Posted by: Greg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:47 pm (PST)
Apparently Bonnie is ignoring me because I keep asking how can you
call winlink a 24/7 system when you need a live operator to generate
the email and a live operator on the other end to read it. Lot of good
that email
I can tell you why. Because P3 is 2.4khz wide and every other mode you
mentioned is much smaller so it takes up less spectrum and the fact
that it is being used for email that is technically against part 97
because there is an alternative called sailmail out there.
Greg
KC7GNM
--- In
Alan G3VLQ wrote:
In my opinion all amateur un-attended automatic operation should be
banned world wide.
Automatic operation might be essential to HF emcomm but is emcomm
essential, I think not.
Alan,
Are you ready, along with all your friends, to personally
monitor HF 24/7 for
You have hit the nail on the head with the use of emergency service
as a simple justification for non-emergency use.
There is a COST to the use of amateur spectrum, primarily, time denied
to others. However, since there is no physical cost to automatic
stations, they have no incentive to
expeditionradio wrote:
Alan G3VLQ wrote: In my opinion all amateur un-attended automatic
operation should be banned world wide. Automatic operation might be
essential to HF emcomm but is emcomm essential, I think not.
Alan,
Are you ready, along with all your friends, to personally
At 11:47 PM 10/17/2007, you wrote:
John Becker, WØJAB wrote:
***In 1984 they started doing the very same thing to Packed traffic
from one BBS to the other.
As far as I remember, compression started with FBB 5.13 around 1990.
MSYS (1.09 ???) and JNOS (1.10 ???) followed later.
Not really Jose,
The point is that it is 24/7 emergency comms is not required or part
of the amateur service. We over here have RAYNET which is not a
un-attended automatic operation.
You are welcome to your opinion, but the reality is, that we already
have 24/7 access communications being provided on HF by
: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Alan Tindal
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:09 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Need to Expand the HF Auto Band Segments
The point is that it is 24/7 emergency comms is not required or part
OK, John. The first compressed BBS software I knew was it. I have not
read otherwise in my old books. But it is possible to have been existsed
and not gotten popular.
About what goes first and second, the first loss is already enough...he,
he...
73,
Jose, CO2JA
---
John Becker, WØJAB
Are you telling me that if US Amateurs didn't setup an amateur
emmcom then no-one would get a licence ? When was that introduced ? I
worked US amateurs long before this was thought of.
Anyway, even if it is the case, why should it be inflicted on the rest
of the amateur community?
This
What planet do you live on? The CB'ers started a plan called REACT
which proved to be an excellent program, is very much in use today,
and to read their plan and the ARRL EMCOM course, it is difficult to
tell the difference. Best that you should line your ducks up before
starting to shoot.
Different countries have different reasons for the amateur service. Some
consider it a public health issue to have hobbies for their citizens to
participate in and keep them out of trouble. Since HF signals can easily
cross political boundaries, one countries rules may not apply for such
world
] On
Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:00 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Need to Expand the HF Auto Band Segments
Now, the question that I have is when did this 24/7 operation first come
about? The first I ever heard was from someone claiming
--- expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please detail all the HF frequencies and modes
your people will be manually monitoring 24/7.
(This will make big news in the ham community)
27.185 AM here in Tampabay ...
This is the only active non SSB frequency here ..
At 08:34 PM 10/18/2007, you wrote:
Why any amateur would want to see our bands cluttered up with a
third-rate email forwarding system is a mystery
And just why do you think every message passed is email?
It seems to me you have never copied the traffic. Right?
John, W0JAB
Why any amateur would want to see our bands cluttered up with a
third-rate email forwarding system is a mystery
AMEN! This is what I've been saying/asking all along. Add to that,
non-hams using ham frequencies for email.
73 Buddy WB4M
Dan KA3CTQ wrote:
I am sorry Bonnie, but you are arguing from a very weak spot. 1%
asking for 10% and more for a poor efficiency mode is nothing but a
land grab. Your points are based in personal opinion and lack any
examples or numbers to back up the need to make this change.
