[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, W2XJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Demetre SV1UY wrote: First of all not many can afford a satellite phone, which is also not amateur radio. A satellite phone plus connection fees are far more expensive than a PACTOR MODEM. Second many do not even have the luxury of a UHF link, nor are they near a town, so HF is playing a viable role in their communications. This is where PACTOR 3 comes and solves their problem. Also when everything has gone down in an emergency, PACTOR 3 can give you reliable communications using a PACTOR mailbox that resides in a neighbouring country. Sometimes through the night when I cannot access any European PACTOR PMBOS because I do not have a decent 80 meters antenna It looks like your Internet connection to this list is working fine. Are you using PACTOR? I only use PACTOR regularly when I am away from home and only when I want to make test PACTOR connection OM. At home it is not very efficient to use PACTOR except for PACTOR QSOs, which are also condemned and QRMed by some LIDS in this list. 73 de Demetre SV1UY
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: QRM from PMBOs and other deaf robots spoils the enjoyment of amateur radio for many operators Demetre. That's why so many are willing to do practically anything to make WinLink stop generating QRM. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists; Ack *this*. You see now why the PBMOs cannot install any DCD mechanism that detects QRM and they leave the busy detection to be the responsibility of the client? Because people like you would misuse such a mechanism and the PMBOs would be rendered useless. This is a VERY bad practice that you and your followers excercise and hence you should have your license revoked for this action you just admitted yourself. Anyway please comment to your daddy (the FCC) as you like, although you do understand you are wrong, and if you have a PACTOR MODEM and have not understood it's use yet then I am sorry for you because nothing comes even close to PACTOR 3 for emergency comms OM. 73, Dave, AA6YQ 73 de Demetre SV1UY
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
+++ more AA6YQ comments below --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: QRM from PMBOs and other deaf robots spoils the enjoyment of amateur radio for many operators Demetre. That's why so many are willing to do practically anything to make WinLink stop generating QRM. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists; Ack *this*. You see now why the PBMOs cannot install any DCD mechanism that detects QRM and they leave the busy detection to be the responsibility of the client? Because people like you would misuse such a mechanism and the PMBOs would be rendered useless. This is a VERY bad practice that you and your followers excercise and hence you should have your license revoked for this action you just admitted yourself. +++Demetre, an anti-radiation missile is a weapon typically used to destroy air-defense radars by locking onto their transmitter frequency. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists was a humorous way of pointing out that PMBO QRM has generated widespread and massive frustration. Nowhere in this message -- or any other message I have posted -- do I advocate QRMing PMBOs. This sort of action would be as irreponsible as using or operating a PMBO, and I have made that point here on several occasions. +++I have heard the argument that WinLink can't now apply busy- frequency detectors because the amateur radio community is so angry at them for years of QRM that operators would camp on PMBO frequencies just to prevent them functioning. This argument is completely bogus - just another rationalization for continuing to generate QRM. While a few operators might QRM a few PMBOs for a few days, the effect would be minimal. Even the most perverse human operator won't sit at a station continuously just to QRM an automated station. He or she will get bored and go bother someone more likely to provide a reaction. 73, Dave, AA6YQ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
IMNSHO malicious interference, interference that prevents or interrupts a QSO on a frequency from any source is ILLEGAL by the existing rules. The fact that this rule is not being enforced should generate information to the FCC on these interferences and requests to the same agency to clean it up. If I were operating on a frequency and one of these stations climbed on MY frequency (yes, I own it while operating on it legally) a report would go to the FCC the same day with time, frequency, and any identifying information on the interfering station. The squeaky wheel concept. Again in MO, any station operating unattended and generating RF interfering signals should NEVER be allowed on Amateur frequencies. If any persons/organizations wishes to operate in this fashion they should apply for licenses and frequency assignments that allow this type of operation. It certainly is more commercial than hobby. 73 Les At 01:36 PM 12/27/2007, you wrote: +++ more AA6YQ comments below --- In mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.comdigitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: QRM from PMBOs and other deaf robots spoils the enjoyment of amateur radio for many operators Demetre. That's why so many are willing to do practically anything to make WinLink stop generating QRM. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists; Ack *this*. You see now why the PBMOs cannot install any DCD mechanism that detects QRM and they leave the busy detection to be the responsibility of the client? Because people like you would misuse such a mechanism and the PMBOs would be rendered useless. This is a VERY bad practice that you and your followers excercise and hence you should have your license revoked for this action you just admitted yourself. +++Demetre, an anti-radiation missile is a weapon typically used to destroy air-defense radars by locking onto their transmitter frequency. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists was a humorous way of pointing out that PMBO QRM has generated widespread and massive frustration. Nowhere in this message -- or any other message I have posted -- do I advocate QRMing PMBOs. This sort of action would be as irreponsible as using or operating a PMBO, and I have made that point here on several occasions. +++I have heard the argument that WinLink can't now apply busy- frequency detectors because the amateur radio community is so angry at them for years of QRM that operators would camp on PMBO frequencies just to prevent them functioning. This argument is completely bogus - just another rationalization for continuing to generate QRM. While a few operators might QRM a few PMBOs for a few days, the effect would be minimal. Even the most perverse human operator won't sit at a station continuously just to QRM an automated station. He or she will get bored and go bother someone more likely to provide a reaction. 73, Dave, AA6YQ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.11/1200 - Release Date: 12/27/2007 1:34 PM
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +++ more AA6YQ comments below --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY sv1uy@ wrote: QRM from PMBOs and other deaf robots spoils the enjoyment of amateur radio for many operators Demetre. That's why so many are willing to do practically anything to make WinLink stop generating QRM. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists; Ack *this*. You see now why the PBMOs cannot install any DCD mechanism that detects QRM and they leave the busy detection to be the responsibility of the client? Because people like you would misuse such a mechanism and the PMBOs would be rendered useless. This is a VERY bad practice that you and your followers excercise and hence you should have your license revoked for this action you just admitted yourself. +++Demetre, an anti-radiation missile is a weapon typically used to destroy air-defense radars by locking onto their transmitter frequency. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists was a humorous way of pointing out that PMBO QRM has generated widespread and massive frustration. Nowhere in this message -- or any other message I have posted -- do I advocate QRMing PMBOs. This sort of action would be as irreponsible as using or operating a PMBO, and I have made that point here on several occasions. +++I have heard the argument that WinLink can't now apply busy- frequency detectors because the amateur radio community is so angry at them for years of QRM that operators would camp on PMBO frequencies just to prevent them functioning. This argument is completely bogus - just another rationalization for continuing to generate QRM. While a few operators might QRM a few PMBOs for a few days, the effect would be minimal. Even the most perverse human operator won't sit at a station continuously just to QRM an automated station. He or she will get bored and go bother someone more likely to provide a reaction. 73, Dave, AA6YQ Exactly Dave, This is because of people like you. You just admitted it, so don't cry now. You know all the techniques of war it seems. 73 de Demetre SV1UY
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
AA6YQ comments below --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Les Warriner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMNSHO malicious interference, interference that prevents or interrupts a QSO on a frequency from any source is ILLEGAL by the existing rules. The fact that this rule is not being enforced should generate information to the FCC on these interferences and requests to the same agency to clean it up. If I were operating on a frequency and one of these stations climbed on MY frequency (yes, I own it while operating on it legally) a report would go to the FCC the same day with time, frequency, and any identifying information on the interfering station. The squeaky wheel concept. Unless you're willing to purchase an SCS TNC, you will not be able to know who or what QRM'd you. A requirement that all unattended stations identify in CW at least once within each 5-minute period of activity would eliminate this problem. 73, Dave, AA6YQ
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
You caught me, Demetre. I did rent an F-16 last weekend and got all the way to Winlink Planetary Headquarters before realizing that the HARMs Hertz gave me were tuned to 7.105 GHz instead of 7.105 MHz as requested. So I buzzed the tower and flew home to beat the commuter congestion at Hanscom. What's your grid square? 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Demetre SV1UY Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 5:42 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +++ more AA6YQ comments below --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY sv1uy@ wrote: QRM from PMBOs and other deaf robots spoils the enjoyment of amateur radio for many operators Demetre. That's why so many are willing to do practically anything to make WinLink stop generating QRM. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists; Ack *this*. You see now why the PBMOs cannot install any DCD mechanism that detects QRM and they leave the busy detection to be the responsibility of the client? Because people like you would misuse such a mechanism and the PMBOs would be rendered useless. This is a VERY bad practice that you and your followers excercise and hence you should have your license revoked for this action you just admitted yourself. +++Demetre, an anti-radiation missile is a weapon typically used to destroy air-defense radars by locking onto their transmitter frequency. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists was a humorous way of pointing out that PMBO QRM has generated widespread and massive frustration. Nowhere in this message -- or any other message I have posted -- do I advocate QRMing PMBOs. This sort of action would be as irreponsible as using or operating a PMBO, and I have made that point here on several occasions. +++I have heard the argument that WinLink can't now apply busy- frequency detectors because the amateur radio community is so angry at them for years of QRM that operators would camp on PMBO frequencies just to prevent them functioning. This argument is completely bogus - just another rationalization for continuing to generate QRM. While a few operators might QRM a few PMBOs for a few days, the effect would be minimal. Even the most perverse human operator won't sit at a station continuously just to QRM an automated station. He or she will get bored and go bother someone more likely to provide a reaction. 73, Dave, AA6YQ Exactly Dave, This is because of people like you. You just admitted it, so don't cry now. You know all the techniques of war it seems. 73 de Demetre SV1UY
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
Oh, I nearly forgot to ask you Dave, what's the matter with you and PACTOR-3? Has uncle Steve been bad to you recently? I can help you know!!! 73 de Demetre de SV1UY P.S. Please smile, this is only a hobby OM. MERRY CHRISTMAS and a HAPPY NEW YEAR to all.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
At 04:23 PM 12/27/2007, you wrote: Again in MO, any station operating unattended and generating RF interfering signals should NEVER be allowed on Amateur frequencies. It's not ! under FCC rules
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave AA6YQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You caught me, Demetre. I did rent an F-16 last weekend and got all the way to Winlink Planetary Headquarters before realizing that the HARMs Hertz gave me were tuned to 7.105 GHz instead of 7.105 MHz as requested. So I buzzed the tower and flew home to beat the commuter congestion at Hanscom. What's your grid square? 73, Dave, AA6YQ Well our old God APOLLO will not be kind to you Dave. Propagation is not good between us right now so I guess I am saved for the time being! 73 de Demetre SV1UY P.S. Please have a good drink OM, you might forget about PACTOR 3. It's Christmas after all.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
At 04:37 PM 12/27/2007, you wrote: Unless you're willing to purchase an SCS TNC, you will not be able to know who or what QRM'd you. A requirement that all unattended stations identify in CW at least once within each 5-minute period of activity would eliminate this problem. Dave I'm not to sure about this. My pactor station *WILL* ID in either CW or P1 my call no matter what pactor mode I'm running at the time. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
If you'd actually read any of my posts, Demetre, you'd know that my focus is on automatic stations without busy detectors -- no matter what protocol they are using. In fact I recently posted here that banning Pactor III because a bunch of inconsiderate operators use it in PMBOs would be like banning automobiles because some people drive drunk. See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/message/25201 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh, I nearly forgot to ask you Dave, what's the matter with you and PACTOR-3? Has uncle Steve been bad to you recently? I can help you know!!! 73 de Demetre de SV1UY P.S. Please smile, this is only a hobby OM. MERRY CHRISTMAS and a HAPPY NEW YEAR to all.
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
I have never heard a WinLink PMBO identify in CW. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:37 PM 12/27/2007, you wrote: Unless you're willing to purchase an SCS TNC, you will not be able to know who or what QRM'd you. A requirement that all unattended stations identify in CW at least once within each 5-minute period of activity would eliminate this problem. Dave I'm not to sure about this. My pactor station *WILL* ID in either CW or P1 my call no matter what pactor mode I'm running at the time. John, W0JAB
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
Listen to mineIt IDs in CW at the end of an unsucessful connect attempt and at the end of a completed connect... The rules allow for ID via Pactor exchanges in the interim showing the callsigns of both stations. Dave WB2FTX - Original Message - From: Dave Bernstein To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 8:26 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats I have never heard a WinLink PMBO identify in CW. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:37 PM 12/27/2007, you wrote: Unless you're willing to purchase an SCS TNC, you will not be able to know who or what QRM'd you. A requirement that all unattended stations identify in CW at least once within each 5-minute period of activity would eliminate this problem. Dave I'm not to sure about this. My pactor station *WILL* ID in either CW or P1 my call no matter what pactor mode I'm running at the time. John, W0JAB -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.11/1200 - Release Date: 12/27/2007 1:34 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
Dave Bernstein wrote: I have never heard a WinLink PMBO identify in CW. 73, Dave, AA6YQ That is because they never do. The SCS TNCs can be set to ID in CW, but in practice no one ever does. de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
Dave, you said earlier that you were running Winlink Classic, not Winlink 2000.
That would make your station a BBS instead of a PMBO, wouldn't it?
