[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] [MMTTY] RE: [digitalradio] Why (and How) You Should Urge the

To: MMTTY@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] [MMTTY] RE: [digitalradio] Why (and How) You Should Urge the FCC to Reject the ARRL's Symbol Rate Petition
From: Peter Laws <plaws@plaws.net>
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 18:12:43 -0600
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@ambersoft.com> wrote:

>>>>In the absence of a remote control link conformant with 97.3(38), Winlink 
>>>>servers are automatic stations, as defined by 97.3(6);
> if using a mode wider than 500 hertz, WinLink servers are subject to 97.221.

Control link, eh?  Are the sailors claiming that the station at the
other end is controlling the remote station?

Because if that's the case, then the person remotely controlling the
distant station is operating an auxiliary station and the rules for
those say they can only be operated above 144.5 MHz (with exceptions -
used to be 222.15, but Kenwood got that changed because their
SkyCommand wouldn't be legal without it).  See 47 CFR 97.201 and

So either ...

o the internet email gateways are automatically controlled stations,
in which case many of them are operating outside of the
automatic/unattended allocations, or ...

o the gateways are being remotely controlled in which case the
operator of the station doing the remote control is operating an
auxiliary station outside  allocations for that type of station.

Doesn't seem a tenable situation.  *Someone* is violating the letter
of the regulations (the spirit was long ago killed when they started
sending email over the air).

Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
RTTY mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>