Expeditionradio said:
"This narrow auto sub-band is time-shared with many different automatic/semi-automatic nets and stations, including various packet and pactor modes. The segment is only 4kHz wide, so if one is using a standard 3kHz SSB filter, it almost covers the whole segment. It is important, as ALE400 operators, for us to co-operate with the other nets and modes we share this narrow segment of the band with. We will never achieve a "worldwide clear frequency" specific to ALE400 in this narrow sub-band, so we must accept some non-ALE400 interference, as the reality of operating in this part of 20 meters. If the frequency is already in use, this means that we sometimes may need to wait a few minutes to make an ALE400 call. " The HF link folks are NOT an official body, rather a small group of ALE enthusiasts who actively support PCALE software. They do not support multipsk. In my opinion PCALE is inferior to MultiPSK and is unable to do many of the things that MPSK is capable of , including working down into the noise, and the ease of an ARQ QSO , or passing files. The HFlink folks would relegate ALE400 to frequencies which would be undesirable, with birdies, and packet interference. Why? It is up to ALE400 users to pick a frequency, more particularly, it is up to US users to pick frequencies which conform to the US band plan , which the rest of us don't understand. There is no reason why ALE400 could not share 14109.5 with regular ALE stations, of which there appears to be relatively few active. Maybe an adjacent frequency such as 14108.5 would be satisfactory. The point is as ALE400 users, we don't have to take Bonnie and the HFlink's suggestions as gospel. We can, and should find our own way with a frequency that is relatively clear and useable. John VE5MU
