Sorry Jim but you did not say in your post how you knew it was WinLink stations? And not some KB2KB QSO..
At 08:43 PM 10/14/2007, you wrote: >Don't believe everything you hear. A couple of years ago when I was >doing packet work, I listened to winlink a lot. What I heard >convinced me that clients did not listen and that the hidden >transmitter was not only a problem with other stations, but winlink >stations too. You can't believe how many times I heard a winlink >session be interfered with by another winlink session starting up! > >Do you really think they would consolidate their pmbos to just a few >frequencies with busy detection even if no one interfered with them? >I don't believe so. Their users expect "instant" access and would not >be willing to come back periodically to try and initiate a session >should a "busy detector" not allow a session. As a result, they will >continue to try and gain access to sufficient frequencies to allow one >freq, one pmbo. > >Pactor 3's proclivity to increasing its bandwidth anytime during a >session is one of the biggest problems, and will continue to be so >regardless of busy detection or not. I don't understand how anyone >can expect hams not to initiate sessions within a 3 kHz channel around >ANY pactor signal. Heck, entire sessions may take place in pactor 2 >and last for the duration of a band opening. It seems unreasonable to >claim all that space when it may not even be used. It's like saying >my use is more important than anybody else's. > >Jim >WA0LYK
