Winlink Lids Exposed.

[kc7gnm]

I will start this topic off by posting a very malicious interference with a Packet QSO I was having when a pactor lid came up right on top of me and decided I didn't need to use the freq anymore and that he needed it more. The call sign of the lid PMBO is W1ON which is a club station whose trustee is AA1VS, Chales Suprin. Below is a screen capture of what a PIII signal does to a packet radio signal.

http://www.ke7ipw.org/W1ON.jpg

[N2RJ]

I guess he W(1)ON the frequency?

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ May 04 2007,21:08)]I guess he W(1)ON the frequency?
Yeah but illegally. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[kc7gnm]

Ok here is another lid K6IXA. In the space of 1 hour I got jammed 2 times while trying to maintain a connect on 14.105 packet. What the hell is wrong with this picture when someone can just jump on a freq without LISTENING first. I am pretty sure they could hear me if I could hear them this good. Here is the picture but without markings this time.

http://www.ke7ipw.org/k6ixa.jpg

[N5PVL]

Good work, Greg!

I've been watching 14.105 too, working up a "Lid List" of WL2K QRM mills there.

Anybody besides the Packet guys getting slammed by WinLids?

- If so, let me know the mode and frequency, and I'll monitor there when I can.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ May 04 2007,21:46)]Good work, Greg!

I've been watching 14.105 too, working up a "Lid List" of WL2K QRM mills there.

Anybody besides the Packet guys getting slammed by WinLids?

- If so, let me know the mode and frequency, and I'll monitor there when I can.
Yeah I got fed up with trying to stay connected for any length of time. Those guys think they own the frequency and it is really pissing me off.

Greg

[w3bny]

Bravo! Thats what you need to do! like I always love to say....HIRES or it didnt happen. Nothing like good ole fashioned embarassment amongst ones peers!

[kc7gnm]

Another lid that came on top of a connect I had with KB0MPY-7 totally destroying my QSO. I challenge the winlinkers to defend this ignorant operating. This is why winlink should be banned from ham radio permanently. Not one time today did I have a QSO that was not destroyed by a winlink station.

http://www.ke7ipw.org/KA6IQA.jpg

[N5PVL]

I suppose everyone has thier own theory about all of this. #- My theory is that the WinLinkers and the ARRL people attempting to force more of this upon the ham radio community are lacking in the essential character, intelligence, and common decency that sets a bag of smelly fecal matter apart from a man - much less a ham.

I'm sure that others have different, maybe even better descriptions of the kind of personality it takes to calmly accept the fact that what you are doing to your fellow hams is wrong - and to go ahead and do it anyway. - Repeatedly, constantly in a continuous grind of crashing people's ongoing QSO's.

This is what the ARRL stands for today: Arrogance, Ignorance, Greed and the degeneration of human character.

Remember when the ARRL used to stand for the pride that comes from proper, intelligent operating practice and a special kind of fraternal decency directed toward your fellow hams?

That was nice, wasn't it? - Well, we really can get all of that back again, but first we have a dirty job to do, something that we have neglected for too long a time...

We need to take out the trash at ARRL HQ.

[N5PVL]

This is on a different frequency, 14.098 LSB. #- Same story - WinLink2000 QRM all day long, QSO's crashed right and left, aided and abetted by the ARRL.

http://www.rgvham.com/img/ww/ii001.jpg

[k6jpd]

heres another call sign you can add to the W1ON/AA1VS QRM mill # http://www.winlink.org/stations/w1on.htm

BTW, their info (do a QRZ callsign lookup on the sysop)states they are on 14.078.

Name: DoC sysop @
W1ON w0rli BBS 145.75 Mhz

W1ON-3 APRS GATEway 10.151 and 144.39 Mhz

W1ON-5 WinLink 3 HF forwarding

W1ON WL2K PMBO 14.078 MHz LSB

in Bedford, MA

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (k6jpd @ May 05 2007,07:51)]heres another call sign you can add to the W1ON/AA1VS QRM mill http://www.winlink.org/stations/w1on.htm

BTW, their info (do a QRZ callsign lookup on the sysop)states they are on 14.078.

Name: DoC sysop @
W1ON w0rli BBS 145.75 Mhz

W1ON-3 APRS GATEway 10.151 and 144.39 Mhz

W1ON-5 WinLink 3 HF forwarding

W1ON WL2K PMBO 14.078 MHz LSB

in Bedford, MA
Well they are definitely not on 14.078. If they are then they are splattering all the way to 14.105 as you see in my screen shots.

[k6jpd]

yes i saw the freq. on your screen shot, hummm, .... i wonder what freq "W1ON-5 WinLink 3 HF forwarding" is on, it might be interesting to "monitor" it and read the actual traffic.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[n0nwo]

This might be a dumb question, but what kind of traffic are they sending?

Minton

[KA4DPO]

This just serves to illuminate what's wrong with the ARRL proposal.

The answer is to give the wide band data guys 15 KC of their own to wallow in and QRM each other to their hearts content.

[N5PVL]

Quote[/b] (n0nwo @ May 05 2007,11:35)]This might be a dumb question, but what kind of traffic are they sending?

Minton
The Packet stations being interfered with are transferring amateur radio communications, ARRL bulletins, 4sale, Packet messages, NTS, Propagation, contest info, etc. etc.

The WinLink stations are transferring internet eMail that might or might not be to or from an amateur radio operator.

I thought it was a good question, not dumb at all.

[K4GUN]

Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ May 05 2007,09:50)]This just serves to illuminate what's wrong with the ARRL proposal.

The answer is to give the wide band data guys 15 KC of their own to wallow in and QRM each other to their hearts content.
This thread is making me understand what all the hubbub is about. As a newbie, I couldn't figure out what the big deal was and nobody seemed to take the time to explain exactly how Winlink makes a mess of things. I see it now.

This leaves me wondering why this suggestion of giving Winlink its own little piece of bandwidth isn't being pursued. Or maybe it is being pursued, but its not something I've seen mentioned before. Proposing this would seem to back the Winlinkers into a corner of either accepting it or admitting that they don't want to compete with the QRM of other winlink stations.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (n0nwo @ May 05 2007,12:35)]This might be a dumb question, but what kind of traffic are they sending?

Minton
We will never know unless they are in pactor 1 but because SCS will not give out the code for PII or III we cannot monitor for any type of illegal activity.

[kc7gnm]

Here is this idiot lid K6IXA again interupting a QSO I was having. This guy seems to be the biggest lid and I am collecting all kinds of information on this idiot so I can shove it all to the FCC so maybe he will get a huge fine. Maybe it will take one of these morons getting a fine to make them realize they are hurting not helping ham radio.

http://www.ke7ipw.org/k6ixa-1.jpg

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (k4gun @ May 05 2007,13:47)]Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ May 05 2007,09:50)]This just serves to illuminate what's wrong with the ARRL proposal.

The answer is to give the wide band data guys 15 KC of their own to wallow in and QRM each other to their hearts content.
This thread is making me understand what all the hubbub is about. As a newbie, I couldn't figure out what the big deal was and nobody seemed to take the time to explain exactly how Winlink makes a mess of things. I see it now.

This leaves me wondering why this suggestion of giving Winlink its own little piece of bandwidth isn't being pursued. Or maybe it is being pursued, but its not something I've seen mentioned before. Proposing this would seem to back the Winlinkers into a corner of either accepting it or admitting that they don't want to compete with the QRM of other winlink stations.
That is exactly why I started this thread. The winlink guys so far have not come in here and said a word defending winlink like they do in every other thread. I guess evidence speaks louder than their idiotic words ever will. Yes I am calling all winlinkers idiots because they do not care where they park their freqs and because their PMBO's do not have the capability to listen. My Kam can tell when a P 1, 2, or 3 signal is on the band so why can't these $1000 modems do that? The reason why is they just don't care. I will stick with my $150 Kam which is about 7 or 8 years old and can tell when the freq is busy than buy a dumb SCS modem any day.

[ad4mg]

***sarcasm_ON***

Goodness Greg, how else would they get their NOAA charts for sailing the seven seas? Obviously there is no commercial service available for internet ftp file transfers, is there?

Grady has it all figured out ... his personal info on the winlink page is a testimony as to how clever one can be while crashing the qso's of others:
Quote[/b] ]Needless to say Winlink again was a Godsend while on the ship... Found several reliable PMBO’s covering the Mediterranean… With Pactor III, sea and wave charts could be readily downloaded from a NOAA ftp site. Great Stuff!!!
It takes considerable free amateur radio bandwidth, 150 watts, and gain antennas to get these free "via amateur radio to internet ftp" services not available anywhere else on the planet!

***sarcasm_OFF***

What wonderful, considerate amateurs these winlink lids are ... kinda makes you want to throw up a little, eh?

EDIT: Remember, Winlink needs more spectrum so that they can provide Emcomm to their served agencies. Grady has been served!!!

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ May 05 2007,16:40)]***sarcasm_ON***

Goodness Greg, how else would they get their NOAA charts for sailing the seven seas? Obviously there is no commercial service available for internet ftp file transfers, is there?

Grady has it all figured out ... his personal info on the winlink page is a testimony as to how clever one can be while crashing the qso's of others:
Quote[/b] ]Needless to say Winlink again was a Godsend while on the ship... Found several reliable PMBO’s covering the Mediterranean… With Pactor III, sea and wave charts could be readily downloaded from a NOAA ftp site. Great Stuff!!!
It takes considerable free amateur radio bandwidth, 150 watts, and gain antennas to get these free <via amateur radio to internet ftp> services not available anywhere else on the planet!

***sarcasm_OFF***

What wonderful, considerate amateurs these winlink lids are ... kinda makes you want to throw up a little, eh?
Kinda makes you wonder don't it. LOL I am still waiting for the winlink defenders to come in this thread and tell me what I am hearing is not pactor because it sure does sound like it to me. Even mixw says it is, LOL.

[kc7gnm]

Now granted these are the PMBO's that I am catching because I have yet to be able to copy a callsign of the idiot lid that initiates the call. I thought, according to larry, that they were supposed to id in P1. If so I have yet to see that happen.

[N4AUD]

The ARRL just said interference is A-OK, though. I guess we need to suck it up quit belly aching, or at least that's what I got from their latest message from on high.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (n4aud @ May 05 2007,17:04)]The ARRL just said interference is A-OK, though. I guess we need to suck it up quit belly aching, or at least that's what I got from their latest message from on high.
Well I am not going to suck it up. I plan on collecting as much info as possible on these idiots and provide proof to the FCC so they can levy some hefty fines to these idiots. In fact I am also going to write the ARRL and show them this evidence I have against these lids and see what they say too.

[N4AUD]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 05 2007,17:09)]Quote[/b] (n4aud @ May 05 2007,17:04)]The ARRL just said interference is A-OK, though. I guess we need to suck it up quit belly aching, or at least that's what I got from their latest message from on high.
Well I am not going to suck it up. I plan on collecting as much info as possible on these idiots and provide proof to the FCC so they can levy some hefty fines to these idiots. In fact I am also going to write the ARRL and show them this evidence I have against these lids and see what they say too.
That's the right thing to do, but IF they reply they are going to spin it in favor of Winlid.

[kc7gnm]

Finally got a call sign from a lid that has no clue. He is in Mexico according to this screen capture.

Here is his info from QRZ

Callsign: KI6IQP Class: General Codes: HAI USA
Name: MICHAEL E KEHIR
Addr1: 501 BUENA VISTA ST
Addr2: MOSS BEACH, CA 94038
Country: USA
Effective: 27 Mar 2007 Expires: 27 Mar 2017
FRN: 0012081436 What's this?
FCC: ULS Listing
Lookups: 16

http://www.ke7ipw.org/ki6iqp.jpg

[kc7gnm]

Here is another moron crashing an ongoing packet QSO. This goes to show by how many I have captured in just a 24 hour period how bad this winlink crap is.

Here is the moron that initiated the call on top of ongoing packet

Callsign: NP2LS Class: Extra Codes: HAI USA
Name: Angela L Hunter
Addr1: C/O Connections E, PO BOX 9901
Addr2: St John, VI 00830-9726
Country: USA
Effective: 28 Feb 2002 Expires: 27 Feb 2011
FRN: 0004748190 What's this?
FCC: ULS Listing
Lookups: 131

http://www.ke7ipw.org/np2ls.jpg

[kc7gnm]

Here is a long email I got from the PMBO LID. Of course he says it is not his fault.

