I'm really quite disappointed. President Obama has scuppered plans to send people back to the moon.

George Bush announced the idea back in 2004 that NASA would return man to our nearest celestial neighbour before aiming for Mars. If all had gone to plan, humans could have made the first return journey by 2020.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like that will happen. Owing to budget shortages, and what Obama calls a lack in innovation, he has recommended in the 2011 budget that the Constellation vehicle be abandoned.

A White House spokesperson says this isn't a step back, and that the ambition is still there but I can't help treating the comment with a little scepticism.

My view is that returning people to the moon is important and not just for the excitement for all of us who get to observe. I thought this time it could lead to a more permanent space presence. This would provide opportunities for science of course; a launch pad for vehicles to move further out into the solar system and also as a mining base. It's fairly well known that the element Helium-3 is present on the Moon but rare on Earth. This element could prove vital in providing power from Nuclear Fusion. Solving the world's energy problem seems a pretty good reason to go, and I'd have thought the sooner this happens the better.

Of course, money at the moment is a big problem and there are always other projects and needs which require funding. I've questioned before why there isn't greater international co-operation in space ventures. It doesn't need to be America that returns to the moon. Lets get space agencies from around the world all involved in a common goal and sharing the cost.

0 comments | Related Entries: 2 | Related Links: 5 | Attachments:

Tags: space, nasa, opinion, moon

I was asked recently via Twitter if I had any tips on taking photographs in low light situations. Now, I'm no photography expert but here's a few pointers that I've picked up since owning a DSLR.

There are three main elements which control how much light is needed to take a photograph: sensor sensitivity (ISO rating), aperture and exposure time. Each of these settings will have an impact on your picture in ways other than increasing the brightness.

Deciding which settings to use is entirely subjective. It depends on the subject of the photograph, the style of the photographer and the camera/lens combination. It's also a balancing act. If you change, say, the aperture to create a narrow depth of field, you may need to change either sensitivity or exposure to maintain the chosen light level. You may set an exposure time suitable for hand-holding your camera, but this may not allow enough light, so the sensitivity of aperture is adjusted accordingly.

Sensitivity (ISO):

The ISO rating is often given as a number such as 100, 200, 400 etc. Doubling the number increases the amount of light on your picture, but the side effect is more noise. In days of film, this would have been referred to as grain but nowadays digital noise is less pleasant and too much can ruin a picture.

To make things more difficult, the amount of visible noise depends on the camera. Expensive professional-grade cameras tend to have much better performance at higher ISO levels, whereas a cheaper camera may ruin pictures at ISO800 and cause distracting noise at ISO400.

If you have a DSLR, don't assume that it will cope well at the higher ends. I wouldn't take my Nikon D80 above ISO800 - and even that I'd use as a last resort.

Aperture (f-number/f-stop)

The aperture is the size of the opening at the front of the lens. Working in a similar way to the eye, a larger opening means more light will get through to the sensor compared to a smaller opening.

Again though, there is a consequence of opening the aperture. The wider it is, the narrower the depth-of-field. This means that the distance which is in focus is less. It can be used to great effect - you could use a wide aperture to take a portrait photograph with a nicely blurred background for example - but this would not be ideal for landscape photography where it would be more appropriate to have everything in focus.

The aperture is given as an f-number such as f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8. These numbers are 'full stops' - that is each one provides half the light of the previous. DSLR cameras will also allow the photographer to set half-stops or even third-stops.

The size of the aperture is limited by the lens in use. As a rule, more expensive lenses provide larger apertures than their cheaper counterparts. Zoom lenses will generally not provide the same maximum aperture throughout their range.

Exposure

In my mind, this is the easiest element to understand in terms of it's effect and consequences. Exposure simply means the amount of time the shutter is open and the sensor is exposed to light. It is measured in seconds or fractions of a second depending on the length of time.

Perhaps obviously; the longer the exposure time, the more light hits the sensor and the brighter the resulting image. The main consequence of a longer exposure time is camera shake or object movement.

Camera shake occurs when the length of exposure is simply to long for a person to keep the camera still. This effect is magnified for longer lenses and can be resolved by the use of a tripod. The recommendation is to look at the length of your lens and to use this figure as the minimum shutter speed. For example; if I am using a 200mm lens and am hand-holding the camera, I will not set my exposure any slower than 1/200 seconds. For a 50mm lens, the exposure will be 1/50 seconds.

Object movement occurs when something in your picture moves whilst the shutter is open. A little movement looks like an out-of-focus shot. Lots of movement can make objects appear ghostly. This can be used to great effect - think of a picture of a busy train station perhaps, where the building itself and perhaps trains are sharp and in focus, but all the people are blurry images.

Another consequence of very long exposures can be noise which can be introduced when the camera sensor gets hot due to prolonged use. This, however, is usually only seen on very long exposures of minutes rather than seconds.

Artificial Lighting

One other way of dealing with low light may be artificial lighting. The camera flash may be frequently used to make subjects brighter but it's important to consider how effective it will be. For example, when watching concerts you will often see the flashes of cameras going off around the auditorium. Often these are compact cameras or even mobile phones. All the flash will do in this case is illuminate the head of the person in front of you. DSLRs may have larger flashes but they too are limited to a few meters.

External flash guns can be purchased which have more power again, but you're not going to illuminate a landscape! The advantage here is that the flash can be mounted off-camera to create or eliminate shadows around a subject. These units also reduce the risk of red-eye because the angle of light going into the eye is higher. Light reflected from the back of the eye is not sent straight into the camera lens.

Further Reading

The internet is full of useful tips and guides for photography. Wikipedia may be an obvious starting point and I have attached some links to this post which may be helpful. Specialist forums are a good place to ask questions too. I'd recommend Talk Photography - again the link is posted in the 'Related Links' section of this post (see below)

0 comments | Related Entries: 0 | Related Links: 4 | Attachments:

Tags: photography

There's been a lot written in the technology press recently about e-book readers - tablet like devices with e-ink screens used primarily for reading e-books but also, in some cases, as a basic media player.

Whilst the concept of e-books has been around for a number of years with the likes of Project Gutenberg and reading on PDAs, actual dedicated readers are only around 5 years old though; with more being released with the last year than in the 4 years previous.

The growth of the reader has probably been spurned on by the launch of the Amazon Kindle reader sold by the internet behemoth initially in the US. Now, the latest version is available in the UK and Waterstones have been pushing a Sony model in its stores.

As a gadget, I'm quite impressed. The thin, book size devices - perhaps with a nice leather fold-over cover - with a battery life measured in page turns rather than minutes or hours (when reading at least) certainly results in an appealing gadget but the question is will I buy one?

For some reason or another, I've been pondering this over the last couple of days. Initially I was firmly in the 'NO' camp. I couldn't bear the idea of getting rid of my ordinary books. Bookshelves look nice. They make a home look lived-in. Somehow, an e-book reader would not have the same ambience. My opinion hasn't changed greatly during my musings, but I have moved ever so slightly away from the steadfast 'NO' to "No, but I won't rule it out".

You see, there is a part of me (and it is a small part) that likes the clutter-free home. Where a living room is rather minimalist; dominated by furniture but that's all - books, DVDs, blu-ray discs, CDs are all out of site.

The technology-lover in me reminds me that at one time I thought I'd never embrace music downloads ... now I have a monthly subscription of 75 songs.

I then think of the times I carry books around in my bag and the tatty edges they earn like trophies awarded for the many miles they may have travelled. None of that for a nice e-book reader.

Before I cry 'Vive le (gadget) révolution' and rush to Waterstones waving my wallet shouting 'take my cash, take my cash', there are problems that draw me back into the 400 year old world of print:

• The cost. With e-book readers costing upwards of £150, I would be quite wary. Reading in the living room, or at work in the staff room would be great but what about reading in public: on the bus, tube, train or plane, on the beach, in a cafe? Can I engrose myself fully in the book knowing that I hold in my hand what could be quite a desirable object? Advertising to thieves? Also thinking of the beach, what would sand do to the device, or salt water for that matter? Reading in the bath? No thanks. If I drop a paperback in water, I've lost maybe £10. To loose £150 is another matter.

• The cost of a book. As I understand it, e-books aren't significantly cheaper than real books. The argument is that editing costs etc. are the same. I argue that distribution costs must be vastly reduced and the lack of a physical product naturally reduces the value. If I can't get books for cheaper digitally then I'm unlikely to embrace the idea.

• Formats. Amazon uses it's own e-book format for which a Kindle is required. Other readers use more open formats. I don't want to get involved in a format war, so I will wait until a standard for all stores appears that works on all e-book readers. Much like most digital music is now available in MP3 and will play on anything.

• DRM. I know piracy is likely to be an issue, just like with music. However, just like with music, if the product is cheap enough and easy to use I believe many people will opt for the legal option. I won't enter this market if it is riddled with DRM. I don't want to have limits on how many devices I can use, or have the possibility of a book being deleted from my device because of a publication problem.

If all of these problems are addressed, and I'm sure many if not all will be over time, then I'll reconsider my position on e-books. Until then, paper is my friend.

0 comments | Related Entries: 0 | Related Links: 0 | Attachments:

Tags: gadgets, technology, books

As is tradition, here is my final blog entry for the year - and this time, the final one for the decade.

Blogs all over the internet seem to be doing it, so I thought I'd jump on the bandwagon and take a look back over the last ten years, from a personal point of view, on how things have changed.

Back in December 1999, I was just 17 years old and awaiting the turn of the the popular millennium. (Of course this didn't really happen until 2001 but why let technicalities get in the way of a good party? The roll-over of 4 figures seems much more significant anyway). I remember all the comments: where's our flying cars, jet packs and silver suits so often dipicted in futuristic novels and films. Of course none of these came about, but a lot has developed in technology. Things that may have been unthinkable at the time.

I'm looking around my living room at the tech that sits in front of me. Computers, digital photography, a big screen High Definition television, blu-ray, Sky+HD ... Really all amazing things that probably most people would take for granted nowaday.

The Computer

Ten years ago, I didn't have my own PC - the most powerful computer system I owned was a Sony Playstation. The desktop machine was a shared family machine running Windows 98. I don't know what it's spec was but obviously it was nothing compared to now. Internet connectivity was via dialup modem - the cheapest way to get online was via congested 0800 services such as IC24. No networking, multimedia consisted of poor quality video and 128kbps MP3s.

It wasn't until 2001 that I could afford to build my first desktop computer - a measly 1GHz Intel Duron machine running Windows ME before changing to Windows 2000. There was still no networking so I had my own modem in order to get online.

2002 was the year I first became connected to broadband at the seamingly blisteringly fast speeds of 512kbps down/256kbps up. Of course nowadays these speeds can be achieved by mobile phone and the thought of speeds like this on a fixed line would be sneered at. It was 2002 that the connected world meant I could start properly developing my website.

From then it's been more computers, the addition of wired and then wireless networks leading to the sitation now where I operate a home server, a desktop machine used as a media centre, a desktop machine used for amateur radio and general use, the laptop computer and a 3G/WiFi connected mobile phone.

Gaming

I've always been a bit behind the times when it's come to computer games. I've never had a machine of high enough specification to seriously consider PC gaming bar the odd game here and there, so it's been left to the games console. In 1999 I'd saved up enough to buy my own Playstation and I remember being amazed at the visuals of games like Tomb Raider, Resident Evil and Final Fantasy VII. Of course by now this machine was already aging - the Playstation 2 was only two years away.

The later machine I didn't purchase until 2006 and it is this machine that sits under my TV. As of now, I'm still working my way through Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Even comparing the PS2 to the original machine though, the visuals are vastly superior and the games more immersive. I know the Xbox 360 and PS3 will be a huge leap again but I don't intend to get the latest Microsoft console until later in 2010 - 5 years after it was originally released.

