ad: RichCrouch-1

ARRL proposes change to HF digital rules

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KX4O, Aug 12, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
  1. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    a) yes, you could have STAs required...but how would you notify the persons in a devastated area of the newly authorized stations for them to connect to??? They aren't going to have the Internet to look up the announcement....having them pre-authorized is what the current status quo does.

    b) Yes, if you changed what the ARRL wrote, to 150 Hz, then JS8 would be covered.

    c) No, your assertion regarding JS8 is not correct --- try it for yourself. We have test station here in our town doing precisely 97.221(c) automated responses, and I've even see that very regulation cited to explain why that portion of the software is lawful. under the proposed changes, JS8 is going to be in real trouble.

  2. K0IDT

    K0IDT Ham Member QRZ Page

    I was responding to Matthew's comment about the problem he had with "no exclusive use" in #4.
    There are those out there that want channelization and exclusive use.
    K7JEM likes this.
  3. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    here is text right off the JS8call site to demonstrate that they are claiming operation identical to a winlink 500 hz gateway, and citing the exact same regulation. To be certain they only RESPOND rather than initiate, they have to turn off their beacon. After that , they are citing 97.221(c) to justify their AUTO responses (exactly like a winlink gateway)

    Does BEACON mode violate FCC 97.221 Automatically Controlled Digital Station rules in the United States?
    For operators in the United States, here’s a reference to the rules:

    With this, keep in mind:

      • 1) The control operator is responsible for the station operation. The software makes a best effort to require a human to be present during operation (beacon off by default, a watchdog timer feature built-in, etc). It is up to the operator to make sure they are in compliance with the rules of their jurisdiction.
      • 2) Responses to directed queries by non-automatic stations fall under §97.221.C.1 exemption.
    • So, my recommendation to operators is to turn off BEACON when not at the station control point, but, they can feel comfortable leaving AUTO on while they are away since their station would only be responding to queries initiated by a non-automatic station.
  4. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    i'm sure there are, but I am not one of them.
  5. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    OK, that seems right. I think the thing to look at is why some people are opposed to 221C stations, and what can be done to fix that problem. I am not opposed to them, and JS8Call may very well be a good example as to why that section needs to be retained, or modified in bandwidth, in order to satisfy the greatest majority of people. I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

    Obviously, we need more people working on new digital modes, not fewer people.
    KX4Z likes this.
  6. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    So I think you are beginning to see why getting rid of 97.221(c) [what you are proposing to re-write] is not a good idea.

    Further, please consider that the narrowest mode of ARDOP (a winlink mode, publicly sourced) is 200 Hz --- narrower than RTTY. If you are going to allow 150Hz, why not allow 200 Hz winlink gateways? They use less space than RTTY!!
  7. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Sorry, my error. I thought you were referring to ALE in establishing a phone contact. I overlooked the sliver frequency you mentioned which was a big clue.
    KX4Z likes this.
  8. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    Understand, you may be correct -- I am just not enough of an expert on ALE. But they do tend to use ACDS space when outside the phone segments. I just don't know, but they are THERE. I hear them all the time.
    Thank you.
  9. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    I do not understand the animosity toward 97.221(c). These stations ONLY respond to human-operated stations. They do NOT baloon up in size -- they are 500 Hz maximum. I already documented that the WINLINK ones of them are a nearly ZERO interference to anyone. far far far less than 1% usage of available time space. Further, it would not hurt to put them in some segment in my opinion --- but that could have been done by gentleman's agreement without much fuss. Why such a big deal was made is beyond me. Harming JS8 seems particularly wrong. Yes they use a total of 2.5 to 3 kHz of space but currently they are VERY lightly used It is normally REAL ham conversations, but it has the huge advantage of a psk-reporter built in, and the enormous advantage for disaster areas of ad-hoc creation of resources. Can't do that with anything else that I know of. Why damage them?
  10. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    And for all I care you could restrict them to 200 hz and i think they would still serve a very useful purpose. But RTTY signals are wider than that so why pick 200 Hz? But destroy them? really wrong.
    K7JEM likes this.

Share This Page