[RTTY] FW: If you care about CW and RTTY - time is of the essence

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

On 8/17/2016 7:21 AM, Matthew Pitts via RTTY wrote:
 >
> Claims of potential increases in QRM, nothing more. And without at
 > least a year long test period where Pactor 4 and only that would be
 > allowed, there is no way to prove to anyone on this and other lists
 > that your fears of being overrun by it are ungrounded.

Matthew,

You are, as usual, full of it.  The basis of potential increases in
QRM are well founded based on the automatic station interference like
the case I reported here just the other morning for which you have
still not provided a useful explanation/solution:

>> How often are hams in the RTTY/data segment interfered with by 6 kHz
>> bandwidth signals that originate from hams now?
>
> While it wasn't 6 KHz ... just this morning a PACTOR station fired up
> right in the middle of the WSPR, JT-65 and JT-9 activity on 30 meters.
>
> The interference was either a remote mail system or a user who was
> not listening for existing activity since I could see at least 10
> WSPR signals within the passband of the PACTOR station and that many
> or more JT65 and JT9 signals that would have received QRM if the
> PACTOR station had "up-shifted" to a faster protocol.
>
> This is exactly the issue with both the automatically controlled
> §97.221 (b) and "semi-automatically" controlled §97.221 (c) stations -
> there is absolutely no concern for existing activity on any frequency.
> PACTOR users are the only mode that believes "listen before transmit"
> and "first come, first served" does not apply to them.  *THAT* is the
> quintessential definition of *LID* and "intentional interference."

This is by far not the only case ... ask DXers about the constant QRM
to DXpeditions working split on 40 meters.  I know several who lost
a once in generation opportunity to work Amsterdam & St. Paul when
automated/semi-automated PACTOR QRM ran roughshod over the DX for hours
*outside the §97.221 (b) frequencies* with no way of reaching the
responsible lids to get the QRM ended.

Automatically and semi-automatically controlled stations should only
be permitted if the software and/or modems includes *fully functioning*
and effective "channel busy" capability.

73,

     ... Joe, W4TV