Moderator: VK6ZMS
There is quite a bit of buzz about D-Star!robbage wrote:Have they a callsign or proposed callsign yet? Do you know if they will be linking with any other repeater so the people in the cheap seats can talk back at you? There doesn't seem to be great amount of care about DSTAR at the moment from what I've overheard.
The callsign of the repeater when it's active will be VK6RWN. As to the repeater linking, it's my understanding (and I'm far from being an expert on DSTAR so please don't take this as gospel) that there's no easy way to link digital to analogue. So only people with DSTAR capable radios will be able to use the DSTAR repeater... I think ... However, VK6RWN will be linked to the Internet, to communicate with other DSTAR repeaters worldwide.robbage wrote:Have they a callsign or proposed callsign yet? Do you know if they will be linking with any other repeater so the people in the cheap seats can talk back at you? There doesn't seem to be great amount of care about DSTAR at the moment from what I've overheard.
I've yet to venture into HF, or contesting, or SSTV, or any of the other million and one things that people spend their valuable leisure time on. But I'm keen to have a play with digital technologies like DSTAR, IRLP, EchoLink, etc.Anything's possible. I guess it depends whether you believe what you hear and read. The fundies will say that they aren't going to touch it because you can't grab a pile of components and make something to work with it (unlikely we'll see a three transistor receiver for DSTAR) The propietry codecs don't sit too well either, considering free (as in beer) ones could have been used. Maybe not really in the true spirit of Amateur. I don't have an opinion myself. Sounds too much like the Free Open Source Software vs Closed Software debate.Zebedee wrote:Last of all, regarding the amount of "care" about DSTAR, it seems that there's a few people out there already with DSTAR capable radios - and I guess it'll be one of those things that will likely gain momentum after the repeater is up and running.
SSTV, Packet, RTTY etc can all be done with 'traditional' rigs and a bit of home made gear (documented freely). DSTAR will turn many off because it's not that. Maybe some are thinking that it will be like HDTV. Analogue FTA will be unplugged soon. I heard one say that it will disappointing not to be able to simply listen in to random QSOs with their 'regular' gear. No doubt the same was said when FM was first developed.Zebedee wrote:I reckon that's the beauty of AR - there's so many things that people can get involved in if they want to, but by the same token, if it doesn't interest them then they don't have to
Sure, but then some people complain about anything newer than CWrobbage wrote:Anything's possible. I guess it depends whether you believe what you hear and read. The fundies will say that they aren't going to touch it because you can't grab a pile of components and make something to work with it (unlikely we'll see a three transistor receiver for DSTAR).Zebedee wrote:Last of all, regarding the amount of "care" about DSTAR, it seems that there's a few people out there already with DSTAR capable radios - and I guess it'll be one of those things that will likely gain momentum after the repeater is up and running.
Same - I don't really care about the codecs, it's just something new to fiddle with, and I'm more interested in the digital side of AR, so it's definitely on my radarrobbage wrote:The propietry codecs don't sit too well either, considering free (as in beer) ones could have been used. Maybe not really in the true spirit of Amateur. I don't have an opinion myself. Sounds too much like the Free Open Source Software vs Closed Software debate.
Yep - it's new, so it's scary. I've heard the same thing said for the 70cm repeaters... "nobody uses them so why bother?" etc.robbage wrote:SSTV, Packet, RTTY etc can all be done with 'traditional' rigs and a bit of home made gear (documented freely). DSTAR will turn many off because it's not that. Maybe some are thinking that it will be like HDTV. Analogue FTA will be unplugged soon. I heard one say that it will disappointing not to be able to simply listen in to random QSOs with their 'regular' gear. No doubt the same was said when FM was first developed.Zebedee wrote:I reckon that's the beauty of AR - there's so many things that people can get involved in if they want to, but by the same token, if it doesn't interest them then they don't have to
Yeah - I suspect though that when companies other than Icom get in on the game, prices will no doubt come down.robbage wrote:Most likely it all boils down to the $$$ It does with cheap bastards like me.
They might have said it about SSB (most likely did) but at least FM could be slope detected on an AM receiverrobbage wrote:. I heard one say that it will disappointing not to be able to simply listen in to random QSOs with their 'regular' gear. No doubt the same was said when FM was first developed.
Would you care about propietry codecs if you knew the radios would be a lot cheaper with free-to-use codecs? Not saying they would be or could be, but you have to wonder. Anybody else using the chips will be paying for the rights.Zebedee wrote:Same - I don't really care about the codecs, it's just something new to fiddle with, and I'm more interested in the digital side of AR, so it's definitely on my radar
I'm going to have a go once I have a working antenna. It's worth a try. I hear some of the old-timers using it occasionally. Dunno if it's the Roley repeater, my set or the frequency itself, but it sounds brilliant compared to 2m.Zebedee wrote:Yep - it's new, so it's scary. I've heard the same thing said for the 70cm repeaters... "nobody uses them so why bother?" etc.
I remember when colour TV came out. Bloody expensive, crappy quality. Now I watch HDTV on my PC and cost me $50. I seem to remember Icom developed the codec? This means Yaesu, Kenwood etc will have to licence from their rival. And the knock-off Chinese will have to steal itZebedee wrote:Yeah - I suspect though that when companies other than Icom get in on the game, prices will no doubt come down.
I use them and I am under 45robbage wrote:I'm going to have a go once I have a working antenna. It's worth a try. I hear some of the old-timers using it occasionally. Dunno if it's the Roley repeater, my set or the frequency itself, but it sounds brilliant compared to 2m.Zebedee wrote:Yep - it's new, so it's scary. I've heard the same thing said for the 70cm repeaters... "nobody uses them so why bother?" etc.
