soundmodem which implement already engineered protocols.  Jose has done the considerable work of developing a protocol AND the software and is doing continuing development and support.  Maybe I’m wrong but at $70 bucks a pop, I don’t think Jose is getting rich off this. 

 On top of that, if you put together a group of ten folks who want licenses, the price is $50 a pop. I suspect that SNOVARC could round up 10 hams who want VARA licenses with not much trouble.

This morning I stumbled across the following article on the Winlnk website, detailing the results of some testing of the speed of WINMOR, ARDOP, VARA, and PACTOR under various conditions including noise, fade, and various levels of multipath.  It’s interesting reading but also very useful even if you do nothing beyond scroll thru and look at the graphs.  Of particular interest is the part at the end about how VARA FM performs compared to AX.25 and FX.25 packet.  


-p W7PFB
73, Don’t forget to smile and have fun!

On Jul 21, 2020, at 11:54 PM, W7ABD <w7abd1@...> wrote:

I have seen many CMS HF stations now reporting they will no longer be supporting winmore after the end of July.  Also heard that ARDOP is being abandoned by winlink.  So that leaves VARA as the only current solution for email over HF. 

I too have been experimenting with VARA and agree it's quite a bit faster and more reliable than winmore was.  Even in it's reduced "evaluation" version.

I am not happy that the VARA Team has chosen to make their product commercial.  Rather than follow the winlink model, with an optional donation option.  I have supported the winlink product by donating over the years and will continue to do so, but don't think I will support VARA, as I don't like their business model.  But since the other options are going away, will use the eval version of VARA until something better comes along.

Jim
W7ABD


On 7/21/20 21:30, Rowland wrote:
I have been experimenting with VARA HF non-paid version and the connection rate is much higher than Winmor.  I do not have a lot of experience so I will be interested in hearing about your trials.  If you want me to work with you I would be delighted.


Thanks,

Rowland



On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 9:19 PM Paul Butzi (W7PFB) <w7pfb@...> wrote:
Motivated by the Weekly Net check-in via Winlink I have been experimenting with Winlink again.

In particular I was interested in what changes happen as a result of the abandoning of the Winmor connection protocol/modem/soft TNC.

The direct replacement for Winmor is ARDOP.  I have used ARDOP for a while, it is more reliable and perhaps a bit faster than Winmor but not a dramatic improvement.

So I decided to try VARA.

The downside of VARA is that if you want it to go into fast mode, and you want to avoid the nag screen, you must buy a license, which costs $70.

The upsides are:

* VARA is faster, especially in good conditions when you can run a fair bit of power on your end (most of the Winlink RMS stations seem to run pretty solid signals).  On a really solid connection, VARA is massively faster.

* In any conditions that are less than ideal VARA is dramatically more reliable and faster than any of the non PACTOR alternatives.  As PACTOR TNC’s cost more than $1k, that makes $70 a pretty good deal.  (I don’t own a PACTOR TNC so I don’t know how the various PACTOR modes stack up against VARA)

In short I can connect to more Winlink RMS stations using VARA than I can using Winmor or ARDOP.  I can connect more reliably when conditions are not optimal.  I can connect reliably using 5-15W instead of 30-70W.   And the connections are faster.

In short, I think it’s a pretty interesting piece of technology.

And that’s all on HF.

There’s a version of VARA for VHF/UHF FM which can exploit the wider audio bandwidth you get when you use the 9600 baud receive data path of a VHF/UHF radio that offers input/output for a 9600 baud packet modem.

This would get around the big problem with VHF/UHF Winlink, which is that packet radio is deadly slow.  The slow speed of packet is the flaw that makes VHF/UHF Winlink nearly useless for tactical use in an emergency.  There are other problems with VHF/UHF Winlink but the flaw that cannot be ignored is that it is just too darn slow for modern needs like moving digital photos or larger files.

I’l be ordering some hardware to allow me to exploit the wider data path you get using the 9600 baud audio path - basically a couple of wide bandwidth sound cards. 

Is anyone else interested in experimenting with experimenting with VARA on VHF/UHF FM?  If so, let me know and we can coordinate.

Also, if you’re a Winlink HF user, I urge you to check out VARA.  The evaluation copy, speed throttled as it is, is still a dramatic improvement over Winmor and ARDOP, especially in marginal conditions.






-p W7PFB
73, Don’t forget to smile and have fun!







Re: VARA and Winlink

W7ABD
 

I have seen many CMS HF stations now reporting they will no longer be supporting winmore after the end of July.  Also heard that ARDOP is being abandoned by winlink.  So that leaves VARA as the only current solution for email over HF. 

I too have been experimenting with VARA and agree it's quite a bit faster and more reliable than winmore was.  Even in it's reduced "evaluation" version.

I am not happy that the VARA Team has chosen to make their product commercial.  Rather than follow the winlink model, with an optional donation option.  I have supported the winlink product by donating over the years and will continue to do so, but don't think I will support VARA, as I don't like their business model.  But since the other options are going away, will use the eval version of VARA until something better comes along.

