Did he say Win link/discussion

[kopcicle]

The base mike had a second push switch marked "monitor". You were supposed to press this and listen first before keying the transmit button.

Which is my issue unattended "store and forward" stations operating on amateur bands. Of course this leads to an extended rant no one want's to hear ...

 

[AudioShockwav]

Which is my issue unattended "store and forward" stations operating on amateur bands

Like FT-8 ugh I should not have said that

Of course this leads to an extended rant no one want's to hear ...

I find the effort is not worth it in the long run when time is better spent elsewhere
But I am lazy.

73
Jeff

 

[Crawdad]

Which is my issue unattended "store and forward" stations operating on amateur bands. Of course this leads to an extended rant no one want's to hear ...

Please, rant away..........

 

[kopcicle]

~snip

I Just got a Rigblaster plug and play and wanted to test it with some 2m and 70cm winlink transmissions (probably into a digipeater then into a Igate). My issue is I dont know what freq I should be transmitting on to hit the Winlink servers. I plan to send some simple messages to Commercial email addresses. I look forward to sending winlink on HF once the parts for my Long wire antenna arrive.

/snip

Ya stepped in it now , no doubt . It isn't going to just wash off either. Keep it up and it's sure to leave a mark.

The "generalized" issues that the most fair minded amateur has with WinLink are pecuniary interest and unattended auto forwarding of message traffic. In plain English, someone is making money directly from amateur transmissions no matter how cleverly worded the explanation seems. Further the idea that a station can operate without benefit of a control operator under ANY circumstance is again wrong and again no matter how curiously worded the explanation is.

My personal opinion is it's a bad idea and deserves the same treatment as Broadband Over Power Line. (or worse). What is most disturbing is that WinLink is being promoted by amateurs. Then again ...

This license (above quote)is barely a year old , has 7 posts , two of which are about WinLink .
Craig, you are going to run into extreme resistance even mentioning WinLink here.
If you think the pack mentality is ominous when dealing with the dreaded influx of CB'ers to the technician ranks or expanded HF privileges for technicians then continue to mention WinLink here. Your education is lacking and there is no shortage of amateur licensee's waiting in line to beat you senseless with the facts.

I've now typed WinLink six times in the space of a few minutes and feel dirty enough I need a shower. I may have to say a few St Hiram's and a father Marconi or two just to feel okay about my place in the world. If that doesn't work I'll just get out the Gordon West code tapes and ...

 

[kopcicle]

7521315143.txt
To: FCC - RM-11708
The sailing forms are all engouraging us to file comments in support of RM-11708.
This is my first filing and if I mess this up, please see SailNet Forum at:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/111746-us-citizens-

urged-support-fcc-rm-11708-a.html
I have experienced very dependable service from the amateur radio Internet Winlink
system. Its a great service because all of the other available Internet services
cost money. Even when I am topside crusing the system runs automatically below deck
publishing my position reports and downloading my email. I use the system for
sending position reports, ordering supplies, repairs, chatting with friends and
posting to facebook. My only complaint is that it needs to be much faster. I am
not a amateur radio operator yet but a friend lets me use his call with a SIDD on
the end. I hope to get my own ham call soon.
From what I read on the sailing forums, RM-11708 will allow Winlink eMail to run
twice as fast. That is great and I am for that. Some of the technical folks are
saying that if RM-11708 is published with no bandwidth we can get even faster
Internet and might be able to stream movies on the Winlink Internet!

 

[kopcicle]

Please, rant away..........

Oh , there's more...

 

[kopcicle]

"How many 2.8kHz stations can be supported in the current RTTY/Data sub bands without displacing most of the current users?"
Or stepping all over each other in a winner take all free for all.

 

[AudioShockwav]

Well I thought this would be a Hot Topic......

Fizzles

73
Jeff

 

[kopcicle]

So did I but I'm guessing it resembles Niemöller in that if it doesn't directly affect someone then ...

Several examples.

I worked at a semi-unique manufacturing facility that used great big chunks of RF energy for , umm, oh well, too long a story. So when you're leaking harmonics of 13.56 and 27.120 don't worry about the evening news but gawd help ya if you interfere with General Hospital.

A friend of mine lived next to the drunken CB'er from hell. A clipped limiter, a class "C" box and a bleed stick. My friend had no less than three appliances that would talk to him at all hours of the day and night. No matter how long , loud, or often, or how many signatures were on the petition, the federal clown commission. would do nothing. Only wrapping the coax with several turns of wire and running the wire half way to the fire station two blocks away got any action, and on the same day.
It seems that every word he said could be heard through their PA whether turned on or off.

We had a Seattle council woman protect and defend squatting motor-home zombies. That is until they parked in front of her house and were using her water supplied through hoses that the zombies had stolen from various neighbors.

In short, right or wrong, it just never seems to make a difference until it happens to them, or you.

 

[kopcicle]

You see, for years the maximum baud rate was set insanely low by the FCC for HF radio.

Somehow this got intertwined in the Winlink debacle. It became anti baud rate anything without making the distinction between autonomous, unattended, automatic, store and forward, pecuniary interest, encrypted, commercial use of amateur frequencies and amateurs just wanting more than 300 baud to send anything.


12/08/2023

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published new rules adopted last month that replace the symbol rate restrictions on the HF bands with a bandwidth limit of 2.8 kHz. The new rules go into effect January 8, 2024.

The bands and band segments affected by the rules change are those authorized for data transmission between 160 and 10 meters, exclusive of 60 meters (where no change was made).

In adopting a bandwidth limit in place of the baud rate limit the FCC agreed with ARRL that some limitation is necessary because "without a baud rate or bandwidth limit, data stations using a large amount of spectrum for a single emission could do so to the detriment of simultaneous use by other stations using narrowband emission modes."

ARRL has advocated for this change for a long time. The move opens amateur data communications to faster and more modern modes and restores the incentive for amateurs to experiment with and develop faster and more efficient data methods. Previously, ARRL obtained waivers to the symbol rate rules on a case-by-case basis to facilitate communications during situations like hurricane responses. These delays will now be removed, permitting drills to be conducted with the faster modes and more timely responses when needed.
~snip

Bandwidth Limits Replace Symbol Rates on the HF Bands, Other Bands Open for Comment

The American Radio Relay League (ARRL) is the national association for amateur radio, connecting hams around the U.S. with news, information and resources.

www.arrl.org

So in some ways winlink has been separated from symbol/data rate but proponents of winlink simply gain offshore licenses and proceed to interfere with amateur communications.

It's a simple case of "Not my monkey, not my circus" until it is.