Andy,
97.221 is what you're looking for, The ARRL website has part 97 listed there.
73, Chuck AC5PW
________________________________
From: obrienaj <k3uka...@gmail.com>
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, June 27, 2010 8:40:48 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Busy detect screenshot for Winmor
Anyone have a reliable link to the FCC required band plan for unattended modes?
I have the IARU Region II bandplan but just remembered that it differs, I
think, from the FCC.
Andy K3UK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien <k3uka...@...> wrote:
>
> I agree Skip and have been studying the "unattended" sub-bands for suitable
> frequencies.
>
> Andy
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:24 AM, KH6TY <kh...@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks, Andy.
> >
> > Unless it is not impossible to disable busy detect, to answer your previous
> > question about where to operate with Winmor, I personally think that Winmor
> > frequencies should ALL be kept within the automatic subbands, since the
> > tendency is going to be to disable it due to the uncertainty if there is
> > malicious blocking or not. This way, busy detect can still be useful in
> > enabling frequency sharing with other Winmor stations, and if someone
> > disables busy detect, the effect on the rest of the hams will not be
> > significant. This brings to mind the edict by Winlink that busy detect must
> > not be enabled because of others trying to harm Winlink. It is highly
> > unlikely that any malicious blocking will be done in the automatic subbands,
> > because there is no reason to do so. The only blocking will be if the
> > frequency is already in use by another mailbox.
> >
> > The recently reported problem with a PSKmail server still interfering with
> > JT65 points up to another reason that ALL mailbox stations need to be in the
> > same area, regardless of bandwidth. The more narrow the bandwidth, the
> > easier it is to find a clear frequency there, so there is still an advantage
> > to using a more narrow bandwidth.
> >
> > The frustration of being blocked too often if operating in the general use
> > areas is, sooner or later, going to result in operator deactivation of the
> > busy detection, especially as more and more Winmor mailboxes are set up.
> > Before things get to that point, I think that it would be wise for early
> > adopters, such as yourself, to set a good example by operating Winmor only
> > in the automatic subbands and using the busy detection feature to more
> > efficiently share frequencies there.
> >
> > 73, Skip KH6TY
> >
> >
> > On 6/27/2010 8:46 AM, Andy obrien wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Skip (and anyone else interested), see the attached screenshot showing
> > the Winmor server busy detect
> >
> > Andy K3UK
> >
> >
> >
>
