Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
On the other hand, lmost of the early responders to the Extra ticket, went there because that was where the DX was. How about saying that ONLY the extra portion of the band could be used for the contest? Hi. Im sure to get static on that one. ts the same though, when I read some spot begger asking that dx come up to the General portiion of the band. Gut reaction -- Get a ticket that lets you work the DX - that is why the different class tickets were born. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at: DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred, I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do. Moderator DXandTALK http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk Digital_modes http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159 - Original Message - From: "James French" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor > On Tuesday 24 November 2009 21:45:18 DANNY DOUGLAS wrote: >> I have seen the same thing. One of the problems is that 20 and 15 are >> the two dx freqs in the daytime, where we might reasonably contact other >> scouts, in the rest of the world. I.E. That is the typical Scout >> hangout for contacts. Most activity is late morning/early afternoon, >> because of other activities, such as cooking, eating, and traveling. We >> must work around all other regular Scout activities, in order to get a >> few hours in, on the air. >> >> Its not only that, but many people work all week, and the weekends are >> their sole period of time for hamming. If they like to DX at all, they >> have but one choice: join in the contests. Many simply do no like that. >> Frankly, I am tired of seeing the suggestion of trying other bands. >> Maybe they have only one antenna, or have pretty much worked those bands >> out (if and when we get some sunspots), or its daytime and the low bands >> are not open, or night and the high bands are not open. To tell someone >> that if they don't like contest interference, to go someplace else just >> seems a bit much to me. Id tell the contesters to go someplace else: >> like a specific portion of each band, and stay there, and allow others to >> enjoy their hobby also.Harken back to the old Novice Roundup. It was >> only on the Novice bands, gave plenty of time and space to Novices and >> anyone else who wished to join them, and was a real training ground for >> CW ops. By the way, IT WAS TWO WEEKS LONG, and I do not remember anyone >> complaining about interference, except Novices whose crystals put them >> slap atop a foreign broadcast station, who was out of their own >> international assignment areas (lots of those - Radio Moscow, Chinese >> broadcaster, Radio Tirana, etc). >> Danny Douglas >> N7DC >> >> >> >> > > I just got done with the November Sweepstakes PHONE weekend. My observa- > tions about this weekend that might pertain to the non-contesters. > > The contest didn't start until 4pm EST which gave plenty of time to > demonstr- > ate to others (not just scouts) what can be done on HF. After 4pm, forget > about trying to make a QSO for ragchew purposes. > > I don't go 'camping' out on a frequency either like a LOT of stations did. > Also a LOT (95%) of those stations were camping out within a few KHz of > other stations and causing a LOT of interference to each other. Wether > they > could hear each other or not, that is just not for me to do. There was > PLENTY > of space to spread out between stations to avoid that. Plus the power some > where running, I personally didn't think they needed to run that much > power > 99% of the time. > > As for the CW weekend, there was plenty of space to operate in especially > since most CW was done in the cw only portions of the bands. I didn't > notice > any qrm to other stations for cw and it seemed like they went out of their > way to be considerate to others. > > Here is a consideration that someone could PROPOSE to the major contest > sponsers: > = > You can operate ONLY in the General portion of the bands for contests. > That would free up this much space for each band for those non-contesters: > 80m - 200khz > 40m - 50khz > 20m - 75khz > 15m - 75khz > > 160 and 10m would have to be a compromise. I would say: > 160m - bottom 100khz of the band > 10m - from 28.300 to 28.600MHz so as to include the Technician and Novice > classes. > > IF I am
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
