Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [BPQ32] Unattended ops

Expand Messages
  • Rick Muething
    Trip, Your comments well put. They bring up some important points and necessary operating practices. Here is my feelings as developer of WINMOR and what we
    Message 1 of 8 , Mar 2, 2010

      Trip,

       

      Your comments well put.  They bring up some important points and necessary operating practices.

       

      Here is my feelings as developer of WINMOR and what we recommend for RMS WINMOR and RMS Express.

       

      1)       RMS Express is a single user client…It can’t initiate a connection automatically. For WINMOR it has a busy detector to indicate and warn the user that a channel is busy and while not perfect this works pretty well and will be improved over time.

      2)       RMS WINMOR never initiates a connection…it is a server and only listens.  It can (and should) be set up to use the busy detector (same as 1) above) to block the response to a connect request if the channel wasn’t clear just before (500 ms) the start of the connect request. This is set by enabling Busy Lock. It is not always enabled because MARS operations don’t want it.  Using busy lock will go a long way (again not perfect) to eliminating interference due to the “hidden transmitter” effect.  (The station calling the RMS WINMOR thinks the channel is clear but the RMS WINMOR hears channel activity that the calling station can’t).

      3)       I think these same mechanism can and probably should also be used in BPQ WINMOR and I think John has it set up that way but I am not sure.

       

      While it might be nice to put all the WINMOR and Pactor forwarding (auto or otherwise ) in the auto forward sub band it is not practical…these are very small bands (e.g. 5 KHz on 40 meter) and wide band signals (e.g. P3) MUST go in the  sub band since it is over 500 Hz.  So what we are requesting for RMS WINMOR stations is that US stations ONLY operate WINMOR’s 500 Hz mode and that they stay out of the already crowded auto forward sub bands.  This is completely legal since the forwarding is INITIATED by a manned station (e.g. RMS Express) and the band width is <500 Hz.

       

      One of the goals of WINMOR was to address this interference issue with features like the busy detector and busy Lock above.  I think if a BPQ switch is automatically routing a connection that will initiate a WINMOR connection it should be in the auto forward sub band (it is automatically initiated) and it should be using the busy Lock. Maybe John can chime in on this with his thoughts.

       

      I think there are 4 issues here:

      1)       The law and this has been pretty clearly interpreted for us by FCC lawyers.

      2)       The ill will that can be created by allowing automatically initiated sessions to interfere even inside the auto forward sub bands.

      3)       The need to properly train users on proper operating procedures (the most basic…listen first!)  and to use tools like the busy detector to minimize the chance of interference to existing QSO. (while the hidden transmitter effect above is real and often quoted I personally think 80+ % of the interference problem is users that either don’t listen or don’t understand what they are listening for)  

      4)       The need to have sysops properly configure their stations (frequency, busy lock etc) to minimize the chance of interference with other modes.

       

      73,


      Rick KN6KB

       

       


      From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of kt4wo67@...
      Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:40 PM
      To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [BPQ32] Unattended ops

       

       


      Let me say this 1st...I am not trying to start something!!
      Nor is this is a flame.

      IMHO..and thats what it is... "attended station" is not just
      being at home,,,, Asleep-Mowing the yard,,,clearing snow..etc..
      "attended" is sitting at the radio.

      I am already hearing complaints of Winmor stations QRM'ing
      ongoing QSO's..and have been QRM'ed myself on 80 meters.

      We are creating enemies by running Winmor outside of the
      auto-bands "unattended"

      I think Winmor(in what ever use, BPQ, RMS, etc) is going to
      be a GREAT mode and will be used alot, but as with unattended
      Pactor stations outside the auto-subbands, it makes for alot
      of bad press.

      I support ALL digi modes and think they ALL have a strong
      future in AR...but QRM is something nobody likes.

      My plans are to set my Winmor/BPQ station up and leave running
      24/7(once I find a used radio to dedicate to it).

      This is not a bash on Pactor,Winmor, Packet,RTTY, BPSK31,ALE400
      or ANY MODE!!!

      I just dont want our progress to be marred(sp?) by bad press,,,
      and...We are already getting a little...and it will get
      much worse as more stations run 24/7 outside the auto sub-bands.

      Please do not flame me for this... Just tell me what ya'll think.

      Trip - KT4WO
      kt4wo67@gmail. com

      Member of Winmor and BPQ32 groups.

      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2707 - Release Date: 03/02/10 02:34:00

    • kt4wo67@gmail.com
      Rick, I agree..and understand that we all cant go to the auto-subbands...I guess one thing that I saw that could be a problem was we seem to be spread
      Message 2 of 8 , Mar 2, 2010
        Rick,

        I agree..and understand that we all cant
        go to the auto-subbands...I guess one thing
        that I saw that could be a problem was we seem
        to be spread out..Like on 80.. one is on 70 one on 83 one on 90'something... the one on 3583 was the one I overheard some
        other digi=ops complaining about..and honestly..as this has been
        a watering hole for KtoKeyboard ops for many years..It may
        not be the best spot for a winmor station.
        I just think we need to decide on an "area" to use...
        I hope to set my station in the sub-band so I can take
        advantage of the wider/faster submode..but someone
        who is just using it as a personal mailbox does not
        need or want to be in this area.

        Trip - KT4WO


        --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Muething" <rmuething@...> wrote:
        >
        > Trip,
        >
        >
        >
        > Your comments well put. They bring up some important points and necessary
        > operating practices.
        >
        >
        >
        > Here is my feelings as developer of WINMOR and what we recommend for RMS
        > WINMOR and RMS Express.
        >
        >
        >
        > 1) RMS Express is a single user client.It can't initiate a connection
        > automatically. For WINMOR it has a busy detector to indicate and warn the
        > user that a channel is busy and while not perfect this works pretty well and
        > will be improved over time.
        >
        > 2) RMS WINMOR never initiates a connection.it is a server and only
        > listens. It can (and should) be set up to use the busy detector (same as 1)
        > above) to block the response to a connect request if the channel wasn't
        > clear just before (500 ms) the start of the connect request. This is set by
        > enabling Busy Lock. It is not always enabled because MARS operations don't
        > want it. Using busy lock will go a long way (again not perfect) to
        > eliminating interference due to the "hidden transmitter" effect. (The
        > station calling the RMS WINMOR thinks the channel is clear but the RMS
        > WINMOR hears channel activity that the calling station can't).
        >
        > 3) I think these same mechanism can and probably should also be used
        > in BPQ WINMOR and I think John has it set up that way but I am not sure.
        >
        >
        >
        > While it might be nice to put all the WINMOR and Pactor forwarding (auto or
        > otherwise ) in the auto forward sub band it is not practical.these are very
        > small bands (e.g. 5 KHz on 40 meter) and wide band signals (e.g. P3) MUST go
        > in the sub band since it is over 500 Hz. So what we are requesting for RMS
        > WINMOR stations is that US stations ONLY operate WINMOR's 500 Hz mode and
        > that they stay out of the already crowded auto forward sub bands. This is
        > completely legal since the forwarding is INITIATED by a manned station (e.g.
        > RMS Express) and the band width is <500 Hz.
        >
        >
        >
        > One of the goals of WINMOR was to address this interference issue with
        > features like the busy detector and busy Lock above. I think if a BPQ
        > switch is automatically routing a connection that will initiate a WINMOR
        > connection it should be in the auto forward sub band (it is automatically
        > initiated) and it should be using the busy Lock. Maybe John can chime in on
        > this with his thoughts.
        >
        >
        >
        > I think there are 4 issues here:
        >
        > 1) The law and this has been pretty clearly interpreted for us by FCC
        > lawyers.
        >
        > 2) The ill will that can be created by allowing automatically
        > initiated sessions to interfere even inside the auto forward sub bands.
        >
        > 3) The need to properly train users on proper operating procedures
        > (the most basic.listen first!) and to use tools like the busy detector to
        > minimize the chance of interference to existing QSO. (while the hidden
        > transmitter effect above is real and often quoted I personally think 80+ %
        > of the interference problem is users that either don't listen or don't
        > understand what they are listening for)
        >
        > 4) The need to have sysops properly configure their stations
        > (frequency, busy lock etc) to minimize the chance of interference with other
        > modes.
        >
        >
        >
        > 73,
        >
        >
        > Rick KN6KB
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        > kt4wo67@...
        > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:40 PM
        > To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [BPQ32] Unattended ops
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Let me say this 1st...I am not trying to start something!!
        > Nor is this is a flame.
        >
        > IMHO..and thats what it is... "attended station" is not just
        > being at home,,,, Asleep-Mowing the yard,,,clearing snow..etc..
        > "attended" is sitting at the radio.
        >
        > I am already hearing complaints of Winmor stations QRM'ing
        > ongoing QSO's..and have been QRM'ed myself on 80 meters.
        >
        > We are creating enemies by running Winmor outside of the
        > auto-bands "unattended"
        >
        > I think Winmor(in what ever use, BPQ, RMS, etc) is going to
        > be a GREAT mode and will be used alot, but as with unattended
        > Pactor stations outside the auto-subbands, it makes for alot
        > of bad press.
        >
        > I support ALL digi modes and think they ALL have a strong
        > future in AR...but QRM is something nobody likes.
        >
        > My plans are to set my Winmor/BPQ station up and leave running
        > 24/7(once I find a used radio to dedicate to it).
        >
        > This is not a bash on Pactor,Winmor,Packet,RTTY,BPSK31,ALE400
        > or ANY MODE!!!
        >
        > I just dont want our progress to be marred(sp?) by bad press,,,
        > and...We are already getting a little...and it will get
        > much worse as more stations run 24/7 outside the auto sub-bands.
        >
        > Please do not flame me for this... Just tell me what ya'll think.
        >
        > Trip - KT4WO
        > kt4wo67@gmail. <mailto:kt4wo67%40gmail.com> com
        >
        > Member of Winmor and BPQ32 groups.
        >
        >
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2707 - Release Date: 03/02/10
        > 02:34:00
        >
      • kt4wo67@gmail.com
        Rick,,,, Let me also say...I cant tell you how EXCITED about Winmor I am!!! It seems to be working GREAT..and was needed!! Altho I am mostly a KtoK op..I have
        Message 3 of 8 , Mar 2, 2010
          Rick,,,,

          Let me also say...I cant tell you how EXCITED about
          Winmor I am!!!
          It seems to be working GREAT..and was needed!!
          Altho I am mostly a KtoK op..I have been wanting
          a mode that was low cost that could/would work well
          enuff to use on BPQ-HF links.
          Winmor seems to fit the bill well!
          I have ran Packet on HF for years, off and on..and
          have always been discouraged..but Winmor has changed that!!

          Again, Tnx for all the hard work and the great software!!!!!

          Trip - KT4WO

          --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Muething" <rmuething@...> wrote:
          >
          > Trip,
          >
          >
          >
          > Your comments well put. They bring up some important points and necessary
          > operating practices.
          >
          >
          >
          > Here is my feelings as developer of WINMOR and what we recommend for RMS
          > WINMOR and RMS Express.
          >
          >
          >
          > 1) RMS Express is a single user client.It can't initiate a connection
          > automatically. For WINMOR it has a busy detector to indicate and warn the
          > user that a channel is busy and while not perfect this works pretty well and
          > will be improved over time.
          >
          > 2) RMS WINMOR never initiates a connection.it is a server and only
          > listens. It can (and should) be set up to use the busy detector (same as 1)
          > above) to block the response to a connect request if the channel wasn't
          > clear just before (500 ms) the start of the connect request. This is set by
          > enabling Busy Lock. It is not always enabled because MARS operations don't
          > want it. Using busy lock will go a long way (again not perfect) to
          > eliminating interference due to the "hidden transmitter" effect. (The
          > station calling the RMS WINMOR thinks the channel is clear but the RMS
          > WINMOR hears channel activity that the calling station can't).
          >
          > 3) I think these same mechanism can and probably should also be used
          > in BPQ WINMOR and I think John has it set up that way but I am not sure.
          >
          >
          >
          > While it might be nice to put all the WINMOR and Pactor forwarding (auto or
          > otherwise ) in the auto forward sub band it is not practical.these are very
          > small bands (e.g. 5 KHz on 40 meter) and wide band signals (e.g. P3) MUST go
          > in the sub band since it is over 500 Hz. So what we are requesting for RMS
          > WINMOR stations is that US stations ONLY operate WINMOR's 500 Hz mode and
          > that they stay out of the already crowded auto forward sub bands. This is
          > completely legal since the forwarding is INITIATED by a manned station (e.g.
          > RMS Express) and the band width is <500 Hz.
          >
          >
          >
          > One of the goals of WINMOR was to address this interference issue with
          > features like the busy detector and busy Lock above. I think if a BPQ
          > switch is automatically routing a connection that will initiate a WINMOR
          > connection it should be in the auto forward sub band (it is automatically
          > initiated) and it should be using the busy Lock. Maybe John can chime in on
          > this with his thoughts.
          >
          >
          >
          > I think there are 4 issues here:
          >
          > 1) The law and this has been pretty clearly interpreted for us by FCC
          > lawyers.
          >
          > 2) The ill will that can be created by allowing automatically
          > initiated sessions to interfere even inside the auto forward sub bands.
          >
          > 3) The need to properly train users on proper operating procedures
