Bruce, I get it. Chill out. It's only one test station in California, so why bother?! Besides he scanned the frequency range for weeks prior to testing, and heard nothing at all...zip, nada. Of course, the band wasn't open then either.
In addition, I rather doubt an AM station would even notice his low level signal. Keep in mind that although it is 100 watts, it is spread out over as much as 200 kHz. If they heard it at all, they would probably think mit was some weak background noise. Here is his latest update as of today from KD6OZH: I had to take down the antennas to fumigate the house for termites, so I'll be puttng them back up in the next few days. In the mean time, I'm writing some new software. I've been using a program to generate a .wav file to program the arbitrary waveform generator that modulates a signal geneator for the 6 m test signal. The new program will decode that file and could be the basis of a software modem that might work at up to 128 kbps with 96 ksps sound cards. John >From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com >To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Don't ignore proposals/local HF net successes >Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 12:06:01 -0700 (PDT) > >You still don't get it it's not me you need to be >talking to go post this on 6 meter user groups >websites .... and see if they agree with you . > >--- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Bruce, > > > > The segment 50.5 - 51 is too small. Remember we > > need something 200 kHz wide > > to achieve the data rate objective for the test per > > Shannon's Rule. To get > > to 240 kbps with OFDM modulation we need 200 kHz of > > bandwidth. > > > > Again, it is just a TEST and with a temporary > > EXPERIMENTAL ticket. This is > > NOT a permanent band change. If the FCC does allows > > for continued use, > > however, where in the 6M band do you or SMIRK > > suggest we set up > > housekeeping? > > > > John - K8OCL > > > > > > >From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > > >To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > > >Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Don't ignore > > proposals/local HF net successes > > >Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:10:04 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > >Rick.... > > > > > >If someone had proposed 50.5-51.00 ( NOT 50.300 - > > >54.000 ) for SS 99% of us could have lived with > > that. > > >That part of the band is very lightly used except > > for > > >some psk digi radios that are already there. > > > > > >No one I know of is opposed to digital anything > > unless > > >it is going to interfere with all other modes. The > > >ARRL did at best a very poor job of informing band > > >users and if your not a league member and don't get > > >qst you were not informed at all .... and I agree > > >SMIRK which should have done more seems to have let > > us > > >down. > > > > > >What I see here is a lack of concern of the " > > >EXPERIMENTER HAMS " in what what they seem > > important > > >and indifferent to what it would do to all other > > users > > >..... get out of our way you LEGACY modes ...... we > > >are what this band needs ...... > > > > > >Myself I have bought a new TS-2000 and have psk-31 > > on > > >my older ft-100 that i can use over a wide range of > > >bands so I'm not a SSB ELITE type ham and open to > > new > > >modes on any band as long as that mode doesn't > > >displace modes already there .... displacing other > > >hams does nothing to build interest in this hobby. > > > > > >As for 220 MHz we lost 220-222 because the ARRL > > failed > > >again to act and with a CLASS E CB proposed they > > >fought that plan which was modded to allowing UPS > > to > > >have the band anyway. I was one of only 5 users > > within > > >100 miles of Tampa on that band in 1974 and was > > >running stack KLM 9 elm beams at 50 foot here in > > >Tampabay and getting to Orlando and Brooksville > > every > > >night . I was quite active on 220 before i got > > married > > >and had to get rid of it back in 1980 HOWEVER it is > > a > > >wonderful band and SS should get very good results > > as > > >good as 2 meters with much less interference. A > > GOOD > > >CHOICE ON THE PART OF THE FCC ! > > >Unlike 6 or 2 Meters the 220 mhz band is almost > > unused > > >nation wide but remember it is A GREAT BAND FOR > > TROPO > > >and it DOES get E-Skip! just like 2 does. > > > > > >In the future any wide changes to 6 or 2 needs to > > be > > >well thought out with input from the USERS. > > >More proposals like 50.3-54 and 144.3 to 148 are > > >doomed to failure since they impact all ready > > existing > > >modes and set band plans and do nothing to increase > > >usage of these bands. > > > > > >Bruce > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > protection around > > >http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
