Tom,
For a guy who is an ARRL Life Member you sure have a poor opinion of the
organization or bad information.
Normally I don’t post much on the reflector, but……
As an ARRL Director and a member of the ARRL Board Executive Committee
that is studying the issue of a “Regulation by Bandwidth Proposal” I
feel I must correct some of your blatant errors in fact.
1. The ARRL Directors have no links to the German manufacturer SCS, the
manufacturer of the PTC modem that does Pactor III. SCS is not even an
advertiser in QST. Not only are we not in bed with them we are not even
staying at the same hotel. Yes, they donated a modem to W1AW, but that
was arranged through Steve Waterman of Winlink. There has been no direct
contact with SCS.
2. You said, >Many of the members of the ARRL ad-hoc committee that
>>adopted this system were actually the owners, and employees of the
>>company that makes the Winlink machine.
3. The reality is - There were a couple of members who belong to the
Winlink organization, but they are not "employees," nor do they "own
it." Winlink is an all-volunteer group. I'm not sure exactly what you
mean by the "Winlink machine." Yes, the individuals in question helped
create the Winlink network, but they have no connection whatsoever to SCS.
4. Winlink is a software system not a modem as Jay, WS7I, has correctly
pointed out.
5. Pactor III is only one of many digital protocols that can be used by
Winlink to send messages.
6. There is currently NO widespread deployment of SBC Pactor III modems
in the USA.
7. I am not aware that any ARES group has yet deployed them. They are
certainly not in use by ARES in New York and New Jersey (my division).
8. Most Winlink traffic is confined to UHF/VHF. Even if eventually
fully deployed there would be no more than 75 HF gateway stations. Few
of those would be operating Pactor III and they would not all be
operating at the same time. And those operating would be on only a few
frequencies. Fears of Winlink taking over HF are not realistic. Few
hams are going to spring for $1500 for a modem to do it.
9. If you are currently getting interference it is probably from packet
or plan old pactor 1 or 2.
10. When I enter a RTTY contest if I get interference it is from packet
or pactor and on 40 meters from SSB or CW stations. The biggest
interference problem I have is with packet which is probably unattended
packet.
11. But you and others are correct that Winlink is not going to go away,
but then neither is RTTY.
At six AM tomorrow morning I fly off to Denver, CO where the ARRL
Executive Committee will meet to this weekend to discuss this and other
issues. I mention this as I will not be able to reply to any messages
until at least next Tuesday.
I can tell you this, I am seeing a great deal of misunderstanding about
this issue of “regulation by bandwidth” which has more to do with things
other than Pactor III and Winlink.
One final comment: If you have a position on this issue let your
director know. It is only the fifteen directors who vote on this issue.
Section managers do not set ARRL policy and this is a policy issue.
73 and please work me in the contests or if you wind up in a rare RTTY
location.
Frank.....N2FF..... and incidentally Hudson Division ARRL Director......
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|