Talking of the players in gaming ten years ago, the likes of Sony, Sega and Nintendo where the big three. Since then Sega has dropped out of manufacturing, and Microsoft came onto the Scene with the original XBox machine. Nintendo looked shaky with it's first machine of the noughties (Game Cube) but was now stormed ahead with the Wii - the first mainstream machine to feature motion control.

Multimedia

The CRT was king for television back in 1999. I had my own personal 14" TV/VHS combi and the family unit was a 28" (I think) beast. Over the air signals were mainly analogue with me not experiencing Freeview until 2002.

Now, my screen is a 32" LCD and I like the idea of upping the size to 42". Such screen sizes would not be possible ten years ago - imagine how much room a CRT of such a size would be!

Of course VHS just didn't cut it anymore. The DVD was released in 1999 and I got my first disk in 2002 which I played through my first computer - not a dedicated player. Now I barely touch the old tapes. I have however bought myself a Video Recorder for the pricely sum of £2 in order to dub some old cassettes.

Now I'm again experiencing a format change with the move from DVD to Blu-ray. Okay it's not as dramatic since I can still play my older DVD collection, but the appeal of High Definition video is too great to resist. Sky HD provides superb broadcast picture quality compared to the often poor standard definition equivalent.

Whilst broadcast picture quality may have decreased with the introduction of digital to terrestrial broadcast and Sky; the number of channels available now is staggering. Compare Freeview today to analogue television a liittle over 10 years ago, featuring just 4-5 stations. For better or worse, no-one can argue that today we are all spoilt for choice.

Photography

Taking photographs has had such a radical change over the last decade. Ten years ago the idea of having a digital camera was completely unrealistic - much too expensive. I had a compact Praktica camera taking 35mm film allowing for 24 or 36 exposures per film. Photography was not a cheap hobby for the casual photographer. The cost of film and development had to be considered each time that shutter was clicked. I like to think that this forced me to consider each shot more carefully but I don't really think this is true - I didn't know what made a good picture so just took the snaps that appealed to me.

Nowadays, there is little if any choice in film cameras for the casual photographer. Many compact cameras now are digital, small and cheap. Where the digital cameras of ten years ago featured perhaps a maximum of 2mp, todays cameras range from 8mp upwards. We are in the situation where those who don't know just believe more megapixels equals better quality photographs. The camera in the mobile phone has now reached 8mp and more despite not having the optics to support it.

My first digital camera was the Sony DSC-P200 - a high end (at the time) 7mp camera. This suited me until 2008 when I bought a Casio Exilim EX1080 10mp compact camera. It features little in the way of manual control, but is good for quick snaps. It was also in 2008 that I bought my first DSLR - the Nikon D80, and started taking photography much more seriously than before. I'm sure I've got a long way to go but my picture taking is vastly better than pre-2008 and a world away from 1999.

Digital photographs have also led to the reduction of printing (for me anyway). Most of my pictures are on my server's hard drive and are shown in a slide show on my general computer screen. One of my presents to my partner Kate was a digital photo frame. Ten years ago, I never would have thought that by the end of the noughties a device would exist that allows easy viewing of those files - a complete album or more on show on a bookshelf with pictures changing every 15 minutes. That's so much better than a static printed picture in a frame.

The Mobile Phone

I don't know if there is another device that has changed so much in ten years that it is almost unrecongisable compared to the earlier devices.

Ten years ago, my experience of the mobile was a device with a monochrome screen, simple games like snake and the best ways of communicating with it were by voice call on the 2G GSM mobile network or by SMS text message which became popular in the late 90's.

Within a year I had experienced the first stage of mobile internet connectivity via WAP. Looking back, this was pretty pointless but at the time I thought it was amazing. I could get online and look at websites designed solely for the mobile phone. I remember speaking to a work colleague in the early 2000s who simply did not believe that getting online via a mobile phone was possible. Yes it was crude and slow but it did work. Of course HTML browsing didn't exist on the mobile for a few more years, but by using a PDA such as a Psion Revo to connect via the mobile using it's infra-red connection did allow access to the full interent (albeit in low resolution monochrome).

