Moderator : Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Please refrain from generalized statements about professions that one does not like. They can be construed as personal attacks. Andy K3UK On Jan 6, 2008 1:57 AM, Demetre SV1UY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Roger J. Buffington" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hey, Demetre, you got something against lawyers? > > > > We lawyers LOVE digital radio. Down with anti-lawyer bigotry. > > He he Roger, > > Some people don't like pactor and some don't like lawyers!! > > > > > de Roger W6VZV > > > > 73 de Demetre SV1UY > > -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Russell, Understand -- licensed 18 years and still asking questions. Have fun... Tony -K2MO - Original Message - From: "Russell Blair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 12:39 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ? > Tony, I'm not trying to split hairs, But Hams that are > remote controling thier radios as with HRD program are > putting there radios in an unattended state. I when > and looked at my TS-450s and your right there is no > command via CV-I to turn off the radio if it got in > trouble. I will post this question to the HRD group, > and ask them how does HRD manage the radio if it get > hung in Tx mode on the air and needs to be turned off > if it in a remote state. > Tony, No project hr just asking question. > > Russell NC5O > > --- Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Russell, >> >> It's my understanding that the ham accessing ones >> station via the >> internet (IRB) is not the control operator. The >> reason is that the ham >> at the computer does not have the ability to shut >> down the transmitter >> in the event of trouble. >> >> I think the bottom line is that the control operator >> must be in control >> of his or her station when operating on specific >> segments of the amateur >> bands that do not allow automation or unattended >> operation. I think it's >> that simple. >> >> Best of luck with your projects... >> >> Tony -K2MO >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Russell Blair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 10:31 PM >> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ? >> >> >> > Tony, well with all the commits about my question >> > about Beacons. I was part of the testing of the >> > "NBEMS" and the question came up about Beacons >> below >> > 10m. >> > >> > So with the Beacon program that comes with VBdigi, >> in >> > the message section I will input a "CQ". >> > >> > Now with attended and unattended, with the >> internet >> > and a ethernet card and VNC or some other programs >> > that "you" or any other operator could be the >> control >> > operator, So I just call you and say can you keep >> > check on my station I need to be away, at that >> time >> > you would connect via the internet to my PC and be >> the >> > control operator, until I get back and take >> controls >> > back. I know this is a crude example of controling >> a >> > unattended station. >> > >> > Russell NC5O >> > >> > --- Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> >> Russel, >> >> >> >> If your goal is to set up an automated beacon on >> the >> >> 10 meter band, then >> >> you're ok as per Part 97.203. It looks like your >> out >> >> of luck if you want >> >> to test propagation using your own beacon on the >> >> lower HF frequencies >> >> without being present in the shack. >> >> >> >> That being the case, why not call CQ instead of >> >> broadcasting a one way >> >> beacon? You'll pretty much gain the same >> knowledge >> >> about propagation and >> >> make a contact in the interim! >> >> >> >> If your interests are strictly propagation, >> there's >> >> always the NCDXF >> >> beacons. They are in continuous operation 24/7 on >> >> 14100.0, 18110.0, >> >> 21.150.0, 24.930.0 and 28.200.0. >> >> >> >> Good luck with your endeavors... >> >> >> >> Tony -K2MO >> >> >> >> >My Question, is a beacon a beacon if is maned, >> or >> >> does it have to be >> >> >unmaned to be a beacon. >> >> >For me my beacon has not be on the air without >> >> being here at the PC. So >> >> >do we scrip the testing or find a >> >> >spot up on 10m. Russell NC5O >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > = >> > IN GOD WE TRUST ! >> > = >> > Russell Blair NC5O >> > Skype-Russell Blair >> > Hell Field #300 >> > DRCC #55 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? >> > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. >> > >> > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping >> > >> >> > > > = > IN GOD WE TRUST ! > = > Russell Blair NC5O > Skype-Russell Blair > Hell Field #300 > DRCC #55 > > > > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Tony, I'm not trying to split hairs, But Hams that are remote controling thier radios as with HRD program are putting there radios in an unattended state. I when and looked at my TS-450s and your right there is no command via CV-I to turn off the radio if it got in trouble. I will post this question to the HRD group, and ask them how does