Re: [digitalradio] Report of the ARRL Ad Hoc HF Digital Committee Dissenting Recommendation
I am somewhat relieved, if still confused about the language. Also, I am certainly glad I never took up the law as a profession - the language used is designed to confuse everyone else, and probably half the lawyers. I am dead set against ANY automatic mode use of our bands during normal operational times. Having such, for emergency use, I do understand and could condone. The problem with that, of course, is the necessity to exercise the system so it, and the operators, will be ready in case of a real emergency situation. Being that these systems are becoming a quasi-arm of the government I believe they should be assigned non-amateur frequencies, but near the present ham assignments so that the antennas and propagation will not be such that they cannot be quickly moved onto the ham bands during a valid emergency situation. We simply do not have the spectrum to allow such modes on to our limited assignments in the hf bands, and still allow for normal amateur use of QSOs, contests, etc. Semi-automatic is just one step better than fully-automatic operation. Neither one will provide compliance of the rule to insure the frequencies are clear, before both ends transmit. Thanks for the information. The ARRL would be well advised to insure such information is thoroughly propagated not only to members, but to the general ham population as well. Printing information in QST is simply not enough. They also need a way to speak in words that the general population would understand and to translate the legalese to plain old English. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk - Original Message - From: "John Champa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:40 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Report of the ARRL Ad Hoc HF Digital Committee Dissenting Recommendation > Danny, > > I think this LONG e-mail from Jim will clear this up > > 73, > John > K8OCL > >
Re: [digitalradio] Report of the ARRL Ad Hoc HF Digital Committee Dissenting Recommendation
It is a frightning thought that the ARRL is acting toward these automatic stations, the same as the FCC is acting toward BPL. Both organizations are charged with doing what is best for the citizens, they represent. The ARRL should be representing the other 99 percent of us, and not the one percent who think amateur radio is a branch of government special emergency communications. The FCC should be representing licensed radio operations - of which amateur radio is a small part- and not the electric companies who are simply in it with the misunderstanding that they are going to profit in this lousy technology. Both governing boards are remiss in doing the job they were put there for, and should be replaced. The FCC chairman and members probably WILL be replaced during the next administration. It is time for US to replace those on the ARRL board who think they have become the Kings and Princes and have no one to answer to. If any of you out there of of a mind to do so, I encourage you to get onboard and either run for the office in your area, or find someone whom you can support, and who would go into the job with an open mind instead of the bloody close mindness of those who are voting to support such actions as this committee has proposed. If the board accepts and pushes thru this anti CW/SSB/RTTY recommendation they have no right to continue on as OUR representatives. It takes a large amount of time to run and organization such as the ARRL, and a certain amount of financial backing for one to hold down such offices. I hope those responsible amateurs who have the time and money will step forward and let us know who they are. Tell us their thoughts, and let us vote as our hearts say. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk - Original Message - From: "Andrew O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:13 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Report of the ARRL Ad Hoc HF Digital Committee Dissenting Recommendation > Report of the ARRL Ad Hoc HF Digital Committee > Dissenting Recommendation > > Prepared by Committee Member Howard Teller, KH6TY > > Why is a dissenting recommendation necessary? > > The majority recommendation of the ARRL hfdigital committee represents > the interests of a small special interest group, Winlink, representing > 0.7% of the FCC licensed radio amateurs in the United States, and NOT > the interests of ALL radio amateurs, as requested by ARRL president, > Jim Haynie. > > The ARRL hfdigital committee majority recommendation [hfdigital:284] > was composed and written jointly by the Winlink author, W5SMM, and the > Winlink Network Administrator, K4CJX, and then rubber-stamped, without > comment except for typo corrections, by the Winlink supporters on the > committee, WA1LOU and K0PFX. All alternative recommendations were > totally ignored by the chairman and Winlink supporters. At no time > during the committee discussions did WA1LOU or K0PFX submit any > independent comments or suggestions except for corrections. The > chairman of the committee, who is also the Winlink software author, > consistently shut off discussion prematurely and forced a vote, which > was naturally won by the Winlink majority, eventually resulting in the > resignation of the widely respected Peter Martinez, G3PLX, in protest > for having his views silenced. > > The committee majority recommendation therefore represents the views > of a special interest group, and NOT the interests of all radio amateurs. > > This dissenting recommendation is submitted as a recommendation that > at least attempts to consider the needs of ALL radio amateurs, > including Winlink. > > Introduction > > Winlink consists of a network of fully automated digital transceivers, > providing free email gateways to the Internet using the ham bands in > competition with commercial LEO satellite services which do the same > thing, but charge for messaging on a per-minute basis. > > This network of fully automated transmitters is causing historically > high levels of interference to all other radio amateur activities on > HF because the automated side of an email gateway is incapable of > "listening first", or frequency sharing, as radio amateurs usually do, > and are required to do, by FCC regulation, and the other side, which > is supposed to be manned by a "listen first" live operator, finds it > unnecessary to be concerned about anyone else already on the > frequency, because the protocol chosen by Winlink is capable of > overpowering anyone else on the frequency,
[digitalradio] Report of the ARRL Ad Hoc HF Digital Committee Dissenting Recommendation
Report of the ARRL Ad Hoc HF Digital Committee Dissenting Recommendation Prepared by Committee Member Howard Teller, KH6TY Why is a dissenting recommendation necessary? The majority recommendation of the ARRL hfdigital committee represents the interests of a small special interest group, Winlink, representing 0.7% of the FCC licensed radio amateurs in the United States, and NOT the interests of ALL radio amateurs, as requested by ARRL president, Jim Haynie. The ARRL hfdigital committee majority recommendation [hfdigital:284] was composed and written jointly by the Winlink author, W5SMM, and the Winlink Network Administrator, K4CJX, and then rubber-stamped, without comment except for typo corrections, by the Winlink supporters on the committee, WA1LOU and K0PFX. All alternative recommendations were totally ignored by the chairman and Winlink supporters. At no time during the committee discussions did WA1LOU or K0PFX submit any independent comments or suggestions except for corrections. The chairman of the committee, who is also the Winlink software author, consistently shut off discussion prematurely and forced a vote, which was naturally won by the Winlink majority, eventually resulting in the resignation of the widely respected Peter Martinez, G3PLX, in protest for having his views silenced. The committee majority recommendation therefore represents the views of a special interest group, and NOT the interests of all radio amateurs. This dissenting recommendation is submitted as a recommendation that at least attempts to consider the needs of ALL radio amateurs, including Winlink. Introduction Winlink consists of a network of fully automated digital transceivers, providing free email gateways to the Internet using the ham bands in competition with commercial LEO satellite services which do the same thing, but charge for messaging on a per-minute basis. This network of fully automated transmitters is causing historically high levels of interference to all other radio amateur activities on HF because the automated side of an email gateway is incapable of "listening first", or frequency sharing, as radio amateurs usually do, and are required to do, by FCC regulation, and the other side, which is supposed to be manned by a "listen first" live operator, finds it unnecessary to be concerned about anyone else already on the frequency, because the protocol chosen by Winlink is capable of overpowering anyone else on the frequency, and keep hammering away using ARQ until the Winlink station dominates the frequency. The result is high levels of QRM to all others. In addition, the manual stations escape detection by never transmitting any callsign identification in case they try to connect with an automatic station and fail. They just create QRM and leave the air unidentified. The majority recommendation proposes to expand this network of robot transmitters to completely cover the ham bands without restriction, including the phone band segments, with the exception of the CW and beacon regions. This chart of the current coverage of the 20 meter band by Winlink robots indicates why interference by these robots is so high and currently disrupts so many other traditional radio amateur communications. It is easy to visualize what it would be like if the majority recommendation were accepted by the Board. There would be no space left on the HF bands for ragchewing, DX chasing, award-chasing, contesting, or experimentation, free from constant interference from Winlink robot stations, such as suffered currently by digital operators, and more recently, on 30 meters by CW operators, who find it more and more difficult to operate without a Pactor station suddenly coming on the frequency in the middle of their QSO. datamodes.jpg Recommendations The hfdigital committee was chartered to address only Minute 63 as follows: "Minute 63. On motion of Mr. Frenaye, seconded by Mr. Bodson, it was unanimously VOTED that the President is authorized to appoint an ad hoc working group to study the new HF data modes in the Amateur Radio Service. The Terms of Reference are to develop recommendations for introduction of voice-bandwidth data modes and to advise the board on amateur-Internet linking and HF automatic control with a final report to the Board by January 2003." Recommendation for Introduction of Voice-bandwidth data modes It is recommended that voice-bandwidth data modes NOT be introduced, nor even allowed, on the crowded HF bands, except for digital voice applications, because they unnecessarily use a disproportionate amount of bandwidth for the benefit of a faster data rate. Data provided by the Winlink Administrator for the first three weeks of 2003, in which 13,182 emails were transferred by Pactor 1 and Pactor 2, which are 500 Hz wide, compared to 5,745 emails transferred by Pactor 3, which is 2400 hz wide, or "voice-bandwidth", shows only a 30% savings in time using a voice-bandwidth data mode, which uses
