To: | rtty@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [RTTY] ARRL's WinLink initiative and Pactor III |
From: | Phil Duff NA4M <na4m@arrl.net> |
Date: | Wed, 11 Aug 2004 19:18:05 +0000 |
List-post: | <mailto:rtty@contesting.com> |
At 06:03 8/11/2004, Thomas K wrote:
Since you have not realized YET that those PACTOR-III stations are out there ... you should not have a problem !!!! Yes - that's why I asked. I've never been interested in operating any of the 'TOR modes so don't know much about their operations. Research indicates that apparently Pactor III is operating in limited sub bands: Use of Pactor-III protocol is limited for US hams and some other countries due to the very wide bandwidth of the Pactor-III signal. Presently digital signals that occupy the bandwidth of PCT-III are restricted to a few sub bands: 28.120-28.189 MHz, 24.925-24.930 MHz, 21.090-21.100 MHz, 18.105-18.110 MHz, 14.0950-14.0995 MHz, 14.1005-14.112 MHz, 10.140-10.150 MHz, 7.100-7.105 MHz, or 3.620-3.635 MHz. I think Pactor-III has been availiable for about more than 2 years now ! Seems that they are operating outside the standard RTTY-freqencies. Yes maybe - if Pactor III stations are adhering to the frequencies above then there should be minimal conflict with RTTY operations, except perhaps 21.090-21.100 and 14.095-14.0995 can be heavily used by RTTY in major RTTY contests. I have been told that the ARES/EMCOMM PACTOR stations have been directed to NOT configure themselves as PMBOs which is good. Additional information I researched regarding FCC regs and Pactor III: ""A 4800 baud digital code may not legally be transmitted below 50 MHz, as the rules are currently written. The limits on HF are 300 baud on all bands but 10m, and 1200 baud on 10m." "In 1995 the FCC relaxed the rules concerning what sort of digital codes could be used. To paraphrase, the "new" rule states that any code is legal AS LONG AS IT IS PUBLICLY PUBLISHED. That's the catch with PACTOR III--its code is NOT published. The company that makes the PACTOR III controllers (SCS) has refused to release the code details." I wonder if the Pactor III protocol/code been published yet? If not it would seem that PACTOR III is not legal on the HF bands in USA? Has anything changed in the FCC regs to address the 300 baud limitation or closed protocol issues??? My concern is if there becomes a large number of ARES/EMCOMM stations on HF running PACTOR III will they stay within these narrow sub bands or spill out from those frequencies and cause problems for RTTY and/or other digital modes. 73 Phil NA4M .--. .... .. .-.. _. ._ ...._ _ _
|
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [RTTY] Multi-mode interface QST article?, Jim Reisert AD1C |
---|---|
Next by Date: | RE: [RTTY] ARRL's WinLink initiative and Pactor III, Ford, Steve, WB8IMY |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [RTTY] ARRL's WinLink initiative and Pactor III, Thomas K |
Next by Thread: | Re: [RTTY] ARRL's WinLink initiative and Pactor III, Duane Budd |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |