2025-10-31 — LinHT Article (by the developers), MESHCON 2025 is a Wakeup Call, Test Bench in a Hand, N8GNJ Standby Battery System, direwolf 1.8, New AllScan USB Radio Interfaces, MMDVM Update
Steve, I don’t know if you’re familiar with the distributor PowerWerx. They’re a great source for most all my DC power distribution components. https://powerwerx.com/dc-power-products
Also, for things like power monitoring, smart chargers, etc it’s very hard to beat Victron. I have a couple of their SmartShunt devices (among other things). The Victron gadgets (power monitors, smart chargers, solar controllers, etc) all have Bluetooth interfaces. They have a nice phone app for reporting data and setting parameters, etc. No Windows computer needed. And their devices talk to each other as needed. No cheap, but great quality.
Craig - I was aware of PowerWerx, but it's been quite a while since I looked at their product line (which includes West Mountain Radio's power products).
I was also aware of Victron though they were a bit out of scope for this project (not just cost). But I've heard the same glowing reports from a few others, including some serious techie boaters. If I had to do a "serious" battery power system (such as a communications van) I would definitely use Victron components.
Re zero degrees charging (and use), I contacted Bioenno, they recommend using an insulated box (I got a picnic cooler for my 100 AHr), 12v silicon pad low wattage heater, and thermostat.
Yes, amateur radio is hamstrung by the encryption and broadcast (and other) restrictions, as well as the licensing barrier to entry. On the other hand, there are many areas of technological experimentation and radio operations where ham radio is a more fertile field. The Venn diagram has enough overlap that both ham and Meshtastic-types can cross-pollinate.
I do know that there is some Meshtastic operation in the San Juan Islands (between Vancouver Island and the WA State mainland). As for the license-free bands, don't overlook the 13.x MHz ISM bands. You won't be doing any fast networking, but there is enough bandwidth available for experimenting and DX propagation.
Paul - The point I was trying to make was that (my perception, anyway) the Meshtastic folks are happily off doing their thing using Meshtastic, etc. using unlicensed spectrum, and they're not looking "next door" at Amateur Radio and finding much that is useful to them.
You've mentioned the 13.x ISM band previously, but I haven't found any references to it. Could you provide some reference for further study?
I believe the 13MHz ISM band is used for RFID and NFC systems. According to one random web page https://www.tesswave.com/what-are-the-ism-frequency-bands/ there is a 14 kHz wide allocation at 13.56 MHz. Given all the phones that can access NFC cards, I wonder if there's always some low-level of transmit activity from all these smartphones surrounding us that could make some applications for communications/beacons... troublesome.
I honestly don't know the rules on this beyond what is referenced in the above link, but I do know that people are sending very low-power WSPR on this band and getting worldwide reports. And obviously people are receiving on this band.
I would be interested in very low-speed mesh networking for remote telemetry applications on this band. With no restrictions on broadcasting, encryption, modulation, etc., this could actually be useful.
Paul - Agreed! One of the things that were overlooked with the "junk bands" for communications use is that improving technology with FEC and other robust modulation methods meant that even with significant "interference", they were usable for new types of communications. The eye opener for me was WSPR, and how extensive the communications could be with very low power. I like these "HF Underground" folks for their extensive coverage of the possibilities.
Regarding encryption, I've come to believe this is an area of Part 97 that's actually quite permissive and progressive. It merely prohibits encoding messages *for the purpose of obscuring their meaning*. For once, the FCC doesn't actually prohibit (or allow) any particular technology, they actually regulate the intent.
To me, this means if I encrypt some messages and then publish the keys in a conspicuous, public location, my purpose is clearly not to obscure the meaning of the messages. This helps when the desire is to reuse Internet technologies that have encryption "baked in".
However, I have yet to hear of a legitimate situation where hams really want private comms not covered by exceptions in Part 97. What they most often want is actually authentication: to prove that something came from them and no one else, be that telecommand of a device or similar. This is also easily done and doesn't contravene Part 97 in my opinion. A cryptographic signature appended to the end of a message does not obscure meaning if the message is unencrypted. Amazingly, ARRL (perhaps by accident) already developed everything we need to do this as part of LOTW:
They could easily publish the root certs and everyone's public keys. Then, you could sign anything with your private key and it would be verifiable. It really just needs someone with the time/funding to tie it all together. Perhaps a fertile area for a grant...
I agree, encryption to obscure seems unnecessary and against the spirit of ham radio. On the other hand, authentication could be a critical capability.