Nowaday's my mobile has an always on internet connection either over the 3G mobile network or via WiFi. The phone (HTC T-Mobile G1) features a full colour touchscreen display, can play high quality audio files, play certain video files, take photographs and low quality video, automatically poll my Google account for emails, calendar updates and RSS reader updates and automatically receives updates to Twitter and Identi.ca. In short, the full internet is accessible via the built in browser with very few exceptions. Nowadays, a significant percentage of my internet time is via mobile phone.

Honourable Mentions

Obviously I can't talk in-depth about every technological development, so just to mention other things that have developed in the last decade:

Music downloads; online on-demand media (BBC iPlayer, ITV Player, 4OD etc., spotify, last fm and others.); worldwide internet gaming via consoles; casual online games such as flash games; the portable media player (NOT just the iPod, but all of the others); eBooks; and presumably many other things that have slipped my mind

Technology - Where next?

I'm not going to fall in to the trap of trying to predict what technology and the 21st century lifestyle will be like in another 10 years. I think the last decade has proven how difficult that would be. We'll likely see new technologies that very few of us can imagine. Existing technologies will be developed further. I can say with some confidence that computers will continue to become more powerful and mobile phones will do more further decreasing the need to sit at a desk to be connected to the online world.

Personally, I don't know where technology will be for me more than 2 years into the future. I'll likely obtain a surround sound amp and speakers to go with it before 2012 and also upgrade from a PS2 to Xbox 360. More than that though, I just don't know.

The last ten years personally

Outside of technology, the noughties has been very interesting for me. I started working in telesales before quickly starting work in an off-licence in April 2000. 3 1/2 years later, I found myself working for the local council via a temping agency and then in 2005 I became a permanent member of staff at my current job.

I passed my driving test in 2003 and have since bought and disposed of two cars - the first a Ford Fiesta which almost literally fell apart, and the second a Peaugot 405 which I sold for scrap when I no longer needed it or had anywhere to keep it. Now I'm back to not owning a vehicle although I do still drive.

I have moved home three times with Kate, in all cases moving into rented accomodation, before settling into our current flat which has for the most part served us well since 2007.

After a number of years listening to and using CB radio, I obtained my first amateur radio licence on 2001 before obtaining my full licence in 2007.

Happy New Year...Happy New Decade

So with that, what has become quite an essay for me, I'll sign-off with a Happy New Year for 2010 and a Happy New Decade for the Tens. Oh, and for the record I'll be saying twenty-ten.

0 comments | Related Entries: 0 | Related Links: 0 | Attachments:

Tags: gadgets, opinion, it's my life

Since obtaining my first DSLR camera in October last year, I haven't had the opportunity to try fireworks photography. So yesterday I found myself at the Maldon Promenade Fireworks Display fully kitted out to make a first attempt.

Before this event, my only other tries at photographing fireworks was by using handheld compact cameras. This time I had my DSLR, 18-55mm lens, tripod and remote release.

The worst element was deciding where to set up. By the time I arrived, the venue was already busy, so I choose a spot behind a bench (useful to protect the camera from knocks and bumps). Unfortunately a tree was right in front of me, but not having attended this event before, it really was guesswork for determining where the fireworks would launch from. As it happens the tree was directly between me and the fireworks but for the most part I don't think it mattered.

As the event started, I found myself franticly adjusting the position of the camera. I soon learnt that despite the stability requirements, I wouldn't be able to tighten the tripod too much as I'd need to frequently re-adjust for high up rockets, and lower fireworks.

Timing was another interesting variable which I had to learn fast. I was using the camera on bulb mode, so the shutter was open as long as I held the release. Early on I'd figured out a rough idea of how long to open the shutter, only to have that scuppered by brighter explosives. Throughout the evening I did spot checks to ensure that the pictures I was taking were coming out. Due to the fast nature of fireworks I couldn't check every picture.

