Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
On the Spot Page and monitoring 14.078 as of 1615Z Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: vk4jrc [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 9:19 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Hi all Pactor Packet people, Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor Packet operators. See http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ Hope this will stir up some interest Thanks Sholto :-)
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
- Original Message - From: vk4jrc [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 9:19 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Hi all Pactor Packet people, Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor Packet operators. See http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ Hope this will stir up some interest Thanks Sholto :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php View the DRCC numbers database at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1207 - Release Date: 1/2/2008 11:29 AM
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
Pactor and Packet spots and sked arranging are also welcome at http://www.obriensweb.com.sked Andy On Jan 3, 2008 9:19 PM, vk4jrc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all Pactor Packet people, Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor Packet operators. See http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ Hope this will stir up some interest Thanks Sholto :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC -- Andy K3UK www.obriensweb.com (QSL via N2RJ)
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
Charles Brabham wrote: Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way. The difference is that the Packet folks do not feel that they have a god-given right to crash other hams' QSO's. We operate according to PART97 and The Amateur's Code. - When we are not having our QSO crashed by a mindless PACTOR Lid, that is... Stop by at WinLink-Watch to see the pics. - http://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htm http://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htm 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL I doubt you'll see many Pactor QSOs. Pactor is dead and will stay dead. de Roger W6VZV
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way. The difference is that the Packet folks do not feel that they have a god-given right to crash other hams' QSO's. We operate according to PART97 and The Amateur's Code. - When we are not having our QSO crashed by a mindless PACTOR Lid, that is... Stop by at WinLink-Watch to see the pics. - http://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htm 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: vk4jrc [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 8:19 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Hi all Pactor Packet people, Sholto, KE7HPV has been kind enough to put up a spot page for Pactor Packet operators. See http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ Hope this will stir up some interest Thanks Sholto :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1208 - Release Date: 1/3/2008 3:52 PM
RE: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
Nice analogy, John. Dave From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Becker, WØJAB Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 11:34 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Charles please don't lump us good pactor operators in with the PMBO operators. There is as much difference as there is a house guest to a burglar. At 08:44 AM 1/4/2008, you wrote: Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way.
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
Charles please don't lump us good pactor operators in with the PMBO operators. There is as much difference as there is a house guest to a burglar. At 08:44 AM 1/4/2008, you wrote: Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way.
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
At 12:44 AM 1/5/2008, you wrote: Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way. The difference is that the Packet folks do not feel that they have a god-given right to crash other hams' QSO's. We operate according to PART97 and The Amateur's Code. - When we are not having our QSO crashed by a mindless PACTOR Lid, that is... Stop by at WinLink-Watch to see the pics. - http://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htmhttp://www.arwatch.com/watch/w_winlink.htm 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL [EMAIL PROTECTED] - So, you are saying ALL Pactor operators crash the Packet guys? I thought the problem was with WinLink PMBO's on Pactor 3? I don't think too many individual people would have licenced Pactor 3, I certainly have not, and don't need to. Since part of this idea is to announce our Pactor/Packet skeds via Sholto's Andy's spot pages, it may revive things a little, is there anything wrong with that? Those looking for contacts, have places to help them coordinate skeds. Oh yes, how about trying 600 baud Robust Packet ;-) Pactor may be deadbut whats wrong with trying to get it going? Like, Ham Radio IS a hobby? Why not all enjoy it for what it is, with what ever mode we want to use. :-) 73s Jack VK4JRC
RE: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
At 10:48 AM 1/4/2008, you wrote: Nice analogy, John. Sorry Dave, I just call em as I see em
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
Hey Charles! Me thinks you've got a rather broad brush being used here. Someone says that PACTOR is dead..period. Another has said that PACTOR is deadand if I was smart, I'd pitch my AEA unit like everyone else. You, speaking for Packet enthusiasts, say Packet operators won't climb on board this innocent proposal because they're constantly being QRMed by PACTOR lids and for that reason, the Packet operators want nothing to do with anything that remotely touches PACTOR. That isn't fair to me, and any number of other folks who like the PACTOR I mode and are kindling a small surge of rebirth in the mode's interest. I've always followed the rules as they have, I'm sure. Individual PACTOR I operations cannot possibly be linked to BOTS, Winlink or whatever. I'm sure that Jack has been a considerate and law-abiding Ham for all his licensed life and means no ill-will towards anyone, least of all disrespect. I bet you and the others don't even know Jack and doubt you have ever been deliberately interferred with by him. I doubt he'd like to be included in any association with Winlink and the BOTS any more than I would. That message you quoted was a friendly, enthusiastic idea that came about from some ideas that have been bantered about offline amongst myself and some others who want to use our TNCs and PACTOR I again, just because. Seriously, this business about Winlink and BOTS is getting just a bit hysterical I think, to the point of irrationality. I say that simply because of your reaction and you're not alone at all. AND...it's understandable for sure. But, jeez, Charles. Aren't you being a bit harsh to the point that you're taking a swipe at everyone? That's exactly what the Packet operators don't want for themselves. I was on last night running my PK232 through its paces and getting reacquainted with it. I even made a couple of contacts with it using PACTOR I during Sunday and it was fun! Surely, you're not going to call me a lid simply because of using the PACTOR mode, alledged to being mis-used by others alledged to have a totally selfish agenda are you? Just my polite $ .02 worth. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN - Original Message - From: Charles Brabham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 9:44 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up. Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way. The difference is that the Packet folks do not feel that they have a god-given right to crash other hams' QSO's. We operate according to PART97 and The Amateur's Code. - When we are not having our QSO crashed by a mindless PACTOR Lid, that is...