Dave (the other one) was commenting about PMBOs. Maybe the WL2K code is
different?
73, Howard K5HB
- Original Message
From: David Struebel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 7:36:45 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR
PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
Listen to mineIt IDs in CW
at the end of an unsucessful connect attempt and at the end of a completed
connect... The rules allow for ID via Pactor exchanges in the interim showing
the callsigns of both stations.
Dave WB2FTX
- Original Message -
From:
Dave
Bernstein
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 8:26
PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on
digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
I have never heard a WinLink PMBO identify in CW.
73,
Dave,
AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com,
John Becker, WØJAB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
At 04:37 PM
12/27/2007, you wrote:
Unless you're willing to
purchase an SCS TNC, you will not be
able
to know who or what
QRM'd you. A requirement that all unattended
stations identify in
CW at least once within each 5-minute period of
activity would
eliminate this problem.
Dave I'm not to sure about
this.
My pactor station *WILL* ID in either CW or P1 my call
no matter what pactor mode I'm running at the time.
John,
W0JAB
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free
Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.11/1200 - Release Date:
12/27/2007 1:34 PM
!--
#ygrp-mkp{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px 0px;padding:0px 14px;}
#ygrp-mkp hr{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
#ygrp-mkp #hd{
color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0px;}
#ygrp-mkp #ads{
margin-bottom:10px;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad{
padding:0 0;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad a{
color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}
--
!--
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{
font-family:Arial;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{
margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{
margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
--
!--
#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean,
sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
#ygrp-text{
font-family:Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p{
margin:0 0 1em 0;}
#ygrp-tpmsgs{
font-family:Arial;
clear:both;}
#ygrp-vitnav{
padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
#ygrp-vitnav a{
padding:0 1px;}
#ygrp-actbar{
clear:both;margin:25px 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
#ygrp-actbar .left{
float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
.bld{font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-grft{
font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
#ygrp-ft{
font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
padding:5px 0;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
padding-bottom:10px;}
#ygrp-vital{
background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
#ygrp-vital #vithd{
font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-transform:uppercase;}
#ygrp-vital ul{
padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
#ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;padding-right:.5em;}
#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-vital a{
text-decoration:none;}
#ygrp-vital a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}
#ygrp-sponsor #hd{
color:#999;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov{
padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #nc{
background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad{
padding:8px 0;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
text-decoration:none;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
margin:0;}
o{font-size:0;}
.MsoNormal{
margin:0 0 0 0;}
#ygrp-text tt{
font-size:120%;}
blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
.replbq{margin:4;}
--
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition, QRM on PACTOR PMBOS now from DAVE, Congrats
At 07:26 PM 12/27/2007, you wrote: I have never heard a WinLink PMBO identify in CW. Like I said Dave my winlink station does it all the time. Either in P1 or CW. Now if I'm in a KB2KB QSO it will not I will force the SCS modem to do it. But under computer control it will. It's in use right now. and I will let you know what it does. Nice really nice - some lid with a PSK signal is tuning up and down the band to make sure he get's us. P1 ID when the link was dropped. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, W2XJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think the whole thing is pointless. Why to I want to try to send email via a slow speed serial stream when I have 100 meg Internet on the computer next to the rig? I firmly believe that these systems are too organized to be dependable in an emergency. That is when you loose a lot of infrastructure. Simple systems, temporary installations all with some form of emergency power is what is required in an emergency. Modes should be those that can be supported station to station. Basically if it is not part of the rig, it is too complicated for an emergency. Now that CW is not an FCC requirement that is no reason to abandon it as a primary emergency mode. It is still the mode that permits one to accomplish the most with the least. What about the Radio Hams that do not have the luxury of 100 meg Internet that YOU ENJOY, or don't even have a 56k dial-up connection? What about the ones who travel the world in a boat, in an RV, the ones that are on holiday away from home? What about the ones who travel in places where not even a mobile phone can operate? Are these not Radio Hams? Not to mention emergency situations where these Extremely Wide HF Networking Digital Modes like PACTOR 3 might assist. (2.2 KHZ wide, less than a voice channel, hmm some width, don't you think?) . Helping in Emergencies is number ONE PRIORITY in every Amateur Service all around the World!!! From what I have read it is also number ONE in USA. QSL card collection (although I do not dislike it) is not number ONE. It is number TWO in Amateur Radio. Are you trying to tell us that number ONE priority is worthless??? Everyone has the right to exercise their hobby in the Ham Radio Bands OM. And don't tell me that PACTOR 3 operators do not listen before they transmit. They always listen because they want their transmitters to stay cool, especially if this HF radio they are using is their only means of communication. Makes sense doesn't it? At least I hope it does to you!!! 73 de Demetre SV1UY