Greg

I do not work packet on any HF frequencies... If you have a screen shot then I must assume you took it in the Packet mode http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif However I do operate a Winlink Pactor MBO on a center frequency of 14.063.4 and 14.101.2 mhz This station has been in continuous operation since 1999 unter part 97 which allows unattended automatic digital forwarding... Therefore there is no responsibility placed upon me as the station operator as to inadvertant inteference... Im sure you are aware of that... If not I can dig out the part 97 that pertains to that subject... Now if it was my station you heard, then I'm sorry for the inconvenience it caused you... However the owness for asertaining the frequency is clear is TOTALLY up to the user accessing the system... And depending on where he is located he might or might not know the frequency is busy... I would like to think that if a user noticed the frequency was occupied that they would select another frequency or system... That's the way it is supposed to work... I would suggest if you operate in that region of the band you become familiar with the Winlink stations that could cause potential problems... Check where the band plans suggest packet be conducted and take a look at where existing Winlink stations currently operate... To assist you in this endevor, I would suggest you take a look at www.winlink.org

Malacious interference, DEFINITELY not... Inadvertant inteference unknownly commited by a winlink user, possible... Then agan can we be sure that he heard you or realze the potential inteference he could cause by connecting... Provide me THAT stations call and I can advise him of the problem...

Here is a copy of the Frequency list of 93 stations world wide, which will help... Let me know if there is any further information you would like me to provide... If you would like to discuss on the phone will be glad to give you a call... We are toll free here...

Regards Grady Williams K6IXA

THE ZS5S DIRECTORY OF WL2K PACTOR MBO's (PMBO's) - 06DEC05

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~

This list is recognized by the ARRL and supported by AirMail

All stations provide Radio-EMail service, are auto-replying in

either Pactor-1 or Pactor-2 and, unless noted, available 24 hours.

Frequencies followed by a hash sign are available for Pactor-3 connects.

Listed are the standard Center Frequencies. Times in UTC.

A separate directory is issued for "Classic" Pactor MBO's,

those are not associated with WL2K and do not accept Emails.



Explanation of codes used:

- = Unknown

# = Pactor-3 only frequency

A = Additional information

S = Sysop Phone number (fixed or cell)

P = Packet port to local network

Antenna being used:

B = Beam

D = Dipole

V = Vertical

Internet details:

E = E-mail address sysop - if not listed, use mbo_call_sign@winlink.org

H = Homepage URL

T = Telnet TCP/IP ID - Registered WL2K users should

obtain port # and password from the sysop.

All PMBO's offer 'Fastlink', permanent Internet connection.



Full H-Address, Name Sysop, QTH, (YRMODA last update rcvd)

---------------------------------------------------------

9Y4/WG3G.TYCMM.TTO.CAR.SA, Bernie, [FK90fq: Trinidad], (05DEC27)

D 3618.0 3618.0# 7036.9 7107.0# 10138.0 10138.0# 14066.9

18101.9 18106.5#

P yes, WL2K, 145.010

E bernie@tstt.net.tt

H -

T wg3g.no-ip.com (reported not working)

A not accepting Pactor-1 connects

AH6QK.HI.USA.NA, Richard, [BL11cj: Oahu/HI], (03SEP18/K4CJX)

V 7070.9 10126.9 14069.0 14110.0# 18101.9

P none

E rhacker@aloha.net

H none

T 24.94.84.68

DB0FHW.DEU.EU, Micha/DD2MIC, [JO52ge: Wolfenbuettel], (06SEP07)

D 14103.0 14103.0#

P yes, WL2K, 439.925MHz

E info@afu-ag.de

H http://www.afu-ag.de

T pactor.afu-ag.de port 12001

A Assistant sysops: Chris, DD7AN & Oli, DO1OLI

DL4HAO.DEU.EU, Dietmar, [JO44wf: Norderstedt], (06NOV05)

D 3591.9 3591.9# 7037.4 7040.9#

10137.9 10137.9# 10146.2 10146.2#

14104.9 14104.9# 18104.9 18104.9#

P none

E dl4hao@yahoo.de

H none

T none

A Closed 06DEC01 - 07APR01

DX1FLR.PHP.AS, Ed/DU1DPE, [PK04lp:Manila], (06APR05/HP3CS)

D 7079.0 7079.0# 7089.0 7089.0#

14066.5 14066.5# 14076.5 14076.5#

P none

E du1dpe@gmail.com

H http://www.qsl.net/dx1flr

T none

S Tel #: 632-2817790 / 632-2824481

Cell #: 63917-9683312

EA8RCT.ESP.AF, Fred/EA8CAP, [IL28gd: Las Palmas], (05JAN28/N7LGK)

- 7036.9 7038.7# 10131.9 10145.7# 14064.9 14110.0#

18102.9 18108.4# 21095.9 21100.0#

P -

E adeubler@mail.infocanarias.com - bouncing

H -

T -

A still awaiting further details

HB9MM.CHE.EU Philip and Jean-Claude, [JN36eh: Lausanne], (05MAR31/K4CJX)

B 14075.9 14109.2#

P none

E philip.hb9hfd@gmail.com

H www.hb9mm.com

T winlink.hb9mm.com

A Beaming the MED area

HP2XBA.PNR.NA, Craig, [EJ88rk: Bagala], (06SEP08)

V 7104.4 7104.4# 10148.2 10148.2# 14109.2 14109.2#

18119.0 18119.0# 21102.9 21102.9# 28130.0 28130.0#

P none

E david@pananix.com

H www.svpogo2.com & www.pananix.com

T winlink.panamix.com port 12001 or 64.116.183.2

A Craig/AG4XE is the operator and David/AI4FG does maintenance

IV3XHR.ITA.EU, Gianpaolo, [JN66pb: Udine/ITA], (05NOV13)

Station 1

V 14073.9 14103.2#

Station 2:

D 10129.9 10142.7#

Station 3:

D 7037.9 7046.7#

P yes, WL2K, 144.975 & 433.825 (1200)

E iv3xhr@tin.it

H none

T iv3xhr.no-ip.com

A accepts no P-1 connects

K4CJX.TN.USA.NA, Steve, [EM66oc: Nashville/TN], (05JUL06)

Station 1:

D 7076.9 7101.2# 14076.9 14106.7#

2300-1100: 3631.2 3631.2#

Station 2:

D 10123.9 10141.2# 18103.9 18108.7#

P none

E k4cjx@comcast.net

H winlink.org/k4cjx

T k4cjx.no-ip.com

S Home: 615-665-0952, Cell: 615-300-5296

A not accepting Pactor-1 connects

K4SET.#WKY.KY.USA.NA, Scott, [EM56uo: Murray/KY], (03SEP29)

D 7074.9 7103.7# 10136.9 10143.4# 21073.9 21095.2#

P yes, wl2k, 145.010

E k4set@radioministries.org

H radioministries.org/k4set

T k4set.no-ip.com

K6CYC.CA.USA.NA, Scott/N6ABC, [DM03sx: Los Angeles/CA], (05APR04)

V 7069.9 10123.9

B S Pacific & Mexico - 14068.9 14094.9# 14102.7# 21068.9 21096.2#

P none

E dr.scotts@verizon.net

H www.calyachtclub.com

T k6cyc.no-ip.com

A California Yacht Club, Marina del Rey

A Does not accept P-1 connects.

K6IXA.#CCA.CA.USA.NA, Grady, [CM97qi: Atwater], (05APR02/K7BFL)

Station 1:

V 10122.9 10143.7#

Station 2:

B 135 dgs, after 0500 240 dgs - 14064.9 14102.7#

P yes, WL2K, 144.910

E gradyw@elite.net

H www.elite.net/~gradyw/ bouncing

T 206.62.222.199

KA6IQA.CA.USA.NA, Tom, [DM12jx: nr San Diego/CA], (03MAY30/KN6KB)

V 7066.9 7101.2# 14104.2# 14112.4 18102.9 18106.7#

P none

E lafleur@ucsd.edu

H none

T swan.dyndns.org

KB6YNO.#NCA.CA.USA.NA, Eric, [CM88qg: Petaluma], (05FEB27)

V 7063.9 10124.9 14063.9 14108.9# 18098.9

P yes, WL2K, 144.910

E kb6yno@comcast.net

H http://www.qsl.net/kb6yno

T kb6yno.no-ip.com

A Pactor-3 temporarily not available

KL7EDK.AK.USA.NA, Jerry, [BP64GV: Fairbanks], (05JUL15)

V 3627.9 3627.9# 7065.9 7104.4# 10147.7 10147.7# 14064.0 14098.5#

P yes, WL2K, 147.960

E jercurry@att.net

H none

T kl7edk.no-ip.com

KN6KB.#MLBFL.FL.USA.NA, Rick, [EL98pq: nr Melbourne/FL], (05JAN19)

V 7068.9 7103.7# 10146.2# 14066.4

P yes, WL2K, 145.090 & 441.000 (1200)

E rmuething@cfl.rr.com

H www.dwatt.com/users/kn6kb.html

T kn6kb.no-ip.com

A Pactor-1 connects between 0000z and 1200z only.

KQ4ET.VA.USA.NA, Joel, [FM16xu: Virginia Beach], (05MAR06)

Station-1:

L 3628.7 7067.9 18106.9#

Station-2:

L 10146.5# 14110.0# 21098.7#

P yes, WL2K, 145.730 (1200) & 441.050 (9600)

E traffic@exis.net

H none

T kq4et.no-ip.com

A L = 80 mtr loop

LZ1PKS.BUL.EU, Krassimir, [KN12qp: Sofia, Bulgaria], (05MAR31/K4CJX)

D 7043.5 7043.5# 10139.5 10145.9# 14111.9 14111.9#

P none

E pingelov@techno-link.com

H none

T lz1pks.no-ip.info

N0IA.#CENFL.FL.USA.NA, Bud, [EL98jv: Deltona], (05APR21)

D 3626.9 (0000-1200) 7063.9 10133.9

B 320 dgs: 14074.9 14098.7# 18106.2# (1200-2400)

P yes, FBB, 144.910

E budt@cfl.rr.com

H none

T n0ia.no-ip.com

A 0000-1200: 3626.9 & 1200-2400: 18106.2#

N8PGR.#NEOH.OH.USA.NA, Hans, [EN91dh: nr Cleveland], (05APR18/K4CJX)

D 3621.9 7071.9 10140.4 14077.9

P yes, WL2K, 145.010

E n8pgr@winlink.org

H -

T n8pgr.no-ip.com

NP2E.VIR.NA, Bernie/NP2W, [FK78mi: St. Thomas], (06JAN20)

Station-1:

V 3633.0 3633.0#

Station-2:

V 7066.9 7101.4#

Station-3:

D 10127.9 10145.2#

P none

E np2e@paradise.vi (bouncing)

H none

T np2e.no-ip.org

A not accepting Pactor-1 connects

A Packet availability expected soon

OE4XBU.AUT.EU, Rudi/OE4RYC, [JN87gu: Eisenstadt], (05OCT02/K4CJX)

B South: 14074.9 14110.0# 21074.9 21098.0#

P yes, wl2k, -

E oe4xbu@winlink.org

H none

T none

A off line

ON5FS.BEL.EU, Andre, [JO10st: Kluisbergen], (06NOV28)

Station-1:

D 3596.0 3596.0#

Station-2

D 7039.0 7041.0#

Station-3

B 10137.5 10147.5#

Station-4

B 14077.5 14105.0#

P Yes, WL2K, 439.850 Mhz (9600)

E on5fs@skynet.be

H www.qsl.net/on5fs

T on5fs.no-ip.info

A Not accepting Pactor-1 connects

PA3DUV.NLD.EU, Dick, [JO32cf: Deventer/NLD], (04JUL19)

Station-1:

D 3583.5 3593.5#

Station-2

D 7035.4 7043.9#

Station-3:

V 10136.9 10141.0#

Station-4:

