Amateur Radio Packet Over 802.11 Cards 189
Skuld-Chan writes: "I stumbled across this the other day -- basically discusses modifying common 802.11 boards for amateur radio bands (or Part 97 rules). Under Part 97 there is a 100 watt limit and no gain limit (unlike the 6 db gain limit on Part 15). I thought it was interesting :)." Consult your friendly branch of the FCC :) Note that this is just one of several interesting projects from this site.
interference (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:interference (Score:2)
I just loved the bit where the author mentions that you just have to use a different polarity then "everyone else". Go over the adslreports and you'll find that Linksys users are recommended to put their antennae at a 90 degree angle w.r.t. each other. Now just which polarity is not being used in your area?
It'll only be a matter of time before people start jamming 802.11 just for the heck of it.
Re:interference (Score:2, Informative)
Second, when you start getting above 30-50Mhz, getting serious power out is NOT easy. If you get into the S band (2.4Ghz), anything over about 1 to 3 watts is a B*TCH to get, expensive to get and expensive to operate.
Sure when I was in the Navy (ET), we had transmitters that would and did fry a sea gull that flew too close to us, but most people don't have that kind of money.
BWP - AKA N5VMF
Re:interference (Score:2)
Re:interference (Score:2)
Hope this doesn't classify me under the "radio skript k1dd13" designation... Like I said, I wouldn't actually use it, I'm just curious.
And does anybody really doubt whether Tesla caused the Tunguska explosion?
Re:interference (Score:3, Informative)
I suspect the bps would be fairly low, but I haven't checked on the state of the art in a couple decades. Oh yeah, add 1.5 seconds to the packet latency! :^)
ping moon ...
Moon Bounce (Score:2)
Re:interference (Score:4, Interesting)
Since the RF is white, there is no way to design a feedhorn or antenna to properly radiate the power. High VSWR would kill the transmitter in a very short period of time. Food in the microwave acts like a dummy load. It absorbs the RF, so little gets reflected back into the transmitter. VSWR as low as 15% of total power out of a klystron will make it explode in just a few seconds. The electrons "piling up" forces the klystron to act like a capacitor, and the electron gun will arc with the collector, causing the glass vacume chamber surrounded by rare earth magnets to implode with a force compounded by the high voltage being applied to it.
Suffice to say, a klystron out of tune or improperly capacitance match with it's antenna goes like a grenade.
Make sure you disable the power supply safety interlocks and bypass the fuses in addition to cutting a hole in the door of the microwave to achieve this effect.
Re:interference (Score:1)
A general rule-of-thumb on the amateur radio side of things is that a 90-degree polarity difference between transmitter and receiver will result in a 20dB loss in line-of-sight communication. Whether the difference is actually 20dB, I don't know, but there is a loss. Why linksys would recommend this is beyond me (maybe so they can sell better/more expensive versions to overcome the 20dB loss?).
Re:interference (Score:2)
Sorry, should've mentioned more context on the adslreports site. It's a forum where users (and occasionally, a vendor employee) exchange ideas, ripe and green.
The brilliant polarization idea came from the users, not Linksys, but I've seen it so often that the myth is all over the place.
Re:interference (Score:3, Informative)
It's not a myth!
For line-of-site, beamed, i.e. direct communications in particular. Anyone who has done 2m Transmitter hunts can tell you it's real. For that matter, try doing 2m side-band and you'll find that the average user is horizontally polarized compared to the FM croud which use vertical. Again, an easily observed difference. You put up two antennas and flip a switch, you'll see a difference in signal level.
Now - a few of things about doing this in the US. The first issue is content rules. No bad words, etc over the ham frequencies. So that let's you off going to that favorite porn site of yours. You can forget a usenet feed. Hams are actually limited as to what the what they can say over the radio, same is going to be true of digital communications.
Another is no encryption. No need to worry about whether you need 40 bit or 128. Can use either in the ham bands.
What about monitoring what comes through your digital repeater station. You DO know you're responsible for it don't you?
It's an interesting experiment idea, and I can think of some neat OTHER applications beyond the internet. Hams are into talking. Maybe this is a relatively cheap Digitial repeater system and you move Voice data over it in a wide area network using dishes?