So I've now been through the images and out of 166 taken, I've settled on 49 that I will keep. That's not to say that others were technically poor (although some were), but I was releasing the shutter so frequently that there was many similarities between some pictures.

In summary, from this one event, these are the tips that I am giving myself for next time:

• Use a tripod to ensure the camera is stable.

• Use a cable release so that the camera doesn't shake when the shutter is opened.

• Anticipate the best location to set up, being mindful of potential obstacles like trees and other people. Find a place where the camera/tripod is less likely to be knocked.

• Set the focus to manual so that the camera doesn't have to auto focus each time the shutter is released. Pre-adjust the focus so that this is ready before launch.

• Try and aim the camera before the first fireworks go up to minimise the amount of time taken to get that final position. Quickly use the first fireworks to confirm that the focus is sharp.

• Remember that brighter fireworks need a shorter exposure time than darker ones. I had exposure times varying between 2 seconds and nearly 10 seconds in a few instances.

• If using a digital camera, do spot checks on the pictures to ensure that the timings are good. Don't check every picture.

• Check through the viewfinder from time-to-time to ensure that fireworks are in-frame and to re-adjust the focus if necessary.

So for the most part, I'm quite pleased with my results. Therefore, I've published the selected 49 photographs in an album which can be found in the photography section, or by clicking on the link below.

0 comments | Related Entries: 0 | Related Links: 1 | Attachments:

Tags: photography

I know I said I wouldn't do anymore serious testing until I'd built a new PC, but I just couldn't help myself. Over the last few days I have been active on 20m with reasonable success.

After experimenting with different settings on the computer soundcard and the audio levels on my interface, I came to the conclusion that running the sound output from the PC at 100% for both the master volume and PCM volume was a bad idea.

I can't say why this didn't occur to me before especially considering I'd noticed audio distortion on other computers when listening to music with the levels at 100% - I'd always reduce them slightly with significant improvement. So it was, that after various tests I came to settle on the master volume at 90% and the PCM fader at approximately 50-60%. Further adjustments would then be made at the soundcard interface.

The other conclusion I came to - and this is almost certainly ludicrously obvious to all seasoned PSK operators out there - is that adjustments to the audio level need to be made after each change in frequency made on the computer. The higher the audio tones (higher frequencies) the louder the audio going in to the radio needs to be. When changing to lower frequencies, the audio volume needs to be reduced to maintain the same power level.

Now I've made these discoveries, I've had a lot more fun! Since I had today to myself, I decided to make it a radio day and have been pretty much stuck to the keyboard calling CQ and answering the calls of others. I'm still limited to around 10w of power since higher levels continue to interfere with the keyboard; but - and here is another revelation that will be obvious to the old-timers - power isn't everything.

To give an example of the success I have had today, I have made contacts with operators in Spain, Sweden, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Ukraine and Russia. Perhaps that doesn't sound too remarkable, but considering my balcony mounted whip aerial I'm very pleased. To top it off though, according to the PSKReporter map, which I monitored throughout the day, my signal was reported as being heard in Canada! That is something I'm really pleased about.

What I do find strange though is this keyboard interference. All day I have been transmitting with 10w of power - sometimes creeping up to 14w. The keyboard has been fine. A key may occasionally not respond but it was easily workable. However, about half an hour ago when working RX6BH in Russia, the keys became very unresponsive making typing during transmission a nightmare - it was slower than transmission rate of PSK31! I'm not sure why this would be. Nothing had changed. The power level was peaking at 10w initially, and I even reduced it slightly to no effect.

Actually, I'm wrong. Something had changed. I'd switched on the lights in the flat. Could that be what makes a difference?

5 comments | Related Entries: 1 | Related Links: 0 | Attachments:

Tags: amateur radio, psk31

Over the last month, I've been preparing my station to operate on digital modes by building a radio to soundcard interface. After various hurdles I finally got the device working and conducted my first on air test yesterday, using PSK31.