B SW 14065.9 14106.7#

Station-5:

D 18100.9 18106.2#

P none

E pa3duv@planet.nl

H www.qsl.net/pa3duv

T pa3duv.no-ip.com

A not accepting P-1 connects

SK6PS.SWE.EU, Bjorn and Thomas, [JO57xm: Gothenburg], (06NOV21/K4CJX)

A closed down

VE1YZ.NS.CAN.NA, Neil, [FN84bq: nr Halifax/NS], (06NOV30]

D 3631.9 3631.9#

V 7096.5 7096.5# 10148.2 10148.2# 14114.0 14114.0#

P Telpac, VE1YZ-10, 145.030

E ve1yz@eastlink.ca

H none

T ve1yz.no-ip.com

A condensed, scanning 4 frequencies only, Pactor-1, -2 & -3

A actual QTH is St Margarets Bay and MM's are welcome

VE2AFQ.QC.CAN.NA, Andre/VA2AF, [FN35im: Montreal], (05MAR02)

D 3629.9 3629.9# 7094.0 7094.0#

V 10137.9 10137.9#

B South: 14068.9 14068.9# 21109.4 21109.4#

P yes, Telpac, 145.070

E va2af@videotron.ca

H lereseauducapitaine.qc.ca

T ve2afq.no-ip.com

VE6KBS.AL.CAN.NA, Karl, [DO20wx: Calgary/AL/CAN], (O6NOV02)

B 240 dgs - 7096.0 7096.5# 14078.9 14104.2#

18100.9 18106.2# 21079.9 21098.7#

P yes, WL2K, via digipeater on 145.150 (-600 kHz)

E ve6kbs@telus.net

H none

T ve6kbs.no-ip.com

A closed till year end

VK2SYD.NSW.AUS.OC, Charles, [QF56ne: Sydney], (04APR30)

D 3620.2 3620.2# 7046.7 7046.7# 10116.2 10116.2#

14106.7 14106.7# 18107.0 18107.0# 21298.7 21298.7#

P none

E leahyfamily@bigpond.com

H none

T vk2syd.no-ip.com

A does not accept P1 connects

VK3PG.VIC.AUS.OC, Phil, [QF22jb: Melbourne], (06dec03)

Station-1:

D 3627.7 3627.7# 7068.3 7068.3# 7098.5 7098.5#

10140.0 10140.0# 14127.5 14127.5#

Station-2:

18126.5 18126.5#

P yes, WL2K, 144.900 147.600

E philharb@mel.quik.com.au

H none

T vk3pg.no-ip.com

VK5ATB.BVL.#SA.AUS.OC, Pops, [PF95mn: Nuriootpa], (06SEP07)

V 3633.8 3633.8# 7054.5 7054.5# 10123.5 10123.5#

14113.5 14113.5# 18121.5 18121.5# 21293.7 21293.7#

P yes, WL2K, 144.875

E -

H none

T vk5atb.no-ip.org

VK6KPS.WA.AUS.OC, Phil, [OF78wa: Perth], (04NOV07)

D 3624.3 3624.3# 7043.5 7043.5# 10135.4 10135.4#

14097.5 14097.5# 18113.8 18113.8# 21126.5 21126.5#

P YES, WL2K, 144.725

E vk6kps@clew.com.au

H none

T vk6kps.no-ip.com

VO1CRC.NL.CAN.NA, Laurie/VO1XC, [GN37po: St. Johns, (06DEC01)

D 3557.0 3557.0# 3696.5 3696.5# 7098.5 7098.5# 10146.5 10146.5#

14110.0 14110.0#

P -

E vo1crc@xplornet.com

H none

T vo1crc.no-ip.com

A New PMBO

VU2GMN.IND.AS, Gopal, [NK03da: Madras], (06FEB17)

V 3643.0 3643.0# 7053.0 7053.0# 14116.0 14116.0#

18124.0, 18124.0#, 21183.0 21183.0# 24939.0 24939.0#

P none

E gopalmadhavan@vsnl.com

H none

T none

W1ON.MA.USA.NA, Doc/W1EO, [FN42jm: Bedford/MA], (04FEB15)

D 3620.9 7070.9 18100.9

B SSW - 14075.9 14104.2#

P none

E doc@mitre.org

H none

T none

W6IM.CA.USA.NA, Rod/W6MWB, [DM12jr: San Diego]/CA, (06JUN13)

D 7073.9 10141.2#

B 135 dgs - 14073.9 14098.7#

P none

E mclennan@cox.net

H none

T w6im.no-ip.org

W7BO.#SWWA.WA.USA.NA, John, [CN85pw: nr Portland], (05NOV25)

D 3619.9 3622.2# 7067.9 7071.9 7101.2#

P yes, -, 145.090, use command 'c 1 w7bo' through local node GOBLE

E w7bo@adelphia.net

H www.qsl.net/w7bo

T w7bo.no-ip.com

W7IJ.#WWA.WA.USA.NA, Bill, [CN86sv: nr Olympia], (05JAN01)

Station-1:

B 240 dgs/SW: 14069.4 14110.0# 21077.9 21091.2#

Station-2:

LW 7068.9 7103.7# 10139.5

D 3631.9 3631.9#

P yes, WL2K, 145.070

E w7ij@arrl.net

H none

T w7ij.no-ip.com

A Accepts Pactor-1 connects on 3631.9 only

W9GSS.IL.USA.NA, Chuck, [EN50pf: Peoria/IL], (06NOV01/K4CJX)

D 7072.9

B SSE: 14073.9 14109.9# 21098.0#

P none

E w9gss@insightbb.com (bouncing)

H none

T w9gss.no-ip.com

A FAX: (775) 490-1399 att. W9GSS (for license verification)

A Closed till further notice


W9MR.#SEIL.IL.USA.NA, Ken, [EM68bi: Keensburg], (05AUG21/K4CJX)

V 7065.9 10145.2# 14069.0 14101.7#

P none

E kmw9mr@shawneelink.net

H none

T -

WA2DXQ.#HWDFL.USA.NA, Dave, [EL96we: Ft. Lauderdale], (06MAR28)

D 7074.9 10143.7# 14075.9 14101.7#

P yes, WL2K, 145.070

E dwagner2@bellsouth.net

H none

T 65.12.219.21 or wa2dxq.no-ip.com

A not accepting P-1 connects

WB0TAX.LA.USA.NA, Deni, [EM32gi: Shreveport/LA], (05NOV02)

D 2200-1200: 3636.9 3636.9#

D H24: 7103.7# 10143.7#

B SE: 14066.9 14096.2#

D 1100-2400: 18106.2#

P none

E deni@dwatt.com

H www.dwatt.com

T 70.148.96.70

A not accepting Pactor-1 connects

WB5KSD.TX.USA.NA, Jon, [EM13ud: nr Dallas], (06JUL06)

D 7075.9 7101.7# 10132.9 10147.7# 14078.9 14109.2#

P yes, Telpac, 145.090

E wb5ksd@bigfoot.com

H none

T wb5ksd.no-ip.org or 66.212.107.195

WD8DHF.TX.USA.NA, Gary, [EM11dc: nr Austin], (06MAR03))

Station-1:

D 3590.9 10127.9

Station-2:

D 7075.4 7103.7# 21075.4 21091.2#

Station-3:

B 164 dgs: 14075.4 14098.7# 18075.4 18107.9#

P none

E gburrows@hot.rr.com

H none

T wd8dhf.no-ip.com

A does accept Pactor-1 connects

WH6DS.HI.USA.NA, Ron, [BL11cg: Honolulu/HI], (02FEB15/K4CJX)

V 3641.9 3641.9# 7103.7# 10142.7 10142.7# 14064.4 14109.2#

18106.2 18106.2#

P none

E wh6ds@aol.com

H none

T wh6ds.no-ip.org

WU3V.MT.USA.NA, Jim, [DN47jl: Great Falls], (06NOV30)

Station-1:

D 0000-1500: 3593.0

D 10126.9 10143.4#

Station-2:

D 7074.9 7103.7#

B Baja & S. Pacific: 14069.0 14102.7#

P WU3V-10 Telpac on 145.010

E james@wu3v.net

H none

T moe.wu3v.net or wu3v.no-ip.com (port 12001)

WX4J.FL.USA.NA, Earl, [EM90ec: nr Jacksonville], (05MAR30)

Station-1:

D 3622.4# 7066.9

Station-2:

D 10143.4# 14066.9

P Yes, 144.990 Telpac gateway: WX4J-10, WL2K 144.930

E unlisted

H none

T wx4j.no-ip.com

A Pactor-1 connects accepted on 3622.4 and 7066.9

ZF1GC.CG.NA, Frank, [EK99ig: Grand Cayman Isl.], (06JAN23)

D 7072.9 7101.7# 10125.9 10143.7# 14065.9 14098.7# 18100.9 18106.2#

P none

E zf1gc-1@candw.ky

H none

A accepts no P-1 connects

ZL1MA.NZL.OC, Arnold, [RF73kc: Auckland], (05NOV24)

D 3631.2 3631.2# 7163.0 7163.0# 7176.5 7176.5#

10131.5 10131.5# 18116.3 18116.3#

P none

E agibbons@xtra.co.nz

H none

S +649 272 299 587

T zl1ma.no-ip.com

A VHF 2 meters Land/Marine = Musick Point ("Tower")

repeater 145.775 Mhz (-600 kHz offset). Covers

Whangarei Heads/Hauraki Gulf/Auckland Harbour

A Off air

ZL2UT.#38.NZL.OC, Basil, [RF91ai: Gisborne], (06JUN29)

B 14090.2 14090.2#

0000-0900: NE (Cook Is., Fr. Poly)

1800-2400: NW (AUS, New Cal., Fiji)

D 0500-1900: 7050.0 7050.0#

P yes, WL2K, 144.650

E b.davoren@xtra.co.nz

H none

T zl2ut.no-ip.com

ZS5S.ZAF.AF, Joost, [KG50cm: nr Durban], (06DEC01)

Station 1:

B 345 dgs (Africa/Europe)

1600-0400: 7041.0 7041.0#

0200-2200: 14111.0 14111.0#

0500-1600: 21111.0 21111.0#

Station 2:

V 0400-1600: 7041.0 7041.0#

0400-0700 & 1400-1900: 10141.0 10141.0#

P yes, WL2K, 144.625

E zs5s@zs5s.net

H zs5s.net

S **27 - 33 - 3304702

T zs5s.no-ip.com

A 7041.0 khz on station-1: 1600-0500 & on station-2: 0500-1600

A 3.5 18 24 or 28 Mhz on request

ZS6JDE.ZAF.AF, Hannes, [KG44DG: Pretoria], (06OCT01)

Station 1:

D 3590.0 3590.0# 7038.7 7038.7# 10143.4 10143.4# 10148.4 10148.4#

21117.9 21117.9#

Station 2:

D 14088.2 14088.2# 14115.5 14115.5#

P yes, Telpac, ZS6JDE-8 439.650 9K6 also

via ZS0DLD-9 144.675 1K2,

via ZS0DLD-10 430.600 1K2,

via ZS0DLD-11 438.025 1K2 and

via ZS0DLD-13 439.650 9K6

E zs6jde@sentechsa.com

H winlink-africa.net

T zr6jde.no.-ip.com



To connect to above PMBO's client software 'AirMail'

version 3.2.xxx is required, available free at

www.airmail2000.com

Info about the WL2K system can be found at winlink.org

To subscribe to this directory, send E-mail

To: zs5s@zs5s.net

Subj: SUBSCRIBE PMBO

Text: your_call_sign

This bulletin is issued on the first of each month.

A continuously update can be found at zs5s.net





DIRECTORY OF CLASSIC PACTOR MBO's - 06DEC05

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The only list recognized by the ARRL and supported by AirMail.

A separate directory is issued for Winlink-2000 MBO's (PMBO's).

Unless noted, all MBO's are using 'Classic' Winlink software, are

available 24 hours a day and are auto-replying in either Pactor-1

or Pactor-2. A few MBO's offer Pactor-3 on frequencies which are

followed by the hash sign.

Listed are the standard Center Frequencies.

PLEASE NOTE - The following stations DO NOT accept radio-emails.

