"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message

Carl check me here but wasn't it you who advocated the abandonment of
all mode setasides in order to be able to run wall-to-wall spread
spectrum on 20M?

No ... I have pointed out that most countries of the world do not have
"by-mode" sub-band allocations in their amateur regulations and it doesn't
seem to cause any real problem.

Not the point and most of us were well aware of the differences in
band/mode edges.

I also (as did Gary Coffman, independently)

'nother sweetheart . . .

postulate a strawman design
(but something feasible, never the less) for a system that, in the 150 kHz
of CW/data sub-band on 20m could support a very large number of
20 wpm Morse-equivalent QSOs with virtually no interference.
That was immediately rejected by Morse fanatics,

What's this frigging "Morse fanatic" nonsense? I'm certainly no "Morse
fanatic", I probably spend as much time on an annualized basis with a
mic in my mouth as I do running CW. I use Morse and I support the use
of and testing for Morse.

This particular non-fanatic immediately spotted the fallacies and
impossibilities in your posts on the topic as they relate to any mode
which occupies an entire ham band and is overlaid/underlaid on narrow
modes particularly under weak signal condx. This is not fanaticism.
This is the same reaction some hugely overwheming majority of the
active hams today would reject on smell or sight. Including the
technically savvy amongst us. More like *particularly* the technically
savvy.

who said something
like:
"We don't want no stinking keyboard mode." (My response was to
make Morse I/O a user interface option. Still rejected.)
"The fun of it is digging the weak ones out of the noise." (My response
was, "You want channel impairments? No problem. I can program
all sorts of simulated channel impairments into the system to make copying
as hard as you want ... without having to trash the underlying, reliable
communications system." Still rejected.)

Exactly and none of it flew then and it never will. The big apparent
dent in your mindset is that where you come from logic rules all. Not
an unusual problem one runs into in linear thinkers like engineers
many of whom are well known for both their technical brillance *and*
their, shall we say, ocialization "issues".

If logic drove everything we chose to do Carl nobody in their right
minds would get married let alone have kids. But we do get married and
we do have kids. Thus it also is with 99.99% of all hams. Hell, when
ya get right down to it getting into ham radio is illogical for
several reasons I can toss out. But we do it anyway, right?

You don't have to worry yourself about writing any simulators,
sophisticated contest simulator programs have been around for years,
all the predicatble parameters can be adjusted to suit the intensity
of the pileups, QSB, QRN, code speeds, whacky callsigns, helluva lotta
fun to play with. They also serve a very valuable role as contest
logger and computer station control traininmg wheels. In the end
they're neat electronic ping-pong games but IT AIN'T FRIGGING RADIO.
Nobody is gonna go play electronic ping-pong so that you and Coffman
can play band edge to band edge.

If you don't get it's your problem. But you actually do get it dontcha
strawman?


Some folks just WANT to do things the hard way and want to insist
that others should be similarly constrained.

What "hard way"?? Morse on the air? You jest.

There are instances where it would have been a lot easier for me to
get from here to there by driving on the sidewalk but I'm "constained"
from doing that. Damned good thing too eh?

transmit data reliably over transcontinental distances ... with power
outputs on the order of 10 mW ... as an "underlay" to existing services that don't even notice that they are there.

Times how many stations?

QRPP PSK31 has done the same tricks. But PSK doesn't clobber the whole
band, doesn't require the development of new equipment, didn't require
a radical R&O to get on the air and can be done for the cost of some
audio cables at most ham stations.

I notice that TAPR has given up trying to get spread spectrum on the
air. Nobody in TAPR cares enough about SS to work thru the bugs.
There's a loud statement about ham SS.

But I have always said that I would not like to see the CW/data sub-bands
(whether by rule or by gentleman's agreement) completely over-run with SSB.


Carl - wk3c

w3rv