Exactly
Give me an example of how your little group of robots has helped out in an
emergency. If you do, I can give you one hundred times the examples of how live
operators reacted and even were there ahead of emergencies.
Ask any ham who was in the DC area on 9-11 how they kept the communications
- Original Message -
From: Roger J. Buffington [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Need to Expand the HF Auto Band Segments
expeditionradio wrote:
Automatic operation is essential to HF emcomm
Dan KA3CTQ wrote:
We have people available all the time...
[snip]
We need to be active when and WHERE the problem is.
Ask any group who respond to disasters if they want
a ham or a computer. I am willing to bet they want
a live person.
Hi Dan,
Well, Dan, you would lose your bet.
At
John Becker, WØJAB wrote:
At 08:34 PM 10/18/2007, you wrote:
Why any amateur would want to see our bands cluttered up with a
third-rate email forwarding system is a mystery
And just why do you think every message passed is email?
It seems to me you have never copied the traffic.
At 09:41 PM 10/18/2007, you wrote:
Well John,
Those guys never tried.. so for them it is QRM... sad eh?
Patrick
vk2pn
And the packet, amtor and aplink BBS system did what different?
Just trying to understand why so many HATE the mode
of pactor.
John Becker, WØJAB wrote:
At 09:41 PM 10/18/2007, you wrote:
Well John,
Those guys never tried.. so for them it is QRM... sad eh?
Patrick vk2pn
And the packet, amtor and aplink BBS system did what different?
Just trying to understand why so many HATE the mode of pactor.
1. It
Of Roger J. Buffington
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 8:14 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Need to Expand the HF Auto Band Segments
Why any amateur would want to see our bands cluttered up with a
third-rate email forwarding system is a mystery. This is band
OK, last comment before cooling off: No more space until automatics
listen before transmitting.
Howard K5HB
- Original Message
From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59:3:6 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Need to Expand
Rud Merriam wrote:
Roger,
As a ham I am interested in using email via my radio. Part of it is
technical challenge of working on a system to do this. Part of it is
to explore the digital technologies.
Much of my interest is aside from disaster communications, but there
is that, also.
, October 18, 2007 10:53 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Need to Expand the HF Auto Band Segments
Rud Merriam wrote:
Roger,
As a ham I am interested in using email via my radio. Part of it is
technical challenge of working on a system to do this. Part
I totally disagree. Expanding the auto sub-bands would only make room
for more PMBO's which later on would want more spectrum because the last
bit they got was not sufficient enough. When is enough, enough. Why are
we thinking about using these band hogging protocols like Pactor 3
instead of
Greg KC7GNM wrote:
The point is Bonnie I have seen digital radio going down the tubes
thanks to winlink. ...
I don't think they need more space to operate in.
They already are a menace in the auto sub bands as it is.
Greg,
Digital radio has been progressing tremendously.
I operate
Bonnie did you read my entire post or did you just read the part you
clipped out? Why don't auto stations try to conserve the space they
have instead of trying to gobble up more. The point is winlink and ALE
are two bandwidth hungry modes that should be looking to reduce the
bandwidth they use
expeditionradio wrote:
Automatic operation is essential to HF emcomm. It is certainly not
asking too much that 10% of each ham band be devoted to one of the
primary purposes for the existence of the Amateur Radio Service.
Greg, where is your volunteer force of non-automatic operators
Roger W6VZV wrote:
Where is the 24/7 volunteer force? Red Cross, RACES, and other
minuteman style ham volunteer groups.
Roger,
Respectfully, those are all wonderful groups.
But none of them provide 24/7 access for emergency traffic on HF.
At best, their response is measured in hours
Take a look at this map
http://winlink.org/positions/PosReports.aspx
I don't ZL3LL about 2000 miles south east of the big island of Hilo
had any internet connection to post this location update. nor did
any most of the hams all around Australia.