You miss the point. (Score:2)
Re:interference (Score:3, Informative)
As a "Joe User" with an off the shelf, Part 15 device, you must accept any interference that comes your way. You must also not cause any interference. You are an unlicensed user of the spectrum.
As a ham on the other hand, you can modify the part 15 Device to your allocated freqs, amplify the power output and modify the antenna system. You will also have priority over the Part 15 Devices that coexist in your spectrum.
DE KE4PJW [qrz.com]
Re:interference (Score:2)
100 Watt wireless router? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:1)
1. Jam the interlock in a microwave.
2. Program 5 mins on high power.
3. Insert head into microwave.
4. Have stoner friend hit the button.
5. Have said friend stand back as steam pours out of your head.
What do you think microwave ovens use to cook food? Radio Waves!
BWP
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:1)
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:1)
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:2)
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:1)
From WordNet (r) 1.6 [wn]:
radio wave
n : an electromagnetic wave with a wavelength between 0.5 cm to
30,000 m [syn: {radio emission}, {radio radiation}]
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:2)
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:4, Informative)
Head ache.
Stomach ache.
Permanent Sterility.
Unconsciousness.
Death.
In other word, if the RF makes you pass out, welcome to silicone testicles and Testosterone shots for the rest of your life.
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:2, Funny)
I'd take a minor RF burn over a sunburn, any day. (Yes, I had to try pinching the mag-mount while my 70w 144MHz transmitter was keyed up.. You learn not to do that again very quickly; I can say my fingertip has suffered no lasting damage.)
*It's worth noting that the CDMA phones (Sprint PCS, and all the 3G systems) modulate their power *down* to the minimum level necessary to contact the base station. This is a requirement of the specification, as handsets that fail to do this would accidentally jam adjacent channels; CDMA relies on an extremely rapid frequency-sliding system, with the intent that phones may step on eachother every 2-5 seconds or so; the overall effect averages the noise, and the likelihood of interference is taken into account in determining the necessary buffer sizes and maximum bitrates of the system.
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:5, Informative)
This warm air is also bled into the waveguide itself to drive out any moisture that would impede your signal.
You see, the guy looked straight into a waveguide pumping out 2000 watts at 4.7 Ghz that required 30,000 watts of 480 volt 3 phase AC to generate.
And that dude, well, that dude was dead before he finished the word "here"
AN/TRC-170 V2 [fas.org] Army/Airforce Mobile Troposcatter. Baddest pair of micky mouse ears you will ever see on a battle field. Two 81 db gain 10 foot dishes, 10 feet in the air, and 10 feet apart. 560 foot danger zone in front of the dishes. After a few days transmitting, the ground in front of the dishes would be littered with the corpses of birds, rodents and the scavengers that came for the easy meals.
Re:100 Watt wireless router? (Score:2)
Long distances... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Long distances... (Score:1)
BWP - AKA N5VMF
Re:Long distances... (Score:1)
Nah... Just mount the transmitter on the top of the tower. Run power and controls up and transmit away. I did that with my QRP rig.
PS. I ain't posting my callsign on slashdot too many people know where I am as it is.
Re:Long distances... (Score:1, Offtopic)
(Sorry, just amazed that people will put a direct link to their home address on the web.)
Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:4, Informative)
That said, I may do some hacking in this area myself...
...de K5ZC
Modulation types are also restricted (Score:2, Informative)
For example, see this link
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr
They seem to prohibit any encryption as well.
Re:Modulation types are also restricted (Score:2)
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:2)
You say: ...it's worth a reminder that amateur packet radio is subject to a number of content restrictions that make it extremely poorly suited as a transport medium for general Internet traffic.
The author's page, presenting yet another sucessful end run around the last mile problem, promisses:
If your like me and are seeking a simple way to build a high speed, affordable, RF network, where you mimic the internet and have webpages, conferencing, FTP and so on, I encourage you to look into this technology and use it. If you use this technology and would like to share your experiences, or if you have questions, you may contact me. Also feel free to link to this document and or reprint any portion of it.
So what am I missing here? How is this limited? Whatever you are talking about is at varience with other hopeful posts here. Of course, you sig, "Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!", kinda tells us what you are all about.