Re: [digitalradio] Pactor Packet Spot Page now up.
At 11:45 AM 1/5/2008, Howard wrote: Hey Charles! Me thinks you've got a rather broad brush being used here. Someone says that PACTOR is dead..period. Another has said that PACTOR is deadand if I was smart, I'd pitch my AEA unit like everyone else. You, speaking for Packet enthusiasts, say Packet operators won't climb on board this innocent proposal because they're constantly being QRMed by PACTOR lids and for that reason, the Packet operators want nothing to do with anything that remotely touches PACTOR. That isn't fair to me, and any number of other folks who like the PACTOR I mode and are kindling a small surge of rebirth in the mode's interest. I've always followed the rules as they have, I'm sure. Individual PACTOR I operations cannot possibly be linked to BOTS, Winlink or whatever. I'm sure that Jack has been a considerate and law-abiding Ham for all his licensed life and means no ill-will towards anyone, least of all disrespect. I bet you and the others don't even know Jack and doubt you have ever been deliberately interferred with by him. I doubt he'd like to be included in any association with Winlink and the BOTS any more than I would. That message you quoted was a friendly, enthusiastic idea that came about from some ideas that have been bantered about offline amongst myself and some others who want to use our TNCs and PACTOR I again, just because. Seriously, this business about Winlink and BOTS is getting just a bit hysterical I think, to the point of irrationality. I say that simply because of your reaction and you're not alone at all. AND...it's understandable for sure. But, jeez, Charles. Aren't you being a bit harsh to the point that you're taking a swipe at everyone? That's exactly what the Packet operators don't want for themselves. I was on last night running my PK232 through its paces and getting reacquainted with it. I even made a couple of contacts with it using PACTOR I during Sunday and it was fun! Surely, you're not going to call me a lid simply because of using the PACTOR mode, alledged to being mis-used by others alledged to have a totally selfish agenda are you? Just my polite $ .02 worth. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN All modes have their good and bad features, AND operators! I am sure most Hams respect their resource and its use, needing to share with others. There will always be some who through ignorance or having a bad hair day, will crash someone's QSO. Just like someone driving the highway crashes your lane, wile jibbering on a cell phone, reading the paper, doing their hair, emailing on their Blackberry etc. The responsibility for decent operating rests with the operator, themselves. Relying on the FCC, TUV,ACMA and other regulatory organisations to solve problems in our hobby, does not often provide the results we would like. These regulators are sick of us.believe me. The money they get from Ham licencing? We are a liability to them. Having said that, its really up to the like of the ARRL, RSGB, WIA and other organisations in the World to play more of a part in the hobby regulating itself and promoting good band plans that reflect harmonious operating in the hobby. The Pactor 3 problem? There are many other considerations too, ALE, Propnet, APRS and the list goes on growing.. Many of the these modes use a form of beacons for their operations. They are all entitled to some consideration in trying to work within band plans, some of which maybe need changing? The major part of these problems is the political agendas that seem to always screwup the potential of anything good, that can benefit the majority of people, when there is a decision making process going on. Yep, thats life as a Human Being on this Earth :-) You all may think, OK what goes here? I have been on this board all of 5 minutes, so people are thinking.what's my agenda? You're right, I DO have an agenda, its carrying out experiments/operation on HF 300 baud Packet, HF Robust 200/600 baud Packet, compared to Amtor, Pactor 1 II along with some PSK31 etc. Now you want to know WHY? OK, MY other hobby is motorcycles, specifically off road ones and the remote places I ride them. I am trying to integrate my Ham hobby, with riding in remote places. My best option for digital modes is a TNC based system. An SCS PTC-IIex, with Icom 703, Buddipole antenna, RS232 AA battery powered dumb terminal OR Psion 3mx palmtop allows me to operate motorcycle portable on Amtor, Pactor, Packet, PSK31, CW. Its a compact, portable station which allows me to also run a mailbox on the motorcycle, while mobile or portable. Carrying a laptop is not something I want to do...that leaves all the sound card modes out. Having just bought a bike for my expeditions in South Africa, for riding there and to surrounding countries, and playing Ham Radio, its gonna be a whole lot of fun! 73s Jack VK4JRC
