Andy has some very good points, If you are a human operator and listen on the frequency for a period of time, ideally at least a few minutes if you do not use QRL or a voice equivalent, and do not hear any other activity, you may be fairly safe in assuming the frequency is not in use. It is not 100%, of course, since the hidden station could be transmitting and you can not detect that station.
Unlike voice or CW, the 12 seconds (or whatever you have the parameter set to in the program), is quite a lengthy period of time. One partial solution would be to have a shorter QRL type of mode. In fact, it could even be QRL? in CW, since that is the only mode that can be used on all frequencies that digital modes can be used in the voice/image and text digital portions of the bands. Similarly, there would have to be some way for other stations to respond immediately that the frequency is in use and that would be very difficult to do without some major design changes in our digital programs. But it could be done if it was mandated. Incidentally, this is one of the benefits of ARQ operation between two stations. A third station will hear one of the two sides of the conversation so they know that the frequency is in use, even if they can not monitor the content. Unattended operation is considered illegal by the FCC here in the U.S. and this seems to be glossed over by the proponents of these kinds of automatic modes. As the FCC enforcement folks have said that all stations must have a control operator even if they are not at the control point. Mr. Hollingsworth has stated: "Furthermore, "automatic" control does not mean "unattended" operation." and also "Unattended operation is not authorized under the rules." And this is referring to repeater operation which many of us think of as being basically unattended much of the time. What he seems to really mean is that even if you are not directly controlling at the control point, you are always held responsible for your station activities because you are still the control operator. But realistically, there are "unattended" operations. Even ARRL has uses the word, even if the FCC does not. (There is no such thing as unattended operation in Part 97.) Some may think of beacon operation as being "unattended." But beacons are normally not legal under Part 97, below 28.0 MHz, even though an increasing number of stations are effectively operating as beacons if they are transmitting without a human operator present and are doing it for such things as propagation studies. 97.3(a)(9)/ Beacon/. An amateur station transmitting communications for the purposes of observation of propagation and reception or other related experimental activities. This is exactly what PropNet and part of the time what ALE is doing, is it not? 97.203 (d) A beacon may be automatically controlled while it is transmitting on the 28.20-28.30 MHz, 50.06-50.08 MHz, 144.275-144.300 MHz, 222.05-222.06 MHz, or 432.300-432.400 MHz segments, or on the 33 cm and shorter wavelength bands. There are no lower frequencies where automatically controlled beacons are permitted by licensed radio amateurs in the U.S. If the control operator is present, then it is not automatically controlled and could be legal, as long as you listen before transmitting to insure the frequency is not in use. I have developed a number of questions that I will be forwarding to the FCC for help in understanding how the rules are being applied (or not being applied?). Before doing that, I have forwarded these questions to ARRL Regulatory Branch as of this morning, for their help in understanding why there seems to be a discrepancy between the rules and what is actually happening on the ham bands as of late. Depending upon their response, I will then contact FCC enforcement and find out their understanding. If a group member believes that I am not understanding Part 97 correctly, then please point out my error(s). I have asked this several times, and except for private e-mails on the subject, no one seems to want to deal with this issue. 73, Rick, KV9U Andrew O'Brien wrote: > PC-ALE , and I assume Multipsk ALE, is designed to work in attended > mode for almost all applications other than two likely scenarios. > > 1. Soundings: This now referred to as "station ID" by the HFLINK web > site ( http://hflink.net/qso/). I think this is a fair description, > since it simply sends the callsign "this is K3UK" for a 12 second > period (approximately). It is likely that the station's ID will be > sent , once, on all HF bands over a 5 minute period, usually once per > hour > > > 2. Individual Call: A station manually initiates a call to a station > but PC_ALE uses look-up tables to determine which band to start on , > and moves up or down the bands until al link is found , or all bands > have been tried once and the attempt is ended. This is a longer > call, similar yo a voice station sending "P5DX de K3UK" for a 20-30 > second period . > > > Both scenarios are likely unattended. When I do this I am actually in > the shack and usually need to make sure the SWR on all bands is "good" > while I am calling. I am guilty of sometimes heading to the kitchen > for a quick snack and arrive back at the shack to find that I have > already transmitted on a couple of bands. > > As Bonnie mentioned last week, ALE has no busy detect for none ALE > signals. So yes, Soundings and certain other aspects of ALE cause > QRM. However, what is the REAL difference between sending your > callsign a few times via ALE , versus picking up the Mic and asking > "is this frequency in use" ? I wonder if ALE soundings consisted of > "QRL? QRL ? de K3UK K3UK K3UK K " and then stopped , would we object? > > Andy. > > > On 10/1/07, *Rick* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > After the contact, I switched over to ALE 141A and listened for quite > some time in unproto mode. Later on I heard an eastern station > calling > the HFN, which must be the HFLink Network. This can not be an > automatic > station as it was outside the automatic subband. I am not suggesting > that it was the eastern station since I could not monitor ALE > while in > Olivia mode. > > This frequency turns out to be Channel 21, which is one of the 40 HF > "channels" that is claimed by the HFLink group. > > It is still possible for the first operator to hear a mode being > used on > a given frequency and then when the second operator turns it over > to the > third operator, and the first operator can not hear the third > operator, > they may incorrectly assume that the frequency is not in use. This is > one of the fairly downsides to having many digital modes that can not > understand the content of most other modes (except for CW and voice). > Even having an identifier would not help if they do not realize > that the > two stations are having a QSO. > > 73, > > Rick, KV9U >
