Re: [digitalradio] Re: jt65a is an automatic mode
Robert, The reason that radio amateurs discussing automatic operation would use the term is primarily because that is the term used under Part 97. On the other hand Part 97 does not reference the word unattended. We need to insure we are talking the same language, and not substitute euphemisms for the actual terminology that we are working with in the rules. 73, Rick, KV9U Robert Thompson wrote: It would seem that automatic is a word that provokes un-helpful discussion. Since no meaningful discussion can be held without shared terms and meanings, maybe we could consider the following definitions rather than using the nebulous and diverse automatic: Unattended: Cases where there is no operator present in any meaningful sense. (I am not implying that this is legal or illegal, merely defining terms) Multiplexed:Cases (such as APRS, certain parts of ALE, etc) where the frequency may be shared among different protocols all expecting burst transmissions and possibly implementing ARQ or other methods of surviving interference. Programmatic: Appropriate in any case where there is a protocol controlling the contents of transmissions, (as opposed to strictly-brain-interpreted methods; after all, one *could* implement a packet BBS interface in international Morse over CW. It would be programmatic since the person would have to do what the BBS expected) Most multiplexed protocols and conversations are of course programmatic. A case where this is not so would be keyboard-to-keyboard over unproto ax.25 packets. That would be multiplexed but not programmatic. Not all programmatic protocols are multiplexed: any single-user BBS interface, for example, is not multiplexed. Any criticisms or improvements needed? -- Regards, Robert Thompson
Re: [digitalradio] Re: jt65a is an automatic mode
It would seem that automatic is a word that provokes un-helpful discussion. Since no meaningful discussion can be held without shared terms and meanings, maybe we could consider the following definitions rather than using the nebulous and diverse automatic: Unattended: Cases where there is no operator present in any meaningful sense. (I am not implying that this is legal or illegal, merely defining terms) Multiplexed:Cases (such as APRS, certain parts of ALE, etc) where the frequency may be shared among different protocols all expecting burst transmissions and possibly implementing ARQ or other methods of surviving interference. Programmatic: Appropriate in any case where there is a protocol controlling the contents of transmissions, (as opposed to strictly-brain-interpreted methods; after all, one *could* implement a packet BBS interface in international Morse over CW. It would be programmatic since the person would have to do what the BBS expected) Most multiplexed protocols and conversations are of course programmatic. A case where this is not so would be keyboard-to-keyboard over unproto ax.25packets. That would be multiplexed but not programmatic. Not all programmatic protocols are multiplexed: any single-user BBS interface, for example, is not multiplexed. Any criticisms or improvements needed? -- Regards, Robert Thompson
Re: [digitalradio] Re: jt65a is an automatic mode
Bonnie if you are always this untrustworthy, i better remove the link to your homepage from mine: /- 1. It has an AUTOMATIC button. / Which button is that? I must be blind, I have conducted more that 1500 QSO whith WSJT in various modes, and have never had a glimpse of such a button... /- 2. The operator programs the software to transmit, and it starts - sending various transmissions automatically. / Wrong! the operator programs and *selects a message*, which is then transmitted periodically until the operator decides to do something else! /- 3. It responds automatically to other stations with pre-programmed - sequences. / Plain wrong! It does no such thing, the *operator* responds by selecting or creating a new message /- 4. It automatically logs other stations./ It does not, the operator decides if and when. /- 5. It automatically sends and receives a series of canned QSOs./ Nope, the only thing it does automatically is to start and stop the tyransmission of *the selected* message at the correct times (a task a computer is far better suited at than a human! . Do I have to continue? Please Bonnie: peddle only what you know to be a fact, and leave the Hogwash to others! -- Vy 73 de OZ1PIF/5Q2M, Peter ** CW: Who? Me? You must be joking!! ** email: peter(no-spam-filler)@frenning.dk http://www.frenning.dk/oz1pif.htm Ph. +45 4619 3239 Snailmail: Peter Frenning Ternevej 23 DK-4130 Viby Sj. Denmark ***
Re: [digitalradio] Re: jt65a is an automatic mode
expeditionradio wrote: JT65a is certainly an automatic mode. It is as automatic as any other automatic system. It perfectly fits the definitions of automatic in both the strictest sense and in many other ways, figuratively, literally and as used in RF communications: It sounds like a ghastly prescription for useless QRM. de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Re: jt65a is an automatic mode
Not at all. It is a mode where humans must decide if a QSO is valid. EME ops are certainly picky about this. It is meant for EME, it was not created as another automatic box. Of course, it has proven useful for extreme HF DX as well, which is not as extreme as EME may prove to be. I would advise some actual JT65 operation on the air before creating a stir about it. Jose, CO2JA --- Roger J. Buffington wrote: expeditionradio wrote: JT65a is certainly an automatic mode. It is as automatic as any other automatic system. It perfectly fits the definitions of automatic in both the strictest sense and in many other ways, figuratively, literally and as used in RF communications: It sounds like a ghastly prescription for useless QRM. de Roger W6VZV __ Participe en Universidad 2008. 11 al 15 de febrero del 2008. Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba http://www.universidad2008.cu
