On 8 Mar 99 at 6:47, Karl F. Larsen wrote:
>
> The End of VHF/UHF
>
> Karl Larsen K5DI
>
> March 7, 1999
>
>
> Last summer the President of ARRL spoke at the Alamogordo NM
> Ham-fest and said the ARRL legal team is busy daily around the year
> fighting companies that want to co-use or take away our VHF and UHF
> Ham bands.
That's good ! Because the biggest spectrum globbers are in their
backyard....
> That is 1000 Million Dollar bribes or like that.
>
> Now we Hams have history and a few good lawyers on our side.
> We will not be a push-over to beat but the fact is we will lose. I
> expect the method will be to "share" frequencies. And after just a
> few years we will lose it all.
The method is clear....no comments on that. About the wording, I
would rather say : "...the fact is that we COULD lose...". It doesn't
bias your people to believe in the unavoidability of "Armeggedon".
Think positive...and act accordingly.
Happily, for many of us, our "P.T.T" is not the FCC.
> Looking at PACTOR II which seems to be the very best HF
> system but can't yet get a price from PacComm for the modem.
About 1 K$. And I believe that Paccomm is out of it and only
SCS (Germany) is marketing such boxes.
> And when I get the price that may make straight PACTOR more
> attractive...:-) I can get a MFJ 1276 "Packet/Pactor controller"
> for $139.95 from AES and that is quite cheap. This is what most
> people are using I think.
That is a far cry from what Pactor-II can do.
> I hope someone good at programing gets interested and writes a
> driver for Pactor in Linux. I get my Internet e-mail on Linux and
> use procmail to sort it. So no problem putting mail to me in a
> special place.
Thomas Sailer has already written a driver for a sound card,
hf.tar.gz, which is a driver for Pactor (Pactor I ????) but which is
only the protocol, and requires to be interfaced to a front end. The
protocols for Pactor are NOT in the public domain, as far as I know.
And there is a HUGE difference between Pactor and Pactor-II,
basically, improved coding and modulation methods, which make it
about five times better than the original SCS Pactor I controller
and some ten times better than the non-ARQ clones like AEA's,
Kantronics's and MFJ's.
In spite of this disadventage, it still could be better than HF
packet, because at least, with Pactor, you don't get collissions,
perhaps only QRM, as it is a single user mode. It does not carry
TCP/IP so far (maybe someone devises a way to...). And TCPIP on HF
DOES work, it is slow, but works. The problem is that available
bandwidth sometimes is too little for passing the mammoth sized
chunks usual on Internet, but that is something else.
Think positive, and stand to it. You are defeated already, before the
battle, if you are already thinking you will be the loser....
73 de Jose, CO2JA
---
Ing. Jose A. Amador | Telf: (537) 20-7814
Depto de Telecomunicaciones | E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ISPJAE |