Jim
W7ABD


On 7/21/20 21:30, Rowland wrote:
I have been experimenting with VARA HF non-paid version and the connection rate is much higher than Winmor.  I do not have a lot of experience so I will be interested in hearing about your trials.  If you want me to work with you I would be delighted.


Thanks,

Rowland



On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 9:19 PM Paul Butzi (W7PFB) <w7pfb@...> wrote:
Motivated by the Weekly Net check-in via Winlink I have been experimenting with Winlink again.

In particular I was interested in what changes happen as a result of the abandoning of the Winmor connection protocol/modem/soft TNC.

The direct replacement for Winmor is ARDOP.  I have used ARDOP for a while, it is more reliable and perhaps a bit faster than Winmor but not a dramatic improvement.

So I decided to try VARA.

The downside of VARA is that if you want it to go into fast mode, and you want to avoid the nag screen, you must buy a license, which costs $70.

The upsides are:

* VARA is faster, especially in good conditions when you can run a fair bit of power on your end (most of the Winlink RMS stations seem to run pretty solid signals).  On a really solid connection, VARA is massively faster.

* In any conditions that are less than ideal VARA is dramatically more reliable and faster than any of the non PACTOR alternatives.  As PACTOR TNC’s cost more than $1k, that makes $70 a pretty good deal.  (I don’t own a PACTOR TNC so I don’t know how the various PACTOR modes stack up against VARA)

In short I can connect to more Winlink RMS stations using VARA than I can using Winmor or ARDOP.  I can connect more reliably when conditions are not optimal.  I can connect reliably using 5-15W instead of 30-70W.   And the connections are faster.

In short, I think it’s a pretty interesting piece of technology.

And that’s all on HF.

There’s a version of VARA for VHF/UHF FM which can exploit the wider audio bandwidth you get when you use the 9600 baud receive data path of a VHF/UHF radio that offers input/output for a 9600 baud packet modem.

This would get around the big problem with VHF/UHF Winlink, which is that packet radio is deadly slow.  The slow speed of packet is the flaw that makes VHF/UHF Winlink nearly useless for tactical use in an emergency.  There are other problems with VHF/UHF Winlink but the flaw that cannot be ignored is that it is just too darn slow for modern needs like moving digital photos or larger files.

I’l be ordering some hardware to allow me to exploit the wider data path you get using the 9600 baud audio path - basically a couple of wide bandwidth sound cards. 

Is anyone else interested in experimenting with experimenting with VARA on VHF/UHF FM?  If so, let me know and we can coordinate.

Also, if you’re a Winlink HF user, I urge you to check out VARA.  The evaluation copy, speed throttled as it is, is still a dramatic improvement over Winmor and ARDOP, especially in marginal conditions.






-p W7PFB
73, Don’t forget to smile and have fun!






Re: VARA and Winlink

Rowland
 

I have been experimenting with VARA HF non-paid version and the connection rate is much higher than Winmor.  I do not have a lot of experience so I will be interested in hearing about your trials.  If you want me to work with you I would be delighted.


Thanks,

Rowland



On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 9:19 PM Paul Butzi (W7PFB) <w7pfb@...> wrote:
Motivated by the Weekly Net check-in via Winlink I have been experimenting with Winlink again.

In particular I was interested in what changes happen as a result of the abandoning of the Winmor connection protocol/modem/soft TNC.

The direct replacement for Winmor is ARDOP.  I have used ARDOP for a while, it is more reliable and perhaps a bit faster than Winmor but not a dramatic improvement.

So I decided to try VARA.

The downside of VARA is that if you want it to go into fast mode, and you want to avoid the nag screen, you must buy a license, which costs $70.

The upsides are:

* VARA is faster, especially in good conditions when you can run a fair bit of power on your end (most of the Winlink RMS stations seem to run pretty solid signals).  On a really solid connection, VARA is massively faster.

* In any conditions that are less than ideal VARA is dramatically more reliable and faster than any of the non PACTOR alternatives.  As PACTOR TNC’s cost more than $1k, that makes $70 a pretty good deal.  (I don’t own a PACTOR TNC so I don’t know how the various PACTOR modes stack up against VARA)

In short I can connect to more Winlink RMS stations using VARA than I can using Winmor or ARDOP.  I can connect more reliably when conditions are not optimal.  I can connect reliably using 5-15W instead of 30-70W.   And the connections are faster.

In short, I think it’s a pretty interesting piece of technology.

And that’s all on HF.

There’s a version of VARA for VHF/UHF FM which can exploit the wider audio bandwidth you get when you use the 9600 baud receive data path of a VHF/UHF radio that offers input/output for a 9600 baud packet modem.

