View Single Post
  #9   Report Post  
Old March 16th 07, 01:44 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
[email protected] N2EY@AOL.COM is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Default Extension of PSK segment

On Mar 15, 3:44�pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 14, 4:28?pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
What would be nice would be some extra suggestions. What
would be nice would be to have another couple SSB signals
worth of
space, separated by enough to allow a RTTY signal or two between 'em.


I disagree!


It seems to me that the best way for the different modes to
coexist is for like modes to cluster together, rather than being
spread about the band. If PSK31 is currently between
Frequency A and Frequency (A plus 2.7 kHz), and more room is needed,
it seems the most logical thing to do is to
spread out a little below A and/or a little above (A plus 2.7)
That way it's easy to find each other.


* * * * It does make it easy, very true.

* * * * A little bit about my seemingly weird rationale.

* * * * RTTY signals often trash the segment, especially when there is a
contest going on. A couple RTTY signals in the segment, PSKer's just
turn their radios off (or switch modes) *My thoughts were that if there
were a RTTY station in between segments, another RTTY will probably set
up far away from them to give us a little breathing room


Maybe.

It seems to me that there are really two problems here.

The first is that there are times when there are so many

PSKers' on simultaneously that more room is needed.
That's the situation I imagined, and what my fix was aimed
at.

The second problem is when the band gets busy with
contesters and such. That's a problem every mode faces,
and going elsewhere in the band may or may not solve
it. The WARC bands are one solution.

IMHO the whole point of gentleman's agreements is not to set
a hard line in the sand that marks absolute territory (the regs
do that)., but rather to be a flexible line that moves as
conditions warrant.


This will be more and more important in the future, as more
diverse modes share the same bandspace, often without the
ability to intercommunicate.


We really get hammered by those robot stations. Open up on top of us
and since they are automatic, not much can be done about it.

One solution is to expand the PSK31 watering hole outside
the robot subband.

* * * * Digipan does have recieve software so that we can ID the station and
issue a complaint to the FCC. I haven't seen as much of it lately,
mayber the complaints are working.


Yup. It's important to document such things, particularly
from robots, because one of the arguments put forth for
allowing "semi-robot" operation all over the band was that the
nonrobot end would avoid QRM. In the real world, that may
not work out.

I don't mean to sound like a wimp regarding PSK31. It is just a unique
and low power mode that is easily disruptable by other modes.

Nothing wimpy about it, Didn't sound that way either.

Expecting every amateur station to be equipped to transmit
and receive every possible digital mode in use by hams on
a band just isn't reasonable. So we need gentleman's
agreements.


IMHO.


It seems to me that as the variety of modes used by hams
continues to grow, we need more and better agreements
in order to be able to best use the spectrum available to us.

--

K0HB has suggested that we let "the market" decide.
I think that has been done, in a way.

Some time back, a group calling itself the "Communications Think
Tank" (CTT), proposed simply eliminating all subbands-by-mode from the
regulations. Their proposal
would have allowed all authorized modes on every Hz of
every band.

"The market" spoke very clearly, in the form of comments
to FCC. The CTT proposal was overwhelmingly
opposed. About 7 out of 8 comments on it clearly said NO.
Sounds like a clear message from the market to me!

73 de Jim, N2EY