[RTTY] BoD votes LoTW initiatives

[Kok Chen]

On Jul 26, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Peter Laws wrote:

> We shouldn't get sidetracked, though.  The issue at hand is excessive
> bandwidth in the narrow-band portions of the FCC allocations.  We need
> to fix the automatic station stuff and we need to fix the proprietary
> encoding problem (D-STAR, PACTOR, etc), but this isn't the time.

Let me pose a question for the community.

Lets say the automatic stations are bound by enforceable rules that they cannot transmit over an on-going QSO, and will also not respond to other modes (even my puny RTTY signal) with their idiotic bzzzzt when my signal is not meant for them.  

Is there still an objection over having wideband modes among narrow band modes?

Each item (wideband, ALE, etc) when taken alone are not objectionable to me (but that's just me).  But together, it just doesn't work for me.

If no rules are enforceable, then I cannot but object to wide band signals among narrow band signals.  It is good for neither of the users of narrow band modes nor the wideband modes (as Henning Harmuth pointed out eons ago).

A human cannot copy Morse over 2.8 kHz of wideband garbage, and you won't be able to copy RTTY through it either.  And the only time when a wideband signal can survive a narrow band carrier is if it were to use spread spectrum techniques (why Hedy Lamar came up with her Spread Spectrum patent to start with).  And Spread Spectrum is forbidden below 29 MHz.

73
Chen, W7AY