Justin - The primary reason I've heard cited for retaining the prohibition against "deliberate obfuscation", that I have some sympathy with, is the retaining the ability to "audit" a communication in Amateur Radio spectrum that it's not commercial use, or broadcasting, or other prohibited types of communication. If encryption was allowed, you wouldn't be able to know.
The reason I hear cited most often that encryption is "needed" is the (mostly hypothetical, that I've heard) transmission of medical information under emergency communications - the "HIPPA" bogeyreason. The second most cited reason encryption is "needed" is that folks of this (technical) generation kind of take it for granted that all modern communications are encrypted as a routine matter of safety of communications. As in "why WOULDN'T you routinely encrypt a communication, just like everyone else does?"
One nagging issue is interconnection with Internet. One glaring example, that I intend to cite when this issue inevitably comes up in a proposed US rules update is that it's impossible to query the FCC website to do a callsign lookup... without encryption (HTTPS). Radio Amateurs of Canada have worked it out with their regulator that putting keys in escrow when encryption is used is acceptable, and that seems like a reasonable compromise.
But to your main point, yes, authentication is useful, and in many cases needed. I'm really proud that M17 experimentally added transmission authentication, and that seems like a good idea going forward to add that to new Amateur Radio communications systems in development.
Figuring out how to do that easily and decentralized would be a very useful thing to do a research and development grant. One way I could imagine is regular broadcasts / bulletins of public key signatures (which, itself would have to be authenticated, of course).
Steve, appreciate the thoughtful response as always!
I forgot to mention this but it's not clear to me that the FCC even has the authority to allow encryption in the general case, as they're treaty-bound by ITU Radio Regulations (25.2A) from which the "encoding for the purpose of obscuring meaning" phrasing appears to directly come from. Perhaps that would only apply to international communications though, not purely domestic. But if you're connecting to the Internet in an unrestricted way, can you guarantee it's not going international? The issue is thorny! I think I would argue it would take an act of Congress to allow it in the way you want.
Boogeyman is a good word for the HIPAA thing, because there's nothing under the bed. It might be the most misunderstood law in the US. Standard I-am-not-a-lawyer disclaimer aside, ham radio operators, and even groups like the Red Cross are not "Covered Entities" and thus HIPAA does not apply. Not to mention waivers of HIPAA have been applied for and granted in disasters even for covered entities. In any case, I remain of the opinion that SHARES is the more appropriate vehicle for much of our "emcomm Winlink" activities.
From a broader perspective, I'm not sure we want to go all the way down the road of Internet integration. In some ways, despite my background, I kind of like that amateur radio is "separate" and doesn't have the baggage associated with what the Internet has become (we have plenty of our own baggage!). I guess this is where the "but we do it everywhere else" argument falls flat for me. I haven't spent the time to put that handwavy idea into a cogent argument, but it's something I've been mulling for a while.
Check page 9 of the Epic Powergate manual: USB settable parameters.
Just hook up a cable, open your favorite serial communications software (PuTTY, Serial, minicom), make sure you get clean text showing various status parameters updated every second, then hit enter and you'll get a configuration menu.
One of my to-do list items is to build an ESP32 interface for my Powergate with a web interface, but pretty far down since it's basically a set-and-forget device.
Steve, the Anderson Powerpole 15/45 series is rated at 32 A according to Anderson. The SB50 is rated far higher, up to 120 A. And a 40-Ah battery will not supply 40 A for 1 hour. Batteries like that are rated at either 10 or 20 hours, so maybe 2 A for 20 hours. A higher discharge rate results in a smaller capacity, but 10 or 20 hours is industry standard.
Interesting... Here's the reply from West Mountain Radio Technical Support about the Bioenno battery's two connectors:
The big one is used if you plan to charge/discharge above 45A. The Epic is only rated for 40A so the smaller Power Pole is right.
> but 10 or 20 hours is industry standard.
I'm guessing you meant 10 or 20 amps...
In any case, I think my typical load is around 5A with brief peaks of 10 or so when transmitting. I just started working on setting up the new system today.
No, hours, the other half of Amp-hours. You will not get 20 Amps for 2 hours (maybe 75 minutes), but you might get 1 Amp for 50 (is more than 40) hours…. Amp-hours is not linear, higher discharge rates means fewer amp-hours. They test for Ah at a standard discharge time if 10 or 20 hours for small batteries like this one.
Don - Fair points, all - thanks for the voice of experience in this discussion (and my new power system planning). As I said, with my previous power system and the larger 100 Ah AGM battery, I mostly didn't worry about power load, discharge curves, etc. as I had "ample" capacity... until the battery aged out and I didn't. With a 40 Ah battery, NOW I'm going to be paying attention to such things and will test, and plan accordingly.
