[SEDXC] FW: [SECC] What is the ARRL doing?

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Although Jim Weaver, W8JE (Great Lakes Division Director) may 
claim the '3 kc' in their submission is a mistake that is the 
goal of SCS (the developers of Pactor III), the operators of 
the WinLink and AirMail systems as well as their commercial 
allies.  I dealt with many of these individuals in the 1980s 
as a member of the original ARRL "ad hoc digital committee" 
that was charged with developing the proposal for what became 
the current rules on automatic digital operation.  

The "semi-automatic" carve out to the rules was preordained by 
the non-packet members of that committee (the WinLink operators)
and there would have been no automatic operation had they not 
been allowed to run their scanning monstrosities any place they 
wanted. 

Everyone should get involved in this instance.  As several of 
us argued in even back then, "semi-automatic" does not work 
because the calling station cannot hear the same stations as 
the unattended station and therefore cannot prevent the 
unattended station from causing interference.  One need only 
spend a short time monitoring 20 meters (just below 14070 and 
between 14090-14100) to hear multiple examples of interference 
to existing users by unattended stations in "semi-automatic" 
operation. 

If SCS and their commercial allies want to continue promoting 
"semi-automatic" operation, the Commission should require the 
protocol to include DSP code to detect any other user (coherent 
signal) in the maximum bandwidth to be used and hold off 
transmission unless the frequency has been clear for at least 
one minute prior to receiving the activating call.  

There are those who will argue the PACTOR systems hold a value 
for emergency communications.  That argument is weak if not 
bogus ... there is no need for unattended operation in an 
emergency.  Emergencies are not characterized by the lack of 
human capital ... they are characterized by the destruction of
physical capital and infrastructure! 

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 








> -----Original Message-----
> From: sedxc-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:sedxc-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tommy
> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 8:14 AM
> To: secc at contesting.com; sedxc at contesting.com
> Subject: [SEDXC] FW: [SECC] What is the ARRL doing?
> 
> 
> I have just read an email response from the Great Lakes 
> Division Director,
> but no input from the SE Director, stating that the ARRL had 
> made a mistake
> in their submission to the FCC, specifically by leaving the 
> term '3kc' in
> their submission, pertaining to RTTY. Evidentially the ARRL 
> has already sent
> a modification to the FCC, clarifying many of the issues.
> 
> Supposedly very soon, the ARRL will have complete information 
> available
> about RM-11306 on their web site, including a discussion memo 
> on this issue
> by K1ZZ.
> 
> At the present time, all of the legal talk about the 
> 'problem' and how the
> ARRL proposes to correct it, is significantly beyond my comprehension!
> 
> Tom - W4BQF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: secc-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:secc-bounces at contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of Tommy
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 11:25 AM
> To: secc at contesting.com; sedxc at contesting.com
> Subject: [SECC] What is the ARRL doing?
> 
> 
> As a rather long-time Life Member of the ARRL, I normally try not get
> publically involved in 'rumors' of what the ARRL is doing or 
> trying to do.
> But if this pdf publication by the FCC is correct, and I have 
> to assume it
> is factual, the ARRL has privately asked the FCC to widen the 
> RTTY bandwidth
> to 3kc, allow RTTY to operate anywhere in the ham bands, 
> including WARC
> bands, and  allow automated email bots (read 'Winlink') to 
> operate ANYWHERE
> they wish in the ham bands, any time they wish.
> 
> If you are at all interested in this, YOUR hobby, it would be 
> informative
> for you to read this document published by the FCC and draw your own
> conclusions.
> 
> 
> 
> Ref: http://n4af.blountscreek.org/CW/RM11306.pdf
> 
> 
> US hams may comment direct to FCC at
> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
> 
> 
> There may be some explanation for this of which I'm unaware. 
> Perhaps the SE
> Director or the SE Vice Director would care to comment on 
> this to help us
> all understand what the ARRL is really trying to accomplish? 
> However I doubt
> they will since their history shows extremely little 
> communication about
> what the ARRL is trying to do, with the folks who voted them 
> into office.
> 
> Tommy Alderman - W4BQF
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SEDXC mailing list
> SEDXC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/sedxc
> 
>