Explanation of codes used:

- = Details unknown

# = Pactor-III only frequency

A = Additional information

P = Packet port available and forwarding to domestic network

S - Telephone #

Antenna being used:

B = Beam

D = Dipole

V = Vertical

Internet details:

E = E-mail address sysop

H = Homepage URL

T = Telnet address. Contact sysop for password.



Full H-address, Name sysop, [Locator: QTH], (last update rcvd)

---------------------------------------------------------------

9K2EC.KWT.AS, Mohsen, [LM30--: Kuwait], (06JAN11/icpt)

B 10141.9# 10144.9# 14065.9 14070.9 14079.9 14111.9#

AS/OC: 0030-0900 1200-1800 - EU: 0900-1200 1800-0030

E abajeel@qualitynet.net

9Y4IBN.TTO.CAR.SA, Irvine, [FK90gk: Trinidad], (06NOV04)

B North - 1100-2400 : 14064.9 14069.9 14075.9 14112.4 14115.9

21064.9 21078.9 28135.9 28137.9

P none

E i9y4ibn@lycos.com & i9y4ibn@carib-link.net

H www.angelfire.com/hf/9y4ibn

A Off air 06NOV15 - 07JAN01

DA5UHA.#HH.DEU.EU, Rup/DJ6HH, [JO53bp: Hamburg], (06JAN09)

D 3590.4 3591.4 3595.9 3611.9#

7037.9 7039.9 7041.4# 10145.9

D 0600-1800: 14089.9 14092.9 14095.9 14110.4#

V 0600-1500: 21111.9#

P yes, FBB, -

E rupteacher@gmx.net

H none

A FBB s/w


DK0BLN.#BLN.DEU.EU, Andre/DL7UAZ, [JO62sl: Berlin], (06MAR19)

D 3593.0 3595.0

V 14092.0 14074.0 14098.0 14105.0# 14107.0#

P yes, via DB0FEZ 439.800/430.400 9k6

yes, via DK0BLN-15 439.700/434.900 76k8

E dl7uaz@freenet.de

A DPBox-Linux system

DK0MAV.#NDS.DEU.EU, Gerrit/DH8GHH, [JO52ch: Peine], (06APR02, DJ6HH)

D 3589.9

P yes, DPBox, 438.025

E confidential

H www.qsl.net/dk0mav

A DPbox-Linux system

DK0MUN.#BAY.DEU.EU, Werner/DL2JA, [JN48--: nr Munich], (------)

B AS/OC: 14065.9 14071.4 14073.9 14115.9 21074.9

E dl2ja_dk4if@t-online.de (reported bouncing)

F2PY.FMLR.FRA.EU, Pierre, [JN04rf: Montpezat], (06MAY03)

B 14097.9 - 100 dgs 1100-1600

14067.9 - 100 dgs 1100-2200, 240 dgs 0500-0800

P yes, -, -

E peter.f2py@wanadoo.fr

H none

A On 3583.9 (0600-2200) & 7039.9 (0800-1100) available

in terminal mode with program "Maildrop QRV"


F3KT.FPDL.FRA.EU, Michel, [IN88--: Nantes], (06JAN11)

D 3591.9 7037.9 7039.9

1800-0600: 3590.4 3590.9 3592.9 3593.9

B S (180 dgs): 0600-1800 - NW (315 dgs): 1800-0800

14093.4 14090.9 14097.4 21113.4

0600-1800: 21117.4 28313.4

P no

E f3kt@free.fr

H None

A FBB s/w

F6HBB.FRPA.FRA.EU, Joaquim, [JN18CX : nr Paris], (06JAN08/DJ6HH)

D 7037.9 7039.9

P none

E f6hbb@caramail.com

H none

A FBB linux

A forwarding to domestic packet network (no user port)

GB7CIP.#32.GBR.EU, Paul/G4APL, [IO91wh: Caterham], (06OCT01/HB9BRJ)

V 7037.9 7039.9 7041.4 7041.4#

0600-2300: 14076.9 14095.9 14107.4 14107.4# 14110.4 14110.4#

21111.9#

E paul@skywaves.demon.co.uk

H www.theskywaves.net

A FBB Linux

HB9AK.CHE.EU, Martin/HB9AUR, [JN47fe: Cham/Zug], (05DEC31)

D 3595.9 3611.9#

V 7038.9 7041.4# 10145.9 14095.9 14105.9#

18115.9# 21095.9 21111.9# 24935.9# 28315.9#

P yes, WLc, none, call HB9AK-9 via digi's

E hb9aur@swiss-artg.ch

H www.swiss-artg.ch

HS0ZDZ.#SAR.NNK.THA.AS, Roy/G3NOM, [OK04pg: Nakhon Nayok], (06NOV03/DJ6HH)

A Station has closed down due to severe illness of Roy.

HS0ZER.#PWT.BKK.THA.AS, Rudolf, [------, nr Bangkok], (05MAY31/HP)

B 14069.4 14072.4

- 0800-1600: 21072.4

P yes, 145.570, FBB

T hs0zer.no-ip.com port 6300

E dl1zav@amsat.org

H www.qslnet.de/dl1zav

A all frequencies P1, P2 and P3

A believed to be QRT

I5FLN.ITOS.ITA.EU, Luciano, [JN53--: Florence], (00DEC)

B 14068.9 14072.9 21068.9 21072.9 28068.9 28072.85

AF 0600-1800 NA 1700-2300

P no

E i5fln@iol.it

H http://www.webalice.it/luciano.fusari/

A Pactor-1 only

IK0MIL.ILAZ.ITA.EU, Lamberto [JN61ft: Roma], (05DEC31/DJ6HH)

D 14110.4

E i0blc@libero.it

K7EK.#TAC.#WWA.WA.USA.NA, Gary, [CN87tb: Spanaway], (06NOV01)

D 3620.0 3622.0 3624.0 3629.0 3632.0# 3640.0#

7071.0 7072.0 7076.0 7077.0 7100.5 7103.7#

10128.0 10141.0 10147.9

14073.5 14096.0 14098.0 14107.0 14111.9# 14114.0#

P yes, FBB, 224.560 (1200 Bd)

K7EK-4 is Telpac & K7EK-5 is UROnode

E gary.k7ek@gmail.com

H www.k7ek.net

T k7ek.dyndns.org, port 3601, 3694 & 6300

A ex W7NTF

A Accepting Pactor-1 connects

A Linux FBB s/w - Relaying NTS Traffic & BBS Personal Mail.

KD1RY.CT.USA.NA, Rocco, [FN31hj: Bethel], (06SEP14/HB9BRJ)

V 14096.5 14098.0 14110.0

P no

E kd1ry@arrl.net

N0RVX.IA.USA.NOAM, Ron, [EN31fo: Des Moines], (06SEP14)

B 14067.9 14074.9 14077.9 14104.9 14113.9

P yes, FBB, 145.010

E n0rvx@mchsi.com

N7QDN.OR.USA.NA, Duane, [CN85sl: nr Portland], (05MAR28)

D 3621.9 3523.9 3626.9 3628.9 7070.9 7072.9 7074.9 7101.2

10121.9 10123.9 10125.9 10143.9 14065.9 14067.9 14069.9

14098.9 14104.9 14113.9

B 240 dgs 1400-0400: 18106.2 18108.8 21067.9 21093.9

24928.9 28072.9 28123.9

P -

E n7qdn@arrl.net

OK0PBR.#MOR.CZE.EU, Libor/OK2PEN, [JN89hf: Brno], (04APR08)

V 7037.9 7040.9 10127.9 10147.9

14064.9 14065.9 14066.9 14072.9 14074.9 14076.9

18107.9 21072.9 21074.9 21076.9 28072.9 28076.9

P yes, via OK0NMA

E ok2pen@medvidek.dyndns.org

H medvidek.dyndns.org (1200-0100 only)

T 193.165.211.34 (OK0NMG: CZGATE amprnet gate)

ON0BEL.#LG.BEL.EU, Rene, [JO20um: Liege], (06OCT01/HB9BRJ)

V 3579.9 3581.9 3583.9 7036.9 7037.9 7039.9 10143.9 10145.9

B 14065.4 14067.9 14068.4 14069.9 14070.9 14072.9 14074.9

21072.9 21075.4 21076.9

160 dgs: 0000-1900, 270 dgs: 1900-2400

P yes, FBB, 144.8875 and 438.150 (9600)

E on0bel.pr@skynet.be

H on0bel.dynip.com

T on0bel.dynip.com port 23

A server: ftp://on0bel.dynip.com

SL5ZXN.C.SWE.EU, Rolf/SM5BPV, [JO89sn: Baalsta], (06JAN08/DJ6HH)

V 3589.9 3591.9 3593.9 3595.9 3597.9 7037.9 7038.9

14088.9 14090.9 14092.9 14094.9 14096.9 18103.9 18107.9

21089.9 21099.9 24922.9 24927.9 28124.9 28134.9

E rolf.wikstrom@fro.se

SV1IW.ATH.GRC.EU, Manos, [KM17uw: Athens], (05DEC31/DJ6HH)

B NW: 14088.9 14096.9 14110.4# 21111.9#

E sv1iw@raag.org

H www.raag.org

A FBB s/w

T90BOX.SAR.BIH.EU, Sead/T97S, [JN93eu: Sarajevo], (99MAY)

D 3590.9

2200-0700: 3585.9 3586.9 3591.9 3593.9 7034.9 7036.9 7037.9 7039.9

B N 0700-2200: 14069.9 .. steps of 1 kHz .. 14089.9

E -

A FBB s/w

TA2BBS.#ANK.TUR.EU, Fatih/TA2FQ [KM69jv: Ankara], (05DEC31/DJ6HH)

D 7037.9 7039.9 7041.4#

V 10147.9#

D 0500-1800: 14097.9 14111.9#

V 0500-1500: 21097.9 21111.9#

P yes, FBB, 144.625 & 433.650 (9k6), call TA2BBS-8 via TA2 FlexNet

E confidential

H none

T 44.176.206.128 6300 ARP TA2BBS-10 via TA2 FlexNet (TCP/IP via RF)

A LinuxFBB s/w

A Realtime FBB gateway to TA2 packet network:

Enter 'G' for gateway, '5' for port DIGI, 'C TA2BBS-2' for Node

A Co-sysop Thomas - DG4FDI @ DK0MNL

UA6ADV.H.KRD.RUS.EU, Raya, [------: Holmskaya], (04NOV28/DJ6HH)

D 1900-0300: 7034.9 7035.9 7036.9 7037.9 7039.9

0300-1900: 14062.9 14073.9 14074.9 14097.9# 14110.4# 14111.9

P yes, -, -

E ua6adv@bk.ru

H -

A FBB s/w

VE3BDM.#EON.ON.CAN.NA, George, [FN05--: Brockville], (03MAY01)

D 3621.9 7070.9 7072.4 7100.4

1200-0100 (summer until 0430): 10129.9 10139.9 10140.9

14073.4 14095.9 14097.9 14111.9 21075.9 21093.4

0100-1300: 3620.9

P no

E ve3bdm@ripnet.com

H web.ripnet.com/~ve3bdm

A NTS ONLY

VK2AAB.#SYD.NSW.AUS.OC, Barry, [------: Sydney], (06JAN02/DJ6HH)

- 14067.9

P -

E bewhite@bigpond.net.au

T none

A Operation erratic - best times 0700-0900 & 2100-2300

VK3WZ.#MEL.VIC.AUS.OC, John, [QF22--: Melbourne], (06OCT17)

A Became silent key on 06AUG17

VK8PDG.PLM.#NT.AUS.OC, Peter, [PH57lm: Palmerston], (06JAN04)

Station-1 (FBB)

V 28073.0 28104.0 28124.9 28129.9 28137.9 28159.9 28169.5

Station-2 (Winlink Classic)

D N-S: 14065.9 21068.9 21072.5 21072.9 21075.5 21077.9

Station-3 (Airmail)

D 2x20m NE-SW: 3580.9 7034.9

P yes, FBB, 144.900 and

WL2K Telpac, 144.925

E petergiles2@hotmail.com

H www.vk8pdg.com

T vk8dpg.no-ip.com : 23 or 6300

W0WWR.#WICHITA.KS.USA.NA, Preston, [EL90ec: Wichita], (02NOV03)

