I take that as a "no" to my question about whether Pactor III has ever been publicly documented.
My understanding is that if it is not, then it isn't authorized for use on the amateur bands in the US. I'm not opposed to Pactor III, per se, but by my understanding it doesn't comply with the basic rules. If this is the case, then either the rules need to change, or the modes that don't comply need to be removed from the air. Thoughts? Dave On May 10, 2010, at 9:18 PM, Andy obrien wrote: > FYI, I plan to file a comment opposing the PIII on 60M proposal. My > objections are > > PIII is a proprietary mode . > PIII as used in non-busy detect Winkink system has been the leading cause of > QRM complaints for the past 10 years, hence they are likely to cause the same > for the primary services that have 60M allocations. > Recent tests of NBEMS with FLICS and WRAP have proven as effective as PIII > and take up less spectrum (and are not proprietary) > Winmor 500 offers most of the Winlink capabilities without the problems > associated with wide PIII and is freely available to all hams. > > I will probably suggest that they authorize PS31, MFSK16 and Winmor 500 if > they are going to get mode specific. > > Andy K3UK > > > > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Dave Wright <hfradio...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 10, 2010, at 7:26 PM, Chris Jewell wrote: > >> >> Rick Ellison writes: >> "recommending that instead of authorizing only PSK-31 and Pactor-III, >> that the FCC instead permit all publicly-documented data modes " >> > > > So, has Pactor III every been publicly-documented??? > > > > Dave > K3DCW > > Real radio bounces off the sky > -- > > Dave K3DCW Real radio bounces off the sky --