On Tuesday 24 November 2009 21:45:18 DANNY DOUGLAS wrote: > I have seen the same thing. One of the problems is that 20 and 15 are the > two dx freqs in the daytime, where we might reasonably contact other scouts, > in the rest of the world. I.E. That is the typical Scout hangout for > contacts. Most activity is late morning/early afternoon, because of other > activities, such as cooking, eating, and traveling. We must work around all > other regular Scout activities, in order to get a few hours in, on the air. > > Its not only that, but many people work all week, and the weekends are their > sole period of time for hamming. If they like to DX at all, they have but > one choice: join in the contests. Many simply do no like that. Frankly, I > am tired of seeing the suggestion of trying other bands. Maybe they have > only one antenna, or have pretty much worked those bands out (if and when we > get some sunspots), or its daytime and the low bands are not open, or night > and the high bands are not open. To tell someone that if they don't like > contest interference, to go someplace else just seems a bit much to me. Id > tell the contesters to go someplace else: like a specific portion of each > band, and stay there, and allow others to enjoy their hobby also.Harken > back to the old Novice Roundup. It was only on the Novice bands, gave plenty > of time and space to Novices and anyone else who wished to join them, and was > a real training ground for CW ops. By the way, IT WAS TWO WEEKS LONG, and I > do not remember anyone complaining about interference, except Novices whose > crystals put them slap atop a foreign broadcast station, who was out of their > own international assignment areas (lots of those - Radio Moscow, Chinese > broadcaster, Radio Tirana, etc). > Danny Douglas > N7DC > > > > I just got done with the November Sweepstakes PHONE weekend. My observa- tions about this weekend that might pertain to the non-contesters. The contest didn't start until 4pm EST which gave plenty of time to demonstr- ate to others (not just scouts) what can be done on HF. After 4pm, forget about trying to make a QSO for ragchew purposes. I don't go 'camping' out on a frequency either like a LOT of stations did. Also a LOT (95%) of those stations were camping out within a few KHz of other stations and causing a LOT of interference to each other. Wether they could hear each other or not, that is just not for me to do. There was PLENTY of space to spread out between stations to avoid that. Plus the power some where running, I personally didn't think they needed to run that much power 99% of the time. As for the CW weekend, there was plenty of space to operate in especially since most CW was done in the cw only portions of the bands. I didn't notice any qrm to other stations for cw and it seemed like they went out of their way to be considerate to others. Here is a consideration that someone could PROPOSE to the major contest sponsers: = You can operate ONLY in the General portion of the bands for contests. That would free up this much space for each band for those non-contesters: 80m - 200khz 40m - 50khz 20m - 75khz 15m - 75khz 160 and 10m would have to be a compromise. I would say: 160m - bottom 100khz of the band 10m - from 28.300 to 28.600MHz so as to include the Technician and Novice classes. IF I am correct, that would free up the PSK, SSTV, and RTTY suggested freque- ncies from contest QRM and allow general qso's to be conducted during conte- sts. Does anyone want to propose this to the contest sponsors or is this something that shouldn't even be suggested. I am NOT an avid contester but I also do NOT like to do many long drawn out ragchews either. If I want a ragchew, I will do that on six, two, or higher VHF band since I will probably see these individuals at Dayton or a VHF+ conference during the year. Plus I can cover out to about 400 miles on any VHF band up to 1296MHz on most days. VHF + microwaves is my prefered bands of operations. These are my thoughts. Milelage may vary. James W8ISS Suggested frequencies for calling CQ with experimental digital modes = 3584,10147, 14074 USB on your dial plus 1000Hz on waterfall. Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
DANNY DOUGLAS wrote: > I have seen the same thing. One of the problems is that 20 and 15 are the > two dx freqs in the daytime, where we might reasonably contact other > scouts, in the rest of the world. I.E. That is the typical Scout If those bands are open, 17 meters will be open. I have had pileups of Europeans call me on 17 meters. For most of the recent DXpeditions, 17 meters has been the "money" band. Lots of rare DX on there. You can work DX all night long on 30 meters after 20 is closed. It is also great for DXpeditions. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
I have seen the same thing. One of the problems is that 20 and 15 are the two dx freqs in the daytime, where we might reasonably contact other scouts, in the rest of the world. I.E. That is the typical Scout hangout for contacts. Most activity is late morning/early afternoon, because of other activities, such as cooking, eating, and traveling. We must work around all other regular Scout activities, in order to get a few hours in, on the air. Its not only that, but many people work all week, and the weekends are their sole period of time for hamming. If they like to DX at all, they have but one choice: join in the contests. Many simply do no like that. Frankly, I am tired of seeing the suggestion of trying other bands. Maybe they have only one antenna, or have pretty much worked those bands out (if and when we get some sunspots), or its daytime and the low bands are not open, or night and the high bands are not open. To tell someone that if they don't like contest interference, to go someplace else just seems a bit much to me. Id tell the contesters to go someplace else: like a specific portion of each band, and stay there, and allow others to enjoy their hobby also.Harken back to the old Novice Roundup. It was only on the Novice bands, gave plenty of time and space to Novices and anyone else who wished to join them, and was a real training ground for CW ops. By the way, IT WAS TWO WEEKS LONG, and I do not remember anyone complaining about interference, except Novices whose crystals put them slap atop a foreign broadcast station, who was out of their own international assignment areas (lots of those - Radio Moscow, Chinese broadcaster, Radio Tirana, etc). Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at: DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred, I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do. Moderator DXandTALK http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk Digital_modes http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159 - Original Message - From: Rick Karlquist To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor Alan Barrow wrote: > > I do radio with boy scout troops when camping. And find increasingly, > that contests are making weekend operation very difficult. It's hard to > find a weekend without a major contest, sometimes more than one. Have you tried 60, 30, 17 or 12 meters? No contests there. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Rick Karlquist wrote: > Have you tried 60, 30, 17 or 12 meters? No contests there. > > Yep, I'm a regular 60m user for that reason. And 30m for digital. 17m is of course one of the best options, but lately prop has not made it a good spot to demo for scouts. For that matter, 60m can be hard to scare up contacts outside of morning/evening. Have fun, Alan
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Alan Barrow wrote: > > I do radio with boy scout troops when camping. And find increasingly, > that contests are making weekend operation very difficult. It's hard to > find a weekend without a major contest, sometimes more than one. Have you tried 60, 30, 17 or 12 meters? No contests there. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
KH6TY wrote: > > > There are VHF contests that are limited to only certain bands out of > all available. There are HF contests for just phone, or CW or RTTY, so > it should be no problem for HF contest sponsors to only allow credit > for Q's made between certain frequencies on each band. I do radio with boy scout troops when camping. And find increasingly, that contests are making weekend operation very difficult. It's hard to find a weekend without a major contest, sometimes more than one. Like many hams say about something they are not involved in, I don't mind contesting, but find it violates many "good neighbor" policies. Enough that if I listen and hear it's a contest weekend, I don't bother to try to demonstrate radio to the scouts, or even just make casual qso's. Just not worth the frustration. I'd like to see a voluntary approach like you described. Add multiplier if you stay out of the top x% of the voice band, or avoid psk sub-bands in a RTTY contest. IE: implement a good neighbor approach to not taking over 100% of a given band segment for the contest. Same number of contacts will take place, it will just happen over a longer period. So you won't have stations Sunday afternoon hitting autokey "CQ contest" six times for hours at end without response. I've heard a rtty station do that 1-2 hours on an common ALE frequency without contact. The issue is that most HF contests do not require (or even check) the frequency of operation, just band. I'm good friends with a very avid contester (not that there's anything wrong with that) who is also a scout leader, and even he is now starting to see the negative impact on non-contesters. All that said, I see this issue going away in a decade or two. :-) Have fun, Alan km4ba
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Sure, there's an alternative! - How about operating in compliance with PART97, which prohibits harmful interference? 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL Prefer to use radio for your amateur radio communications? - Stop by at HamRadioNet.Org ! http://www.hamradionet.org >Personally, I don't think this will ever be resolved until each band is >sliced by bandwidth & nature of operation (wide/narrow, analog/digi, >attended/auto). We'd all lose, but since no one will compromise, there's >not an alternative. >Have fun, >Alan >km4ba
RE: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