D 0200-0230: 3377.9 - 2000-2200: 10143.0 - 1400-1800: 14100.0

P no

E pbarr40659@aol.com (bouncing)

H none

A NTS ONLY

W1WCG.XT.USA.NA, Van, [FN31nj, (06JAN11/icpt)

D 3621.9 7070.9 7100.4 10141.9 10144.9

B 260 dgs - 1200-2300: 14097.9# 14112.4# 14113.9# 18102.4 21075.9

E w1wcg@snet.net

W5SEG.#STX.SEG.USA.NA, Robby, [EL19as: Seguin], (04MAY20)

D 3629.9 7100.4 7103.7# 10144.9

14109.9 18105.9 21097.9 24927.9 28122.9

P yes, -, 145.090

E w5seg@swbell.net

H www.axs4u.net/home/w5seg (not working in 2006)

WA1URA.IN.USA.NA, Frank, [EN71mf: nr Fort Wayne], (02SEP02)

D 3619.9 3620.9 3622.9

V 7070.9 7074.9 10125.9 10127.9 10139.4 10140.4

B 060 dgs - 14068.9 14070.4 14073.4 14074.9 14110.4 14115.9

21073.9 21075.9 21078.9

P -

E fn.moore@verizon.net

WB2FTX.#NENJ.NJ.USA.NA, Dave, [FM20tx: Butler], (02MAY)

D 3621.9 3623.9 7072.9 7102.4 10129.9 10142.9

14075.4 14097.9 14114.4 21077.9 21094.9

P yes, -, -, not available to users

E wb2ftx@optonline.net

WB3DTG.#CEPA.PA.USA.NA, Bob, [FN20hq: Bethlehem], (05MAR/DJ6HH)

D 7067.9 7068.9 7069.9 7071.3 7071.9 7072.9 7073.9 7078.9 7102.4

P -

E robert4461@yahoo.com

WO0A.MN.USA.NA, Norb, [EN34mn: nr Cannon Falls], (01MAR)

D 3620.03 3621.9 3624.03 7074.53 7079.03 7103.53

14075.53 14100.03 14112.9 14115.53 14117.9 14120.03

21075.9 21078.03 21098.03

P -

E wo0a@arrl.net

A Airmail s/w

WU3V.#GTF.MT.USA.NA, Jim, [DN47jl: Great Falls], (06JUL04)

A Closed down

ZL2BAU.#79.NZL.OC

ZS0MEE.SRJ.GAU.ZAF.AF, Dick/ZS6RO, [KG33xr: nr Pretoria], (06JAN/icpt)

B N 0400-2000: 14064,9 14070.9 14077.4 14077.9

21063.4 21077.4 21111.9

P yes, FBB, 144.550 144.650 438.025 439.750

E dick@zs6ro.co.za

H www.zs6ro.no-ip.org or www.zs6ro.co.za

A All HF frequencies Pactor-1, 2 & 3

ZS6KM.PTA.GAU.ZAF.AF, Mario, [KG44dg: Pretoria], (02OCT26)

B night: 14117.9 14117.9# day: 21117.9 21117.9#

P yes, WLc, 430.600 & 439.650 (9K6)

E zs6km@winlink.org

H none

S none

Stations not listed either have not submitted details (unknown),

have restricted access or are operating illegally.

Additions/corrections may be e-mailed to zs5s@zs5s.net

This bulletin will be renewed on the first of each month.

To subscribe to this bulletin, send E-mail

To: zs5s@zs5s.net

Subj: SUBSCRIBE CLASSIC

Text: your_call_sign

[kc7gnm]

Another LID using the K6IXA PMBO.

Callsign: KA9KAI Class: Advanced Codes: HAI USA
Name: CHESTER P EASLEY
Addr1: 409 South Harrison Street
Addr2: Frankfort, IN 46041
Country: USA
Effective: 03 May 2005 Expires: 24 May 2015
FRN: 0013411004 What's this?
FCC: ULS Listing
Lookups: 236

http://www.ke7ipw.org/ka9kai.jpg

[KA4DPO]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ May 05 2007,15:40)]***sarcasm_ON***

Goodness Greg, how else would they get their NOAA charts for sailing the seven seas? #Obviously there is no commercial service available for internet ftp file transfers, is there?

Grady has it all figured out ... his personal info on the winlink page is a testimony as to how clever one can be while crashing the qso's of others:
Quote[/b] ]Needless to say Winlink again was a Godsend while on the ship... #Found several reliable PMBO’s covering the Mediterranean… #With Pactor III, sea and wave charts could be readily downloaded from a NOAA ftp site. #Great Stuff!!!
It takes considerable free amateur radio bandwidth, 150 watts, and gain antennas to get these free "via amateur radio to internet ftp" services not available anywhere else on the planet!

***sarcasm_OFF***

What wonderful, considerate amateurs these winlink lids are ... #kinda makes you want to throw up a little, eh?

EDIT: Remember, Winlink needs more spectrum so that they can provide Emcomm to their served agencies. #Grady has been served!!!
You got to the essence of the issue. These are mostly sailboat types who are too cheap to pay for the commercial services so they QRM the HF bands at their leisure to check their e-mail and get charts and so forth.

This should be illegal since there are services available and the use of the ham bands for their purposes is right on the hairy edge of pecuniary interest.

[K4GUN]

Is there a technological solution here? Is there any way to block Winlink from destroying your QSO that would not be considered "malicious" on your part? It seems like any system that is able to overpower your communication could itself be overpowered. If done solely for the purpose of maintaining your ongoing communication and not to expressly to torch the Winlink transmission, wouldn't that be essentially the same as they are now doing?

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ May 05 2007,19:21)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ May 05 2007,15:40)]***sarcasm_ON***

Goodness Greg, how else would they get their NOAA charts for sailing the seven seas? Obviously there is no commercial service available for internet ftp file transfers, is there?

Grady has it all figured out ... his personal info on the winlink page is a testimony as to how clever one can be while crashing the qso's of others:
Quote[/b] ]Needless to say Winlink again was a Godsend while on the ship... Found several reliable PMBO’s covering the Mediterranean… With Pactor III, sea and wave charts could be readily downloaded from a NOAA ftp site. Great Stuff!!!
It takes considerable free amateur radio bandwidth, 150 watts, and gain antennas to get these free "via amateur radio to internet ftp" services not available anywhere else on the planet!

***sarcasm_OFF***

What wonderful, considerate amateurs these winlink lids are ... kinda makes you want to throw up a little, eh?

EDIT: Remember, Winlink needs more spectrum so that they can provide Emcomm to their served agencies. Grady has been served!!!
You got to the essence of the issue. These are mostly sailboat types who are too cheap to pay for the commercial services so they QRM the HF bands at their leisure to check their e-mail and get charts and so forth.

This should be illegal since there are services available and the use of the ham bands for their purposes is right on the hairy edge of pecuniary interest.
DPO you are correct. These do not conform to part 97 since there are similar commercial services available. Part 97 clearly says that amateur radio should not be used to circumvent a commercially available service.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (k4gun @ May 05 2007,19:28)]Is there a technological solution here? Is there any way to block Winlink from destroying your QSO that would not be considered "malicious" on your part? It seems like any system that is able to overpower your communication could itself be overpowered. If done solely for the purpose of maintaining your ongoing communication and not to expressly to torch the Winlink transmission, wouldn't that be essentially the same as they are now doing?
I am afraid not. The problem is Pactor in itself is a very aggressive mode that will continue to pound until it gets an ack back from the station it is in comms with. That is what it was designed for to break through just about any natural or man made interference. I wish I could work through this crap but it is just getting frustrating trying to enjoy the hobby and getting these lids crashing every qso I am making.

[K4GUN]

Hmmm... look what I found on the Winlink web site.

Quote[/b] ] Listen First! #Because there is a live human being (control operator) is always present at the initiating station, one common theme is paramount to the successful operation of the system. #This common theme, which is consistent with all Amateur Radio operations, consists of simply listening on the frequency about to be used by the initiating station in order to determine if that frequency is occupied. #Obviously, if the frequency that is about to be used is occupied, the proper procedure is to either wait until it is free before transmitting, or find another Radio Message Server (PMBO) whose frequencies are not otherwise occupied. #Not only is this a common courtesy to other Amateurs, but it is also a specific requirement of any Country's rules which regulate Amateur licenses, Worldwide.

So, how is it that they don't listen and still claim that are operating within the law? #Their own web site says its not the case.

Here's the link: http://www.winlink.org/guidelines.htm

[N6WK]

I also have never understood much about Winlink. I have never understood its purpose and I personally do not know ONE amateur that uses it. So, I must ask, Why is a harmful mode such as winlink, that is used by so few, even allowed on the Amateur bands?
Any mode that allows a station to just start transmitting on top of another needs to be excluded from amateur radio.
Just what is it that Winlink does for Amateur radio ??
Who developed Winlink? Who Ok'd it for the Amateur Bands ?
I'd like to know !


Gordon
N6WK

[N6WK]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 06 2007,00:33)]Quote[/b] (k4gun @ May 05 2007,19:28)]Is there a technological solution here? Is there any way to block Winlink from destroying your QSO that would not be considered "malicious" on your part? It seems like any system that is able to overpower your communication could itself be overpowered. If done solely for the purpose of maintaining your ongoing communication and not to expressly to torch the Winlink transmission, wouldn't that be essentially the same as they are now doing?
I am afraid not. The problem is Pactor in itself is a very aggressive mode that will continue to pound until it gets an ack back from the station it is in comms with. That is what it was designed for to break through just about any natural or man made interference. I wish I could work through this crap but it is just getting frustrating trying to enjoy the hobby and getting these lids crashing every qso I am making.
Well, If I am using PSK31 and they step on me, I'll just crank my amp to 1500 watts and keep on working PSK.
Screw these Pactor and Winlink guys. They have NO place on the Amateur bands IMHO ! If ARRL supports these modes, then we ALL need to cancel our Memberships. Then the ARRL will no longer exist!! I used to support the ARRL, but I am fast losing my patience with them !

Gordon
N6WK

[N5PVL]

Riley Hollingsworth on Interference and Automated Stations
From: The ARRL Letter Vol. 23, No. 10 March 5, 2004

Hollingsworth issues interference reminder:

FCC Special Counsel for Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth says no Amateur Radio stations are exempt from the requirement to avoid unnecessarily interfering with ongoing communications.

"It is very important for all stations, including automated ones, to realize that they are responsible for any interference caused when they come on top of existing communications," Hollingsworth said in response to a recent inquiry. "There are no exemptions for automated stations."

FCC Part 97 Amateur Service rules generally address interference with other communications in §97.101(d): "No amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communication or signal."

An amateur had written to Hollingsworth alleging that what appear to be automated PACTOR stations routinely start transmitting atop PSK31 QSOs on 40 and 30 meters. The amateur also contacted one of the PACTOR stations in an effort to "dialogue about it not just complain."

Hollingsworth expressed the hope that all involved could work things out. He also points out that stations responding to automated interrogations are equally responsible for not causing interference.

"It doesn't mean the frequency is clear merely because they were interrogated by another station," he told ARRL this week. "It's a two-way responsibility."

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ May 05 2007,20:43)]Riley Hollingsworth on Interference and Automated Stations
From: The ARRL Letter Vol. 23, No. 10 March 5, 2004

Hollingsworth issues interference reminder:

FCC Special Counsel for Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth says no Amateur Radio stations are exempt from the requirement to avoid unnecessarily interfering with ongoing communications.

"It is very important for all stations, including automated ones, to realize that they are responsible for any interference caused when they come on top of existing communications," Hollingsworth said in response to a recent inquiry. "There are no exemptions for automated stations."

FCC Part 97 Amateur Service rules generally address interference with other communications in §97.101(d): "No amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communication or signal."

An amateur had written to Hollingsworth alleging that what appear to be automated PACTOR stations routinely start transmitting atop PSK31 QSOs on 40 and 30 meters. The amateur also contacted one of the PACTOR stations in an effort to "dialogue about it not just complain."

