Because it was occurring right on published winlink channels. Could
some of them been kb2kb, sure, some of them could have been. However,
even then, there weren't that many kb2kb qso's on pactor taking place
in the auto sub-bands.
Why do you think winlink has spread their stations out? Without
Jim you really can't go by that.
I had 4 KB2KB QSO's last evening right on 7077.4
as you put it a published winlink channels.
One of the QSO's was with a member of this list K2MO.
In fact it's been weeks since my WinLink system has
been used. Everything has been KB2KB.
Pactor KB2KB is far from
Remember, this was a couple of years ago. Plus, it really doesn't
matter if it is kb2kb interfering with a pmbo session or two pmbo
sessions. There was obviously no busy detection nor did the
interfering operators listen first. It was still pactor on pactor
interference and that is the point.
From what the Winlink 2000 owners have said in the past, they want to
control at least two frequencies per band in order to maximize access to
their scanning automatic stations.
There is no question that they consider the Winlink 2000 system to be
much more important than contacts between two
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Winlink's continuing refusal to deploy this solution can only be
interpreted one way: our traffic is more important than your
traffic; if we QRM you, too bad. Or to paraphrase Demetre, stay off
our highway.
Guys,
Transmitting SSB in the text digital sub band is illegal in the U.S. All
parts of our bands except for 60 meters permit digital operation of
varying kinds.
If you follow the rules you must transmit SSB in the voice/image
portions of the bands. Same thing with digital voice or digital
Have I ever transmitted SSB in the CW or DIGITAL subbands? Of course
not, Demetre; that would be a violation of the rules governing
amateur radio operation here.
How does your question relate to the discussion?
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Demetre SV1UY
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have I ever transmitted SSB in the CW or DIGITAL subbands? Of course
not, Demetre; that would be a violation of the rules governing
amateur radio operation here.
How does your question relate to the discussion?
First, Demetre, my focus has been on unattended stations that rely on
remote initiators to determine whether or not the frequency is clear.
This has nothing to do with the bandwidth of the protocol employed.
It would be just as unacceptable in CW as it is in PSK, RTTY, or
Pactor.
Second, none
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Do you ever transmit SSB in the CW or DIGITAL subbands Dave? I'd love
to see you doing that!
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
73 de Demetre SV1UY
Talk about a false analogy. By this logic anytime a human digital
station operates where Pactor operates (i.e. everywhere there
Demetre,
Here in the U.S. there are no wide digital sub bands. In fact, in the
text digital sub bands there do not seem to be any legal limits as to
the band width permitted at this time. Most radio amateurs would
consider a voice SSB bandwidth mode to be about as wide as would be
acceptable.
Don't believe everything you hear. A couple of years ago when I was
doing packet work, I listened to winlink a lot. What I heard
convinced me that clients did not listen and that the hidden
transmitter was not only a problem with other stations, but winlink
stations too. You can't believe how
Sorry Jim but you did not say in your post
how you knew it was WinLink stations?
And not some KB2KB QSO..
At 08:43 PM 10/14/2007, you wrote:
Don't believe everything you hear. A couple of years ago when I was
doing packet work, I listened to winlink a lot. What I heard
convinced me that clients
Merriam K5RUD
ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX
http://TheHamNetwork.net
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of jgorman01
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:44 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Busy frequency
14 matches
Mail list logo