This would get around the big problem with VHF/UHF Winlink, which is that packet radio is deadly slow.  The slow speed of packet is the flaw that makes VHF/UHF Winlink nearly useless for tactical use in an emergency.  There are other problems with VHF/UHF Winlink but the flaw that cannot be ignored is that it is just too darn slow for modern needs like moving digital photos or larger files.

I’l be ordering some hardware to allow me to exploit the wider data path you get using the 9600 baud audio path - basically a couple of wide bandwidth sound cards. 

Is anyone else interested in experimenting with experimenting with VARA on VHF/UHF FM?  If so, let me know and we can coordinate.

Also, if you’re a Winlink HF user, I urge you to check out VARA.  The evaluation copy, speed throttled as it is, is still a dramatic improvement over Winmor and ARDOP, especially in marginal conditions.






-p W7PFB
73, Don’t forget to smile and have fun!





Re: Have you bought from Quick Silver Radio?

Rowland
 

My son Jesse is needing some LMR400 and RG8X.  Is the UF more expensive than the regular LMR400?


Thanks,

Rowland



On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 8:38 PM Howard E. Mahran / WA1HEM <wa1hem@...> wrote:
I'm about to purchase some LMR 240, LMR 400UF and connectors for an install. I usually buy from DXEngineering or HRO. I ran across qsradio.com - looks legit and I like the fact that the cable is USA made- anybody purchase from them before? What has your experience been?

Thanks!

Howard
--
*************************
Howard E. Mahran
WA1HEM
(425) 864 - 5104
*************************


VARA and Winlink

Paul Butzi (W7PFB)
 

Motivated by the Weekly Net check-in via Winlink I have been experimenting with Winlink again.

In particular I was interested in what changes happen as a result of the abandoning of the Winmor connection protocol/modem/soft TNC.

The direct replacement for Winmor is ARDOP. I have used ARDOP for a while, it is more reliable and perhaps a bit faster than Winmor but not a dramatic improvement.

So I decided to try VARA.

The downside of VARA is that if you want it to go into fast mode, and you want to avoid the nag screen, you must buy a license, which costs $70.

The upsides are:

* VARA is faster, especially in good conditions when you can run a fair bit of power on your end (most of the Winlink RMS stations seem to run pretty solid signals). On a really solid connection, VARA is massively faster.

* In any conditions that are less than ideal VARA is dramatically more reliable and faster than any of the non PACTOR alternatives. As PACTOR TNC’s cost more than $1k, that makes $70 a pretty good deal. (I don’t own a PACTOR TNC so I don’t know how the various PACTOR modes stack up against VARA)

In short I can connect to more Winlink RMS stations using VARA than I can using Winmor or ARDOP. I can connect more reliably when conditions are not optimal. I can connect reliably using 5-15W instead of 30-70W. And the connections are faster.

In short, I think it’s a pretty interesting piece of technology.

And that’s all on HF.

There’s a version of VARA for VHF/UHF FM which can exploit the wider audio bandwidth you get when you use the 9600 baud receive data path of a VHF/UHF radio that offers input/output for a 9600 baud packet modem.

This would get around the big problem with VHF/UHF Winlink, which is that packet radio is deadly slow. The slow speed of packet is the flaw that makes VHF/UHF Winlink nearly useless for tactical use in an emergency. There are other problems with VHF/UHF Winlink but the flaw that cannot be ignored is that it is just too darn slow for modern needs like moving digital photos or larger files.

I’l be ordering some hardware to allow me to exploit the wider data path you get using the 9600 baud audio path - basically a couple of wide bandwidth sound cards.

Is anyone else interested in experimenting with experimenting with VARA on VHF/UHF FM? If so, let me know and we can coordinate.

Also, if you’re a Winlink HF user, I urge you to check out VARA. The evaluation copy, speed throttled as it is, is still a dramatic improvement over Winmor and ARDOP, especially in marginal conditions.






-p W7PFB
73, Don’t forget to smile and have fun!


Re: Have you bought from Quick Silver Radio?

Kirt White / K7KDW
 

I’ve bought from the before when I was building my radio go box. No issues here. 

On Jul 21, 2020, at 8:38 PM, Howard E. Mahran / WA1HEM <wa1hem@...> wrote:

I'm about to purchase some LMR 240, LMR 400UF and connectors for an install. I usually buy from DXEngineering or HRO. I ran across qsradio.com - looks legit and I like the fact that the cable is USA made- anybody purchase from them before? What has your experience been?

Thanks!

Howard
--
*************************
Howard E. Mahran
WA1HEM
(425) 864 - 5104
*************************


Have you bought from Quick Silver Radio?

Howard E. Mahran / WA1HEM
 

I'm about to purchase some LMR 240, LMR 400UF and connectors for an install. I usually buy from DXEngineering or HRO. I ran across qsradio.com - looks legit and I like the fact that the cable is USA made- anybody purchase from them before? What has your experience been?

Thanks!

Howard
--
*************************
Howard E. Mahran
WA1HEM
(425) 864 - 5104
*************************

941 - 960 of 6629