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

[Michael Adams]

W4TV wrote:

> 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.

Just to play devil's advocate for the moment...

How is it known that the Pactor stations involved are under FCC jurisdiction (97.221(b) is an FCCism), and how is it known that this is not a general DQRM incident that just happened to use Pactor for maximum annoyance?

DQRM is DQRM.  It's not unique to Pactor -- I've lost a couple of good CW contacts because someone decided to (ahem) run a RTTY test tape, for example. And granted, while there is some satisfaction to knowing that I missed a CW contact because of THE QUICK BROWN FOX...for some reason DQRMers don't seem to identify, so I'm not sure there was much value in being able to print the text.

That doesn't excuse the Winlink users that just start a contact despite non-Winlink signals in their passband, or the frustration over identifying the stations involved that just potentially carelessly interfered with a keyboard-to-keyboard contact.  However, when it comes time to chat with the Commission about the challenges of automated and non-automated stations coexisting on the bands, those discussions would be most effective by focusing on the issues unique to the use of the automated stations, rather than mode-transcending liddishness.

-- 
Michael Adams | mda at n1en.org