HRD manage the radio if it get hung in Tx mode on the air and needs to be turned off if it in a remote state. Tony, No project hr just asking question. Russell NC5O --- Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Russell, > > It's my understanding that the ham accessing ones > station via the > internet (IRB) is not the control operator. The > reason is that the ham > at the computer does not have the ability to shut > down the transmitter > in the event of trouble. > > I think the bottom line is that the control operator > must be in control > of his or her station when operating on specific > segments of the amateur > bands that do not allow automation or unattended > operation. I think it's > that simple. > > Best of luck with your projects... > > Tony -K2MO > > > - Original Message - > From: "Russell Blair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 10:31 PM > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ? > > > > Tony, well with all the commits about my question > > about Beacons. I was part of the testing of the > > "NBEMS" and the question came up about Beacons > below > > 10m. > > > > So with the Beacon program that comes with VBdigi, > in > > the message section I will input a "CQ". > > > > Now with attended and unattended, with the > internet > > and a ethernet card and VNC or some other programs > > that "you" or any other operator could be the > control > > operator, So I just call you and say can you keep > > check on my station I need to be away, at that > time > > you would connect via the internet to my PC and be > the > > control operator, until I get back and take > controls > > back. I know this is a crude example of controling > a > > unattended station. > > > > Russell NC5O > > > > --- Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Russel, > >> > >> If your goal is to set up an automated beacon on > the > >> 10 meter band, then > >> you're ok as per Part 97.203. It looks like your > out > >> of luck if you want > >> to test propagation using your own beacon on the > >> lower HF frequencies > >> without being present in the shack. > >> > >> That being the case, why not call CQ instead of > >> broadcasting a one way > >> beacon? You'll pretty much gain the same > knowledge > >> about propagation and > >> make a contact in the interim! > >> > >> If your interests are strictly propagation, > there's > >> always the NCDXF > >> beacons. They are in continuous operation 24/7 on > >> 14100.0, 18110.0, > >> 21.150.0, 24.930.0 and 28.200.0. > >> > >> Good luck with your endeavors... > >> > >> Tony -K2MO > >> > >> >My Question, is a beacon a beacon if is maned, > or > >> does it have to be > >> >unmaned to be a beacon. > >> >For me my beacon has not be on the air without > >> being here at the PC. So > >> >do we scrip the testing or find a > >> >spot up on 10m. Russell NC5O > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > = > > IN GOD WE TRUST ! > > = > > Russell Blair NC5O > > Skype-Russell Blair > > Hell Field #300 > > DRCC #55 > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? > > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. > > > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping > > > > = IN GOD WE TRUST ! = Russell Blair NC5O Skype-Russell Blair Hell Field #300 DRCC #55 Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Dave AA6YQ wrote: > > Demetre, amateur radio in the United States is governed by FCC > regulations. > > Would the fact that Winlink PMBOs flagrantly violate these > regulations have something to do with your suggestion that we ignore > them? Thank you for that, Dave. de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Demetre SV1UY wrote: > > Hi all, > > Too many lawyers in USA killed PACKET RADIO. The way you are going on > you are going to kill all DIGITAL RADIO too. > > Hey guys hold your horses. It is a hobby not a court of law. > > 73 de Demetre SV1UY Hey, Demetre, you got something against lawyers? We lawyers LOVE digital radio. Down with anti-lawyer bigotry. de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Russell, It's my understanding that the ham accessing ones station via the internet (IRB) is not the control operator. The reason is that the ham at the computer does not have the ability to shut down the transmitter in the event of trouble. I think the bottom line is that the control operator must be in control of his or her station when operating on specific segments of the amateur bands that do not allow automation or unattended operation. I think it's that simple. Best of luck with your projects... Tony -K2MO - Original Message - From: "Russell Blair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 10:31 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ? > Tony, well with all the commits about my question > about Beacons. I was part of the testing of the > "NBEMS" and the question came up about Beacons below > 10m. > > So with the Beacon program that comes with VBdigi, in > the message section I will input a "CQ". > > Now with attended and unattended, with the internet > and a ethernet card and VNC or some other programs > that "you" or any other operator could be the control > operator, So I just call you and say can you keep > check on my station I need to be away, at that time > you would connect via the internet to my PC and be the > control operator, until I get back and take controls > back. I know this is a crude example of controling a > unattended station. > > Russell NC5O > > --- Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Russel, >> >> If your goal is to set up an automated beacon on the >> 10 meter band, then >> you're ok as per Part 97.203. It looks like your out >> of luck if you want >> to test propagation using your own beacon on the >> lower HF frequencies >> without being present in the shack. >> >> That being the case, why not call CQ instead of >> broadcasting a one way >> beacon? You'll pretty much gain the same knowledge >> about propagation and >> make a contact in the interim! >> >> If your interests are strictly propagation, there's >> always the NCDXF >> beacons. They are in continuous operation 24/7 on >> 14100.0, 18110.0, >> 21.150.0, 24.930.0 and 28.200.0. >> >> Good luck with your endeavors... >> >> Tony -K2MO >> >> >My Question, is a beacon a beacon if is maned, or >> does it have to be >> >unmaned to be a beacon. >> >For me my beacon has not be on the air without >> being here at the PC. So >> >do we scrip the testing or find a >> >spot up on 10m. Russell NC5O >> >> >> > > > = > IN GOD WE TRUST ! > = > Russell Blair NC5O > Skype-Russell Blair > Hell Field #300 > DRCC #55 > > > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Tony, well with all the commits about my question about Beacons. I was part of the testing of the "NBEMS" and the question came up about Beacons below 10m. So with the Beacon program that comes with VBdigi, in the message section I will input a "CQ". Now with attended and unattended, with the internet and a ethernet card and VNC or some other programs that "you" or any other operator could be the control operator, So I just call you and say can you keep check on my station I need to be away, at that time you would connect via the internet to my PC and be the control operator, until I get back and take controls back. I know this is a crude example of controling a unattended station. Russell NC5O --- Tony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Russel, > > If your goal is to set up an automated beacon on the > 10 meter band, then > you're ok as per Part 97.203. It looks like your out > of luck if you want > to test propagation using your own beacon on the > lower HF frequencies > without being present in the shack. > > That being the case, why not call CQ instead of > broadcasting a one way > beacon? You'll pretty much gain the same knowledge > about propagation and > make a contact in the interim! > > If your interests are strictly propagation, there's > always the NCDXF > beacons. They are in continuous operation 24/7 on > 14100.0, 18110.0, > 21.150.0, 24.930.0 and 28.200.0. > > Good luck with your endeavors... > > Tony -K2MO > > >My Question, is a beacon a beacon if is maned, or > does it have to be > >unmaned to be a beacon. > >For me my beacon has not be on the air without > being here at the PC. So > >do we scrip the testing or find a > >spot up on 10m. Russell NC5O > > > = IN GOD WE TRUST ! = Russell Blair NC5O Skype-Russell Blair Hell Field #300 DRCC #55 Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
The unattended terminology is mostly semantics since the effect of allowing automatic operation does permit the station to operate without a control operator present or even performing this duty from a remote base. Although the FCC does not use the term semi-automatic, we hams often use it as a shorthand term for having human to machine connections and with the machine only being permitted to operate when queried by the human control operator. It is clearly covered under 97.22 Automatically controlled digital station. (c) A station may be automatically controlled while transmitting a RTTY or data emission on any other frequency authorized for such emission types provided that: (1) The station is responding to interrogation by a station under local or remote control; and (2) No transmission from the automatically controlled station occupies a bandwidth of more than 500 Hz. Otherwise, if the station is over 500 Hz, or if the station is operated machine to machine, such as the old Winlink network, current NTS/D network, packet networks, etc., (even if they were 500 Hz and under, they must operate inside limited frequency segments on the HF bands. 