Your two-cents worth is money well spent, I agree, David. Andy K3UK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Wright <hfradio...@...> wrote: > > Andy, > > Just two-cents worth here. ALE400 forces the user into one software package > and operating system at the expense of others. Of course, there is > virtualization technologies to help with that, but unless ALE400 gets more > widely adopted it likely isn't the answer as a specified signal of interest > in any amateur band. > > Of course, I like where you are going with that....I'd much rather see > multiple channels of narrow-band ALE in the bandwidth of one normal ALE > signal. > > Another proposal might be to limit the ALE (and Pactor III that was > proposed) to only one of the 60m channels, while allowing voice on all the > others. I think PSK31 was also proposed, but I suspect that it was included > simply to throw people off of the trail of ARRL's 60m EMCOMM grab. > > The problem with trying to setup 60m as an EMCOMM band (supporting ALE, > Pactor III and the like) is that on 60m, we are second class citizens. The > same characteristics that make 60m attractive to hams during an emergency > make it attractive to the government as well. As long as we have to operate > on a not-to-interfere basis, 60m will never be a viable EMCOMM band. FEMA, > DHS, MARS, and others will grab all of the spectrum and there will be no > room left for amateurs during a true regional or nationwide emergency. We > already see that with the request to move one of the 60m frequencies due to > continuing interference from a permanent station on the freq. I'm sure all > of our other frequencies have government-authorized users that WILL show up > during an emergency, effectively removing one or more channels on a regional > or even nationwide basic. > > > Dave > K3DCW > www.k3dcw.net >