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:1)
Amateurs may not transmit a number of things, outlined in section 97.113 [arrl.org] of the FCC rules. Messages for commercial gain, obscene or indecent messages (so much for the pr0n
Further, section 97.115 [arrl.org] places severe restrictions on messages that may be sent by an amateur station when they did not originate at that station.
That's what I mean by limited.
Of course, you sig, "Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!", kinda tells us what you are all about.
Oh, really? What does it say to you? Probably not what you think it says. Hint: I'm not a M$ toady.
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:2)
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:3, Interesting)
There are two important restrictions that should be concidered. In North America you may not transmit in code. i.e you can't use crypto. The second restriction is a tough judgement call: you can't use the amature bands for commercial use. This may restrict you from shopping on line over an amature band WAN.
There are some other restrictions, but these are probably the two big ones that will affect the /. crowd.
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:2)
but you can use it [autopatch] to order a pizza on your way home
That varies region to region. Ordering pizza over the autopatch would be a sure fire way to get blacklisted by the locals in my area.
Autopatch rules (Score:2)
Ordering a pizza online is OK, since you aren't making money on the deal. Calling a tow truck is OK, for the same reason.
However, *dispatching* a pizza delivery over amateur radio ict verboten.
Also, whatever link you are transmitting on must ID itself via a recognized format at least every 10 minutes if not more frequently. In AX.25, your callsign is a part of every packet you send - I don't see how you could ID on an 802.11 system, as you must send your callsign in an accepted format - I don't think sending an ICMP with your callsign in it would be accepted.
And yes, any SSH, SSL, or encrypted files would be right out, as would porn, or commercial traffic in which you had an interest.
Also, the issue of "third party" communications arises. If my station is talking to another ham's station, all is well, but if I'm reading
Also, going to a 100 watt transmitter is really going to increase the range over which people can intercept your conversations.
The only (ahem) reasons to to this I can see are:
The first reason is rather pathetic, and the second is a complete violation of the spirit of amateur radio.
Re:Autopatch rules (Score:2)
The other thing to remember is that while the base may be souped up, ther remote also has to be souped up to be useful. Takes extra work to soup up a PCCard.
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:2)
As long as they kept it clean I don't see what harm could be done.
Re:Before everyone jumps on the bandwagon... (Score:2)
A couple of things apply here... (Score:4, Informative)
Second, any system with more that 1 watt output must be under automatic control so that only enough power as required to compleate the communication is used. You just can't pump out 100 watts to go next door. Not that 100 watts at 2.4Ghz is easy to come by...
The nice thing is that is looks like you don't even have to touch some of the boards to do this. Talk to the manufacture, show them your license and they'll set you up with boards in the ham bands right off the bat! Nice!
BWP
Re:A couple of things apply here... (Score:2)
You might be surprised... Years ago, I was browsing a surplus store in my town and was absolutely amazed by the amount of radar gear that was just sitting there. I was even more surprised that the stuff was selling.
The guy got the equipment from both the army and the national airport. No clue which frequency the stuff works on, but it's at least in the right ballpark (and yes, buyers were informed that they should clear the area of people before hooking it up
Re:A couple of things apply here... (Score:2)
Ummm Wrong. You are being way to broad and generalized. it does not have to have any automatic controls. NONE of my radios that are made by companies like ICOM and Kenwood have any kind of automatic controls. even the 1.2Ghz radios that I have wasting away and collecting dust in the basement dont have and do not require it.
Yes getting a ham license is easy, but it is not for everyone.
Also please keep in mind that high power operation in the microwave bands isn't for the newbie (no-code tech isa newbie).. 100 watts at 2.4Ghz can kill you quite easily.
1200 bps - 11 Mbps (Score:1)
Signup and get your ham license!
KO6RM
Re:1200 bps - 11 Mbps (Score:1)
Re:1200 bps - 11 Mbps (Score:2, Offtopic)
Back in the old days (1980) the 8 bit machine was the computer. SWTPc 6809 Flex boxes were the favorite, but just about anything was used, including TRS-80s.
Re:1200 bps - 11 Mbps (Score:1)
My poor little ol' MFJ TNCs are gathering dust - I used to run a packet BBS. Ended up with one ol' boy usin' it, with a W4 call - almost never got him to get on the Internet.