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
Demetre SV1UY wrote: What about the Radio Hams that do not have the luxury of 100 meg Internet that YOU ENJOY, or don't even have a 56k dial-up connection? What about the ones who travel the world in a boat, in an RV, the ones that are on holiday away from home? What about the ones who travel in places where not even a mobile phone can operate? Are these not Radio Hams? Well I do travel in remote portions of our South West. I carry an IC 7000 and a VX-7. But I also have a satellite phone and an emergency locater in addition to my normal cell phone. It is important to separate business from a hobby. In such a situation there are not that many scenarios where ham radio would be a better emergency solution than those systems designed for the task. The reason I say this is that VHF and UHF are only occasionally viable. If there is a situation where one has a personal emergency, accident or injury, it is not really practical to set up an HF rig. There is also the question will there be the appropriate band conditions for the necessary communications. On a ship there HF gear would already be installed and would be great as a last resort, but I for one would start out with a system where I knew there was 24 hour monitoring. For those who do not have an Internet connection, I have two comments - 1 - They would be better served with a UHF link that offers decent band width. 2- I would question the legality of such a data link in the first place. Not to mention emergency situations where these Extremely Wide HF Networking Digital Modes like PACTOR 3 might assist. (2.2 KHZ wide, less than a voice channel, hmm some width, don't you think?) . 'Might assist' is the operative word. I don't know about you, but I have lived through a few emergencies both here in New York and elsewhere. On 9-11 we lost virtually all communications in the city. The digital radios failed our fire fighters and cost lives. Repeater systems Amateur, Public safety, cell phone and ENG were all lost when the towers fell. Regular telephone and cell phone systems were jammed. The city's emergency management office was destroyed. Things that worked then were the basic things. Same goes for the black outs we have had. We learned not to depend on any installed infrastructure. Our club is in the process of building a repeater that should remain functional under all but the very worst of situations. Helping in Emergencies is number ONE PRIORITY in every Amateur Service all around the World!!! From what I have read it is also number ONE in USA. Very true, but the modes should be reliable and usable under primitive conditions QSL card collection (although I do not dislike it) is not number ONE. It is number TWO in Amateur Radio. Actually experimentation is my number two and it includes a number of digital modes. Are you trying to tell us that number ONE priority is worthless??? No, I am telling you that the number one priority should be given more serious consideration. Anyone can use almost any situation as a straw man and claim that it supports emergency communications. Everyone has the right to exercise their hobby in the Ham Radio Bands OM. And don't tell me that PACTOR 3 operators do not listen before they transmit. They always listen because they want their transmitters to stay cool, especially if this HF radio they are using is their only means of communication. Makes sense doesn't it? At least I hope it does to you!!! That is not what other PACTOR operators have stated as recently as today in this thread. PACTOR stations listen for other PACTOR stations but not stations operating in other modes.
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently deployed PMBOs have no way to reliably determine whether or not the frequency is locally clear. They may be configured to detect Pactor signals, but they cannot detect signals in any other mode. 73, Dave, AA6YQ You said that, but the clients always listen OM. After all we do not live in a perfect world and if there is a little QRM, you can always blame the client if this is what you are after. You can report the client to your FCC and they can pull his/her ear, if it makes you happy!!! 73 de SV1UY
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
+++additional AA6YQ comments below --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently deployed PMBOs have no way to reliably determine whether or not the frequency is locally clear. They may be configured to detect Pactor signals, but they cannot detect signals in any other mode. You said that, but the clients always listen OM. +++In your earlier post, Demetre, you said Sometimes through the night when I cannot access any European PACTOR PMBOS because I do not have a decent 80 meters antenna, I can connect to PMBOs in Canada or USA on 30 or 40 meters. How about that? +++So you -- the client -- are activating a PMBO in Canada or the USA. While you can know that the frequency is clear in Europe, you have absolutely no idea whether your activating a PMBO in Canada or the USA will result in that PMBO QRMing an ongoing QSO. Every time you activate one of these PMBOs, you risk QRMing a QSO. How about that? After all we do not live in a perfect world and if there is a little QRM, you can always blame the client if this is what you are after. You can report the client to your FCC and they can pull his/her ear, if it makes you happy!!! +++The client is indeed behaving arrogantly and irresponsibly, but it is not the client that is generating the QRM. Its the PMBO. 73, Dave, AA6YQ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
