Just some thoughts, critique welcome.

If we think about HF  digital QSOs there are 5 general types.

1. Weak signal propagation "probes" that are frequent in nature and
regularly used by hams around the world (JT65A, ROS, WSPR,  SLOW CW),
Usually the exchange is a signal report, callsign, and location.  No
"Conversation"

2. Conversational digital modes that are hugely popular, very active,
and can include  brief contest exchanges or Dxpedition quick
exchanges. (RTTY, PSK31/63,).

3. Message delivery digital modes in common use, quite active, and
used at times for "emcomm" Pactor, Packet, standard ALE, Winmor,
PSK125-250,  Often fairly "wide" signals

4.  Conversational "rag0chew"  digital modes that are very robust and
used by a small group of hams during weak signal  or low power
conditions ( Olivia, Hell, Thor, MFSK16, ALE400, DominoEX, Throb.
ThrobX)

5.  Experimental "messing around" by digital mode enthusiasts, testing
all kinds of "odd" modes just to see how they work.  No more than 1000
hams  world wide.  Modes include
    Olivia, Hell, Thor, MFSK16, ALE400, DominoEX, Throb. ThrobX, PAX ,
Chip, FPSK, RITTY, PSKAM, QPSK, Contestia, RTTYM, ASCII, Voice, ROS 1,
JT64, JT6M, MT63,


A persistent issue (I avoid the word "problem" because I do not think
it is) is that each of the particular interests wants to have a common
meeting place on the dial.  For some uses, it makes perfect sense  and
for others it is not really that essential.  Message delivery systems
and weak signal detection both would logically want a common place on
the dial.  Other modes can be found by twirling the dial or using
alerting system like PSKreporter or Hamspots, but sometimes you miss a
"CQ" because you happened to be down the dial a tad.

So, what "plan" , a voluntary one, could this group of 4000 hams/SWLs
, develop that would make sense and demonstrate the concepts of hams
working cooperatively on such matters.?  One that did not wait for
regulatory solutions.

It might make sense to start with what is currently working or so
"dominant" that attempts to change would be futile, right ? So,
changing PSK31 and RTTY operations is out of the question.  WSPR and
JT65A operations seem well policed by the enthusiasts of these modes.
So that would take care of items 1 and 2 above.  What about item
number 3, above ?  I'm inclined to agree that this group might work
best if allocated a small section of each band, probably in band
segments that allow unattended operations. PACTOR is an issue because
there are so many frequencies used.  In reality though, Pactor,
Winmor, PSKMAIL, ALE,  Packet, and APRS-Packet could all meet their
goals with just a TOTAL of 6 frequencies per band. 2 frequencies per
band for Pactor, one for Winmor, one for PSKmail, one for ALE digital,
and one Packet.  Six  voluntarily protected "channels" per band,
except in emergencies.

That would leave items 4 and 5, above. That's mostly the  members of
this group,  Since there are 4000 of us, 4000 collective brains should
be able to develop a band plan for a) Conversational communication and
b) experimental messing around using a mixture of wide and narrow
modes.  Ideas ?


The outcome  , in my mind, would allow a new ham to consult a chart
that looks something like..

                                                  160               80
                          75               40                    30
               20        etc, etc.
PSK31 (general)               xxxx.xx to xxxx.xx  xxxx to xxxx.
xxxx to xxxx      xxxx to xxxx       xxxx to xxxx  xxxx to xxxx  etc,
etc.
RTTY (dx)                        xxxx.xx to xxxx.xx  xxxx to xxxx.
xxxx to xxxx      xxxx to xxxx       xxxx to xxxx  xxxx to xxxx  etc,
etc.
RTTY  (general)                xxxx.xx to xxxx.xx  xxxx to xxxx.
xxxx to xxxx      xxxx to xxxx       xxxx to xxxx  xxxx to xxxx  etc,
etc.
Weak Signal Exhange       xxxx. to xxxx  xxxx to xxxx.    xxxx to xxxx
     xxxx to xxxx     (JT65A, WSPR, QRSS, ROS1, etc)
Weak Signal Rag-Chew     xxxx.xx to xxxx.xx  xxxx to xxxx.    xxxx to
xxxx      xxxx to xxxx MFSk16, HELL, Olivia, Throb, etc) )
Narrow Digital Experiments xxxx. to xxxx  xxxx to xxxx.    xxxx to
xxxx      xxxx to xxxx       xxxx to xxxx  xxxx to xxxx  etc, etc.
Wide digital experments      xxxx.xx to xxxx.xx  xxxx to xxxx.    xxxx
to xxxx      xxxx to xxxx       xxxx to xxxx  xxxx to xxxx  etc, etc.
PSKMAIL                         XXXX                         XXXX
            XXXXXX            XXXX                   XXXXXXX
etc, etc.
Packet                             XXXX                         XXXX
               XXXXXX            XXXX                   XXXXXXX
  etc, etc.
ALE                                 XXXX                         XXXX
                XXXXXX            XXXX                   XXXXXXX
   etc, etc.
Winmor                            XXXX                         XXXX
              XXXXXX            XXXX                   XXXXXXX
 etc, etc.
PACTOR                          XXXX  and XXXX           XXXX  and
XXXX   XXXX  and XXXX     etc, etc.


Andy K3UK

Reply via email to