This would be a good plan to insure that the Amateur Radio Service is treated as hobby-only communications. However, to be able to send traffic that is formatted in usable format for the players in an emergency, it takes a bit more than FEC, or throttled back ARQ. There are none of these problems or restrictions on NTIA spectrum, and it is another reason that the ARRL probably feels in peril as far as defending long-haul spectrum for the Amateur Radio Service. I run a 24/7 RMS WINMOR server. I run it on NTIA spectrum. I have had a P# controller in the past, and will probably invest in another one in the future. I wouldn't even consider running a RMS station within the Amateur spectrum; it is not worth the effort or wear and tear on the equipment involved to devote an emcomm asset where it has the least chance of doing anything useful. If things were different, I would put up a second station 24/7 within the Amateur Radio Service spectrum. It simply isn't worth listening to the whining. Also, the potential for being effective in an emergency is too heavily weighted toward Federal spectrum for the same reasons that the Winlink/P3 whining never ceases when it concerns Amateur spectrum. You reap what you sow As far as the bandwidth argument, remember, it is hard to consume like a humming bird and output like an elephant. The ARRL is certainly considering the trend that started in the early 90s when the FCC was defunded, and spectrum auction "refarming" was created. It is now part of a self-fulfilling prophecy, and will play a large part in the continuation of amateur radio service having use of the spectrum it currently enjoys.. David KD4NUE
-----Original Message----- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of KH6TY Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 9:22 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Opposing 60M proposal Why not just limit bandwidth of any emission to 500 Hz? 73 - Skip KH6TY 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. <mailto:hfradio...@gmail.com> 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 --
