Andy, Just two-cents worth here. ALE400 forces the user into one software package and operating system at the expense of others. Of course, there is virtualization technologies to help with that, but unless ALE400 gets more widely adopted it likely isn't the answer as a specified signal of interest in any amateur band.
Of course, I like where you are going with that....I'd much rather see multiple channels of narrow-band ALE in the bandwidth of one normal ALE signal. Another proposal might be to limit the ALE (and Pactor III that was proposed) to only one of the 60m channels, while allowing voice on all the others. I think PSK31 was also proposed, but I suspect that it was included simply to throw people off of the trail of ARRL's 60m EMCOMM grab. The problem with trying to setup 60m as an EMCOMM band (supporting ALE, Pactor III and the like) is that on 60m, we are second class citizens. The same characteristics that make 60m attractive to hams during an emergency make it attractive to the government as well. As long as we have to operate on a not-to-interfere basis, 60m will never be a viable EMCOMM band. FEMA, DHS, MARS, and others will grab all of the spectrum and there will be no room left for amateurs during a true regional or nationwide emergency. We already see that with the request to move one of the 60m frequencies due to continuing interference from a permanent station on the freq. I'm sure all of our other frequencies have government-authorized users that WILL show up during an emergency, effectively removing one or more channels on a regional or even nationwide basic. Dave K3DCW www.k3dcw.net "Real radio bounces off of the sky" On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Andy obrien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I see the brief mention in the latest QST about 60M and new band > proposal for USA stations. The article suggests that the FCC is > encouraging consideration of ALE for that band. That part slipped my > attention when we discussed this topic last month. I'm an ALE fan , > but not ALE as unsuccessfully advocated by HFLINK (although they have > had more success with their ideas, than I have had with mine!). I > wonder if the request for comments is an opportunity to promote the > concepts of ALE 400 for 60M? Seems to me that 60M would be an ideal > band for any ALE but especially for ALE 400. > > Andy K3UK > > --