Douglas - No, not missing anything. Apparently the existence of OpenGD77 is old news, I was unaware of OpenGD77 until now. OpenGD77 was mentioned in the context that perhaps because it's open source, perhaps the parameters (not just the user interface) of a stock DMR radio could be changed to, for example, use the two timeslots for simultaneous transmit AND receive.
Douglas - I don't know about "hard to get" but yes, OpenGD77 seems only applicable to certain models / brands of DMR radios sold to the Amateur Radio market. I haven't studied OpenGD77 closely, only glanced briefly at the info after I was made aware of it last week.
For the Bioenno battery charging, I bought my 1230A from Powerwerx at SEA-PAC 2023(?), and I opted for the fast charger (up to 10 Ah), because they reminded me that you could charge the LiFePo batteries up to 1/3 of the rated capacity (i.e., a 30 Ah battery can charge at up to 10 Ah...). Thus, the smaller powerpole connector could be connected to the charger, and then use a 3-powerpole splitter of that 50A grey connector. (TIP: The metal connectors for that 50A shell are a PITA to crimp without special tools. You may do well to buy that harness.)
The 1230A worked well for Field Day loads, and I now have (2) 1210A and (1) 1206A, but I use slower (less current) chargers for those.
Also at SEA-PAC 2023, 2024, there was a terrific 2-hour session on using Solar Power for Emergency Services. Clark County (WA) ARES folks presented a firehose of information, and the presentations are on the SEA-PAC website, with clues about charging with two panels in series, about which solar chargers are RF-noisy on HF, tips for shielding, and for power distribution. The slides are good, but being at the talk was even better.
David - Thanks for the great tips for the Bioenno batteries. I wasn't able to find an SB50 to 3 PowerPole splitter - only this Powerwerx SB50 to 2 PowerPole splitter (https://powerwerx.com/sb50-gray-dual-pp45-adapter-cable)... though I think I recall seeing those triple splitters at conferences (but never had any need, until now).
I've heard other references to that seminar at SEA-PAC. Thanks for the reminder!
Steve, I don’t know if you’re familiar with the distributor PowerWerx. They’re a great source for most all my DC power distribution components. https://powerwerx.com/dc-power-products
Also, for things like power monitoring, smart chargers, etc it’s very hard to beat Victron. I have a couple of their SmartShunt devices (among other things). The Victron gadgets (power monitors, smart chargers, solar controllers, etc) all have Bluetooth interfaces. They have a nice phone app for reporting data and setting parameters, etc. No Windows computer needed. And their devices talk to each other as needed. No cheap, but great quality.
Craig - I was aware of PowerWerx, but it's been quite a while since I looked at their product line (which includes West Mountain Radio's power products).
I was also aware of Victron though they were a bit out of scope for this project (not just cost). But I've heard the same glowing reports from a few others, including some serious techie boaters. If I had to do a "serious" battery power system (such as a communications van) I would definitely use Victron components.
Re zero degrees charging (and use), I contacted Bioenno, they recommend using an insulated box (I got a picnic cooler for my 100 AHr), 12v silicon pad low wattage heater, and thermostat.
Christian - The insulated box is a very good idea - Thanks!
Meshtastic-
Yes, amateur radio is hamstrung by the encryption and broadcast (and other) restrictions, as well as the licensing barrier to entry. On the other hand, there are many areas of technological experimentation and radio operations where ham radio is a more fertile field. The Venn diagram has enough overlap that both ham and Meshtastic-types can cross-pollinate.
I do know that there is some Meshtastic operation in the San Juan Islands (between Vancouver Island and the WA State mainland). As for the license-free bands, don't overlook the 13.x MHz ISM bands. You won't be doing any fast networking, but there is enough bandwidth available for experimenting and DX propagation.
Paul - The point I was trying to make was that (my perception, anyway) the Meshtastic folks are happily off doing their thing using Meshtastic, etc. using unlicensed spectrum, and they're not looking "next door" at Amateur Radio and finding much that is useful to them.
You've mentioned the 13.x ISM band previously, but I haven't found any references to it. Could you provide some reference for further study?
I believe the 13MHz ISM band is used for RFID and NFC systems. According to one random web page https://www.tesswave.com/what-are-the-ism-frequency-bands/ there is a 14 kHz wide allocation at 13.56 MHz. Given all the phones that can access NFC cards, I wonder if there's always some low-level of transmit activity from all these smartphones surrounding us that could make some applications for communications/beacons... troublesome.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_radio_band for another enumeration of the various ISM bands, including this one.
