Hi Andy, Yes you are missing the key item with this support, its called "Voice Detect", not "Busy Detect"! As such its looking for channel acty that is Voice or Voice like ( which is what I hate about this item) to hold off transmitting.
In Amateur Radio as in most applications of ALE, you have scenarios where ALE is used in a multi-mode environment of digital signaling, digital data, digital voice and analog voice, Voice Detect looks for Analog Voice. Thus with respect to Amateur Radio it would not be used in the digital subbands but rather the Voice subbands so as not to transmit where ALE can be used in limited ways due to Amateur rules in many areas, especially here in the U.S. In MARS, and most all Government and Military operations, all modes utilized are done so on the same channels ( for the most part ) and as such Voice Detect keeps an ALE Sounding or Linking Call from stomping on an Analog Voice contact, predicated on the timing the sample period to detect the analog voice and the analog voice channel acty, which is why no form of busy channel, be it Voice Detect or other will ever be perfect unless one is looking to detect a signal that is always active, in which case the channel is for the most part useless ( unless said signal can be overcome by EIRP). I find all this channel busy detect crap rather funny myself, I know such a statement is going to bring out the flames, but intentional interference is one thing, however system automation for digital communications where one end of the equation is automated and the goal is for the Remote Attended station to grab the Automated station for access to send and receive e-mail is not interference, the stations that are operating on the same spectrum should know better, its that simple. Really what should be done at the next WARC is set aside 10, 25, 50 to 100Khz (depending on the spectrum size of each given band in question) off little used Voice spectrum on the bottom of each band that goes mostly unused except for contests of the occasional rare DX station that pops up for much more useful daily Traffic Automation Systems using 3Khz channels ( or better ) with no symbol rate limitations where no peer-to-peer contacts are NOT allowed in my opinion, there is just so much Phone spectrum going to waste its just stupid, especially consider the benefits it provided by Traffic Automation. Such a move would be a move in the right direction for the future of the Amateur Radio Service. Sincerely, /s/ Steve, N2CKH At 05:12 PM 9/16/2007, you wrote: >I tested PC-ALE on a 21 meter broadcast signal at S5 (both AM and SSB) >, an S3 20M CW signal and and S5 military RTTY signal on 30M-- In each >situation PC-ALE listened for a few brief seconds and then switched to >transmit. > >Perhaps there is a setting I am missing ? > > >Andy K3UK > >digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Has anyone experimented with busy detect in PC-ALE ? I think Bonnie > > and others have mentioned that it does have such capability. I did > > notice the other day that my sounding did not activate on 40M , I > > wondered why but think it may have been related to the busy detect, > > there was a strong broadcast signal present. I wonder how much signal > > it takes to postpone a PC-ALE sounding? I may do some experimenting > > and write a QRG file with some known broadcast signals, see if it goes > > to sounding while a signal is present. WWV freqs might be worth a > > test too. > > > > > >Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at >http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
