From wang!elf.wang.com!ucsd.edu!packet-radio-relay Sat Mar 2 15:10:19 1991 remote from tosspot Received: by tosspot (1.63/waf) via UUCP; Sat, 02 Mar 91 21:38:14 EST for lee Received: from somewhere by elf.wang.com id aa04699; Sat, 2 Mar 91 15:10:18 GMT Received: from ucsd.edu by news.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-shadow-mx) id AA19989; Sat, 2 Mar 91 08:47:20 -0500 Received: by ucsd.edu; id AA00779 sendmail 5.64/UCSD-2.1-sun Sat, 2 Mar 91 04:30:13 -0800 for hpbbrd!db0sao!dg4scv Received: by ucsd.edu; id AA00773 sendmail 5.64/UCSD-2.1-sun Sat, 2 Mar 91 04:30:12 -0800 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb -oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radio-relay packet-radio-list Message-Id: <9103021230.AA00773@ucsd.edu> Date: Sat, 2 Mar 91 04:30:08 PST From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup Reply-To: Packet-Radio@ucsd.edu Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V91 #57 To: packet-radio@ucsd.edu Packet-Radio Digest Sat, 2 Mar 91 Volume 91 : Issue 57 Today's Topics: Grapes/PI card wanted HF Packet A Silly Idea Send Replies or notes for publication to: Send subscription requests to: Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu. Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio". We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 91 08:42:09 EST From: barry@dgbt.doc.ca (Barry McLarnon) Subject: Grapes/PI card wanted To: packet-radio@ucsd.edu The GRAPES WA4DSY 56kbps modem and the Ottawa PI card are separate items, from separate groups. All inquiries about the PI card should go to me: barry@dgbt.doc.ca The contact for info on the modem is Doug Drye, KD4NC: ...gatech!emory!kd4nc!dug Barry VE3JF Barry McLarnon | Internet: barry@dgbt.doc.ca Communications Research Centre | PBBS: VE3JF@VE3JF.ON.CAN Ottawa, Canada K2H 8S2 | AMPRnet: barry@hs.ve3jf [44.135.96.7] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Mar 91 09:08 EDT From: Subject: HF Packet A Silly Idea To: Packet-Radio@UCSD.EDU Original Article: True. Of course, at 300 bps, transmission time is less, so some types of fading and QRM might be less likely to affect Packet. I agree that AMTOR might be more resilient to poor path conditions, though. You make a good point. -- James L. Paul ***** Reply: You bet Amtor is more resiliant! I have seen stuff go through even when you can hardly hear the station! It's a super mode! --Betsey Doane, K1EIC ------------------------------ End of Packet-Radio Digest ******************************