Unfortunately it wasn't overly successful. I can only get the radio to output around 10-12W maximum before the ALC kicks in causing horrendous noise on the signal. I also have some interference problems with my keyboard which makes operating difficult. It was originally the case that only a couple of watts of power would cause the keyboard to lock up (and the mouse too after a bit more power). Now I've enclosed my cheap USB hub and slack cable into a metal case to improve shielding. I've also added ferrite beads to the keyboard cable, mouse cable and the USB hub cable. Although it's improved the situation significantly, when the power level gets over about 8w, some keypresses are missed resulting in "wods tped ike is" (words typed like this).

Despite these problems, I did spend a good while calling CQ and had a very brief QSO with Cris, YO5OAW in Romania. We exchanged reports and location information but due to a fading signal and the problems typing I decided not to stop and chat. PSKReporter also showed my signals being received in Portugal and Rome.

Charlie M0PZT did suggest that using a laptop could be the cause of some problems due to its unshielded nature compared to a desktop PC. I think that's quite likely considering the monitor also receives interference which disappeared when testing with a desktop machine.

So before I try another serious attempt, I think I'll replace the laptop. I'll be building a cheap PC which I reckon can be done for less than £140.00 while still being a machine of fairly modern specification (Intel Celeron Dual Core 2.2GHz, 1GB DDR2 667MHz RAM, 80GB SATA HDD, Wireless LAN, onboard Realtek 5.1Ch audio, onboard Intel graphics) with room for expansion should I need it.

0 comments | Related Entries: 1 | Related Links: 1 | Attachments:

Tags: amateur radio, psk31

Just a quick note to say I visited the National Hamfest in Newark along with Charlie, M0PZT yesterday. It was quite a long trip - about 2.5 hours to get up there, but good fun.

I'd gone with a small shopping list in mind - nothing big, but some bits and pieces that I would find useful. Coming back with 6 out of 7 items suggests it was quite successful.

My haul included a book on HF aerials, a microphone/earpiece for my handheld, a new mag-mount for my 2m/70cm aerial, 2 variable capacitors, two 3.5mm stereo plug > 3.5mm stereo plug cables and a small 4-port USB hub. The only thing I couldn't find (and didn't really expect to find) was a USB to Serial adaptor.

The variable capacitors are needed for my next project which I'll be starting once I'm happy with my soundcard interface which I've been building over the last couple of weeks. I intend to build a small magnetic loop aerial - it'll be the first aerial I've constructed and hopefully will be quite useful in my limited space QTH.

I haven't mentioned the soundcard interface on this blog yet (although it's come up once or twice on Identica/Twitter). Once it's finished I'll do a write up with some photographs. My main stumbling block at the moment is the USB to Serial Port adaptor - the laptop I'm using for radio doesn't have a built in serial port. Curses to progress!

0 comments | Related Entries: 0 | Related Links: 0 | Attachments:

Tags: amateur radio, events

My friend Charlie, M0PZT has taken the time to write a piece of software which provides quick and easy access to the DX Cluster via the internet (telnet). ClusterClient, as it's known, recently received some good comments on the ICQPodcast and I decided to give it a try myself. The only issue being, I run Linux and the software is written for Windows.

Not to worry though. I spent some time last night figuring out if I could make it run and the short answer is yes I can. Thanks to this guide, now so can you!

It's actually very straight forward to get the software going in Linux, and it may well be much simpler than the guide tells you. I'm assuming that the computer being used does not have a copy of WINE installed, nor the appropriate DLL files. I should also mention that I have tested this in Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy Heron) and Ubuntu 9.04 (Jaunty Jackelope).

1. First we need to get a copy of the software. This is available from Charlie's site (see ClusterClient link, in Related Links below) - just scroll down the page until the Download link is visible. Download ZIP file and open it.

2. Extract the contents of the ZIP file to a suitable place on your computer. I've put it in /home/ben/ClusterClient/ but it doesn't really matter as long as you have full permissions to the folder.

3. Use the Applications > Accessories menu to access the terminal. Don't be scared of the terminal if you haven't used it before. It really is quite straight-forward.