re "So you add a magic "frequency is occupied" device to your digi mode. You are legitimately on a frequency, in a digi qso. Yet someone who does not the remote station (hidden) fires up, and stays fired up. At that point, your anti-qrm tripped, and you just lost the frequency, and your qso is terminated. " This would only be true of an extremely naive implementation of a busy frequency detector. The purpose of a busy frequency detector is to prevent an unattended station from initiating a QSO (or responding to a request to initiate a QSO) on a frequency that is already busy. If the unattended station is already in QSO, detection of a signal other than that of its QSO partner would not terminate the QSO. re "Lot's of the (perceived) issue is the classic "hidden terminal" nature of radio you may think a frequency is clear because you hear nothing, but in fact, it's a qso in progress where you can only hear one end. You fire up, and turns out you just stomped on someone. Happens on voice, cw, psk, RTTY, it's equal opportunity." Yes, this does happen, but you neglected to describe the rest of the scenario. The "end" that you can hear says "QRL, pse QSY", and most operators quickly oblige. In contrast, unattended automatic stations *cannot* oblige; they blithely QRM away. An unattended station with a proper busy frequency detector would have likely been monitoring the frequency long enough to detect the copiable half of the QSO already in progress, and thus would never have transmitted on the first place. re "Happens all the time. Some versions of ALE software have reasonable busy freq detectors. Winkink has deployed & tested busy detection. Yet in real life it's unusable, as it pretty much derails any legit qso in progress when other folks (cw, rtty, pactor, whatever) fire up. The naive busy frequency detector, again. re "And when it's been deployed in the winlink world, there has clearly been intentional QRM to hold off the digi's" Yes, Winlink has generated an enormous amount of ill will, to the point where some ops have become so angry that they will waste their time QRMing an automatic station. There is no excuse for this illegal behavior, but its *ludicrous* to use this as an excuse to avoid eliminating the problem by deploying busy frequency detectors. Once Winlink and other unattended automatic stations reduce their QRM rate to something approaching that of the average human operator, the anger will dissipate and the QRMing of automatic stations will dissappear. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on Behalf Of Alan Barrow Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:14 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor KH6TY wrote: > Your prejudice is obviously showing! (Uh - long live HFlink and others > that run unattended transmitters outside the beacon bands and transmit > without checking for a clear frequency???) > With tongue in cheek: "your ignorance is showing" (in the misinformed sense, no insult implied) All unattended ALE operation associated with HFLINK operates solely in the band segments set aside by the FCC for "automatic" operation, including unattended. It's a very narrow slice in each band, and quite full of packet BBS, winlink, and ALE. Given the huge (comparatively) segments where narrow modes (rtty, psk, etc) are allowed that are free from competition, I don't see just cause for complaint. You may not like it, but it's an allowed operation mode in an allowed band segment. ALE activity in other portions of the band is attended mode, with the same guidelines/recommendations for listen before transmit. > The point Charles is making is that transmitting without listening is > simply exceptionally inconsiderate on shared frequencies by all widely > accepted standards of behavior, but you obviously do not get it, and I > guess you really don't want to, do you... Simply put, "frequency > sharing" means not using a frequency unless you have made a reasonable > attempt to verify it is not being used. There is no technology yet > implemented that makes this possible for an unattended station. So help me out, how does the repeated rtty transmissions in contest weekends handle this? I see 100x the examples of xmit without listening during rtty contests then all the semi-auto modes put together? Lot's of the (perceived) issue is the classic "hidden terminal" nature of radio you may think a frequency is clear because you hear nothing, but in fact, it's a qso in progress where you can only hear one end. You fire up, and turns out you just stomped on someone. Happens on voice, cw, psk, RTT
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
DANNY DOUGLAS thoughtfully asks: > We already require this of CW/SSB/RTTY/PSK etc. users. Why should a > user of these higher-newer modes not be held to the same requirements? How is busy channel detection done in PSK or RTTY? people listen for a bit then, transmit. It's not common practice, nor is there an easy way to ask "is the frequency in use" like in voice. CW ops sometimes ask, but not as common. So all digi'ish modes typically fail the hidden terminal detection, which is the majority of QRM. With PSK transmissions taking as long as they do, very few ops listen on a frequency long enough to determine that there is no qso in process. I've commented previously, all HFLINK related ALE operation is confined to band segments where automated operation is allowed. And yes, that means there is risk of hidden terminal interference like with all radio. All other ALE operation is in attended mode, no soundings, and only semi-auto response when queried by another station. At my ALE station, clicking the mic PTT terminates the digi transmission. So in attended mode I can kill or hold off any semi-auto response. I do whenever needed. 