Here's some more info: https://www.hfunderground.com/wiki/HiFER
I honestly don't know the rules on this beyond what is referenced in the above link, but I do know that people are sending very low-power WSPR on this band and getting worldwide reports. And obviously people are receiving on this band.
I would be interested in very low-speed mesh networking for remote telemetry applications on this band. With no restrictions on broadcasting, encryption, modulation, etc., this could actually be useful.
Paul - Agreed! One of the things that were overlooked with the "junk bands" for communications use is that improving technology with FEC and other robust modulation methods meant that even with significant "interference", they were usable for new types of communications. The eye opener for me was WSPR, and how extensive the communications could be with very low power. I like these "HF Underground" folks for their extensive coverage of the possibilities.
There is also a small group doing APRS Lora on 440 MHZ using the same inexpensive Lora devices.
https://lora-aprs.live/
Steve N0FPF
Steven - Yeah, I gotta check that out. Thanks for the reminder!
Regarding encryption, I've come to believe this is an area of Part 97 that's actually quite permissive and progressive. It merely prohibits encoding messages *for the purpose of obscuring their meaning*. For once, the FCC doesn't actually prohibit (or allow) any particular technology, they actually regulate the intent.
To me, this means if I encrypt some messages and then publish the keys in a conspicuous, public location, my purpose is clearly not to obscure the meaning of the messages. This helps when the desire is to reuse Internet technologies that have encryption "baked in".
However, I have yet to hear of a legitimate situation where hams really want private comms not covered by exceptions in Part 97. What they most often want is actually authentication: to prove that something came from them and no one else, be that telecommand of a device or similar. This is also easily done and doesn't contravene Part 97 in my opinion. A cryptographic signature appended to the end of a message does not obscure meaning if the message is unencrypted. Amazingly, ARRL (perhaps by accident) already developed everything we need to do this as part of LOTW:
https://github.com/Mihara/lotw-trust
They could easily publish the root certs and everyone's public keys. Then, you could sign anything with your private key and it would be verifiable. It really just needs someone with the time/funding to tie it all together. Perhaps a fertile area for a grant...
I agree, encryption to obscure seems unnecessary and against the spirit of ham radio. On the other hand, authentication could be a critical capability.
Paul - Yep! See above.
Justin - The primary reason I've heard cited for retaining the prohibition against "deliberate obfuscation", that I have some sympathy with, is the retaining the ability to "audit" a communication in Amateur Radio spectrum that it's not commercial use, or broadcasting, or other prohibited types of communication. If encryption was allowed, you wouldn't be able to know.
The reason I hear cited most often that encryption is "needed" is the (mostly hypothetical, that I've heard) transmission of medical information under emergency communications - the "HIPPA" bogeyreason. The second most cited reason encryption is "needed" is that folks of this (technical) generation kind of take it for granted that all modern communications are encrypted as a routine matter of safety of communications. As in "why WOULDN'T you routinely encrypt a communication, just like everyone else does?"
One nagging issue is interconnection with Internet. One glaring example, that I intend to cite when this issue inevitably comes up in a proposed US rules update is that it's impossible to query the FCC website to do a callsign lookup... without encryption (HTTPS). Radio Amateurs of Canada have worked it out with their regulator that putting keys in escrow when encryption is used is acceptable, and that seems like a reasonable compromise.
But to your main point, yes, authentication is useful, and in many cases needed. I'm really proud that M17 experimentally added transmission authentication, and that seems like a good idea going forward to add that to new Amateur Radio communications systems in development.
Figuring out how to do that easily and decentralized would be a very useful thing to do a research and development grant. One way I could imagine is regular broadcasts / bulletins of public key signatures (which, itself would have to be authenticated, of course).
Steve, appreciate the thoughtful response as always!
I forgot to mention this but it's not clear to me that the FCC even has the authority to allow encryption in the general case, as they're treaty-bound by ITU Radio Regulations (25.2A) from which the "encoding for the purpose of obscuring meaning" phrasing appears to directly come from. Perhaps that would only apply to international communications though, not purely domestic. But if you're connecting to the Internet in an unrestricted way, can you guarantee it's not going international? The issue is thorny! I think I would argue it would take an act of Congress to allow it in the way you want.
Boogeyman is a good word for the HIPAA thing, because there's nothing under the bed. It might be the most misunderstood law in the US. Standard I-am-not-a-lawyer disclaimer aside, ham radio operators, and even groups like the Red Cross are not "Covered Entities" and thus HIPAA does not apply. Not to mention waivers of HIPAA have been applied for and granted in disasters even for covered entities. In any case, I remain of the opinion that SHARES is the more appropriate vehicle for much of our "emcomm Winlink" activities.
