[RTTY] Fwd: RE: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> Mike, data modes with bandwidths of about 2.4 kHz have been in use on
> HF for at least 13 years.

Huh?  The only 2.4 KHz bandwidth digital protocol in use in amateur
service is PACTOR III.  From the SCS web site:

> At the first of May 2002 SCS introduced the new developed high speed
> data mode PACTOR-III. PACTOR-III is a third generation HF protocol
> building on latest developments in 2-dimensional orthogonal pulse
> shaping, advanced error control coding, and efficient source coding.

That makes PACTOR III only 12 years old and it was certainly not in
widespread use for a year or so after introduction.  That makes K1ZZ's
estimate off by two to three years (20 to 30%).

Stretch credibility just a little?

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2014-06-05 11:02 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
> FYI.  Read the entire chain.
>
> Apparently, the ARRL feels that it does not need to adhere to the all
> the rules that the rest of us do and they effectively own or have the
> exclusive right to their bulletin and practice frequencies.
>
> All you need to do is publish an operating schedule and you too can own
> whatever frequency you want?
>
> I am aghast at his response,  that it is ok for W1AW to maliciously
> interfere with another amateur using a frequency.
>
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:     RE: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations
> Date:     Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:12 +0000
> From:     Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ <dsumner at arrl.org>
> To:     'W0MU Mike Fatchett' <w0mu at w0mu.com>
>
>
>
> Mike, data modes with bandwidths of about 2.4 kHz have been in use on HF
> for at least 13 years. RTTY/data and phone/image have separate subbands.
> Changing that would be a major change. RM-11708 proposes a minor change
> to prevent the use of much wider data bandwidths and more efficient use
> of the bandwidth now in use. Why is that a bad thing?
>
> W1AW does not operate under automatic control. There is a control
> operator on duty at all times the station is in operation. Transmissions
> are made on published frequencies and at published times, and have been
> for decades. If you follow your logic to its natural conclusion then
> somebody could just shut down the bulletin and code practice function by
> squatting on those frequencies.
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett [mailto:w0mu at w0mu.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 10:42 AM
> To: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ
> Subject: Re: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations
>
> Dave,
>
> 113 a 3 iv talks about compensation for the control Ops.  That was not
> my question.
>
> My concern is with any station not just W1AW firing up on a specific
> frequency without checking to see if it is busy.  No where in the rule
> above does it say that all the other rules can be ignored.  Transmitting
> on a frequency without checking if it is busy is contrary to all the
> published operating guides by the ARRL and contrary to the FCC rules.
> Where in the rules does it give any station the authority to fire up on
> any frequency without checking?
>
> The rule says you may pay your control op if you have to have a schedule
> and it has to be published.  It does not mean that the schedule must be
> followed at all costs.  The FCC has stated many times that no net,
> organization or otherwise own or control any frequency unless they are
> using it.  When I stop using a frequency it if free to be used by the
> next person.  If I am using a frequency I should be able to continue to
> use that frequency until I am finished.
>
> Are you saying that there is a control operator on duty at all times
> when the bulletins are being sent?  I always thought it was an automated
> process.  If there was a control op in charge at the time of this issue
> why did he/she allow the transmission on top of a frequency in use?
> This behavior would be in violation of the rules would it not?
>
> Any proposals could and should have moved the wideband transmissions
> into the wideband area ie SSB and SSTV.  The proposal could and should
> have set a much lower limit on signals in the cw portions to something
> much less than 2.8khz.
>
> Pactor 4 and winlink will take over our cw bands with transmissions much
> like the W1AW broadcasts.  No need to check if the frequencies are busy,
> just transmit, wipe out the cw or rtty that was there and do whatever it
> is they do.  These wide band data modes can easily deal with narrow band
> noise which was why the proposal moved them into the cw bands.  They
> cannot deal with wide band noise like SSB ans SSTV.
>
> If W1AW does not have to check if a frequency is in use then why should
> anyone else?  These so called automated systems either ignore
> frequencies in use or just don't care.  There are many complaints about
> many of the other modes just coming on and causing interference.
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> On 6/5/2014 6:50 AM, Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote:
>> Mike,
>>
>> The bulletin transmissions must conform to the published schedule in
>> order to comply with 97.113(a)(3)(iv). 18 MHz is problematic because
>> the band is narrow, but it provides excellent coverage.
>>
>> 2.8 kHz HF data signals are permitted now and have been in use for
>> more than a decade. What RM-11708 would do is to limit the bandwidth
>> to that rather than to continue the status quo, which allows much
>> wider bandwidths.
>>
>> 73,
>> Dave K1ZZ
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett [mailto:w0mu at w0mu.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 8:49 PM
>> To: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ
>> Subject: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations
>>
>> Dave,
>>
>> Apparently in the last few days it was reported that W1AW came up on
>> 18.100 and started the Bulletin.  Unfortunately, one of the W1AW/X
>> stations was on that frequency.
>>
>> I have been going over the rules and I would like to understand why
>> W1AW does not check for a busy frequency prior to firing up.  Where in
>> the FCC rules is this allowed.  I am sure that I would be subject to a
>> pink slip if I decided to fire up on top of W1AW or face much peer
>> retribution wouldn't I?
>>
>> Sadly if RM-11708 passes we will all be subject to 2.8khz signals
>> firing up on top of people using a frequency just like W1AW does.
>> Maybe you can explain the difference to me.
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>