4. In the terminal window, change to the directory containing ClusterClient. In my case I'd type the following code. Replace the directory structure with wherever you saved your copy of ClusterClient (remember it is case sensitive):

   cd /home/ben/ClusterClient

5. Again in the terminal window, type (or copy) this command to install WINE (the Microsoft Windows compatability layer) and cabextract:

   sudo apt-get install wine cabextract

   You will probably be asked for your password. This is normal and is required to confirm that you wish to make changes to your system i.e., install an application. After entering your password, if you are prompted to confirm installation, press Y

6. Once WINE is installed, we need to get a couple more files required by ClusterClient. These aren't available through the repository.

7. Still within the terminal window, type (or copy) the following command:

   wget http://www.kegel.com/wine/winetricks

   A few additional files will be placed in the currently selected folder; the ClusterClient folder if you followed Step 2 above.

8. The package downloaded will enable us to get those missing files, so type in the following command:

   sh winetricks comctl32.ocx vb6run

   When asked to confirm if you would like to the Visual Basic 6.0 Run Time files, click on Yes.

9. With any luck, that should now be it. Attempt to run ClusterClient from the terminal with this command:

   wine ClusterClient.exe

   After a few moments, the window should appear.

That's all there is to it. ClusterClient can now be run from the terminal at any time by opening the terminal window, changing to the ClusterClient directory and running the command above.

But that's not the easiest way to launch it. Follow these additional steps to add a launcher to the desktop:

1. Right-click on a blank area of the desktop to display the context menu

2. Choose 'Create Launcher...'

3. A window will appear. Complete the following details (remember, the directory in Command will need to be whatever is applicable in your case):
   Type: Application
   Name: ClusterClient
   Command: wine /home/ben/ClusterClient/ClusterClient.exe
   Comment: ClusterClient by Charlie, M0PZT

4. Click OK

5. An icon will now be on your desktop. Just double-click to launch ClusterClient

Simples!

3 comments | Related Entries: 0 | Related Links: 3 | Attachments:

Tags: amateur radio, software

Over the last couple of weeks, I have been racing along with the development of my amateur radio station. Starting off with the purchase of a HF/6m whip aerial, through to buying my first HF transceiver (Yaesu FT-450) to setting up the IT side of things. It is here that I have hit a snag.

The modern radio shack isn't complete without a computer. Whether it is used for logging, decoding digital signals or just looking up callsigns; it must be said that it is a pretty indispensable piece of equipment. Because my setup is in the living room of my flat, I needed a solution that was low profile and quiet.

Fortunately, I had access to an old laptop (IBM Thinkpad R50e) which has a broken LCD screen. Perfect I thought. Connect up an LCD monitor, keyboard and mouse and there's my solution. I've attached some brackets to my desk so that the machine is out of the way and today I connected up the peripherals.

Being quite sure the machine worked, I wasn't to worried about the big switch on but I do have a record of things dieing at this point so I was pleased to see it all spring to life even just running off the battery which hadn't been charged for a while. I did of course connect the mains adaptor too.

And it is this that is the problem. When connecting the mains adaptor to the laptop, it wipes out my radio with +20dB of noise making most (if not all) signals unreadable. To confirm it was the power supply; I unplugged it (after which the signal meter fell to a much more reasonable S3), tuned about on 20m until I found a signal and then plugged it back in again. Lo-and-behold, the noise floor rose and the signal dissappeared.

So now I'm on the search for a solution that doesn't involve me giving up on the laptop and putting in a desktop computer. I can charge the laptop battery when not using the radio and then unplug it when I'm operating but that's a little inconvenient.

I did get to wondering whether the laptop would run from my DC power supply at 13.8V. I checked the laptop's power block which is rated at 16V 4.5A. No problem providing the amps, but I'm a little short on the volts. However, the battery is rated at 10v. I'm thinking that perhaps running without a battery, I could get away with it. However, I'm also wondering if there is a chance of damage to the laptop or power supply.

I'm going to have to do some more research.

2 comments | Related Entries: 0 | Related Links: 0 | Attachments:

Tags: amateur radio