From a broader perspective, I'm not sure we want to go all the way down the road of Internet integration. In some ways, despite my background, I kind of like that amateur radio is "separate" and doesn't have the baggage associated with what the Internet has become (we have plenty of our own baggage!). I guess this is where the "but we do it everywhere else" argument falls flat for me. I haven't spent the time to put that handwavy idea into a cogent argument, but it's something I've been mulling for a while.
Check page 9 of the Epic Powergate manual: USB settable parameters.
Just hook up a cable, open your favorite serial communications software (PuTTY, Serial, minicom), make sure you get clean text showing various status parameters updated every second, then hit enter and you'll get a configuration menu.
One of my to-do list items is to build an ESP32 interface for my Powergate with a web interface, but pretty far down since it's basically a set-and-forget device.
Steve, the Anderson Powerpole 15/45 series is rated at 32 A according to Anderson. The SB50 is rated far higher, up to 120 A. And a 40-Ah battery will not supply 40 A for 1 hour. Batteries like that are rated at either 10 or 20 hours, so maybe 2 A for 20 hours. A higher discharge rate results in a smaller capacity, but 10 or 20 hours is industry standard.
Interesting... Here's the reply from West Mountain Radio Technical Support about the Bioenno battery's two connectors:
The big one is used if you plan to charge/discharge above 45A. The Epic is only rated for 40A so the smaller Power Pole is right.
> but 10 or 20 hours is industry standard.
I'm guessing you meant 10 or 20 amps...
In any case, I think my typical load is around 5A with brief peaks of 10 or so when transmitting. I just started working on setting up the new system today.
No, hours, the other half of Amp-hours. You will not get 20 Amps for 2 hours (maybe 75 minutes), but you might get 1 Amp for 50 (is more than 40) hours…. Amp-hours is not linear, higher discharge rates means fewer amp-hours. They test for Ah at a standard discharge time if 10 or 20 hours for small batteries like this one.
Don - Fair points, all - thanks for the voice of experience in this discussion (and my new power system planning). As I said, with my previous power system and the larger 100 Ah AGM battery, I mostly didn't worry about power load, discharge curves, etc. as I had "ample" capacity... until the battery aged out and I didn't. With a 40 Ah battery, NOW I'm going to be paying attention to such things and will test, and plan accordingly.
Concerning OpenGD77.
I find glowing reports, but the most current git repository is 4 or more years old.
Have I missed something?
Douglas - No, not missing anything. Apparently the existence of OpenGD77 is old news, I was unaware of OpenGD77 until now. OpenGD77 was mentioned in the context that perhaps because it's open source, perhaps the parameters (not just the user interface) of a stock DMR radio could be changed to, for example, use the two timeslots for simultaneous transmit AND receive.
So this is a software modify of hardware that may be hard to get?
Douglas - I don't know about "hard to get" but yes, OpenGD77 seems only applicable to certain models / brands of DMR radios sold to the Amateur Radio market. I haven't studied OpenGD77 closely, only glanced briefly at the info after I was made aware of it last week.
For the Bioenno battery charging, I bought my 1230A from Powerwerx at SEA-PAC 2023(?), and I opted for the fast charger (up to 10 Ah), because they reminded me that you could charge the LiFePo batteries up to 1/3 of the rated capacity (i.e., a 30 Ah battery can charge at up to 10 Ah...). Thus, the smaller powerpole connector could be connected to the charger, and then use a 3-powerpole splitter of that 50A grey connector. (TIP: The metal connectors for that 50A shell are a PITA to crimp without special tools. You may do well to buy that harness.)
The 1230A worked well for Field Day loads, and I now have (2) 1210A and (1) 1206A, but I use slower (less current) chargers for those.
Also at SEA-PAC 2023, 2024, there was a terrific 2-hour session on using Solar Power for Emergency Services. Clark County (WA) ARES folks presented a firehose of information, and the presentations are on the SEA-PAC website, with clues about charging with two panels in series, about which solar chargers are RF-noisy on HF, tips for shielding, and for power distribution. The slides are good, but being at the talk was even better.
David - Thanks for the great tips for the Bioenno batteries. I wasn't able to find an SB50 to 3 PowerPole splitter - only this Powerwerx SB50 to 2 PowerPole splitter (https://powerwerx.com/sb50-gray-dual-pp45-adapter-cable)... though I think I recall seeing those triple splitters at conferences (but never had any need, until now).
I've heard other references to that seminar at SEA-PAC. Thanks for the reminder!