The best solution is then regulation by bandwdth so that text and data can be sent in the current phone/image segment. The rtty/data segments could become the 500 Hz bandwidth segments, the phone/image segments the 3 kHz bandwidth segments, and there could be 6 kHz and 50 Hz bandwidth segments at the top and bottom for AM and CW.
73, John KD6ZOH ----- Original Message ----- From: W2XJ To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 23:46 UTC Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Your excellent petition Demetre SV1UY wrote: > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, W2XJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>If you go to the SCS website, it clearly states that PACTORIII is >>designed for commercial operation, especially maritime. They then > > have a > >>tanned rich German guy on the website giving a testimonial how the >>system works from his yacht. If people want to tie up marine > > frequencies > >>with such a low speed system, fine. Personally I think if one can > > afford > >>a sea going vessel with an installed ham station, they can carry >>Immarsat and move data at 64 kbps. This has no place on amateur > > frequencies. > > > So are all the radios we use, ICOM, YAESU, KENWOOD, ALINCO to name a > few. Are they commercial too? Noone is going to make something for > nothing OM. These are all commercial radios and we like to call them > Amateur because we like to use them. Same with the SCS modems. As for > the rich tanned German guy, is it illegal to be rich and tanned now? > > Should we ban from the hobby the tanned rich Germans now? > > 73 de Demetre SV1UY > > You miss all my points. I suspect you prefer it that way. Point 1 the website states that PACTOR III is designed for SSB HF channels. They also link to a number of commercial maritime service providers. This is the intended use. At least in the US and probably elsewhere, this on it's face makes the system illegal for amateur use since text and data can not be transmitted in the SSB band segment and SSB width signals are not permitted in the text data segments. It is a very simply a system designed for primarily marine channels and serviced by commercial gateways. My comment about the German guy speaks to selfish abuse of the amateur bands. If he has the money to be cruising the Mediterranean in his yacht, he can afford to pay a commercial PACTOR gateway and/or use immarsat. Immarsat is a superior solution to begin with. It would be interesting to see just how much PACTOR traffic violates various amateur rules pertaining to content and third party relay. In this country it could be argued that it also violates rules that pertain to automated stations. I am contemplating the purchase of an SCS TNC just to turn in the violators.