Demetre, I think you did not read carefully what Dave wrote and you quoted. He said, Currently deployed PMBOs have no way to reliably determine whether or not the frequency is *LOCALLY* clear. This means that if a PMBO is next door to me ( i.e. locally) and I am in a QSO that the client cannot hear, the PMBO will transmit anyway on top of me because the PMBO cannot detect signals in any mode except Pactor, even it busy channel detection is not turned off. Even though I may be strong at the PMBO location, but weak, or even not detectable at all at the client location, the PMBO will transmit anyway in response to a client station that cannot hear me. This is the problem with unattended stations. When stations on both ends are attended, each can hear a station local to itself, so the chances of inadvertant QRM to a local station are probably cut in half. 73, Skip KH6TY - Original Message - From: Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 4:56 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently deployed PMBOs have no way to reliably determine whether or not the frequency is locally clear. They may be configured to detect Pactor signals, but they cannot detect signals in any other mode. 73, Dave, AA6YQ You said that, but the clients always listen OM. After all we do not live in a perfect world and if there is a little QRM, you can always blame the client if this is what you are after. You can report the client to your FCC and they can pull his/her ear, if it makes you happy!!! 73 de SV1UY No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.9/1197 - Release Date: 12/25/2007 8:04 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
Demetre SV1UY wrote: Sometimes through the night when I cannot access any European PACTOR PMBOS because I do not have a decent 80 meters antenna, I can connect to PMBOs in Canada or USA on 30 or 40 meters. How about that? If it uses more than 500 hertz bandwidth it is not something I want on 30 meters period.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
Demetre SV1UY wrote: First of all not many can afford a satellite phone, which is also not amateur radio. A satellite phone plus connection fees are far more expensive than a PACTOR MODEM. Second many do not even have the luxury of a UHF link, nor are they near a town, so HF is playing a viable role in their communications. This is where PACTOR 3 comes and solves their problem. Also when everything has gone down in an emergency, PACTOR 3 can give you reliable communications using a PACTOR mailbox that resides in a neighbouring country. Sometimes through the night when I cannot access any European PACTOR PMBOS because I do not have a decent 80 meters antenna It looks like your Internet connection to this list is working fine. Are you using PACTOR?
[digitalradio] Re: Questions on digital opposition
AA6YQ comments below --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +++So you -- the client -- are activating a PMBO in Canada or the USA. While you can know that the frequency is clear in Europe, you have absolutely no idea whether your activating a PMBO in Canada or the USA will result in that PMBO QRMing an ongoing QSO. Every time you activate one of these PMBOs, you risk QRMing a QSO. How about that? I have done this only a few times just for a test, to see what can be done in an emergency. I know it is a bad idea to do it regularly, so I do it for test purposes and only when I want to convince someone (including myself) how good PACTOR 3 can be in an emergency. So you acknowledge that its a bad idea to remotely activate a PMBO. You clearly accept the fact that PMBOs QRM other hams, but yet you still use WinLink. That can only mean that you consider your use of WinLink to be so important that its okay to QRM other hams. This is the pinnacle of arrogance, and about as far from the spirit of amateur radio as one can get. When the communications infrastructure of a whole country has gone down, this is the only way to pass digital traffic accurately and effectively. There is no other accurate way OM. If you only had a PACTOR 3 MODEM and an open mind you would understand what am I talking about. I have a Pactor 3 modem (PTC-IIe), a very open mind, and fully understand that you will do or say anything to rationalize your continued use of a system that QRMs your fellow amateurs. And if you ever get a little interference from another station, if there is no other way for the traffic to be passed, please be patient. Unless an emergency is in progress, there is always another way for the traffic to be passed that doesn't involve QRMing others. The transfer will soon finish because it is a fast mode, it will not last all day just like many ragchew QSOs do. After all what is going to happen to you? Is the PACTOR QRM going to spoil your toys? QRM from PMBOs and other deaf robots spoils the enjoyment of amateur radio for many operators Demetre. That's why so many are willing to do practically anything to make WinLink stop generating QRM. Anti-radiation missiles tuned to PMBO frequencies were on a lot of Christmas lists; Ack *this*. By the way, your posts are greatly appreciated. They make it very easy to expose the truth behind WinLink. Can we go have this conversation on the QRZ reflector too? 73, Dave, AA6YQ