99% of the time it's someone interfering with my qso in progress, but I still hold it off. Since the HFLink promoted practice is to operate attended mode only outside of the auto sub-bands, you will find very few cases of interference in other band segments. If it does happen it's unintentional due to hidden terminal effect. No soundings, just hams calling & kbd chat just like rtty/psk. Or using selcall (also allowed) in the voice bands. So yes, HFLink has promoted ALE operation. But it's also channeled that operation into areas to minimize unintentional interference to the limits of technology. And by defining "net" frequencies, have managed to focus even unattended operation away from frequencies used by incompatible uses. (QRP, PSK, SSTV, etc) The significant majority (up in the 95-99%) of ALE activity is on one 3khz frequency per band. Yep, a full 3khz, widely published. And contending with packet bbs's, winlink pactor, and many other modes. You might find some kbd qso's on ALE on another defined freq per band. And the normal HFPack voice net frequencies may see occasional (very rare) ALE selcall's, but no other ALE activity. Likewise, we've tuned and tried to standardize the various ALE settings to make it "ham friendly". This is everything from call duration, to the various arcane ALE settings. Your question is a valid one, and we've tried very hard to practice "good neighbor" policies. I like to think we do better than many user groups. I find it hard to reconcile the bedlam your average RTTY contest weekend with complaints about ALE operation. But we feel an obligation to practice good neighbor operation, and wish others would do the same. Have fun, Alan km4ba
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
KH6TY wrote: > Your prejudice is obviously showing! (Uh - long live HFlink and others > that run unattended transmitters outside the beacon bands and transmit > without checking for a clear frequency???) > With tongue in cheek: "your ignorance is showing" (in the misinformed sense, no insult implied) All unattended ALE operation associated with HFLINK operates solely in the band segments set aside by the FCC for "automatic" operation, including unattended. It's a very narrow slice in each band, and quite full of packet BBS, winlink, and ALE. Given the huge (comparatively) segments where narrow modes (rtty, psk, etc) are allowed that are free from competition, I don't see just cause for complaint. You may not like it, but it's an allowed operation mode in an allowed band segment. ALE activity in other portions of the band is attended mode, with the same guidelines/recommendations for listen before transmit. > The point Charles is making is that transmitting without listening is > simply exceptionally inconsiderate on shared frequencies by all widely > accepted standards of behavior, but you obviously do not get it, and I > guess you really don't want to, do you... Simply put, "frequency > sharing" means not using a frequency unless you have made a reasonable > attempt to verify it is not being used. There is no technology yet > implemented that makes this possible for an unattended station. So help me out, how does the repeated rtty transmissions in contest weekends handle this? I see 100x the examples of xmit without listening during rtty contests then all the semi-auto modes put together? Lot's of the (perceived) issue is the classic "hidden terminal" nature of radio you may think a frequency is clear because you hear nothing, but in fact, it's a qso in progress where you can only hear one end. You fire up, and turns out you just stomped on someone. Happens on voice, cw, psk, RTTY, it's equal opportunity. BTW, no one asks in psk "is the frequency in use?". So you add a magic "frequency is occupied" device to your digi mode. You are legitimately on a frequency, in a digi qso. Yet someone who does not the remote station (hidden) fires up, and stays fired up. At that point, your anti-qrm tripped, and you just lost the frequency, and your qso is terminated. They are in a different mode, and did not ask is the frequency is in use. You would not have decoded it if they did. Happens all the time. Some versions of ALE software have reasonable busy freq detectors. Winkink has deployed & tested busy detection. Yet in real life it's unusable, as it pretty much derails any legit qso in progress when other folks (cw, rtty, pactor, whatever) fire up. And when it's been deployed in the winlink world, there has clearly been intentional QRM to hold off the digi's. I see it even now on the ALE net freq's in the auto sub-band: lot's of space in the cw bands, even for no-code/novice. Yet a cw station will fire up in the center of the ALE, packet, and winlink all sharing a few khz for unattended operation. My view, it's tantamount intentional QRM, as there is a 100% chance of a digi station being queried by a hidden terminal. I've even heard them joke about it in the CW qso. It would be a wonderful world if there was a workable solution. I've tried in the past, and would try again, any workable approach. But what I find is that the anti-digital hams (including some rtty) will absolutely take advantage of any good faith attempts to derail legal activity they don't like. Personally, I don't think this will ever be resolved until each band is sliced by bandwidth & nature of operation (wide/narrow, analog/digi, attended/auto). We'd all lose, but since no one will compromise, there's not an alternative. Have fun, Alan km4ba