Hollingsworth expressed the hope that all involved could work things out. He also points out that stations responding to automated interrogations are equally responsible for not causing interference.

"It doesn't mean the frequency is clear merely because they were interrogated by another station," he told ARRL this week. "It's a two-way responsibility."
Thanks for that info. I am gonna post this to that idiot lid that told me that he was not responsible. LOL.

[kc7gnm]

I got this off of Grady's (K6IXA) website. Now if this isn't illegal then I don't know what is.

Missionary Radio Email

On July 3rd , a converted W.W.II freighter, the "Spirit of Grace" operated by Friendships left Wilmington, CA on a Christian, Humanitarian mission through the Panama Canal to the island of Roatan off the coast of Honduras. Grady began manually forwarding email for the ship to and from the Internet. Since then the manual mailbox system has grown from a single user to an automated system with over a hundred users, handling in excess of four thousand messages a month. Missionaries in Mexico, Central and South America are now using the system, along with numerous sailing vessels in the region…

[ky5u]

You're hitting the nail on the head, Greg. Keep nailing.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ May 05 2007,22:04)]You're hitting the nail on the head, Greg. Keep nailing.
Yeah notice it says Missionaries. Now unless they are sending email to an amateur radio operator then that is 3rd party to 3rd party which correct me if I am wrong that is totally against part 97 of the FCC rules.

[KG4RUL]

r.e. the response by K6IXA - I didn't know you could pile crap that high! And that qualifies as a load! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[kc7gnm]

Here is another PMBO LID that is trying to turn things around with no evidence whatsoever. I think I am getting them scared because they are quoting part 97 saying they are protected. This guy even says packet has been interfering with them. Now that is a laugh. I asked him for proof because I

Greg,

I have noticed that on 14.105, in the Part 97.221 auto-forward sub-band, HF Packet has interfered with hundreds of control operator initiated operations in the US. Perhaps this is because there is no control operator initiating the connection with HF Packet? I can certainly understand why that would be so since it is legal to operate fully unattended on each end of the connection under Part 97.221.

Tell me about this "Packet QSO on HF." I would like to see your log of who was in this Packet QSO and how long they have been in this "QSO" on the same occupied frequency.

Thanks,




Steve, k4cjx

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KG4RUL @ May 06 2007,00:01)]r.e. the response by K6IXA - I didn't know you could pile crap that high! And that qualifies as a load! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
LOL tell me about it. I almost busted a gut when I read that. He could be a comedian with the amount of BS he was spouting there.

[k2gsp]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 04 2007,19:04)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ May 05 2007,20:43)]Riley Hollingsworth on Interference and Automated Stations
From: The ARRL Letter Vol. 23, No. 10 March 5, 2004

Hollingsworth issues interference reminder:

FCC Special Counsel for Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth says no Amateur Radio stations are exempt from the requirement to avoid unnecessarily interfering with ongoing communications.

"It is very important for all stations, including automated ones, to realize that they are responsible for any interference caused when they come on top of existing communications," Hollingsworth said in response to a recent inquiry. "There are no exemptions for automated stations."

FCC Part 97 Amateur Service rules generally address interference with other communications in §97.101(d): "No amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communication or signal."

An amateur had written to Hollingsworth alleging that what appear to be automated PACTOR stations routinely start transmitting atop PSK31 QSOs on 40 and 30 meters. The amateur also contacted one of the PACTOR stations in an effort to "dialogue about it not just complain."

Hollingsworth expressed the hope that all involved could work things out. He also points out that stations responding to automated interrogations are equally responsible for not causing interference.

"It doesn't mean the frequency is clear merely because they were interrogated by another station," he told ARRL this week. "It's a two-way responsibility."
Thanks for that info. I am gonna post this to that idiot lid that told me that he was not responsible. LOL.
Please make sure to post his response if there is one. I'm really curious to see him try and wiggle out of that.

[kc7gnm]

Ok don't know where this guy came from but I think Grady is getting someone else to fight his losing battle. This is what I got back from him after I sent the response below.

Greg,

All the traffic over RF is from Amateur-to-Amateur regardless of the origination of the message. How many frequencies does a CONTESTER need? How about a DXER? One or two. How about five or fifteen? How about who cares! I have not seen any restriction in Part 97 regarding the use of multiple frequencies. I also see NOTHING about channelization. We operate on several frequencies so, unlike HF PACKET, if one frequency is occupied, the HUMAN BEING (control operator) initiating the connection may move to an unoccupied frequency.

My lack of knowledge regarding the AX.25 Packet protocol on HF shows me that the symbols are too short for proper operation, causing many retries, where other more modern ODFM protocols with not-so-short symbol rates have higher throughput. But there is certainly a place for both, just like there is a place for CW or any other mode. I see nothing in your remarks that are pertenent to the regulatory invironment.

I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.



Steve, k4cjx

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Thompson [mailto:kc7gnm@**********]
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 22:51
To: 'K4CJX'
Subject: RE: Malicious interference


But much of the packet traffic is amateur to amateur not to 3rd party like winlink is. 14.105 is the only freq you will see packet on except maybe 14.107 for APRS. How many winlink freqs do you guys really need? Why can’t you all park on one freq and share it like the packet community or the psk31 community has done? That is the problem is you guys want to use a wideband amateur unfriendly mode that is duplicating commercially available services and then you jump right on top of an ongoing QSO. Show me an instant where hf packet has interfered with control operator initiated operations? I can cite dozens of times just today where winlink has done that but I haven’t seen one where packet has interfered with a winlink connect. Stop trying to through out your lack of knowledge about packet radio. All you guys care about is your free email service for boaters that should be able to afford a commercial type of service.



Greg

KC7GNM


I cannot figure out how these guys think that what they are doing is legal. They must be reading a different version of part 97 than I am.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ May 06 2007,00:32)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 04 2007,19:04)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ May 05 2007,20:43)]Riley Hollingsworth on Interference and Automated Stations
From: The ARRL Letter Vol. 23, No. 10 March 5, 2004

Hollingsworth issues interference reminder:

FCC Special Counsel for Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth says no Amateur Radio stations are exempt from the requirement to avoid unnecessarily interfering with ongoing communications.

"It is very important for all stations, including automated ones, to realize that they are responsible for any interference caused when they come on top of existing communications," Hollingsworth said in response to a recent inquiry. "There are no exemptions for automated stations."

FCC Part 97 Amateur Service rules generally address interference with other communications in §97.101(d): "No amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communication or signal."

An amateur had written to Hollingsworth alleging that what appear to be automated PACTOR stations routinely start transmitting atop PSK31 QSOs on 40 and 30 meters. The amateur also contacted one of the PACTOR stations in an effort to "dialogue about it not just complain."

Hollingsworth expressed the hope that all involved could work things out. He also points out that stations responding to automated interrogations are equally responsible for not causing interference.

"It doesn't mean the frequency is clear merely because they were interrogated by another station," he told ARRL this week. "It's a two-way responsibility."
Thanks for that info. I am gonna post this to that idiot lid that told me that he was not responsible. LOL.
Please make sure to post his response if there is one. I'm really curious to see him try and wiggle out of that.
Trust me I will repost if he get enough courage to actually reply. He is getting another guy to fight his losing battle now. LOL.

[k2gsp]

I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.


No it's just a duplication of commercially available services; which is a problem.

And sending pictures of the boat trip isn't a safety or well being issue.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ May 06 2007,01:08)]I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.


No it's just a duplication of commercially available services; which is a problem.

And sending pictures of the boat trip isn't a safety or well being issue.
That is the problem. They just do not get that they are duplicating a commercial service and that some folks are using it exclusively instead of paying for their internet. These have got the be the cheapest boaters ever. If they can afford those huge boats then they can damn sure afford a commercial over the air email service such as Sail Mail.

[KI4NGN]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 05 2007,22:15)]Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ May 06 2007,01:08)]I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.


No it's just a duplication of commercially available services; which is a problem.

And sending pictures of the boat trip isn't a safety or well being issue.
That is the problem. They just do not get that they are duplicating a commercial service and that some folks are using it exclusively instead of paying for their internet. These have got the be the cheapest boaters ever. If they can afford those huge boats then they can damn sure afford a commercial over the air email service such as Sail Mail.
I agree 100% that WL2K appears to be a major QRM problem, but you guys should get off of the argument about using ham radio instead of commercially available services. Almost every time a ham has a QSO he is duplicating a commercially available service. It's called the telephone, available as land-line, cellular, or satellite services. (Is a boater having a phone QSO too cheap to get a satellite phone?)

Don't slam me for this opinion...I agree whole-heartedly that WL2K in its current incarnation should be eliminated, but this particular vein of argument towards that goal is not going to fly.

Mike

[n9lya]

Keep those screen shots coming in guys.. Peer pressure always works..

73 jerry

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (KI4NGN @ May 06 2007,04:40)]Do you have somethiing to dispute the only point I was trying to make Charles, or are you just going to expose your ass to the world again by making uncalled for personal insults?

I responded to a post dear boy, and that makes it ON TOPIC.
I have something.

Quote[/b] ]Almost every time a ham has a QSO he is duplicating a commercially available service. It's called the telephone, available as land-line, cellular, or satellite services. (Is a boater having a phone QSO too cheap to get a satellite phone?)

The part you are missing is that a QSO from amateur to amateur is a PART 97 communication. Part 97 communications cannot be duplicated using a commercial service.

THIRD PARTY communications, on the other hand, which undoubtedly compose the majority of the WL2K emails ARE a duplication of communications carried by commercial services -- at least if done on a regular basis. They are NOT PART 97 COMMUNICATIONS if done on a regular basis.

That puts emails to third parties, when done on a regular basis, in violation of Part 97 rules. Amateur to amateur communications are NOT in violation of Part 97 rules!

This commercialization of the amateur radio spectrum, not only do we now have WL2K we now also have PSKmail, will continue until it becomes pervasive enough for the FCC to have to make a ruling about it. I only hope they rule for the survival of amateur radio and not for the use of amateur radio as a common carrier.

tim ab0wr

[WA0LYK]

Quote[/b] (KI4NGN @ May 06 2007,03:48)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 05 2007,22:15)]Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ May 06 2007,01:08)]I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.


No it's just a duplication of commercially available services; which is a problem.

And sending pictures of the boat trip isn't a safety or well being issue.
That is the problem. They just do not get that they are duplicating a commercial service and that some folks are using it exclusively instead of paying for their internet. These have got the be the cheapest boaters ever. If they can afford those huge boats then they can damn sure afford a commercial over the air email service such as Sail Mail.
I agree 100% that WL2K appears to be a major QRM problem, but you guys should get off of the argument about using ham radio instead of commercially available services. Almost every time a ham has a QSO he is duplicating a commercially available service. It's called the telephone, available as land-line, cellular, or satellite services. (Is a boater having a phone QSO too cheap to get a satellite phone?)

Don't slam me for this opinion...I agree whole-heartedly that WL2K in its current incarnation should be eliminated, but this particular vein of argument towards that goal is not going to fly.

Mike
You have used this argument before on other threads and have been corrected. You are just as full of it now as you were then.

97.3 Definitions.
(4) Amateur service. A radiocommunication service for the purpose of
self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations
carried out by amateurs, that is, duly authorized persons interested in
radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary
interest.

97.111 Authorized transmissions.
(a) An amateur station may transmit the following types of two-way
communications:
(1) Transmissions necessary to exchange messages with other stations in
the amateur service, except those in any country whose administration
has given notice that it objects to such communications. The FCC
will issue public notices of current arrangements for international
communications;

You will note that transmissions for the purpose of intercommunication with other amateur stations is expressely allowed under the rules and regulations.

I'll give you one to think about. Read "97.119 Station identification" and then tell me how winlink, using pactor 3 meets the station id requirements.

Here is the pertinent regulation concerning duplications of commercial services.

97.113 Prohibited transmissions.
(5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be
furnished alternatively through other radio services.

Please tell me what other radio service the phone patches to Vietnam, whether to ships or land based MARS stations, could have been used to alternately furnish these communications.

Also, did the same folks regularly use the phone patches? As I remember, there were very, very few from the same individual and certainly not on a daily basis. I believe they were only used for special occasions.

