Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

I don't think that unattended stations should
be allowed to "set up camp"
anywhere they choose in the HF bands ... at least
until someont *proves(
that they have solved the QRM problems that such
stations can and do cause
do to the "hidden terminal" problem.

For now, at least, I think the only reasonable
solution is to confine them
to a (reasonably sized - YMMV on what that
means and I would need more data
on the "requirements" to pick a number) sub-band
so that the machines don't
pound the human operators into submission
with their (effectively)
relentless attempts to get a message through.
(Let them figure out how to
"play nice" with the other machines first ...)

I agree 100%, Carl. Give them a nice usable chunk
of each band to work with, but not the whole
enchilada.

Should ARRL endorse/standardize/push modes requiring the
purchase of proprietary hardware and software from specific
providers?

I do not believe so ... I think that proprietary modulation
techniques and
protocols are "bad" for several reasons:
1) It locks out the expermenters who could, in
an "open source" model
provide enhancements, additional features, etc.
2) It prevents people from building their own
compatible unit if the want to
and have the necessary level of technical knowledge and skill
3) The lack of competition amongst vendors of
compatible hardware
artificially inflates prices to the detriment
of the user community.
(I am big on "open consensus standards" - something
I do in IEEE 802.)

All reasonable and I agree 100%. But there's mo

4) If the proprietary company decides to stop supporting
the hardware or software for any reason, hams can be
left high and dry, with a "legacy system". (Example:
Win95 was left unsupported by Microsoft after less
than 10 years. Their advice was to migrate to a newer
Windoze version.)

5) Standardization on proprietary stuff acts as a disincentive
for other manufacturers and individual hams to even get a good
understanding of how the system works. Why should they bother
if they can't do anything to it?

6) It's traditional in amateur radio that standards be determined
conceptually, with many ways of realization. For example, hams
standardized on LSB below 10 MHz and USB above decades ago, but
used all sorts of methods to get there - LC filters just above the
audio range, phasing, crystal filters in the ~455 kHz region,
mechanical filters, HF crystal filters, even the "third method
of SSB" were all used by hams. Nowadays HF crystal filtering is
almost universal, but other methods are still usable if someone wants
to bother with them.


73 de Jim, N2EY