New Digital Petition at the FCC -- RM-11831

SHARES and the former use of Winlink by MARS were what drove the development of the Radio-Only part of Winlink. Amateur Radio is simply the place where the testing is done. We don't have to be tied to those modes if we can push sound card modes to the same level as Pactor.

 

Someone earlier asserted that all the petitioner wanted was to make everybody able to read easily what the other person is sending. So do you know when packet, a X.25 was invented? Because that error corrected technique has basically the same difficulty being read by any average ham as does pactor. You have to be slick to read any error corrected ac knowledge request system. The only difference with pactor is you have to buy their hardware. But you still have to conquer the problem of all technology request systems. There’s not really much difference there. And the FCC clearly let these people build the systems for two decades. So stopping them now is going to look quite arbitrary and capricious.

 

I’m sorry but that’s not correct. The radio only section only works with SCS devices. It simply does not work with any sound card mode between gateways. And the volunteers who built it are not likely to be able to hold up two separate systems to suit the whims of a petitioner. So here the lack of breath of knowledge of the petitioner harms ham radio in harms the general public in the event the systems are needed.

 

thank you, but unfortunately you’ve created a huge new amount of work for me. Because now I have to do an enormous amount of education to explain to people the implications of this petition that you have made. Because it’s pretty bad what it could do and most people don’t understand it until they get really educated. I could’ve spent that time teaching other folks and all the courses that I teach but it’s now going to get a bit diverted.

 

Let me be sure the rest of you understand the important radio only emergency function in the event of cyber hacking of the Internet in the United States. It is true that you can retrieve one of your messages using winmore sound card techniques. But unfortunately, gateways will be unable to forward messages from one to another because that requires pactor with the current completely volunteer written system. Trying to re-write that into a sound card will slow it down, use more space, damage throughput at the very time that our nation is desperate.

Now let’s hope this never happens, but it could. This fellow’s implications are so far reaching I don’t think he realizes all of them.

 

Apparently, you didn't read it, or Part 97.307(f) 3 and 4 very carefully. Ron's approach is to substitute his fully decodable using nonproprietary source language as what were defined as SPECIFIED DIGITAL CODES. Since there are so many new ones appearing, it makes more sense than just a list of what is OK. Now, for the real meat. Your cite applies ONLY to UNSPECIFIED CODES. If you look at the band/mode tables, you'll see that UC's are limited to 6M and higher. No UC's permitted, even now, on the HF Bands. So, bye bye VARA; PacTORS 2, 3, and 4; and I think WINLESS....in jest. I meant WINMOOR.

 

the NTSD as I have studied and used it, uses PACTOR

 

So as I told the other person that stuff is hard to read but my reading of it is completely the opposite.

 

Read it...... On a regular basis. That means repeatedly, over and over.

 

And I don’t understand why the FCC would have let it go on if it is illegal as you claim. Can you explain that?