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Alan Barrow wrote: > Rick Karlquist wrote: >> That reminds me. During the CW Sweepstakes 2 weeks ago, I was trying >> to operate on ~7030 and bursts of RTTY-sounding stuff kept coming >> on the frequency for 5 or 10 seconds every once in a while. >> Is that ALE? > > That was not ALE, as the common frequencies used for ALE are up in the > higher parts of the band for US ops and for all unattended, in the > "automatic" sub-bands as defined by the FCC. > > Might could have been Euro ALE, but I doubt it, and you are in their > voice band, so all types of QRM could be there. > > Likely it was exactly what you described it as: RTTY of one form or > another. > > Have fun, > > Alan > km4ba I think I was actually on 7040, which someone else pointed out is an automatic frequency. BTW, the Euro voice band is now 7100 to 7200, but it was never as low as 7040 except during Phone contests. If all automatic stuff is confined to 7040, I think it can coexist fine with contesters; we can just avoid that frequency like we avoid the slow scan frequencies on 20 meters. It isn't worth arguing with the 14.230 MHz frequency police. Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Rick Karlquist wrote: > That reminds me. During the CW Sweepstakes 2 weeks ago, I was trying > to operate on ~7030 and bursts of RTTY-sounding stuff kept coming > on the frequency for 5 or 10 seconds every once in a while. > Is that ALE? That was not ALE, as the common frequencies used for ALE are up in the higher parts of the band for US ops and for all unattended, in the "automatic" sub-bands as defined by the FCC. Might could have been Euro ALE, but I doubt it, and you are in their voice band, so all types of QRM could be there. Likely it was exactly what you described it as: RTTY of one form or another. Have fun, Alan km4ba
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Hi Dave "I'm no fan of the way in which many contest stations seem to use, and abuse, the band plans (..)" I could not agree with you more. 73 de LA5VNA Steinar Dave Ackrill wrote: > DANNY DOUGLAS wrote: >> Bonnie, sitting on the side, I see both sides of this. You, on one hand, >> always appear to be pushing expansion of new modes >> - Original Message - >>> From: expeditionradio > >>> If you are really concerned about lids on HF, start with the #1 primary >>> source of QRM: contesters. > > I'm no fan of the way in which many contest stations seem to use, and > abuse, the band plans, but neither am I a fan of digital modes that, > maybe unintentionally at times, trample upon other legitimate users of > the bands either... > > Unfortunately, legislating against either abuse is both unlikely to work > and probably impossible to implement. > > Personally, I would like the organisers of the various contests to > enforce their own rules against persistent offenders. However, > experience over many years suggests that they either will not, or dare > not, do this, which begs the question "why have the rules?" > > I would prefer that the DX community did not trample on top of people at > times, and listen before they transmitted and I would like the Band > Police to not transmit over the top of what they think should, or should > not, be done on a frequency. > > I would also like the ALE and digital community to recognise that they > share the bands with everyone else and are not immune from the 'listen > before use' rule either. > > However, these are just my 'would like to have' and are obviously not > shared by the majority, as they do not happen. > > Dave (G0DJA) >
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Wow another rant. I don't care for contesting, but they are not the only QRM on the band. ALE can be, Winlids for sure but wait lets bring up cw and ssb, and of course AM, this is even during a contest. QRM is a way of life, get over it. KT --- On Mon, 11/23/09, expeditionradio wrote: From: expeditionradio Subject: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 23, 2009, 10:23 AM Charles, Your constant efforts to spread disinformation about ALE use in ham radio shows how little you know about how hams are using ALE. If you are really concerned about lids on HF, start with the #1 primary source of QRM: contesters. Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA --- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, "Charles Brabham" wrote: > The system was not designed for use on amateur > radio's shared spectrum, and that is why it's use > is not appropriate there.