When I moved, I finally took it down, and didn't start it back up.
Been thinking about firing one up lately to see if there's any APRS activity anymore, but just haven't gotten around to it.
Now, if we can build out a packet network with some decent speed, that'll be a whole different kettle of fish
73 de KE4UWL
If I had speakers that handled it.. (Score:1)
Re:If I had speakers that handled it.. (Score:1)
You can get ultrasonic transducers and pass data with them. Might drive your dog crazy though.
Now, what does this have to do with using 802.11b on ham bands again?
Re:If I had speakers that handled it.. (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd recommend against it! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I'd recommend against it! (Score:1)
Amateurs are encouraged to modify equipment (within the rules of course), whereas the people who were busted modified equipment that required some sort of type acceptance.
There is a long history of amateurs modifying commercial gear for their own purposes.
Re:I'd recommend against it! (Score:5, Informative)
So yes, hams are allowed to hack wireless cards to work on their frequencies. They're expected to know what frequencies they may use, how much power they're putting out, how to resolve any resulting interference, and so forth.
BTW, it is not very difficult to get a ham license. Contact your local radio club, or have a look at http://www.arrl.org. Just takes a bit of reading, $10, and a 35-question multiple choice exam.
-John, KG4RUO
Re:I'd recommend against it! (Score:1)
Don't crank up on a high gain antenna pointed through your neighbor's bedroom. Be prepared to show compliance with RF exposure rules anytime you put up any antenna.
73 de KE4UWL
Re:I'd recommend against it! (Score:1)
Re:I'd recommend against it! (Score:1)
Nowadays, there are three types of ham license available: technician, general, and extra. I don't currently have any amateur (ham) license, but I am studying for the general license.
The technician license doesn't require you to copy or send morse code. The other two require you to be able to copy Morse code at 5 words per minute. Theoretically you should be prepared to send at 5 WPM, too, but apparently they assume (reasonably) that if you can copy at 5 WPM, you can send at 5 WPM.
Check out the Amateur radio relay league's website for more details. (arrl.org)
MM
--
Re:I'd recommend against it! (Score:2)
Re:I'd recommend against it! (Score:1)
Also ... for that radio, you can modify the transmit frequencies via software ... of course TRANSMITTING on the "extra" freqs are illegal ... but the mod is fine ... :)
KC0MOX ...
1.5 KW (Score:2, Funny)
de KO6RM
Re:1.5 KW (Score:1, Offtopic)
(I know I sure as heck wouldn't put my home address in a slashdot posting.)
Re:1.5 KW (Score:1)
BTW, Your license will expire Apr 21, 2002. I hope you renewed.
Re:1.5 KW (Score:2)
Broadcast 1500 watts on a wireless card, and you'll probably fry any receiving card in the same building.
-John, KG4RUO
Re:1.5 KW (Score:2)
Re:1.5 KW (Score:2)
Open-Source Microwave Oven, but just local (Score:2)
Would https be a violation? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Would https be a violation? (Score:2, Informative)
Face it, ham radio is meant to be experimental and bleeding edge, and 802.11b is pretty much appliance operator level stuff.
'Course, if AMSAT could put up a bird more than once every 15 years that worked, we could push for the next one to have an 802.11 interface on it.... THAT would be worthwhile, and give me a reason to use all the 2.4G antennas and amps I bought for AO-40...
John Gorkos
AB0OO
Re:Would https be a violation? (Score:2, Informative)
Offtopic (-1) (Score:1)
That was George Carlin.
Re:Offtopic (-1) (Score:2)
Fuvg, cvff, shpx, phag, pbpxfhpxre, zbgureshpxre, gvgf.
If you're reading this over encrypted wireless, we're going straight to hell. Sorry about that.
-l
Re:Offtopic (-1) (Score:2)
Incomplete! I'm surprised nobody mentioned the other three (four) from one of George Carlin's later routines, namely:
"sneg gheq gjng, and SPP!"
Re:Would https be a violation? (Score:2)
Licence revoked: (Score:4, Insightful)
This story reminds me of the one about the website that teaches people to make an x-ray machine. Nice to know, but definitely not for the irresponsible masses.
