Hi Skip
I have been monitoring a ROS idling over time using DL4YHF's Spectrum
Lab. Here is the results.You can clearly see a pattern
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
On 26.02.2010 12:29, KH6TY wrote:
Alan,
Of course, the FCC rules on SS are outdated and ROS should be allowed
due to its narrow
That's a good analysis, Steinar. Is it possible to see if the pattern
changes when sending data? That is all the FCC is concerned about. The
pattern has to change when sending data and not just remain the same to
exclude it from being FHSS.
73 - Skip KH6TY
Steinar Aanesland wrote:
Hi Skip
Here is the new ROS signal. It is idling with two gruops of 25 sec of
X's . As you can see the pattern change when sending data.
http://home.broadpark.no/~saanes/bilder/ROS_X_2.JPG
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
On 27.02.2010 13:19, KH6TY wrote:
That's a good analysis, Steinar. Is it
Looks like good news Steinar! If the data changes the frequencies, it
does not qualify as FHSS as Jose originally claimed. I am sure the FCC
will find the same during their tests and expect them to say it can be
used on HF and VHF. I am especially interested in being able to use the
1 baud
KH6TY wrote:
Looks like good news Steinar! If the data changes the frequencies, it
does not qualify as FHSS as Jose originally claimed. I am sure the FCC
will find the same during their tests and expect them to say it can be
used on HF and VHF.
When they do, please let me know so that I
Hi Skip
First , I have read all of your mail's and I think you have argued fair
and square.
I can't tell if ROS is FHSS or not . This is to complicate for a country
boy like me, but I really hope that FCC will let you use narrow band
SS on HF some day .
Cross my fingers for you and 73
LA5VNA
The FCC will say that it up to each licensee to check the legality by reading
the new technical specification. Unless someone shows that the spectrum doesn't
match the specification U.S.hams should feel safe using ROS.
73,
John
KD6OZH
- Original Message -
From: Dave Ackrill
