FCC Extends Waiver Permitting Use of PACTOR 4 for Hurricane Relief Efforts

Is it 300 baud or 300 bps (bits per second) that the limit is?

It may make a huge difference since baud is modulation changes per second, and at each modulation you can actually transfer more than one bit.

 

Is there any legitimate reason for this mode to be restricted?

I’ve only been licensed for a few months. Still learning quite a bit.

 

FCC §97.307(f) limits digital data emissions of Amateur stations operating below 28 MHz to a symbol rate of 300 bauds. So if one symbol represents 1 state of a QAM-64 signal (6 bits per symbol), you're legally transmitting 1800 bps.

 

There's more to it than that. The ARRL claims to represent all amateurs to congress to fight for the radio sectrum and the ARPA, etc, etc. What leverage do they have? What is their purpose for being in the eyes of our congressional leaders, who know nothing about amateur radio? Emergency communications and public safety, of course. So asking the FCC for use of Pactor 4 during an emergency AND having the FCC approve it implies that amateurs are using PACTOR 4 to serve the public, whether they are of not. It furthers the appearance of usefulness. It's a bargaining chip. But, we've seen how valuable that chip has been during negotiations between the league and Washington.

 

I totally agree with this Post.. And I have a SCS Pactor 4 Modem that I have had for years, eagerly awaiting the OK to use it.. Has not happened so far.. I would and will help if HELP was needed by any means I have, BUT I do not wish to give up everyday privilege's for the World Savers and Do-Gooders..

 

Nope.
There is no legitimate reason to restrict USA ham radio to a 300 symbol per second limit on HF data/texting.
It was simply an old blue law left over from the late 20th century.

The 300 baud rule is part of the antiquated Technology Jail of ye olde FCC rules.

Another blue law in ham radio's Technology Jail:
Content-based HF sub-band assignments.

The Technology Jail only applies to USA.
Other countries don't have this Technology Jail.

The story goes... back in the 1980s, as packet radio was first taking off, some ARRL codgers got together in a smoky back room. They wanted less of that "new-fangled computer stuff" around the HF ham bands. So, they talked FCC into hobbling data throughput, in an attempt to stem the growth of HF digital technology. Their plan actually worked for a while. For 30 years, it has kept USA back in the digital stone age, while other countries developed advanced HF technology.

 

Bonnie,............. singing her one note song ,.......again

 

Singing "the greatest hits of the last century".

 

Agreed, it needs to go but, do you still want to put everyone into channelized jail hell?

 

I prefer Freedom.
I'm old enough to remember when we were free.

 

During a hurricane, be ready. However, accessible alternate means should be employed when they are available. Hurricanes are not for hobbyists.

 

Some background on these restrictions are there to protect all from threats to our way of life (i.e. organised terrorism) etc. Higher data bandwidths = the possibility of this to be used for literally untraceable endpoint comms !

Yet as a paradox the FCC permits something that Bin-Laden exploited - Internationally licensed are unable and not required to list actual address on their licence; remailer addresses or mates can be used.

Now isn't that what occurred in "911" with pilot training?

The best security is to be open and be several steps ahead I say !

 

Well said.

 

Ah yes. Organized terrorism is NO MATCH for an FCC imposed 300 baud limit. "Sorry, no attack today, we're stymied by a HF data limit law..."

 

Frequency dependent is a MBO requirement for general use. Like amtor or pactor you can call CQ and have a contact I would hope you respect the band plan .
The Baud rate Yes was limited so the "Authorities" could monitor . Now However our tax monies have paid for some pretty fancy electronics Capable of monitoring just about anything.
With Bin-Laden it was the coded encryption that was used . Not the baud rate . Gee we now even have this on our I phones !!!

So the limit could easily be changed (Rule mod) as the technology has changed.

Since presently our government agency ,the FCC , seems to not enforce anything , amateur related ,which does not net them a substantial fine . It really isn't channelization , Its the destruction by some amateurs from within ,totally dis regarding the rules .