Yeah that's right, each and every one of them
There is a huge difference between what one can call
emcomm in the larger organizational sense, and
the actual service of providing 24/7 emergency access on HF.
Presently there are no manually operated stations providing
24/7 emergency access on HF. But, there are several
automatic entities
expeditionradio wrote:
Roger, it's time to put your money where your mouth is.
If you can provide such 24/7 access on HF with manually operated
stations, they do so now. Show us your volunteer operator army on
duty. Otherwise, your continued protests ammount to little more than
lip
At 07:41 PM 10/17/2007, you wrote:
One last thing. I like to say only what I *know* to be so. I do not,
for a fact, know that a large portion of the internet messages that pass
on Winlink are business-related, although I do know that some are. I
will therefore withdraw my comment to that
Bonnie you keep forgetting one important factor in your automatic
scenario. There has to be a human on either end to 1) send the message
and 2) to read the message. What is the winlink station going to do?
Automatically send food and water?
Greg
KC7GNM
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com,
No one is saying you don't have a right to get on the air. What this
thread is about is expanding a sub-band that does not need to be
expanded. Also the problem with folks like you, not saying you do,
that cause so much harmful interference it is making it hard for us to
get on the air. Now I flip
It is quite easy to alert or wake a human within seconds or minutes
with phone text messaging, to provide real world emergency response
services. Phone texting is currently available right this minute, by
automatic methods on HF 24/7, covering most of the North America
region, and vast areas of
*** comments in line.
At 07:59 PM 10/17/2007, you wrote:
No one is saying you don't have a right to get on the air. What this
thread is about is expanding a sub-band that does not need to be
expanded.
*** You do know that you slow and wide retry after retry mode of packet
will be in the same
John,
Are you saying that you are able to monitor the traffic on Pactor modes
going to the Winlink 2000 system?
73,
Rick, KV9U
John Becker, WØJAB wrote:
Show us some of this business-related traffic.
I have never seen any at all pass my screen. Not any.
John, W0JAB
in and out of this station yes.
Off the air traffic, some but not all.
As you may know it's compressed.
John, W0JAB
At 08:41 PM 10/17/2007, you wrote:
John,
Are you saying that you are able to monitor the traffic on Pactor modes
going to the Winlink 2000 system?
73,
Rick, KV9U
Of course traffic going through your station has to be read or it would
not have a purpose, but one of the selling points that the Winlink
2000 folks claimed in the past, was that because of the compression it
made it virtually impossible to anyone to monitor the traffic. One other
ham claimed
At 09:23 PM 10/17/2007, you wrote:
Of course traffic going through your station has to be read or it would
not have a purpose, but one of the selling points that the Winlink
2000 folks claimed in the past, was that because of the compression it
made it virtually impossible to anyone to monitor
John Becker, WØJAB wrote:
At 07:41 PM 10/17/2007, you wrote:
One last thing. I like to say only what I *know* to be so. I do
not, for a fact, know that a large portion of the internet messages
that pass on Winlink are business-related, although I do know that
some are. I will therefore
I discontinued VHF packet about 15 years ago when it became obsolete in
our area. A few people still used it for a while but now the trunk lines
are gone and while some sites were converted over to APRS, long haul
traffic is not possible. In the last week I did help a ham a little bit
in
As Jean Paul Roubelat explains in the FBB docs, the design of FBB B1
compression had to comply with a requisite from the french authorities,
by which message headers must be sent in clear text.
But compression gives a measure of efficiency and allow to double the
traffic or reduce the channel
John Becker, WØJAB wrote:
***In 1984 they started doing the very same thing to Packed traffic
from one BBS to the other.
As far as I remember, compression started with FBB 5.13 around 1990.
MSYS (1.09 ???) and JNOS (1.10 ???) followed later.
SNIP
***So where do you stand on Packet. It's
48 matches
Mail list logo