Re:Licence revoked: (Score:2)
Part 15 devices have no protection from other licenced devices (Read the fine print in the manual that came with your part 15 device).
The using more power than necessary bit, you are correct about, although for satellite/moon bounce more than 100mw would be useful.
Re:Licence revoked: (Score:1)
This was a concern the first time I built a 2.4 GHz wireless network (2mbps, using Overlan gear), so I looked it up specifically.
73 de KE4UWL
Re:Licence revoked: (Score:1)
Um, what if you want Omnidirectional coverage? 100mw won't get you much if you want to have a large coverage area.
DE KE4PJW
Re:Licence revoked: (Score:5, Insightful)
And as the article mentioned, this applies to Packet Radio, which by it's nature has a single source and a single destination. Omni directional antennas are used primarily for point to multipoint communication not point to point as is typically used for packet radio.
Also, remember the inverse square law when designing your network. Putting more power into your transmitter does less to improve communications performance at a distance than a properly designed antenna. High gain omni directional antennas are more efficient at propagating your signal than increasing your power to 100w.
For instance, a 15 dBi High Performance Omni sold here [hyperlinktech.com] for $209.95 increases the effective radiated power by a factor of 100,000. A factor of 10 for every 3 db of gain. So, your standard 100mw transmitter would transmit less power than the 100w transmitter initially, but would fall off less with distance, surpassing the performance of a 100w transmitter on a standard antenna after the first few feet.
The other route is to use a 2.4 Ghz Klystron like this [nec.co.jp] that costs in the neighborhood of $30,000 which of course can be coupled with an high gain antenna, which will not survive long at its maximum rated load.
This is not a competition of Penis sizes or "My athlon is faster than your Intel boxen" this is a game of finesse where the sharpest mind and the most efficient system dominates through signal quality, not signal quantity.
You get Mary on her 2.4 phone and the Muni Hospital complaining about you ruining ther gossip chat and emergency beeper service and you won't just loose you expensive 'leet 2.4 Ghz gear, you will do prison time for willfully jamming vital communications services, tantamount to a terrorist act, post 911.
Want to be 'leet? Implement a flat panel phased array with electronic beam steering to pinpoint your distant end receiver at gain levels limited only by the precision of the real time clock you use to gate the injection of the 0-180 and 180-360 phases of your waveform.
That would cover as many stations as you wanted, within the limits of line of sight. You could go back to college to learn the RF theory necessary to build such a device for the price of a big dumb klystron and go on to dominate the mobile gigabit bandwidth telecommunications arena. Perhaps your choice is clear.
'cept you have to compete with me, and I'm 11 years ahead of you
Re:Licence revoked: (Score:2)
Your posts are full of technical errors and bullshit. Do you have an amateur radio license? Have you ever operated on packet radio?
100 mW into a 15 dBi antenna produces an ERP of 3.16 W. This is an increase of approx. 32 times the ERP of an isotropic antenna.
Re:Licence revoked: (Score:2)
yep, nope and nope.
my bad, you are right, 3 db is 10 times in sound not rf..?
Just trying to scare you away from using, as a distinguished gentilman called it, "an RF-SUV" when an "RF-miata" would do the trick.
Like that 1.2 Kw 2.4 Ghz Klystron link? Those were not even available 6 months ago. Not like they could be used for troposcatter for increased range, not at 2.4 ghz anyway. But imagine the phenominal data rate that could be achieved at any line of sight distance. I keep imagineing circular polarized 30 mile gigabit pipes. Free after rebate, since you did not have to spend the 30 million dollars for a 30 mile fiber installation.
How does that sig go?
"Information wants to be free but fiber wants to cost a million dollars a mile"
Thanks for doing the math for me, I was wondering how I was going to figure out what the 15 db omni was going to be worth to me on my community wireless node.
Did you do that on a slide rule? they are great for logrithmic functions, faster than computers if you know what your doing.
Yep, full of bs, but certainly a fan of community wireless. Hate to see that get stomped on by an RF-SUV.
Done a few trolls yourself eh?
"You just whip out your $60,000 spectrum analyzer. What's the problem?"
"Sniffing glue will kill brain cells, but you already know that."