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Good point Skip, in this modern era with cabrillo files, it should be easy to do. On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:37 PM, KH6TY wrote: > > > There are VHF contests that are limited to only certain bands out of all > available. There are HF contests for just phone, or CW or RTTY, so it should > be no problem for HF contest sponsors to only allow credit for Q's made > between certain frequencies on each band. That would be on the honor system, > or might require logging a certain frequency instead of just a band, but > maybe that would be a way to reserve some space for other activities (IF > there could be agreement on what space to reserve!:-) ). > > Just a thought... > > Skip KH6TY > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
DANNY DOUGLAS wrote: > Bonnie, sitting on the side, I see both sides of this. You, on one hand, > always appear to be pushing expansion of new modes > - Original Message - >> From: expeditionradio >> If you are really concerned about lids on HF, start with the #1 primary >> source of QRM: contesters. I'm no fan of the way in which many contest stations seem to use, and abuse, the band plans, but neither am I a fan of digital modes that, maybe unintentionally at times, trample upon other legitimate users of the bands either... Unfortunately, legislating against either abuse is both unlikely to work and probably impossible to implement. Personally, I would like the organisers of the various contests to enforce their own rules against persistent offenders. However, experience over many years suggests that they either will not, or dare not, do this, which begs the question "why have the rules?" I would prefer that the DX community did not trample on top of people at times, and listen before they transmitted and I would like the Band Police to not transmit over the top of what they think should, or should not, be done on a frequency. I would also like the ALE and digital community to recognise that they share the bands with everyone else and are not immune from the 'listen before use' rule either. However, these are just my 'would like to have' and are obviously not shared by the majority, as they do not happen. Dave (G0DJA)
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Bonnie, sitting on the side, I see both sides of this. You, on one hand, always appear to be pushing expansion of new modes (which is good in some respect - that's what makes for advancements in science), but on the other hand, you appear to always want to push other users away, with broader bands, higher speeds, and be dammed with any mode you do not want to use. I haven't been reading much of your output this past year, because I truly got tired of seeing that, particularly when you seem to just ignore the expense of present users. I would like to remind you that many of us have, over and over, been the victim of some digital mode popping up on a busy frequency, and driving us off. You could make a great contribution to acceptance of these new modes, if you would just step up and agree that it happens, and that the contributors (program writers) should write in for "busy frequency" checking of the bands, before transmitting their own signal. We already require this of CW/SSB/RTTY/PSK etc. users. Why should a user of these higher-newer modes not be held to the same requirements? With your knowledge and experience you can make a great contribution here, but really need to help cut back on the push to allow interference to others, for "advancement" to techonology. Please give this some thought. And by the way, contesters are a very main reason for advancement of technology in antennas and hardware - and they have been here a long time. ( I agree, they too should be limited to set sub-bands within the spectrum, but that is unlikely to happen because the sponsors are quite unwilling to accept the facts of their interference to other users). Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at: DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred, I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do. Moderator DXandTALK http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk Digital_modes http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159 - Original Message - From: expeditionradio To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 10:23 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor Charles, Your constant efforts to spread disinformation about ALE use in ham radio shows how little you know about how hams are using ALE. If you are really concerned about lids on HF, start with the #1 primary source of QRM: contesters. Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Brabham" wrote: > The system was not designed for use on amateur > radio's shared spectrum, and that is why it's use > is not appropriate there.
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
OK all put a stop to this. John, W0JAB moderator
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
> Charles, > > Your constant efforts to spread disinformation about ALE use in ham > radio shows how little you know about how hams are using ALE. > > If you are really concerned about lids on HF, start with the #1 primary > source of QRM: contesters. > > Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA > That reminds me. During the CW Sweepstakes 2 weeks ago, I was trying to operate on ~7030 and bursts of RTTY-sounding stuff kept coming on the frequency for 5 or 10 seconds every once in a while. Is that ALE? Why am I as a contester "QRM" and that stuff is not QRM? Rick N6RK
Re: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor
Bonnie: I have not spread any disinformation about ALE anywhere. Take your personal attacks elsewhere. You bore me. 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL Prefer to use radio for your amateur radio communications? - Stop by at HamRadioNet.Org ! http://www.hamradionet.org - Original Message - From: expeditionradio To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 9:23 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Disinformation about ALE by N5PVL Re: Getting serious about ALE / LID factor Charles, Your constant efforts to spread disinformation about ALE use in ham radio shows how little you know about how hams are using ALE. If you are really concerned about lids on HF, start with the #1 primary source of QRM: contesters. Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Brabham" wrote: > The system was not designed for use on amateur > radio's shared spectrum, and that is why it's use > is not appropriate there.
