-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Steve Waterman, k4cjx
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 6:13 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink Scanning
Rick,
We would LOVE to have a redundant system, but only
ce ... emergency communications. And perhaps even more
importantly,
> if you don't have those systems in place and used daily, contrary
to what
> some people believe, they won't be there when you need them the
most.
>
> 73,
>
> Rick, KV9U
>
>
>
>
> ---
: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Vince
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 17:16
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] RE: Winlink Scanning
Bob DeHaney wrote:
>It is clear that the ARRL serves a vital representative need for radio
>amateurs wor
Bob DeHaney wrote:
>It is clear that the ARRL serves a vital representative need for radio
>amateurs worldwide. In the time I've been licensed (since 1961), they've
>saved our mutual bacon several times. Your digital modes are permitted
>because the ARRL lobbied for them and got the regulations
neral
population couldn't care less.
Bob
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bob DeHaney
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 15:17
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] RE: Winlink Scanning
It is clear that the ARR
: [digitalradio] RE: Winlink Scanning
It is clear that the ARRL serves a vital representative need for radio
amateurs worldwide. In the time I've been licensed (since 1961), they've
saved our mutual bacon several times. Your digital modes are permitted
because the ARRL lobbied fo
democracy, flawed as it is, it's the
best we have at present.
Vy 73, DJ0MBC/WU5T
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Vince
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 14:48
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] RE: W
N7HIY wrote:
>Don't hold your breath Skip, waiting for the ARRL board to change their
>Winlink Pactor band/mode petition. Their decision to totally take over the
>HF bands was made long before their socalled meeting. It's now time we vote
>with our wallets at ARRL advertisers, ARRL membershi
Skip Teller scribed>
"I agree, and appropriate restrictions on unattended operations of all kinds
are essential
to continue to provide sufficient space for alternate tools, and not let
that space be
dominated by a single system like Winlink. Let's amend the ARRL petition to
provide enough
space
> Message: 5
>Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 18:54:21 -0500
>From: "Rick Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: RE: Winlink Scanning
>
> Some specific replies to Skip:
>
> Skip: I don't think the radio amateur community as a whole agrees to
> sacrifice unreasonable for
> the operating conve
Some specific replies to Skip:
Skip: I don't think the radio amateur community as a whole agrees to
sacrifice unreasonable for
the operating convenience of less-than-1% of the US hams, and only 0.3% of
hams world wide,
just for a minor increase in convenience for the less-than-1%.
KV9U: There is
We fundementally agree, Skip: Winlink (and all other semi-automatic
station automation software with the ability to detect busy
frequencies) should expeditiously be modified to peacefully coexist
with all other users of the amateur spectrum. Whether this is
achieved by utilizing the SCS modem
ow that's where they transmit so
> > > we
> > > try to leave the frequency open for them. They do not frequency hop or
> > > where
> > > would we listen? Or weren't you aware of this?
> > >
> > > 73,
> > >
> > > Bob DJ0
***AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Skip Teller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Once he resumes scanning, he is going to connect with the
strongest caller that he can hear, even if there are multiple
callers. The only way he would be unable to connect is if all
calle
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Skip Teller
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 8:09 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] RE: Winlink Scanning
> >>>By distributing callers across multiple scanned frequencies, the
> incidence of multiple callers colliding on a sin
> >>>By distributing callers across multiple scanned frequencies, the
> incidence of multiple callers colliding on a single frequency is
> reduced. Such collisions prevent the PMBO from connecting with any
> of the competing callers, increasing time-from-request-to-
> connection. If the callers ca
>>>AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Howard S. White"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A Couple of Comments:
> 1.My 6 SSB Channels equivalency assumed equal distribution of
traffic over the 24 hours of the day... in the real world, traffic
tends to cluster around
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 9:49
PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink
Scanning
A good example of scanning is provided in the "Station
Description" section of Steve K4CJX's web page at http://www.winlink.org/stations/k4cjx.htm
.Excerpting from this description
>>>AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Skip Teller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Dave, how is the time-from-request-to connection reduced by
scanning?
>>>By distributing callers across multiple scanned frequencies, the
incidence of multiple callers colliding on a sing
know that one callsign is used for many, many different
simultaneous signals on the air.
Rick, KV9U
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Skip Teller
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 7:53 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [
> Message: 3
>Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 04:49:28 -
>From: "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Winlink Scanning
> While such an increase may reduce the time-from-
> request-to-connection for Winlink users, its wrong to do this by
> inconveniencing other operators -- unless
A good example of scanning is provided in the "Station Description"
section of Steve K4CJX's web page at
http://www.winlink.org/stations/k4cjx.htm .
Excerpting from this description,
>>>Beginning of excerpt<<<
Station one: a Kenwood TS-2000 at 100 watts operating on the 40,
and 20 meter
Ed, thank you very much for explaining this to us.
> Now, in my book, it makes absolutely no sense for the PMBOs to be
> scanning, that's something that the user stations should be doing. After
> all, when you have two phones in the house, just look to see which one
> is not in use. That's called
23 matches
Mail list logo