73, Rick, KV9U jgorman01 wrote: > Hey! I'll call and raise you two! > > Unattended operation is not just "not prohibited", it is specifically > allowed. > > 97.3(a)(6)Automatic control. The use of devices and procedures for > control of a station when it is transmitting so that compliance with > the FCC Rules is achieved without the control operator being present > at a control point. > > 97.109(d) When a station is being automatically controlled, the > control operator need not be at the control point. > > As you say each of these rules do require a control operator for the > station AND neither of these rules have verbiage relieving the control > operator of meeting all the requirements you have listed. However, > they do not require the control operator to be present. In other > words, if someone claims harmful interference and you are operating > unattended, I don't see where you would have a leg to stand on when > claiming you didn't interfere. At the very least, you couldn't have > followed 97.101(b) and you are putting yourself at a large risk for > not being able to meet 97.101(c). > > By the way, the claim for semi-automatic operation is a joke. The > rules very plainly delineate three types of control, local, remote, > and automatic. That's it, end of story. The rules also plainly > detail what an auxiliary station station is when using an RF link to > control your station remotely, and a winlink client simply doesn't > meet the requirements for an aux station or a telecommand station. > > Jim > WA0LYK > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Russel, If your goal is to set up an automated beacon on the 10 meter band, then you're ok as per Part 97.203. It looks like your out of luck if you want to test propagation using your own beacon on the lower HF frequencies without being present in the shack. That being the case, why not call CQ instead of broadcasting a one way beacon? You'll pretty much gain the same knowledge about propagation and make a contact in the interim! If your interests are strictly propagation, there's always the NCDXF beacons. They are in continuous operation 24/7 on 14100.0, 18110.0, 21.150.0, 24.930.0 and 28.200.0. Good luck with your endeavors... Tony -K2MO >My Question, is a beacon a beacon if is maned, or does it have to be >unmaned to be a beacon. >For me my beacon has not be on the air without being here at the PC. So >do we scrip the testing or find a >spot up on 10m. Russell NC5O
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Demetre, amateur radio in the United States is governed by FCC regulations. Would the fact that Winlink PMBOs flagrantly violate these regulations have something to do with your suggestion that we ignore them? 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Demetre SV1UY Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 7:25 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ? Hi all, Too many lawyers in USA killed PACKET RADIO. The way you are going on you are going to kill all DIGITAL RADIO too. Hey guys hold your horses. It is a hobby not a court of law. 73 de Demetre SV1UY
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Hi Don, I agree that is not completely clear from reading the rules, but maybe one could interpret them to mean that you can transmit a beacon if you are the control operator. The main point is that you definitely can not do this if you operate automatically on the bands below 28 MHz. I contacted ARRL several months ago and did receive a response from Paul Rinaldo, W4RI, on some of these issues. At the time I was mostly concerned about clarification on what text data refers to vs. image/fax and whether or not we could consider documents (.doc, .xls, .pdf, etc.) to be fax, that sort of thing. Also, the issues about baud rate in the voice/image portions of the bands. I believe that I published his response on the HFDEC yahoogroup, maybe on this group as well?. He had some clear answers to some questions but on some he felt that the issues were yet to be determined. About that time, additional issues came up and as I sent an e-mail to ARRL's Dan Henderson, N1ND, on 10/1/07, mentioning that I had contacted Paul about some of the issues. He indicated he would defer the questions to Paul and I waited about a month and contacted him to find out how things were going and he indicated that he did not plan to do anything further as he assumed somehow that Paul had already answered the questions. It was a bit bizarre to say the least as I thought I explained that only some of the questions had been dealt with, but he had no further response. I then asked this group to respond and make recommendations to my draft questions I was planning to forward to the FCC. I believe that Andy, K3UK, had any suggestions. Some hams publicly and privately appreciated that someone was at least going to ask these questions. At least one ham, was over the top with a personal attack but I guess that you have to expect this behavior these days. I took Andy's suggestions, and modified the questions and sent them to the attention of Mr. Hollingsworth, on 12/11/07. I have not heard anything back at this time. I agree with you completely on this issue and I take issue with those who do not want a response from the FCC. It is simply not reasonable for so many hams to not clearly understand what a given rule does or does not mean. We should all be pleased that someone is finally asking for some assistance in interpreting some of these rules. If the FCC does respond in a way that some feel is not a proper interpretation, or they are opposed to the rule, they can then petition the government for a change. That is the democratic process and it should be strongly supported by hams who want to do the right thing. 