SCAMP, Win Link,  and Black Helos?

SCAMP, Win Link, and Black Helos

The ARRL recently announced the commencement of SCAMP (Sound Card Amateur Message Protocol) testing. The announcement said:

Vic Poor is well known as a developer of WinLink and Chairman of the recent "Ad Hoc Committee" responsible for the ARRL Bandwidth proposal. The Committee was embroiled in controversy when two of its members resigned to protest the "taking over of the Committee" by WinLink proponents. Likewise Rick Muething describes himself as, "Currently, involved with the Program and design development for Winlink 2000 as a member of the Winlink development team."

Why is SCAMP so Important?

Much of the controversy over WinLink involves its need for pricey Pactor modems. Pactor modems use proprietary software, another of its downfalls according to many Amateurs. In addition, Pactor has been targeted by Amateurs as not "spectrum friendly" as used by automatic stations and by excessive bandwidth use in the case of Pactor III. Finally as stated before, Pactor modems are expensive.

SCAMP substitutes a computer and sound card for the need to use a Pactor Modem. As the ARRL Article says, "SCAMP is designed to eliminate the need for pricey external hardware for passing e-mail traffic on relatively narrow-bandwidth channels", i.e. Pactor Modems. Therefore, as Pactor modems are eliminated from the WinLink argument the main arguments of WinLink critics are rendered moot.

Where's The Money?

Another argument that becomes less significant with the advent of SCAMP is the acertation that only "wealthy" Amateurs can afford WinLink. The argument that well-heeled Amateurs on sailboats and in RVs touring the world were trying to take over frequencies (per the ARRL Bandwidth based Bandplan proposal) for their own personal use appears to vanish as well. But does it?

The ARRL Article states:

Internet searches on the SCAMP alpha testers reveal a cross section of people that include sail boaters, RVers, an amateur with worldwide religious ministries, and more. They include Mr. Muething, Mr. Poor, and Steve Waterman all of WinLink fame. In essence, the same alleged "well heeled" group supporting WinLink are supporting SCAMP.

Black Helos

First the good news. The WinLink group has avoided any tie to pecuniary interests and WinLink remains free to Amateurs. It also appears that SCAMP will be made available to Amateurs at no charge. With SCAMP the potential exists for an open software modem scheme that ensures proper identification and is not dependent on an Amateur's pocket book.

The bad news is that there still appears to be a motivation for specific Amateurs to gain non-monetary benefit from the use of SCAMP and WinLink. In the article, Muething states he'd like to see:

While the simple act of benefiting Amateurs with the development of Amateur freeware is the usual reason effort is expended to bring these applications to market, it remains to be seen whether specific amateurs' push to garner more spectrum is for a greater good, or for personal reasons.

What Should the Average Amateur Do?

The development of SCAMP is good news for most Amateurs interested in digital communications. No one can argue that WinLink using SCAMP is not better than WinLink using Pactor modems. The fact that SCAMP will be freely available to all Amateurs should be a boon to less "affluent" Amateurs using WinLink.

The average Ham should also ensure that in making additional spectrum available for these applications, that current users of other modes are not harmed. To do this, many Amateurs suggest segregating these modes to certain band areas. Others argue that whether Pactor or SCAMP, digital use and voice use do not mix well.

Whatever you decide as an Amateur to support, you should make your feelings know to the ARRL. Proposals that open the door for wide spread denigration of voice and CW (which account for over 95% of users today) should be avoided. Likewise, committees considering rule changes where these new digital applications are concerned should include a crossection of Amateurs including representation for current popular digital and non-digital modes.

At no time should a particular group of Amateurs supporting a specific application such as Winlink or SCAMP be allowed to "take over" a committee. Especially a committee making recommendations for FCC Rules (thereby legislating their views on all Amateurs). SCAMP and WinLink are not inherently BAD for Amateur Radio. How the use of these applications is applied or legislated to all Amateurs could be. Amateurs should follow the WinLink and SCAMP issue closely to ensure the proper amount of sunlight falls on related activities.

 

Charles, thanks for the good job of presenting above information in the context of realism, not spin.

73 Mike

 

I concur wholeheartedly with W8MW's assessment.

AL7N

 

I'm glad to hear a sound card alternative is under development. I am impressed with WINLINKs capabilities but not willing to invest the money it would require to get on line.

Besides, isn't inovation what this hobby is truely about?

 

Quote:

Internet searches on the SCAMP alpha testers reveal a cross section of people that include sail boaters, RVers, an amateur with worldwide religious ministries, and more.  They include Mr. Muething, Mr. Poor, and Steve Waterman all of WinLink fame. In essence, the same alleged "well heeled" group supporting WinLink are supporting SCAMP.

End Quote:


Hmmmmmmmmmm, I don't own a RV, nor a sailboat, and keep my religious beliefs close to home. I am just a humble public fire department employee, that sees the value of an alternative, to the SCS Modem, and Pactor 3.

Having been in the emergency management buisiness most of my life, with technical responsibility for a 7,200 Sq mile RACES program, I can't wait for its release.

It will allow another method to pass messages in reliable form, to a participating HF or VHF mail system.

Will it ever equal the great throughput of Pactor 3, perhaps not, but after all you do get what you PAY for.

I find it wild that all the speculators abound with a shotgun approach to fact gathering, to generally support a personal agenda.

Within hours of the information that a new and exiting experiment on amateur frequencies was announced, here comes the soothsayers of doom.

Lets see, PSK31 and its variants, MFSK8/16, Hell mode, MT63, HF packet, etc. etc. etc., lets see "sound card based", OK...

Oh no need to complain, the word WinLink did not get mixed in, well excuse me.

Did you know that a WinLink PMBO can use Clover, Gtor, and other modes to get connected to, so lets be sure to whine about them now, after all I just used the "W" word.

Just like a bunch of election year pundits....

Relax, there is nothing to fear, move on.......

www.rivcoraces.org

 

I intend to get heavily involved in converting some older boatanchor PCs to WINLINK/AIRMAIL nodes - primarily VHF - to have them ready for disasters. I'm waiting on an infusion of funds to replenish my supply of
boatanchor PCs which are slowly
being consumed for other ham projects.

 

Very well written article. I feel the author is not slamming the developers of this new mode, but infact giving us the details so that a very infirmed decision can be made to include it in amateur radio. The need of newer, more "robust" systems to handle messages is need, and the volunteers doing the work cannot be asked to bear the expense. I believe an open mind, with caution and appreciation that others need space on the band also, is needed in looking at these new modes.

 

Isn't sending an email generally a one way transmission?

Is it possible that an email could be prohibited by international third party-traffic agreements when an email is being sent to a non-Amateur?

What about the rules of international communications where transmitted remarks may only be of a personal nature and not for business purposes? An non-amateur could send a business related email to an amateur station.

I am referring to FCC Parts 97.113, 97.115, and 97.117

 

As one of the Alpha Testers... I wish I owned a sailboat and I really wish I owned an RV... I do not belong to any Religious Ministries.. but when was that a crime? I am actually a not so humble Ph.D. engineer with more than 40 years experience with Computers and Radio.

SCAMP is an opportunity for Amateur Radio to remain relevant in the 21st century. We should be proud of this achievement.

Read Charles' post for what it is, a backhanded slap against the Winlink Development Team.

So as not to let this forum degenerate into something it should not be..Stop the "Jailhouse lawyering".... WINLINK IS LEGAL .. Period..

 

I guess the ultimate authority hast spoken.

 

Ok did I miss something?
Another way of getting away from building interfaces
I know you want have to buy one of those expensive interfaces
What happen to building your own hardware?
Now all you have to do is go to the store and buy audio cables why build them
I am glad I am not one of the appliance operators or have my ideas about ham radio gotten to old
I do own a fancy rig but I still build ham radio related items
Any way I hope there are still a few of us left who desire and experiment own our own
I do run sstv with a program but guess what I built my own interface


73

Jerry
Wb9jfr

 

Yah missed again - I've never owned a sailboat (nor do I care to). Perhaps 'one of these days' for the RV. Not very good fact gathering (Internet search)....
As for 'an Amateur with Worlwide Ministries' my understanding is, he is a volunteer (believe you volunteer fire) for several Worldwide Ministries, getting messages to/from remote parts of the World....
When first 'exposed' to Winlink I opposed the idea, however I do read and I did read about it. Owning a PACTOR III modem might be 'nice' but my budget does not allow so SCAMP looks (and works) great! My interest in SCAMP is Emergency Communication. I do urge all the ARES/RACES members to check out Winlink and SCAMP in the near future.

Hope you get your "Internet Searches" a bit more accurate.
Larry - KB0EMB
http://www.qsl.net/kb0emb/

 

My understanding is that digital voice is now starting to be used on HF and I think I have heard some of this on 20 meters. I do know for sure that digital imaging is being sent on HF voice frequencies at this time using RDFT which is also used in the SCAMP mode.

What I don't understand is why folks would be upset about one mode over another. Once they are sent as a digital stream it is not possible to tell the content by just listening to that stream on your rig. You have to decode the information.

The main difference you will find with the digital data modes is that they will be able to function with lower S/N ratios since they can operate at relatively slow data rates if they have to due to poor conditions. This may not be true of digital voice since in order to have a reasonable conversation, the data rate has to be fast enough to make it work at least as well, and preferably better than current SSB technology.

73,

Rick, KV9U

 

The Winlink team slapped themselves with their conduct on the Ad Hoc Committee. Even so, this does not mean WinLink is bad, nor does it mean we should not examine its use with SCAMP. What we should not do is be railroaded into a bandplan by any special interest.

When the Ad Hoc Report was released, many objections were expressed (including my own) against the report and against WinLink. This article says that while I don't advocate getting on your knees and worshiping WinLink just yet, I acknowledge that many of the problems we saw with WinLink have been addresses by the use of SCAMP.

I guess the SCAMP Testers who commented were too busy organizing their appearance to actually read the article and realize it represents a basic softening of opposition to WinLink using SCAMP.

 

My understanding is that digital voice is now starting to be used on HF and I think I have heard some of this on 20 meters. I do know for sure that digital imaging is being sent on HF voice frequencies at this time using RDFT which is also used in the SCAMP mode.

What I don't understand is why folks would be upset about one mode over another. Once they are sent as a digital stream it is not possible to tell the content by just listening to that stream on your rig. You have to decode the information.

The main difference you will find with the digital data modes is that they will be able to function with lower S/N ratios since they can operate at relatively slow data rates if they have to due to poor conditions. This may not be true of digital voice since in order to have a reasonable conversation, the data rate has to be fast enough to make it work at least as well, and preferably better than current SSB technology.

73,

Rick, KV9U