This argument is used over and over by folks who haven't taken the time to research the rules and it just doesn't wash. In addition, even if these types of phone patches were not ok under the rules, you can't justify further violations by pointing out other violations. Two wrongs don't make a right!


Jim
WA0LYK

[K3UD]

In all the time that this topic has been debated it seems that if WinLink, auto bots and wide band digital modes on HF go away or are prohibited on HF, so will 95+% of the opposition.

73
George
K3UD

[WA0LYK]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 05 2007,21:54)]Ok don't know where this guy came from but I think Grady is getting someone else to fight his losing battle. This is what I got back from him after I sent the response below.

Greg,

All the traffic over RF is from Amateur-to-Amateur regardless of the origination of the message. How many frequencies does a CONTESTER need? How about a DXER? One or two. How about five or fifteen? How about who cares! I have not seen any restriction in Part 97 regarding the use of multiple frequencies. I also see NOTHING about channelization. We operate on several frequencies so, unlike HF PACKET, if one frequency is occupied, the HUMAN BEING (control operator) initiating the connection may move to an unoccupied frequency.

My lack of knowledge regarding the AX.25 Packet protocol on HF shows me that the symbols are too short for proper operation, causing many retries, where other more modern ODFM protocols with not-so-short symbol rates have higher throughput. But there is certainly a place for both, just like there is a place for CW or any other mode. I see nothing in your remarks that are pertenent to the regulatory invironment.

I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.



Steve, k4cjx

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Thompson [mailto:kc7gnm@**********]
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 22:51
To: 'K4CJX'
Subject: RE: Malicious interference


But much of the packet traffic is amateur to amateur not to 3rd party like winlink is. 14.105 is the only freq you will see packet on except maybe 14.107 for APRS. How many winlink freqs do you guys really need? Why can’t you all park on one freq and share it like the packet community or the psk31 community has done? That is the problem is you guys want to use a wideband amateur unfriendly mode that is duplicating commercially available services and then you jump right on top of an ongoing QSO. Show me an instant where hf packet has interfered with control operator initiated operations? I can cite dozens of times just today where winlink has done that but I haven’t seen one where packet has interfered with a winlink connect. Stop trying to through out your lack of knowledge about packet radio. All you guys care about is your free email service for boaters that should be able to afford a commercial type of service.



Greg

KC7GNM


I cannot figure out how these guys think that what they are doing is legal. They must be reading a different version of part 97 than I am.
Greg,

First of all, KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK! You are providing some very good information to show that winlink does not intend to change its operation to prevent willful interference. I use the term willful because they have been continually told over the last several years that their "system" operation is designed in such a manner that it does interfere with ongoing qso's. To keep operating in such a manner means that at sometime, one must conclude they are doing so without regard to the interference that is created, i.e. on a willful basis.

Here is what frightens winlink the most and you are well on the way to justifying some FCC actions.

97.109 Station control.
(d) When a station is being automatically controlled, the control operator
need not be at the control point. Only stations specifically designated
elsewhere in this part may be automatically controlled. Automatic
control must cease upon notification by an EIC that the station is
transmitting improperly or causing harmful interference to other stations.
Automatic control must not be resumed without prior approval of the
EIC.

97.3 Definitions.
(a) The definitions of terms used in part 97 are:
(22) Harmful interference. Interference which endangers the functioning of
a radionavigation service or of other safety services or seriously
degrades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunication
service operating in accordance with the Radio Regulations.

Italics added by me.

k4cjx is the "system administrator" for the winlink system and one of its most vocal supporters.

Do not let the winlink folks focus on other things like the AX.25 being a technologically unsophisticated protocol therefore not worthy of being used. Or about how many frequencies that DX'ers or CONTESTERS need.

These are not pertinent to the INTERFERENCE issue concerning winlink and are only being tossed out to confuse you. You do not need to justify packet interference to winlink, what a laugh, that is up to the winlink folks to accomplish.

Stay on track with the one and only issue that you started with, winlink harmful interference to ongoing packet communications! Don't try to include arguments about winlink violating this, that, or the other and don't let them try to drag you into these arguments. Other issues are for other threads. YOU ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK.

By the way, EMAIL is not the way that ham-to-ham intercommunications take place today. This is just another smokescreen. Email done on a regular basis that involves third partys is the issue. This is where another service, such as sailmail is pertinent.

Jim
WA0LYK

[kf4vgx]

Well I am on topic as well http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

Take for example if someone were to listen on a frequency,then wait for a pause.

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !

I know its going to interfere with my qso ,they been using this frequency for awhile now!

"Then jump on the same frequency " http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif .

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !


I'll cry interference and post the images on QRZ.

I'll get everyone fired up " GRIN ".

Its an easy offense isn't it.
If you think others will be blinded by these lame attempts.

Then think again.

Winlink has already won this battle .

All that is left is the crying .

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KC9JIQ]

This thread puts the Code/No Code threads to SHAME.


Sounds like OF's don't want Win-Link. Again, win-link is not the problem, it's the operators.

So stop the win-link bashing, it is after all, "just another mode" http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (kf4vgx @ May 06 2007,06:56)]Well I am on topic as well http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

Take for example if someone were to listen on a frequency,then wait for a pause.

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !

I know its going to interfere with my qso ,they been using this frequency for awhile now!

# #"Then jump on the same frequency " http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif .

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !


I'll cry interference and post the images on QRZ.

I'll get everyone fired up " GRIN ".

Its an easy offense isn't it.
If you think others will be blinded by these lame attempts.

Then think again.

Winlink #has already won this battle .

All that is left is the crying .

#http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
You don't even know how packet works, do you?

My pk-232mbx, in packet mode, won't transmit if it detects a carrier on the frequency. So even if it starts a QSO during an idle period, it won't continue to transmit over the top of someone else.

It is also obvious that you don't even know how Pactor works either, do you?

How long do you think the "idle" periods in a Pactor session are?

(Hint: Pactor sessions don't "pause")

tim ab0wr

[N5LRZ]

To the original poster...

If you want to bitch then you have only one option...

Send your pictures and a brief description of the details and what happend to the FCC Enforcement Bureau.

IF they act on your complaint YOU win.

IF they ultimately do not act then you lose because it is the FCC who is the judge, jury and executioner.

As to IDs not present, HMM HAVE YOU THOUGHT that the signal came for OUTSIDE the US where the FCC has absolutely no jurisdiction what so ever. In such a case of overseas interference it is extremely likely that you are completely wasting your time. Each country governs its own amateurs by its own rules and regulations as it sees fit to establish and more importantly ENFORCE.

LOL IF IF IF you want to see REAL interference wait for Field Day, the blood and the dead weak stations littering the ground.


N5LRZ

[N5LRZ]

Re KC9JIQ

Naaa the code no code thing spilled a lot more blood.

This is a transient thing because in the end the FCC is going to mandate digital something banning all non digital analog at some point in time. Just like they did when they banned spark gap.

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ May 06 2007,05:59)]OH boy. - First VJX, then NGN.

Looks like CJX has called up the Troll patrol. - anything to waste time and space, anything to disrupt a discussion the WinLinkers and ARRL goons do not want us to have.

Please do not feed the Trolls.

Let's stay on-topic.
Wasn't CJX one of the original WinLink droids on the ad hoc digital committee which morphed itself into the ad hoc bandwidth committee, sans Martinez and Teller?

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] (N5LRZ @ May 06 2007,10:18)]Re KC9JIQ

Naaa the code no code thing spilled a lot more blood.

This is a transient thing because in the end the FCC is going to mandate digital something banning all non digital analog at some point in time. Just like they did when they banned spark gap.
Don't hold your breath.

[N5PVL]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ May 06 2007,09:23)]This thread puts the Code/No Code threads to SHAME.


Sounds like OF's don't want Win-Link. #Again, win-link is not the problem, it's the operators.

So stop the win-link bashing, it is after all, "just another mode" # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Sure... If you want to ignore the built-in interference issues.

Have you been under a rock while this issue has been discussed over the last few years?

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif --{ #Oh! - Those terrible WinLink BASHERS! #}

Give me a break.

[k2gsp]

Quote[/b] (N5LRZ @ May 05 2007,09:12)]To the original poster...

If you want to bitch then you have only one option...

Send your pictures and a brief description of the details and what happend to the FCC Enforcement Bureau.

IF they act on your complaint YOU win. #

IF they ultimately do not act then you lose because it is the FCC who is the judge, jury and executioner.

As to IDs not present, HMM HAVE YOU THOUGHT that the signal came for OUTSIDE the US where the FCC has absolutely no jurisdiction what so ever. #In such a case of overseas interference it is extremely likely that you are completely wasting your time. #Each country governs its own amateurs by its own rules and regulations as it sees fit to establish and more importantly ENFORCE.

LOL IF IF IF you want to see REAL interference wait for Field Day, the blood and the dead weak stations littering the ground.


N5LRZ
It doesn't matter if originated outside the US if it was relayed in the US and caused the interference; which I believe is what it is showing. Nice try though, but try again.

And you keep dreaming about all digital, because it's not going to happen.

Oh and just because Field Day causes interference on one day. It doesn't mean you get to intentionally interfere everyday.

[k2gsp]

Quote[/b] (kf4vgx @ May 05 2007,07:56)]Well I am on topic as well http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

Take for example if someone were to listen on a frequency,then wait for a pause.

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !

I know its going to interfere with my qso ,they been using this frequency for awhile now!

# #"Then jump on the same frequency " http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif .

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !


I'll cry interference and post the images on QRZ.

I'll get everyone fired up " GRIN ".

Its an easy offense isn't it.
If you think others will be blinded by these lame attempts.

Then think again.

Winlink #has already won this battle .

All that is left is the crying .

#http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Are you saying that, because Winlink uses certain frquencies that they own those frequencies and no one should try to use them, because they are guaranteed to be interfered with?

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (AC0H @ May 06 2007,10:25)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ May 06 2007,05:59)]OH boy. - First VJX, then NGN.

Looks like CJX has called up the Troll patrol. - anything to waste time and space, anything to disrupt a discussion the WinLinkers and ARRL goons do not want us to have.

Please do not feed the Trolls.

Let's stay on-topic.
Wasn't CJX one of the original WinLink droids on the ad hoc digital committee which morphed itself into the ad hoc bandwidth committee, sans Martinez and Teller?
And Vic Poor, too.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[n5rfx]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 04 2007,16:52)]
http://www.ke7ipw.org/ki6iqp.jpg
Great pictures. It shows that the center frequencies for the packet and Pactor stations are a little less than 600 Hz apart and could possibly co-exist if the Pactor stations would not use Pactor III. The shift to Pactor III without determining if the additional bandwidth is clear is what is causing most of the interference in these examples. In your picture that is Pactor III Speed Level 1 with a bandwidth of around 1kHz.

I agree with Jim WA0LYK...stay focused, you are doing a fine job.

73,
Mark N5RFX

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KI4NGN @ May 06 2007,06:48)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 05 2007,22:15)]Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ May 06 2007,01:08)]I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.


No it's just a duplication of commercially available services; which is a problem.

And sending pictures of the boat trip isn't a safety or well being issue.
That is the problem. They just do not get that they are duplicating a commercial service and that some folks are using it exclusively instead of paying for their internet. These have got the be the cheapest boaters ever. If they can afford those huge boats then they can damn sure afford a commercial over the air email service such as Sail Mail.
I agree 100% that WL2K appears to be a major QRM problem, but you guys should get off of the argument about using ham radio instead of commercially available services. Almost every time a ham has a QSO he is duplicating a commercially available service. It's called the telephone, available as land-line, cellular, or satellite services. (Is a boater having a phone QSO too cheap to get a satellite phone?)

Don't slam me for this opinion...I agree whole-heartedly that WL2K in its current incarnation should be eliminated, but this particular vein of argument towards that goal is not going to fly.

Mike
Mike the problem is it is against the rules in part 97 and the winlink folks are pushing that rule past the breaking point. Me having a conversation with another ham on ham radio is not against the rules at all. Hams sending email from a non-ham to another non-ham is in violation of part 97. If we went with your opinion then there would be no ham radio whatsoever.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (WA0LYK @ May 06 2007,09:49)]First of all, KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK! You are providing some very good information to show that winlink does not intend to change its operation to prevent willful interference. I use the term willful because they have been continually told over the last several years that their "system" operation is designed in such a manner that it does interfere with ongoing qso's. To keep operating in such a manner means that at sometime, one must conclude they are doing so without regard to the interference that is created, i.e. on a willful basis.