          > (the most basic.listen first!) and to use tools like the busy detector to
          > minimize the chance of interference to existing QSO. (while the hidden
          > transmitter effect above is real and often quoted I personally think 80+ %
          > of the interference problem is users that either don't listen or don't
          > understand what they are listening for)
          >
          > 4) The need to have sysops properly configure their stations
          > (frequency, busy lock etc) to minimize the chance of interference with other
          > modes.
          >
          >
          >
          > 73,
          >
          >
          > Rick KN6KB
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > _____
          >
          > From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          > kt4wo67@...
          > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:40 PM
          > To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [BPQ32] Unattended ops
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Let me say this 1st...I am not trying to start something!!
          > Nor is this is a flame.
          >
          > IMHO..and thats what it is... "attended station" is not just
          > being at home,,,, Asleep-Mowing the yard,,,clearing snow..etc..
          > "attended" is sitting at the radio.
          >
          > I am already hearing complaints of Winmor stations QRM'ing
          > ongoing QSO's..and have been QRM'ed myself on 80 meters.
          >
          > We are creating enemies by running Winmor outside of the
          > auto-bands "unattended"
          >
          > I think Winmor(in what ever use, BPQ, RMS, etc) is going to
          > be a GREAT mode and will be used alot, but as with unattended
          > Pactor stations outside the auto-subbands, it makes for alot
          > of bad press.
          >
          > I support ALL digi modes and think they ALL have a strong
          > future in AR...but QRM is something nobody likes.
          >
          > My plans are to set my Winmor/BPQ station up and leave running
          > 24/7(once I find a used radio to dedicate to it).
          >
          > This is not a bash on Pactor,Winmor,Packet,RTTY,BPSK31,ALE400
          > or ANY MODE!!!
          >
          > I just dont want our progress to be marred(sp?) by bad press,,,
          > and...We are already getting a little...and it will get
          > much worse as more stations run 24/7 outside the auto sub-bands.
          >
          > Please do not flame me for this... Just tell me what ya'll think.
          >
          > Trip - KT4WO
          > kt4wo67@gmail. <mailto:kt4wo67%40gmail.com> com
          >
          > Member of Winmor and BPQ32 groups.
          >
          >
          >
          > No virus found in this incoming message.
          > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          > Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2707 - Release Date: 03/02/10
          > 02:34:00
          >
        • abertheaume
          I have to ask, Given that Winmor forwarding is still in its infancy and all, I would think it doesn t really have wide spread use yet. I could be wrong. That
          Message 4 of 8 , Mar 2, 2010
            I have to ask,
            Given that Winmor forwarding is still in its infancy and all, I would think it doesn't really have wide spread use yet. I could be wrong.

            That said, where is all this "unattended" forwarding taking place, on what frequencies? How does one even identify if it is "unattended" for that matter. Perhaps somebody is griping just to gripe. I think that could really happen in the ham world, again, I could be wrong...hihi

            Your point about collecting in a certain area of the band is valid though. We certainly don't want to be jumping on what is traditionaly the PSK frequencies or the packet net frequencies for example.
            73
            Art, N9ZZK


