Dave AA6YQ wrote:
IDing in CW has the benefits that its universally understood, requires
no decoding software, and is trivial to implement.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
-----Original Message-----
*From:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of *Jack Chomley
*Sent:* Sunday, January 06, 2008 3:28 PM
*To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
*Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Re: Pactor on 30 M
At 04:57 AM 1/7/2008, Rick wrote:
>I sure wish more hams would work on solving this problem, rather than
>exacerbating the situation and being part of the problem.
>
>Just a few minutes ago I was trying to have a Q with VE5MU using FAE 400
>around 10137. A Pactor station starting transmitting right over our
>frequency.
>
>It is really unbelievable how hams think this is acceptable. It is just
>plain illegal operation. Period. There is no other way to call it. The
>Pactor station was S-9 at my location so I doubt very much if that
>station did not hear one of us and we had been on for quite some time
>before that happened.
>
>73,
>
>Rick, KV9U
I bet that guy did not have a clue, he has a hardware box that can
only use Amtor/Pactor. probably PSK31 and a couple of other
modes.....most of which he can't, or has never used. He has probably
never been on any Internet forums or newsgroups, so he has not a clue
what is going on in the digital world of Ham Radio, nor does he
probably care.
I would cite a lack of knowledge of modes and bandwidths etc on his
part, maybe he thinks the various digital modes all have retrys and
error correction......so it will just sort itself out and all modes
will simply "share" frequencies!
Yesterday, I was on 20m and I heard a stack of signals which were not
Pactor (I had a Pactor sked setup) I switched to PSK31 on my hardware
box....no go. I fired up HRD on my SLUSB, still no go :-( I was not
sure what signals they were, to be able to try and resolve them,
being just interested in what they were. Being a little tone deaf and
not having an intimate knowledge of all the modes and what they sound
like, did not help me.
Were they MT63? PSK250? I don't know............ If you run Digipan,
you have no hope!
With the increasing number of new modes being developed, the problem
will get worse :-( Add the coming of improved propagation and this
will become a spectrum quagmire in which no one will be able to
operate easily.
We have all helped create the mess we have. A gazillion software
programs, all doing their "own thing" some with many modes and
expanding more modes, nearly daily, others that don't have so many modes.
No software that I know of has a decoder function, with an "identify
signal" menu. Unless the software guys can come up with something
like that as an integrated or standalone solution, the schemozzle
will get worse.
IF people can identify a signal, with callsigns, they will be less
inclined to interfere with it, if a operator can't resolve a
signal.....they probably care a lot less about any interference to it.
Sadly, only soundcard software solutions can be given this signal
decoder ability, hardware boxes are a different deal. You need
operator digital modes knowledge too, many people do not know what
all the modes sound like, I know I don't, even though I have a
recording of mode sounds that someone on the group was good enough to
post!
Now, this is not bagging all the good people, who do software
development for the benefit of Hams, for little or no cost BUT......
Someone bright enough to do it.......is going to have to write that
"signal decoder" program very soon.........otherwise this whole
problem will get worse. Fixing the WinLink problem is another deal
altogether.
73s
Jack VK4JRC
Hi Dave.... CW id is not universally understood......i for one have a
hearing problem and CW is very difficult for me to hear let alone
decode...also what about those who are deaf...we do have a number of
them around the world... most are now using digital modes....i have
worked a deaf op on PSK31 and i wouldnt have known he was deaf until he
told me...
today there are also many new hams who havent had to learn CW as it is
no longer a requirement for a HF licence in most countries...
73 David VK4BDJ
