[KYHAM] Fwd: winlink and pactor

Thu Apr 7 13:42:36 EDT 2005

Hello Tony and others,

With all due respect. This E-mail you forwarded to KYHAM and elsewhere is
very misinformed and has some very misleading comments in it. The writer
takes quotes from SCS material directed at commercial and maritime
applications for Pactor out of context, trying to imply they are relevant to
Winlink 2000 and amateur radio applications for Pactor (they are not). 

The writer obviously has no understanding at all about Pactor or the Winlink
2000 network and its operations, and they clearly have an axe to grind.

The mode is not the issue: SSB, RTTY, Packet, CW and other modes are all
legal on amateur radio, but also used in commercial, military, and maritime
radio services. Pactor is also used in multiple radio services and is
completely legal on amateur radio when used within the framework of the Part
97 rules regulations guiding the amateur radio service. 

It's not the mode that's relevant here, it's the way it's used. Business
content as defined in Part 97 is not legal on amateur radio period,
regardless of if it's using PSK31, Pactor, SSB, CW, or anything else. The
use of Encryption, IDing practices, and many other issues are a factor in
all modes. Pactor I, II, and III are all legal on amateur radio frequencies
when used in keeping with Part 97 rules.

Winlink 2000 (WL2K) operations are completely legal, and we doing everything
possible to coexist well with other services and operators. All WL2K HF
radio connections involve a control operator (the user). All auto-forwarding
of traffic is done over the internet, for maximum efficiency and
preservation of our very valuable bandwidth. 

QRM from any mode is a problem that can be resolved through good operating
practices as well as good bandplans. Winlink 2000 (and Airmail client
software) have implemented busy channel detection, and carefully trains and
monitors its users. Repeated offenders are locked out of the system.

Much work is needed to accommodate all the fantastic new and emerging
digital modes we have legal access to now. Thankfully, a new bandplan is in
the works that should greatly relieve some of the congestion and conflict. 

For anyone interested in facts regarding the legalities of the Winlink 2000
network I highly recommend the following URL:
http://winlink.org/guidelines.htm

The Winlink 2000 development team has worked very hard to insure complete
compliance as defined in Part 97 rules, working directly with the FCC on
certain aspects. Winlink 2000 is fully compliant with all current rules and
regulations governing the amateur radio service, and working hard to insure
all its users are as well.

Winlink 2000 in playing an increasingly important role in ARES/EMComm
applications and could very well play a large role in securing the future of
amateur radio.

Respectfully,
Scott

Scott Thile, K4SET 
KY ARESR ASEC, Digital Communications
mailto:k4set at radioministries.org
http://www.kyham.net/emcomm/ares/digital/ 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: kyham-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
>[mailto:kyham-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Anthony W. DePrato
>Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 11:17 AM
>To: secomail at alltel.net
>Cc: kyham at mailman.qth.net
>Subject: [KYHAM] Fwd: winlink and pactor
>
>found this to be of great interest
>73 Tony
>wa4jqs
>
>
>>.
>>
>>Just as an information:
>>The most instructive document I found on Pactor utilization is the 
>>following one http://home.tiscalinet.ch/hb9brj/ptc.html
>>"List of PACTOR BBS, gateway and mail drop stations operating in 
>>unattended mode" (link from SCS mainpage)
>>
>>It is interesting because, it shows that
>>- though the IARU R1 bandplan already specifies the maximum bandwidth 
>>usable by band segment, you can find many region 1, Pactor3 unmanned 
>>stations proudly claiming operation in the narrow band segments 
>>(500hz), for example 3580-3600, 10140-10150, etc...
>>- the problem is broader than Winlink itself (most of the stations 
>>listed are not part of the winlink network)
>>
>>I agree with most of the comments expressed by Ekki, except one:
>>Pactor is a commercial, non-public protocol and though it was 
>>admissible to experiment it in ham-bands at an early stage, I 
>think it 
>>has nothing to do anymore in our bands, for several reasons, like the 
>>fact that it is very difficult to know the origin and the 
>content of a 
>>transmission once two stations are connected. IMHO only the FEC mode 
>>(unproto) may be admitted in ham-bands (but in practice this mode is 
>>only used for CQ'ing...). Btw this explains why a certain number of 
>>Pactor-users do not really care about making interferences to other 
>>narrow-band users, like it happens almost every evening in 
>the 3580/3583 segment...
>>
>>Now on PactorIII , I would say that even SCS agree that it is not an 
>>amateur mode...
>>
>>QUOTE
>>Today the PACTORR mode has evolved from a pure Amateur Radio 
>mode into 
>>a mode for world wide professional data transmission on shortwave. 
>>Based on our modems we offer a wide variety of solutions for your 
>>worldwide data communication
>>problems: from pure chat mode, to FTP like data transfer, to a true 
>>TCP/IP transparent link for e-mail services over shortwave!
>>UNQUOTE
>>
>>
>>Now on Winlink, I think this, also coming from SCS mainpage speaks by 
>>itself...
>>
>>QUOTE
>>Around the world with PACTOR-III.
>>Online with PACTOR-III from the high seas. Travel around the 
>world and 
>>send your daily snapshots, log entries, or business email from any 
>>point on the globe via PACTOR SSB email services. Check out which 
>>service provider is best for you...
>>Global Link Network
>>Kielradio
>>BernRadio
>>SailMail
>>Winlink
>>Bushmail
>>CruiseEmail
>>Monaco Radio
>>Radiomarine Network
>>UNQUOTE
>>
>>Where you can see that, winlink, using ham frequencies, is 
>considered  
>>on the same level than commercial providers like Bern-radio 
>or Bushmail.
>>To be noted that a "non profit" organization like sailmail 
>>http://www.sailmail.com/  provides the same type of service, but 
>>outside ham bands - which is logical...
>>
>>Last but not least, the fact that pactor, or winlink "maybe used for 
>>emergency"
>>is not an argument.
>>Any mode may be used for emergency communications, and IMHO 
>preferably 
>>public domain modes like SSB, CW, RTTY, PSK, MFSK,...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>RTTY mailing list
>>RTTY at contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>_______________________________________________
>Kenwood TM-G707A Giveaway
>http://www.kyham.net/support.html
>