[Lowfer] A knight at the Opera

[Bob Raide]

Laurence-you must have had a ball in your pasted life-and sounds like it's continuing  thru this one as well!
 
> From: hellozerohellozero at hotmail.com
> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 17:40:41 -1000
> To: lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> CC: lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Lowfer] A knight at the Opera
> 
> A1a after too many pints or...
> 
> Slurred Cw - used to have an Opera code like scenario with Soviet trawlers coming on net with one too many Vodkas or worse,and for the life of me I had to guess whether they were asking permission to come into port, asking for potable water (most likely), sending a "TR" or just swearing at me.
> 
> Suggest Opera is revised name to either "slurred A1a" or "Vodka" mode.
> 
> Laurence 
> Past life as a coast station and deep sea radio op (never would call myself an occifer)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > On Dec 5, 2013, at 16:38, jrusgrove at comcast.net wrote:
> > 
> > It's ROS mode that's involved in the spread spectrum controversy. OPERA mode is simply on off keying.
> > 
> > Jay W1VD  WD2XNS  WE2XGR/2  WG2XRS/2
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "JD" <listread at lwca.org>
> > To: "Discussion of the Lowfer (US, European, &amp;UK) and MedFer bands" <lowfer at mailman.qth.net>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 8:06 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Lowfer] Looking for 73 kHz band modes to try...
> > 
> > 
> >>>> Opera is not legal to tx in the US, FCC thinks it is a spread-spectrum mode.
> > 
> > Actually, Cliff, that's what its own, er, inventor called it, way back when.
> > Perhaps they took his word for it.  It's not really SS, of course.  It uses
> > no energy-spreading techniques; it's merely frequency agile.
> > 
> > But it's still not legal below 50 MHz in the US amateur service for a much
> > more fundamental reason...the same reason WSPR and PSK31 and others *do not*
> > meet the published Part 97 requirements on HF, either!
> > 
> > In 160m and all relevant segments of the HF bands through 12 meters where
> > RTTY and data are permitted by Sec. 97.305, Note 3 of 97.307(f) also
> > applies:  "Only a RTTY or data emission using a specified digital code
> > listed in §97.309(a) of this part may be transmitted. The symbol rate must
> > not exceed 300 bauds, or for frequency-shift keying, the frequency shift
> > between mark and space must not exceed 1 kHz."  (At 10m, it's Note 4
> > instead, which is exactly the same except for a 1200 baud symbol rate.)
> > 
> > Well, obviously the baud limits and the maximum frequency shift are not the
> > problem.  But if you follow on to 97.309(a), you find that there are only
> > three coding methods specified for RTTY and data emissions...5-level Baudot,
> > AMTOR, and ASCII.  That's all!
> > 
> > Unspecified codes _are_ permitted by Notes 5 and 6, but those notes apply
> > only within bands above 50 MHz.  Thus, OPERA and the other aforementioned
> > modes are legal up there, with a few restrictions.  And, Part 5 licensees
> > are not under the requirements of 97.309(a) at all, so there's presently no
> > problem using any of these modes in the US at LF and VLF.
> > 
> > (QRSS employs International Morse, the coding method explicitly defined for
> > CW in 97.3(c)(1) and permitted virtually everywhere in the ham bands by
> > 97.307(a).  Hellschreiber is an image mode, on which few specs are stated in
> > the Rules other than bandwidth limits, so no problem there either.)
> > 
> > But assuming we do someday get 2200 and/or 630 meters in the amateur
> > service, one of two things will need to happen before it's legitimate to use
> > popular digital modes in those bands:  (1) there will need to be yet another
> > new slow mode that does, in fact, utilize one of the currently specified
> > codes; or else, (2) developers of this sort of software will need to get
> > together and agree on a nice, efficient varicode they can all get behind,
> > publish it, and then petition the FCC to include it in the specified codes
> > of 97.309(a).  I have no doubt most of us here would gladly support such a
> > petition.  Then some variant of each of these worthwhile digimodes would be
> > legitimate for American ham use in all bands.
> > 
> > 73
> > John
> > 
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Lowfer mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> > Post must be less than 50KB total for message plus attachment!
> > 
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Lowfer mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> > Post must be less than 50KB total for message plus attachment!
> > 
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Lowfer mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> Post must be less than 50KB total for message plus attachment!
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html