73, Rick, KV9U Don wrote: > Hi Rick KV9U, > > I know we have had a few email exchanges on this and I really > appreciate you and many other digital ops here in this group and on > the bands. I will not get into this too much but agree it must be > attended while in the shack and as you know I'm also a user and > supporter of PropNet until or if the FCC otherwise states that the > operation of PropNet on 30m is not with in the rules (also, I think > Ev W2EV from PropNet doesn't call PropNet operators 'beacons' but > PropNet stations). If the FCC does comment on this one way or the > other then we will of course do as directed and follow any rules as > they interpret them. I know you where going to email/write/contact > the ARRL and the FCC on the PropNet issues below 28mhz and wonder if > you ever got a response yet? I would be very interested in the > repsonses because we can talk about what we think the rules say or > try our best to interpret them for what PropNet is doing but the FCC > really has the final word and say if what they have is unclear or > operations are not within the rules. Thanks for all you do Rick and > others digital ops here for Ham Radio digi ops. > > BTW, we are planning another 30m PropNet in March 2008 and hope we > have others participate if they are around in the Shack to operate > and participate...those that must leave the shack or can't attend due > to other events can always participate anyway while using the > PropNet 'lurk' mode where you can still be a rcvr and report PropNet > signals but just not participate in the transmit part of the event. > > Thanks for letting me post here in this group. > > de kb9umt Don EN50dp > http://www.30meterdigital.org > > >
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ?
Unattended operation is not prohibited. However, every station must have a control operator (97.7) that fulfills specific duties (97.105) that include not transmitting when the frequency is already in use (97.101d). The cited sections are appended below for your convenience. All of part 97 is available via http://www.w5yi.org/page.php?id=57 73, Dave, AA6YQ 97.7 Control operator required When transmitting, each amateur station must have a control operator. The control operator must be a person: (a) For whom an amateur operator/primary station license grant appears on the ULS consolidated licensee database, or (b) Who is authorized for alien operation by §97.107 of this Part. 97.105 Control operator duties (a) The control operator must ensure the immediate proper operation of the station, regardless of the type of control. (b) A station may only be operated in the manner and to the extent permitted by the privileges authorized for the class of operator license held by the control operator. 97.101 General standards (a) In all respects not specifically covered by FCC Rules each amateur station must be operated in accordance with good engineering and good amateur practice. (b) Each station licensee and each control operator must cooperate in selecting transmitting channels and in making the most effective use of the amateur service frequencies. No frequency will be assigned for the exclusive use of any station. (c) At all times and on all frequencies, each control operator must give priority to stations providing emergency communications, except to stations transmitting communications for training drills and tests in RACES. (d) No amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communication or signal. -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of jgorman01 Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 5:09 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ? What rule says you can't leave an automatic station unattended? It would be a great rule, but I don't see it. Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "John Becker, WØJAB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It is one thing to be " automatic " and " attended " > and another to be " automatic " and " unattended ". > > The rules say you can't be " unattended " > > > > > > At 11:19 AM 1/5/2008, you wrote: > > >A station transmitter without a homo sapiens located at a receiver *at > >the location of the receiver* is unattended. Some have confused the > >issue by claiming that a remote station (i.e. a Pactor station) that is > >activated by another station hundreds or thousands of miles away, is > >"attended" because it was activated by the distant station. This is > >"unattended" transmitting because the distant station cannot check the > >channel to see if it is clear due to the properties of skip. > > > >So Rick's use of the terms was correct. The concept of a distant > >activating station "attending" a remote transmitter is incorrect. > > > >de Roger W6VZV > > > > > > > >Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > >http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php > > > > > >View the DRCC numbers database at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > >
