The Email Robots are coming to the phone bands!

Interesting.

Having sailed a bit myself, here's some food for thought.

1. Masts are solidly grounded via attachment to the keel.

2. Stays are ususally stainless steel cable, and attached with stainless hardware directly to the top of the mast. Hence, grounded at the point of attachment to the mast.

3. Stays are under considerable strain. Probably up to several hundred pounds in a strong wind. Doubtful that the average sailor ham is going to be able to find strain insulators that can safely be inserted in the stay(s) to effectively insulate them from the mast(s).

4. Having a grounded mast very close to a radiator, if one can be effectively fed, would affect the efficiency and SWR rather markedly. But, I'm sure Larry has an answer for that one.

Perhaps Larry should cart a suitably-equipped 40 foot sloop, ketch or yawl over to a DOD anechoic chamber and tell us what it looked like.

 

Nice try, Larry. You didn't answer anything. I didn't expect you to.

Wrong again, Larry. It doesn't have anything to do with phase characteristics of the filter.

Oh, it's very much in evidence to just about everyone but you.

*YOU* said the selectivity is in the modem, Larry. You said the level of selectivity in the IF is immaterial becauseof the selectivity in the modem.

Nice ropa-dope, Larry. But I didn't expect an answer from you. I wasn't disappointed.

ROFL!  It's inflammatory and immaterial because you can't argue against it? Nice shuck and jive.

Oh, Larry. A S-unit is typically 6 to 9db in most receivers. So a 1/2 unit is 3-4.5db. And you think that isn't a significant impact?

And why don't you tell everyone what the disadvantage of a vertical is? Those yachts using one already have a disadvantage to begin with. Do you know what it is?

Yep, a full 6 to 9 db down. And we are expected to believe that is not significant? Did you think you were going to fool anyone by using S-units so the numbers would be smaller?

Like 12-18db is pocket change, right? Again, did you think you were going to fool anyone by using smaller numbers?

Skip -- I told you we wouldn't get an answer. We didn't. Narrower filters are better for noise performance in the overall audio passband. Larry is just blowing smoke and breathing fire because he doesn't have anything else to offer.

tim ab0wr

 

You didn't answer anything in your post above. It's obvious you have no clue as to noise contributions to audio noise in a receiver. You may be a great modem man but you can't answer the simplest questions concerning a receiver.

Your simulator may provide repeatable tests and may provide a return on your money. They are most definitely *NOT* real-world. And you don't even understand why.

Is it any wonder why dl6maa and you just can't understand why the throughput on Winlink is so bad? Get a clue, Larry. Your bragging doesn't mean anything. If you can't even list out the noise contributions in a receiver, how do you expect to know what the real-world even is?

tim ab0wr

 

We are in the same country so we have the same rules.

Our version of FCC called AT has repeatedly told us that linking to any public network is passing thirth party trafic.
We can use closed networks to pass trafic from one ham station to another but not open networks like email gates.

 

Tim,

Thanks for your support, but I really don't care about what blowhard, WA5BEN, says, and the best thing is to do is to just completely ignore him from now on. As you can see, he uses this forum mainly to brag about how "smart" he is and how "wrong" everyone else is!

Isn't it just unbelievable how arrogant and nasty these Winlink promoters all seem to be!

I was engineering manager and chief engineer for shortwave radio design for General Electric Company in the late 60's. At GE, at that time, those without a 4-year college degree or with only a technical school degree were "technicians" and only those with a full 4-year college engineering degree were hired as engineers (in addition to those with a state P.E. license). It is possible that his self-exhaulted creditials do not include an in-depth engineering education - thus his often misinformed, relatively shallow, understanding of radio design.

On the other hand, there are many excellent and capable radio designers without a 4-year degree that are just as capable, or more so, than graduate engineers, but most just don't brag about how smart they are or pretend to know more than they do, and then go on to make so many obviously incorrect statements.

If what he posted recently on another thread is correct,

and he was a radio "bench technician" in the 70's, his theoretical understanding of RF design may not be as complete as that of many graduate radio engineers, and that may be why he makes so many obviously misinformed statements.


The GE Mobile Radio division was in Lynchburg, VA, and the consumer radio division (where I worked) was in Utica, NY. Both divisions cooperated technically, but neither division "specifically" dealt with hams. Hams just liked to convert some of the land mobile units to ham use, and I knew plenty of hams at both divisions.

I do have more than just a few years of radio design under my belt ( http://www.qsl.net/kh6ty  )

and understand a little about RF design, but nevertheless I am always open to constructive  criticism and more learning. I am NOT open to statements such as WA5BEN makes, like, "that is beyond stupid!" He obviously just does not possess the communications skills to intelligently debate an issue without putting down whatever anyone else offers.

The more he opens his mouth, the more everyone is additionally convinced that Pactor-III really does not perform in the real world as Winlink and SCS claim, so we have to thank him for that!

The more you argue with him, the more he will continue to bore all of us bragging about his superior knowledge and understanding! Just ignore him completely and he will eventually crawl away.

 

I happen to be the one who is blamed by Winlink and a few others for promoting the concept of using wide filters for narrowband signals, letting the narrow DSP filters in the software do most of the S/N job, and for DigiPan, which does work (up to a point). But, in the end, switching in a narrow IF filter does improve the S/N and the print somewhat, and DEFINITELY cuts out some interference in the passband (adjacent to the desired signal, but not on top of it).

We are not sure just what is causing Pactor-III to have such poor throughput on the average Winlink Email exchange, but we do know, as you point out, that conditions on a sailboat are usually relatively poor compared to a land station with a high dipole and that any QRM in the passband will result in more NAK and force more repeats of blocks, which puts Pactor-III at a disadvantage compared to Pactor-II because it is impossible to use a narrow filter with Pactor-III just when it is needed most.

AE4TM's graph shows Pactor-III performance approaching the "50% better than Pactor-II" point at around 15-20 miles. Here at Charleston, sailing is a very popular hobby, and most offshore cruising and fishing is done about 15-20 miles out where the Gulfstream brushes our coastline.

Anyway, the point is that Pactor-III is eating up five times the bandwidth of Pactor-II, for only an average of 50% greater speed in actual practice on HF, for whatever unsure reasons.

As a result, the FCC should only allow unattended operations to have enough spectrum to use 500 Hz-wide signals, not 2100 Hz-wide signals or 2400 Hz-wide signals in the false promise of "high-speed" data transfer or multimedia transfer on the HF bands.

Currently, except for a 5 kHz-wide subband on 40 meters, the 97.221 subbands satisfy that condition easily. Let Winlink/ARRL petition for an increase in the 40m subband width, IF they can justify it to the FCC with believable numbers.

Hey, should we suggest to Newington for ARRL to change its name to "ARRLlink"?

Or, perhaps, instead of their latest moniker, "National Association for Amateur Radio", perhaps it should be ARAW, "Amateur Radio Association for Winlink".

I wonder what (Rotten Digital Mode) Hiram Perry Maximum would think of that!

 

I attend meetings every day where problems go unsolved while co-workers argue arcane points of engineering testosterone. You want to get slam dunked in one of my meetings? Just get into a acedemic pi$$ing contest in front of me. I'll let it go until I see it get off subject and into "my whatever (degree) is bigger than yours".

All the qualifications in the world are no good if you don't use them to solve problems. Real problems. Not WL2K has spectrum and isn't satisfied so they want it ALL.

 

Yes, that is precisely  what the ARRL/Winlink petition, RM-11306, says!

It is so sad that ARRL is now mainly the "ARAW".

It is high time for the members to take back control of the ARRL, but how can it be done?

 

I believe it can be done by every member writing to Dave Sumner and advising him that there will be an about face in the way the organization is run, that it will be run to represent the membership, that there is going to be greater respect for membership desires, that there will be interactive membership involvement in issues of great importance and that if there is not a clear movement in that direction in ,say, the next 6 months, the member will allow their membership to lapse. I intend to communicate this to Dave Sumner and my division representatives over the weekend. No if's, no and's, no but's! It will take interactive involvement to avoid the elite telling us that "here's where the membership stands on this or that issue".

 

Good idea, but Sumner will probably tell you just to wait for an ARRL bandplan. However, that is totally unacceptable, because ARRL now has a vested, conflicting, interest in Winlink for ARRL ARESCom and NTS, and the ARRL petition bandplan is already riddled with bias in favor of Winlink and ARRL, and complete disregard for IARU Region 1 concerns, at the expense of everyone else. There is no way ARRL can be trusted to formulate an unbiased bandplan under these conditions.

You might as well also say that only an IARU Region 2 bandplan (in which the US has only one vote to everyone else), is the only one that will even be considered by the membership and get that over with right at the start!

73, Skip KH6TY

 

Skip,

Nice to see you retreat to the "He has me on the facts, so I'll try to smear his character and qualifications" gambit. Most of us recognize it, and we rather expect it from you. Sorry, but it won't work.

Your "technical data" has repeatedly been proven incorrect, your "technical explanations" inaccurate, and your examples (in most cases) unrelated. Your obvious bias prevents you from engaging in any sort of meaningful technical dialog. Those who have taken the time and effort to investigate have found that you have totally and completely "misunderstood and/or mis-stated" just about everything.

Everyone who disputes your obviously false "data" is accused of having a personal stake and/or a pecuniary interest in Winlink, or SCS, or whatever other "demon" you can manufacture to fit into your smear campaign.

Just for the record, I do not have a Winlink station at this time (and have not had one), have not used Winlink at any time, do not own shares of SCS or any related company, do not work for SCS or any related company, do not own a boat, and do not own an RV.

Why, then, am I interested in (relatively) high speed data over HF for ham radio?

I am interested because we need to develop new modes and techniques, because there is significant opportunity for improved digital communications, because experimentation with modes constrained only by bandwidth limits can produce some modes and techniques (both digital and analog) that we cannot yet envision, and because MANY, MANY of us do not believe that "ragchewing" and DX are the SOLE reasons for amateur radio to exist. These have ZERO to do with Winlink.

Why do I dispute your "facts"?

1. Because they are very obviously NOT facts. In most cases, they are a gram of technical truth diluted in a pound of nonsense carefully concocted to lead the reader to a false "technical" conclusion.

2. Because I am one of a relatively small group of hams who have "real world" experience with multi-tone HF modems in daily service carrying traffic on "real world" HF circuits.

3. Because I have designed and successfully implemented the HF multi-tone modem interface for a variety of transmitters and receivers to make them work at optimal levels on these circuits.

4. Because I believe that hams on BOTH sides of the bandwidth issue have both the RIGHT TO and the NEED FOR accurate information about the ACTUAL characteristics of multi-tone modems, and the possible amateur uses for these modems.

5. Because HF modem design constraints, philosophy, and methods should be understood by today's ham. One of these guys or gals may be the one who develops the technique that will make "high speed" and "narrow band" somewhat synonymous.

Your bias and intent is quite evident even in the heading that you chose for this thread. The topic heading is a falsehood, and you knew it to be one when you chose it.

 

ARRL
Winlink
SCS
AE4TM
K4CJX
W5SMM
WA5BEN

 

All hams are equal,but some hams are more equal.

 

PhD=Piled Higher and Deeper


Gosh,I wish I had a set of letters to append to my name so that everyone would know how smart I am,and that they should all unquestionally accept my OPINION as the final word. Should we all post our Stanford-Benet scores ?
What have learned pompous experts told us before ?
There was the guy in charge of the patent office who wanted to close it about 1900 because everything possible or useful had already been invented;and don't forget it was proven that bees can't fly,"they" will never dare attack us, ......
ANY one who has an idea for a new way to communicate may bench test it,and if it requires rf ,he may apply for Special Temporary Authority from the FCC to conduct on air trials.
The only modes being held back are those which might exist in the minds of researchers too paranoid and greedy to disclose their methods or those modes which are disruptive of the existing order. It is all very well to fantasize about some new breakthrough,but the world seldom welcomes a newcomer who leaves suffering and ruin behind while intent only on his own goals.

 

I am beginning to feel strangely weak.... my brain is beginning to swell.... I have a strange desire to snooker people into giving away spectrum to the "Master".

Narrowband Data BAD!! SSB/CW BAD!!! We serve you MASTER! We hear only your words.... WinLink...Pactor.... ARRL.... The holy word chant forms on my lips.....

Winininininininininininininininin-LINK!
Winininininininininininininininin-LINK!
Winininiininininininininininininin-LINK!