Here is what frightens winlink the most and you are well on the way to justifying some FCC actions.

97.109 Station control.
(d) When a station is being automatically controlled, the control operator
need not be at the control point. Only stations specifically designated
elsewhere in this part may be automatically controlled. Automatic
control must cease upon notification by an EIC that the station is
transmitting improperly or causing harmful interference to other stations.
Automatic control must not be resumed without prior approval of the
EIC.

97.3 Definitions.
(a) The definitions of terms used in part 97 are:
(22) Harmful interference. Interference which endangers the functioning of
a radionavigation service or of other safety services or seriously
degrades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunication
service operating in accordance with the Radio Regulations.

Italics added by me.

k4cjx is the "system administrator" for the winlink system and one of its most vocal supporters.

Do not let the winlink folks focus on other things like the AX.25 being a technologically unsophisticated protocol therefore not worthy of being used. Or about how many frequencies that DX'ers or CONTESTERS need.

These are not pertinent to the INTERFERENCE issue concerning winlink and are only being tossed out to confuse you. You do not need to justify packet interference to winlink, what a laugh, that is up to the winlink folks to accomplish.

Stay on track with the one and only issue that you started with, winlink harmful interference to ongoing packet communications! Don't try to include arguments about winlink violating this, that, or the other and don't let them try to drag you into these arguments. Other issues are for other threads. YOU ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK.

By the way, EMAIL is not the way that ham-to-ham intercommunications take place today. This is just another smokescreen. Email done on a regular basis that involves third partys is the issue. This is where another service, such as sailmail is pertinent.

Jim
WA0LYK
Jim thanks. I will continue to put pressure on these lids constantly. I am getting sick and tired of getting pounded by an automatic PMBO that does not have the capability to tell if there is another station on the freq or not. My Kam sure can tell when a pactor lid starts up because while they are transmitting my rec light is on constantly and while that is going on my Kam will not transmit. I have asked these guys why they cannot tell if the freq is busy with their $1000 SCS modems but not one has given me an answer yet. All they say is that they are exempt from interference complaints because they did not initiate the connection. With what you have quoted from Part 97 and what Riley has said they are totally wrong. I really don't like quoting part 97 to them because every ham is supposed to know the rules themselves but it looks like I may have to start doing that to them. Thanks for the support and I will keep it up. I will post any emails I get from these lids here because they are too chicken to come here and debate it themselves because they know there are more hams against winlink than are for it.

[KI4NGN]

Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 06 2007,09:43)]Quote[/b] (KI4NGN @ May 06 2007,06:48)]Quote[/b] (kc7gnm @ May 05 2007,22:15)]Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ May 06 2007,01:08)]I also see nothing in Part 97 that states linking to the Internet for the safety and well-being of those using the system constitutes a commercial system. E-mail happens to be the way people converse today. No different than the phone patches to ships in past years such as those in Vietnam.


No it's just a duplication of commercially available services; which is a problem.

And sending pictures of the boat trip isn't a safety or well being issue.
That is the problem. They just do not get that they are duplicating a commercial service and that some folks are using it exclusively instead of paying for their internet. These have got the be the cheapest boaters ever. If they can afford those huge boats then they can damn sure afford a commercial over the air email service such as Sail Mail.
I agree 100% that WL2K appears to be a major QRM problem, but you guys should get off of the argument about using ham radio instead of commercially available services. Almost every time a ham has a QSO he is duplicating a commercially available service. It's called the telephone, available as land-line, cellular, or satellite services. (Is a boater having a phone QSO too cheap to get a satellite phone?)

Don't slam me for this opinion...I agree whole-heartedly that WL2K in its current incarnation should be eliminated, but this particular vein of argument towards that goal is not going to fly.

Mike
Mike the problem is it is against the rules in part 97 and the winlink folks are pushing that rule past the breaking point. Me having a conversation with another ham on ham radio is not against the rules at all. Hams sending email from a non-ham to another non-ham is in violation of part 97. If we went with your opinion then there would be no ham radio whatsoever.
I agree with you Greg. My point was that several of the arguments used to fight against WL2K can just as easily be applied to other modes of operation.

Sending information from a non-ham to another non-ham via two ham stations is the definition of passing third party traffic. If it's done by phone patch, it's OK. If it's done by messages in any non-digital mode, it's OK. If it's done with PSKMail, that appears to be OK to most. It's when WL2K is mentioned that suddenly passing third party traffic appears to be bad and against amateur ways and rules. It's not how it's being used, but the fact of it's band consumption and the the apparent QRM that it causes. I'm against this mode for these reasons. I'm against any automatic operation, any mode, that does not have some technology in place to minimize or eliminate QRM.

My only point was that slamming it for being used as we have used other modes in ham radio for decades is not going to work as an argument to get rid of it. It has to go because of the QRM, and that seems all the reason that is needed. You're observations are a very solid step in taking some actions in this direction.

73, Mike

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (kf4vgx @ May 06 2007,09:56)]Well I am on topic as well http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

Take for example if someone were to listen on a frequency,then wait for a pause.

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !

I know its going to interfere with my qso ,they been using this frequency for awhile now!

"Then jump on the same frequency " http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif .

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !


I'll cry interference and post the images on QRZ.

I'll get everyone fired up " GRIN ".

Its an easy offense isn't it.
If you think others will be blinded by these lame attempts.

Then think again.

Winlink has already won this battle .

All that is left is the crying .

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Wow how dumb can one person be. 14.105 lsb has been an hf packet freq for well over 15-20 years. Way before I became a ham. Us packet users use ONE freq where these winlinkers use many. Their argument is that if one freq is busy then the user can move to another. Well in the last few days I have not seen one winlinker move freq when you know they heard packet going on. They JUST DO NOT CARE.

[kc7gnm]

Ok Steve is getting nasty now. He CCed our RACES coordinator here in Cochise County which is a very good friend of mine. Here is Charles response to me. I still have not heard back from K6IXA yet. He is getting Charles to fight his battle now even when my original complaint was against Grady and Never against Charles.

Greg,

How about taking the first thing one would do when being brought to court, and "don't assume." First of all, "Friendships" is a vessel used by a volunteer organization spawned for humanitarian purposes, which has saved hundreds, if not thousands of lives. They do very good things for distressed people, and communicating by Amateur radio is one of the very good things they do. They use SSB, so I suppose they are also could be a voice Common carrier, also? Secondly, 60 wpm CW is proprietary if you don't have the tools to copy it. Anyone can copy the Pactor protocol with the correct tools.

Let's see, according to you, Winlink 2000 is a commercial Common Carrier (false) that uses illegal protocols (false), which are maliciously interfering with everyone on the bands (false), and you are one of those users. Winlink 2000, which is NOT automatic operation, but under Part 97.221, is "under local or remote control" and always initiated by a human being (control operator) AND which uses two frequencies in case one of them is occupied, does not work. Packet radio, which has ONE "channel" and which uses a Kantronics signal detection methodology to filter each and every type of signal, works perfectly to keep QRM out, and never transmits when the frequency is occupied? Come on Greg, you know much better than this.

I spent HOURS and HOURS passing phone patch traffic on Amateur Radio. Thousands of Hams did so. I think you should know this. Remember Barry Goldwater?

I see you have used that "commercial service" over Amateur radio using that "illegal" protocol into the Internet, too. So, welcome to all your own self-proclaimed "illegal" activities. When you send your logs, be sure to list yourself.

Lastly, please do not use this system if you are going to spread negative, false rumors about it over large media coverage URLs. All you are doing is creating perpetuating the demise of Amateur radio. It is bad enough without such childish tactics being deployed. Please do not fall into the trap of "get the bad guys" and let those with a persona vendetta mislead you into a space of untruth. If there were an issue, we would have been stopped 9 years ago when we started.




Steve, AAA9AC, K4cjx

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ May 06 2007,10:23)]This thread puts the Code/No Code threads to SHAME.


Sounds like OF's don't want Win-Link. Again, win-link is not the problem, it's the operators.

So stop the win-link bashing, it is after all, "just another mode" http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
You are correct. It is about the operators but it is also about a mode that is very unfriendly on the ham bands. It uses more bandwidth than allowed under part 97 and it does not have the ability to tell if another digital signal or CW is already on the freq before it transmits. My whole point is why can they not use ONE freq and then they can QRM themselves to death. Packet uses ONE freq and they share it just fine. Just because packet is not as fast or aggressive as pactor is there is no reason for Charles to bash it.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (ab0wr @ May 06 2007,10:59)]Quote[/b] (kf4vgx @ May 06 2007,06:56)]Well I am on topic as well http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

Take for example if someone were to listen on a frequency,then wait for a pause.

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !

I know its going to interfere with my qso ,they been using this frequency for awhile now!

"Then jump on the same frequency " http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif .

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !


I'll cry interference and post the images on QRZ.

I'll get everyone fired up " GRIN ".

Its an easy offense isn't it.
If you think others will be blinded by these lame attempts.

Then think again.

Winlink has already won this battle .

All that is left is the crying .

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
You don't even know how packet works, do you?

My pk-232mbx, in packet mode, won't transmit if it detects a carrier on the frequency. So even if it starts a QSO during an idle period, it won't continue to transmit over the top of someone else.

It is also obvious that you don't even know how Pactor works either, do you?

How long do you think the "idle" periods in a Pactor session are?

(Hint: Pactor sessions don't "pause")

tim ab0wr
Tim that is the problem with these guys. They just do not understand how each mode works. I keep telling cjx that my kam will not transmit while a pactor station is destroying my qso. This causes the other side to time me out and disconnect me. Pactor stations do not pause at all and don't care what is on the freq at the time.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (N5LRZ @ May 06 2007,11:12)]To the original poster...

If you want to bitch then you have only one option...

Send your pictures and a brief description of the details and what happend to the FCC Enforcement Bureau.

IF they act on your complaint YOU win.

IF they ultimately do not act then you lose because it is the FCC who is the judge, jury and executioner.

As to IDs not present, HMM HAVE YOU THOUGHT that the signal came for OUTSIDE the US where the FCC has absolutely no jurisdiction what so ever. In such a case of overseas interference it is extremely likely that you are completely wasting your time. Each country governs its own amateurs by its own rules and regulations as it sees fit to establish and more importantly ENFORCE.

LOL IF IF IF you want to see REAL interference wait for Field Day, the blood and the dead weak stations littering the ground.


N5LRZ
Every ID I have captured so far has been a US callsign. One was a US call operating in Mexico. I have yet to see a foreign call yet. After I collect more screen shots of K6IXA I do plan on sending them to the FCC as a complaint. I just want folks here to know how winlink is actually hurting ham radio because it hasn't been said before. Tim is right the winlink shills are coming out of the woodwork now. I think they are getting worried that uncle Riley will now be knocking on their door after a bunch of us start monitoring their activities and reporting them to the FCC. After they get a few fines they will understand we are not just all talk here.

[kc7gnm]

Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ May 06 2007,11:59)]Quote[/b] (kf4vgx @ May 05 2007,07:56)]Well I am on topic as well http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

Take for example if someone were to listen on a frequency,then wait for a pause.

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !

I know its going to interfere with my qso ,they been using this frequency for awhile now!

"Then jump on the same frequency " http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif .

Hay heres a chance to run my packet qso !


I'll cry interference and post the images on QRZ.

I'll get everyone fired up " GRIN ".

Its an easy offense isn't it.
If you think others will be blinded by these lame attempts.

Then think again.

Winlink has already won this battle .

All that is left is the crying .

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Are you saying that, because Winlink uses certain frquencies that they own those frequencies and no one should try to use them, because they are guaranteed to be interfered with?
That is what Grady is saying with his long email he sent me. You notice he says the freqs that winlink uses should be avoided. We don't own the packet freq but we contain it on 14.105. SSTVers don't own 14.230 but they contain their operation to that freq. Winlink spreads out