The first concept of D-STAR that I saw used 10 Ghz for the point to
point connections between sites. Internet is cheaper and we are hams.....
Some time back I said if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, quacks
like a duck, it just may be a duck. I believe DSTAR is a repeater.
I also believe there should be a framework to foster new more spectrum
efficient technologies. P25, D-STAR and others not yet dreamed of. In
other places there is a process to seek a waiver of the rules when there
is no other means of operating. Could this work in our ham radio
hobby? Better yet, find an under utilized repeater - meet with the
owners and see if they would be willing to share - invite and educate
them about the new proposed system. Who knows, they may be willing to
partner with the new system. DON'T be gutless and spineless and go
behind someones back and try and take their repeater pair by surprise.....
73, Steve NU5D
Jim wrote:
George Henry wrote:
The point-to-point communications within a D-Star system take place over a
LAN, WAN, or the internet, not over-the-air. Therefore, I doubt very much
that the claim that D-star systems are auxiliary stations will pass FCC
scrutiny. Yes, I know that there already is a D-Star system in the San
Francisco area operating in that sub-band, but most likely, no one has ever
challenged its presence. If someone does, I'm betting it gets shut down.
I would say if the input and output freqs are the same, it is NOT a
repeater. However, if the input and output are different, it may still
not be a repeater. Is it TRUE full duplex? Is it near real time vs. a
store and forward technique? I'm sure there's other questions that
should be asked as well.