            --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, kt4wo67@... wrote:
            >
            >
            > Let me say this 1st...I am not trying to start something!!
            > Nor is this is a flame.
            >
            >
            > IMHO..and thats what it is... "attended station" is not just
            > being at home,,,, Asleep-Mowing the yard,,,clearing snow..etc..
            > "attended" is sitting at the radio.
            >
            > I am already hearing complaints of Winmor stations QRM'ing
            > ongoing QSO's..and have been QRM'ed myself on 80 meters.
            >
            > We are creating enemies by running Winmor outside of the
            > auto-bands "unattended"
            >
            > I think Winmor(in what ever use, BPQ, RMS, etc) is going to
            > be a GREAT mode and will be used alot, but as with unattended
            > Pactor stations outside the auto-subbands, it makes for alot
            > of bad press.
            >
            > I support ALL digi modes and think they ALL have a strong
            > future in AR...but QRM is something nobody likes.
            >
            > My plans are to set my Winmor/BPQ station up and leave running
            > 24/7(once I find a used radio to dedicate to it).
            >
            > This is not a bash on Pactor,Winmor,Packet,RTTY,BPSK31,ALE400
            > or ANY MODE!!!
            >
            > I just dont want our progress to be marred(sp?) by bad press,,,
            > and...We are already getting a little...and it will get
            > much worse as more stations run 24/7 outside the auto sub-bands.
            >
            > Please do not flame me for this... Just tell me what ya'll think.
            >
            > Trip - KT4WO
            > kt4wo67@...
            >
            > Member of Winmor and BPQ32 groups.
            >
          • D.Calder
            I think the Winmor discussion, should stay on that reflector. MY Opinion. 73 Dave n4zkf n4zkf@n4zkf.com www.n4zkf.com From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
            Message 5 of 8 , Mar 3, 2010

              I think the Winmor discussion, should stay on that reflector.

               

              MY Opinion.

               

               

              73 Dave n4zkf

              n4zkf@...

              www.n4zkf.com

               

               

               

               

              From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of kt4wo67@...
              Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:40 PM
              To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [BPQ32] Unattended ops

               

               


              Let me say this 1st...I am not trying to start something!!
              Nor is this is a flame.

              IMHO..and thats what it is... "attended station" is not just
              being at home,,,, Asleep-Mowing the yard,,,clearing snow..etc..
              "attended" is sitting at the radio.

              I am already hearing complaints of Winmor stations QRM'ing
              ongoing QSO's..and have been QRM'ed myself on 80 meters.

              We are creating enemies by running Winmor outside of the
              auto-bands "unattended"

              I think Winmor(in what ever use, BPQ, RMS, etc) is going to
              be a GREAT mode and will be used alot, but as with unattended
              Pactor stations outside the auto-subbands, it makes for alot
              of bad press.

              I support ALL digi modes and think they ALL have a strong
              future in AR...but QRM is something nobody likes.

              My plans are to set my Winmor/BPQ station up and leave running
              24/7(once I find a used radio to dedicate to it).

              This is not a bash on Pactor,Winmor,Packet,RTTY,BPSK31,ALE400
              or ANY MODE!!!

              I just dont want our progress to be marred(sp?) by bad press,,,
              and...We are already getting a little...and it will get
              much worse as more stations run 24/7 outside the auto sub-bands.

              Please do not flame me for this... Just tell me what ya'll think.

              Trip - KT4WO
              kt4wo67@...

              Member of Winmor and BPQ32 groups.

            • Art Bertheaume
              Dave, We have been testing BPQ32 Mail forward using winmor for several days now and also using winmor in FEC mode which at this time, only BPQ32 is capable of
              Message 6 of 8 , Mar 3, 2010
                Dave,
                We have been testing BPQ32 Mail forward using winmor for several days now and also using winmor in FEC mode which at this time, only BPQ32 is capable of doing.
                73
                Art, N9ZZK
                --- On Wed, 3/3/10, D.Calder <n4zkf@...> wrote:

                From: D.Calder <n4zkf@...>
                Subject: RE: [BPQ32] Unattended ops
                To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
                Date: Wednesday, March 3, 2010, 4:11 AM

                 

                I think the Winmor discussion, should stay on that reflector.

                 

                MY Opinion.

                 

                 

                73 Dave n4zkf

                n4zkf@n4zkf. com

                www.n4zkf.com

                 

                 

                 

                 

                From: BPQ32@yahoogroups. com [mailto:BPQ32@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of kt4wo67@gmail. com
                Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:40 PM
                To: BPQ32@yahoogroups. com
                Subject: [BPQ32] Unattended ops

                 

                 


                Let me say this 1st...I am not trying to start something!!
                Nor is this is a flame.

                IMHO..and thats what it is... "attended station" is not just
                being at home,,,, Asleep-Mowing the yard,,,clearing snow..etc..
                "attended" is sitting at the radio.

                I am already hearing complaints of Winmor stations QRM'ing
                ongoing QSO's..and have been QRM'ed myself on 80 meters.

                We are creating enemies by running Winmor outside of the
                auto-bands "unattended"

                I think Winmor(in what ever use, BPQ, RMS, etc) is going to
                be a GREAT mode and will be used alot, but as with unattended
                Pactor stations outside the auto-subbands, it makes for alot
                of bad press.

                I support ALL digi modes and think they ALL have a strong
                future in AR...but QRM is something nobody likes.

                My plans are to set my Winmor/BPQ station up and leave running
                24/7(once I find a used radio to dedicate to it).

                This is not a bash on Pactor,Winmor, Packet,RTTY, BPSK31,ALE400
                or ANY MODE!!!

                I just dont want our progress to be marred(sp?) by bad press,,,
                and...We are already getting a little...and it will get
                much worse as more stations run 24/7 outside the auto sub-bands.

                Please do not flame me for this... Just tell me what ya'll think.

                Trip - KT4WO
                kt4wo67@gmail. com

                Member of Winmor and BPQ32 groups.

              • D.Calder
                Yea, I know. I have been watching. (and hearing) From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Art Bertheaume Sent: Wednesday, March
                Message 7 of 8 , Mar 3, 2010

                  Yea, I know. I have been watching. (and hearing)

                   

                  From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Art Bertheaume
                  Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 5:17 AM
                  To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [BPQ32] Unattended ops

                   

                   

                  Dave,

                  We have been testing BPQ32 Mail forward using winmor for several days now and also using winmor in FEC mode which at this time, only BPQ32 is capable of doing.

                  73

                  Art, N9ZZK

                  --- On Wed, 3/3/10, D.Calder <n4zkf@...> wrote:


                  From: D.Calder <n4zkf@...>
                  Subject: RE: [BPQ32] Unattended ops
                  To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Wednesday, March 3, 2010, 4:11 AM

                   

                  I think the Winmor discussion, should stay on that reflector.

                   

                  MY Opinion.

                   

                   

                  73 Dave n4zkf

                  n4zkf@n4zkf. com

                  www.n4zkf.com

                   

                   

                   

                   

                  From: BPQ32@yahoogroups. com [mailto:BPQ32@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of kt4wo67@gmail. com
                  Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:40 PM
                  To: BPQ32@yahoogroups. com
                  Subject: [BPQ32] Unattended ops

                   

                   


                  Let me say this 1st...I am not trying to start something!!
                  Nor is this is a flame.

                  IMHO..and thats what it is... "attended station" is not just
                  being at home,,,, Asleep-Mowing the yard,,,clearing snow..etc..
                  "attended" is sitting at the radio.

                  I am already hearing complaints of Winmor stations QRM'ing
                  ongoing QSO's..and have been QRM'ed myself on 80 meters.

                  We are creating enemies by running Winmor outside of the
                  auto-bands "unattended"

                  I think Winmor(in what ever use, BPQ, RMS, etc) is going to
                  be a GREAT mode and will be used alot, but as with unattended
                  Pactor stations outside the auto-subbands, it makes for alot
                  of bad press.

                  I support ALL digi modes and think they ALL have a strong
                  future in AR...but QRM is something nobody likes.

                  My plans are to set my Winmor/BPQ station up and leave running
                  24/7(once I find a used radio to dedicate to it).

                  This is not a bash on Pactor,Winmor, Packet,RTTY, BPSK31,ALE400
                  or ANY MODE!!!

                  I just dont want our progress to be marred(sp?) by bad press,,,
                  and...We are already getting a little...and it will get
                  much worse as more stations run 24/7 outside the auto sub-bands.

                  Please do not flame me for this... Just tell me what ya'll think.

                  Trip - KT4WO
                  kt4wo67@gmail. com

                  Member of Winmor and BPQ32 groups.

                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.