expeditionradio wrote:

>  Respectfully, Roger, if you are one of the many who were jumping up
>  and down on the "PACTOR3 illegal" bandwagon, then it is certainly
>  time for you to eat crow. If you were not, then don't worry about it.
>  But, I do notice that the most vocal PACTOR-haters are conspicuously
>  silent right now for some reason. :)
>
>  Bonnie KQ6XA

I do not notice that.  I do reiterate that contrary to what you were 
reporting on this forum, the FCC has now made it plain that: a) the regs 
as originally promulgated, did make Pactor 3 and certain other modes 
illegal; and b) they are hopefully going to make modifications that will 
affect some modes such that these modes will be permitted.  Your cheery 
email last weekend that "Pactor 3 is OK, etc." is therefore now proven 
to have been wrong. For all I know, automated modes lacking control ops, 
will remain illegal as many amateurs believe they should be.

I used to run Pactor 1 and 2, and I still own a PTC-II modem.  I now do 
not operate Pactor, because keyboard-to-keyboard Pactor qsos are 
essentially extinct, as far as I can tell.  Most Pactor communications 
seem to consist of radio-to-internet messages from boaters.  I do 
question whether this sort of traffic is really traditional amateur 
radio or appropriate for amateur radio.  Many question this.  It has 
nothing to do with whether anyone "hates" Pactor--as someone else 
recently posted, it is senseless to hate a mode.  Disliking certain 
operating practices, i.e. someone who transmits without listening first 
to see if a channel is clear--that is something different.  This 
practice is particularly destructive when it involves a wide band mode 
since obviously a wide band mode like Pactor 3 has the potential to 
interfere with more innocent stations than a narrow-band mode. 

de Roger W6VZV

Reply via email to