RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Wow - thanks Dr Flowers!

To: RTTY contest group <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Wow - thanks Dr Flowers!
From: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 02:42:13 -0800
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
On Dec 25, 2013, at 10:35 PM, Rex Maner wrote:

> I'm glad I know how to press the ENTER key.  I sure don't have any idea what
> this person is talking about , but it sure sounds informed.( I Think )  

I believe some of the points that Andy made are (I paraphrase, and also drill 
down a bit):

1) the Symbol Rate is not about the ARRL strawman of "spectral efficiency." The 
ARRL themselves have in the past said that spectrum efficiency is not a goal of 
amateur radio (and neither does §97.1(a-e)), and now the ARRL petition claims 
that it is, when arguing for wider bandwidths. 

2) based on past FCC rulings, the Symbol Rate is never about bandwidth either, 
but about hams being able to self regulate.
  a) self regulation means that everyone else has to be able to "read the 
mail," (literally :-)
  b) this means that I should be able to copy a signal even when conditions are 
poor,
  c) well, if that is so, high symbol rates simply don't work anyway, since the 
symbol rate has to be kept low even though the path between the two parties is 
good, so that a third party (like an OO) can still monitor the conversation.
  d) by complaining that Pactor-3 is not efficient, the ARRL obviously don't 
even understand how the ionosphere works (Andy cites the Maslin book).

3) modern digital modes use what are called (by Harris, for example) "Serial 
Tone" modems.
  a)  you cannot use low SYMBOL rates (like the 100 baud in Pactor 3) and keep 
adding subcarriers to get higher DATA rates,
  b)  so, you use something like 64-QAM (QAM is a mix of PSK and amplitude 
modulation -- ASK), and you run at really high symbol rates,
  c)  to get high symbol rates through HF propagation when conditions are poor, 
the Serial Tone modems equalizes the channel,
  d)  to do equalization, they periodically send a long pseudo preamble (PN) 
sequence (example Andy gave is 176 bits long, used in STANAG 4285) .
  e)  the receiver takes the PN preamble and performs an autocorrelation, and 
from that derives a real time equalization of ionospheric distortion.
  f)  but here is the crux: unless the PN generator is openly published, it is 
equivalent to encryption, (which serves a dual purpose with the mil STANAG 
modems)
  g)  so we are back to hams not being able to self regulate again, since we 
cannot read the effectively encrypted mail.

So, before the FCC removes the symbol rate and allow higher bandwidths, they 
should make sure that Amateurs have the tools to read the mail.  By citing 
Pactor-4 in the petition, the ARRL must think that Pactor-4 satisfy the "read 
the mail" condition, but Andy thinks that it does not.  Pactor-4 does not 
satisfy the conditions needed to be used in the Amateur service.  

Andy also points to the fallacy with people who expect privacy when they use 
the Amateur service to forward email, since Amateur Radio principals have been 
that messages that are carried by the service must be transparent.  By making 
encryption open, these email users will at least not be misled that they have 
any privacy when they use the Amateur service to forward their email.  Since 
the principal is already embedded in §97.309(a), the FCC need not make a new 
ruling but just re-affirm it, since "it is obviously a point of confusion" to 
many parties.

Andy also called the 2.8 kHz part of the petition "strange," and added that the 
ARRL has not specifically said why they think there is a "tangible need" for 
it.  In my own comment, I had used "arbitrary and capricious" to describe the 
2.8 kHz number -- in lawyerese, a rule is arbitrary if it is not supported by 
logic or the necessary facts; a rule is capricious if it is adopted without 
thought or reason or is irrational 
(http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/arbitrary-and-capricious/ ). 

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>