"This is slashdot, don't confuse us with the facts!"
And even quoted me:
"Any ISP that bets their business on the use of unlicensed spectrum deserves to lose"
Granted, at least one of the men you trolled is a wanker, but that does not make us pals, since you're a brit in america, and belong to a technology political action committee. Seems to me there is some kind of law about foreign money being donated to political parties. But then you probly made it all here to begin with.
Mad yet? Stew a bit before posting a response. I've no more time for you and want it to be worth my while when you do respond.
Re:Licence revoked: (Score:1)
W-ERZ (Score:5, Funny)
Re:W-ERZ (Score:2)
Re:W-ERZ (Score:1)
moon bounce (Score:3, Informative)
-.. . DU1DQ
Re:moon bounce (Score:1, Informative)
Let's do the math - a .030 watt access point will deliver about -70dBm signal to a wireless card 20 meters away using dipole antennas. The noise floor is usually about -100dBm. The moon is a return trip of approximately 400 million meters, or 20000000 times further away. Signal strength is the inverse square of the distance, or 400000000000000 times weaker. Let's assume we're using a 40db dish (one the FCC would have no trouble noticing in your backyard) and you're transmitting at the full 1500 watts output. The signal is 50000 times stronger and your dish amplifies it another 10000fold. The resulting signal is now only 800000 times (or about 59db) weaker to a non-directional antenna (or a directional antenna not pointing at the sky), resulting in a signal level of -129dBm. Which is significantly weaker than a typical noise floor of about -100dBm. As you can see, amateur radio EME (earth-moon-earth) requires a non-trivial antenna array pointed at the moon to even receive such signals.
Many legal problems with Internet over packet (Score:2, Informative)
(3) Communications in which the station licensee or control operator has a pecuniary interest, including communications on behalf of an employer.
4) Music using a phone emission except as specifically provided elsewhere in this Section; communications intended to facilitate a criminal act; messages in codes or ciphers intended to obscure the meaning thereof, except as otherwise provided herein; obscene or indecent words or language; or false or deceptive messages, signals or identification;
(5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be furnished alternatively through other radio services.
Now, IANAL, but I read that as saying: No nicknames, no ads and banners, no mp3's, and no software piracy. Not to mention that encryption is illegal over the air, so your passwords are available for the world to see.
73's, KI0PX
Re:Many legal problems with Internet over packet (Score:1)
Nicknames are fine, just make sure you ID periodically. A simple ping of the nearest gateway with your callsign embedded will do.
No ads and banners? Well no, not if it's coming from your server, but banners while browsing are no problem.
Mp3's are just data, No problem.
No Software Piracy, Well of course, no illegal acts.
And encryption for the purpose of control is allowed, just don't use it for everything.
73's, N7IPBPart 97 (Score:1)
Re:Part 97 (Score:2)
HAM Radio: The Ultimate Geek Hobby (Score:2, Insightful)
If you really wanna have some fun, check out www.irlp.net, where you can use Linux boxen to provide internet linking capabilities to remote repeaters. Very very kool stuff.
73's.
KD6OIZ
be carefull (Score:1)
This can distort ham radio over satellite! (Score:2)
The problem here is that this part of the 13cm band is used by ham radio satellites. This can seriously make problems to the hams using the satellites.
One ham shouldn't do harm to another ham. If you are a ham radio operator interested in wireless LAN please don't forget that other hams have other interests, and there are users of the satellites.
It would be interesting to see if there is a way to modify a wireless lan card to operate on an even lower frequency (below 2400 MHz), so it could be placed into another part of the 13 cm ham radio band.
vy 73 DG3KJU, KG6ICX
Re:This can distort ham radio over satellite! (Score:2)
Not quite as fast but... (Score:2)
Brian Lane
(Yes, I'm lead programmer for Shine Micro, but that doesn't mean that it isn't a cool project).
Re:Windows Is Dying (Score:1)
Next up:
Computer Component Radio!!!!!
Umm... no you don't! (Score:2)
Get your General class or higher (Advanced or Extra) license first...
If I really wanted to be picky, I'd point out that the "Technician Plus" license per se does not exist except as a grandfathered concept since the FCC eliminated the Novice level license, but I digress...