View Single Post
Old 02-08-2008, 01:01 PM   #4
Manual Garcia O'Kely
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 96
Default

Well, I read the first part, up to the point of the technical description of Pactor III.

Well, he wants to restrict the variable bandwidth of Pactor III operation, and further restrict unattended station operations for running WinLink/AirMail.

Overall, it seems pretty sensible in that it does not eliminate the mode, only restricts P III to a controlled bandwidth of 1.5K. That is the only system restricted - RTTY, Amtor, PSK, QPSK all meet this requirement.

His arguement about the automated nature of P III [which if you did not know, uses MORE bandwidth as conditions improve - so as propogation gets better, more and more stations will overlap] makes a fair bit of sense, particularly when accompanied by users who cannot verify adjacent frequency intereference prior to use of expanded bandwidth.

I'm not sure how I feel about this idea. I'm personally not a huge digital user and don't use WinLink or P III at all. I have no idea why I would want to use my HF radio to send e-mail, which seems to be the primary purpose. Given that even HF e-mail service is available commercially at very low cost, I see no compelling reason to permit it to run unrestricted on Amateur bands. Because there is no way to prevent or monitor commercial activity taking place in these communications IMHO it violates the spirit, if not the letter, of our regulations.

Well, we will see if this petition gets any traction.
Manual Garcia O'Kely is offline   Reply With Quote