[RTTY] Will You Let FCC Kill PACTOR3?

[Art W2NRA]

Bravo Joe,

May I plagiarize your comments when I comment in support of Petition for
RM-11392?

73 Art W2NRA
"Keep to the Code!
w2nra.com

-----Original Message-----
From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On
Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV

> And this would be bad ... why?  Automatic == bad, IMHO, whether 
> it's Pactor or RTTY or Morse and as you said, 1500 kHz is plenty 
> of bandwidth. 

PACTOR III has at least three other things against it beside its 
excessive bandwidth.  

1) it is regularly abused for automatically controlled networks by 
   quasi-commercial interests.  

2) it is a proprietary protocol so it cannot be monitored by 
   those who choose not to spend the excessively high price 
   for the proprietary modems. 

3) it lacks any "channel occupied" monitoring capabilities and 
   will shift to wider bandwidth modes on a whim without any 
   consideration of other adjacent users. 
 
PACTOR III should be illegal for US licensees in any case but 
most of all, digital modes should be limited to 500 Hz in the 
current "non-phone" allocations.  Bandwidths greater than 500 
Hz are not compatible with traditional (CW, 170 Hz shift RTTY 
and PSK31/63) "narrow" modes. 

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Peter Laws
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 2:26 PM
> To: RTTY
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Will You Let FCC Kill PACTOR3?
> 
> 
> On Dec 27, 2007 12:23 PM, Kok Chen <chen at mac.com> wrote:
> 
> > RM-11392 pretty much attempts to keep Pactor III in particular, and
> > automatic stations in general, from interfering with 
> keyboard digital
> > modes.  Just MHO, of course.
> 
> 
> And this would be bad ... why?  Automatic == bad, IMHO, whether it's
> Pactor or RTTY or Morse and as you said, 1500 kHz is plenty of
> bandwidth.  Far from (what word was used?) "stifling"  amateur
> innovation, forcing narrower bandwidth should do just the opposite.
> 
> I admit to not clicking through to TFA, but I don't think it's an ARRL
> petition and we all know that the FCC only mangles ARRL proposals.
> :-P
> 
> -- 
> Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
> 

 

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty