Pactor 4 is probably a great mode. We just don't want it used in the digital/CW
portion of the bands where their unattended and
semi-automatic encrypted signals are set to reside. Put it up with other
wide-band mode signals like Voice and Image.
This link was provided previous but it might be worth repeating. It has some
good points.
http://www.w8ji.com/mixing_wide_and_narrow_modes.htm
73, Don AA5AU
-----Original Message-----
From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Michael Rapp
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 12:41 PM
To: rtty@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL attack on current RTTY users
Hi Jeff,
Being fairly new to ham radio I may have mis-heard this, but the use case I
keep hearing about in my local area is to send a large
Excel spreadsheet over HF via Winlink to an served-agency email address in an
emcomm situation.
I do not understand the technical details at all, but the impression I have is
that the Pactor IV protocol is supposed to make this
use case more reliable, more efficient, and/or faster. Or at least that is my
perception from people who seem positive or
indifferent towards the ARRL proposal.
Again, I'm a little hesitant as I'm so new to ham radio but the impression I've
gotten is that the ARRL proposal is to -- somehow --
help remove some of the impediments to sending large file attachments over
Winlink, but I don't understand the technical details
enough to say how it does that, so I could be completely wrong.
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Jeff Blaine <keepwalking188@yahoo.com>wrote:
> The guys promoting the winlink/pactor 4 stuff keep talking about
> improved emcom support. But I'm not sure how these two items tie together.
>
>
73,
--
/*/-=[Michael / KT5MR]-=/*/
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|