Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why WinLInk is illegal on HF  (Read 6293 times)
N5PVL
Member

Posts: 210




Ignore
« on: February 06, 2009, 04:54:48 AM »

There is absolutely nothing "experimental" about WinLink, which uses a commercial modem to provide HF eMail service that has been available on commercial frequencies for a very long time.

Experimenting is when you try something new, with hopes that it will be beneficial. - Not when you insist upon using something old and inappropriate, ignoring the fact that it is detrimental and flouts the law.

We are specifically prohibited by the federal government in the PART97 regulations from providing, on a regular basis, communications which are available outside of amateur radio. WinLink is identical in almost every respect to SailMail, one of many commercial email over HF services, one which uses the exactly the same equipment and software as WinLink. - The differences between the two being that SailMail costs 20 bucks a month and operates PACTOR III on the channelized commercial spectrum it was designed and intended for, instead of polluting the ham bands and interfering with ham radio operators communications as WinLink does - for free.

The interference issues related to WinLink on HF are partly due to the commercial PACTOR III modem having no provision for detecting any kind of signal except other PACTOR signals, partly due to the WinLink administrator specifying that all automated WinLink servers on HF turn off the little bit of signal detection the modem does have, and partly due to the PACTOR III signal automatically causing itself to spread out wider in reaction to improved band conditions - the exact opposite of good operating practice within amateur radio's shared spectrum. Ham radio QSO's which are fortunate enough not to be overwhelmed by the initial PACTOR III transmissions are then enveloped when the signal widens, without the WinLink server operator's knowledge or intervention.

Because of these factors, PACTOR III interferes with legitimate, legal ham radio communications without operator intervention, simply by being utilized with amateur radios shared spectrum instead of the channelized commercial spectrum that it was designed for.

The WinLink administrator and the operators of the WinLink servers are aware of these issues but operate this inappropriate equipment on ham radio HF frequencies anyway, making the interference they cause every day "willful interference", which is specifically prohibited in the FCC's PART97 regulations that define and protect amateur radio.

These are not just Lids, but Lids who set up an automated system that interferes with legal amateur radio transmissions on HF all day, every day. It is literally impossible to operate the PACTOR III modem legally on the HF amateur radio bands, due to its design and operating characteristics.

73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL

http://www.uspacket.org
Logged
N5LRZ
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2009, 08:00:50 AM »

People holding foreign licenses are not obligated to obey our rules and regs Charles.  In fact they do not have to even give a flying expeletive deleted weither you like it or not--or myself for that matter either.  They are governed by THEIR licensing countries (when there) and the ports of call whatever licensing rules and regs exist there.

So they can tell you to go get screwd and there is absoltuely NOTHING you can do to stop them.  Our FCC can request but host governments are NOT obligated to listen.  There is no law that says they have to kiss your happy azz.

Logged
G0GQK
Member

Posts: 634




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2009, 11:54:26 AM »

May I beg to differ ?  There is an organisation called the International Radio Amateur Union which is believed to make decisions for the use of the amateur radio frequencies with different bodies throughout the world.

Where is the Pactor III transmitting equipment located ? I always had the impression that it was somewhere in the United States of America. I also understand that the use of this equipment has been agreed by the ARRL, but I never could understand how they could agree to the use of equipment which is known to cause interference to radio amateurs and in the US, frequently does.

Where is the station located which is licenced to use this equipment ?

G0GQK
Logged
N5LRZ
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2009, 07:13:28 PM »

Re the last poster...The below is to the best of my knoledge...

The international radio meetings that take place every so often to set band plans etc cannot force its decisions on constitutant members as a matter of law.

Case in point...The CW Requirement...

CW was reommended to be deleted or phased out by the meeting.  BUT HOWEVER the ultimate decision to do so was left to the individual countries radio governing bodies.  Those NOT wishing to delete code requirements did not have to do so.  AND perhaps there are still a few countries that require the code in some form as a requirement.

Another example: There are more than one country that allows phone operations on the band segment the US has allocated to CW and digital.  You hear them often in contests using phone/split operations in the US CW Band.  There is nothing the US CW/digi people can do to stop them from doing so.

Each country is ultimately free to govern itself when it comes to the details of operaion.  Hence a person licensed in say New Zeland does not have to even remotely care if is transmissions interfere with transmissions in say the UK as long as he does not violate the rules and regs of the territory where he is located and legally authorized to transmit.

Logged
N5PVL
Member

Posts: 210




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2009, 08:44:14 AM »

G0GQK:

Please ignore my rude, semi-literate countryman - He is one of the thoughtless Lids being discussed, you can see what kind of trash are attracted to the WinLink system.

I put together an explanation concerning ARRL involvement in inappropriate, illegal on the air behavior related to WinLink here:

http://www.rgvham.com/rgvforum/index.php/topic,38.0.html

Most of the PACTOR III stations are licensed in the United States due to the grant money corruption noted in the link above.

73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL




Logged
N5LRZ
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2009, 01:51:55 PM »

Re PVL...
Too bad you do not know what the hell you are talking about

I do not do use nor have I ever used either WinLink or Echo Link.  So I guess you dont know what the hell you are talking about.

BUT I DO support the use of WinLink as long as it is legal in the country of transmit.  Over there its THEIR RULES.  Over here its OUR RULES.
PERIOD...

BUT I will be fair, even though I think you definately do not deserve the courtesy, I will be fair ....

IF you can site any International Communications Treaty still in effect signed by the FCC Reps or  governmental reps of the US Government that clearly states world for word without any interpretation on your part (Preambles NOT acceptable) that someone in say hmmm New Zeland has to give a damn if his signal is annoying someone in another country, say the US.  Site the Treaty, Section, Page  etc so I can look it up.

And remember you are NOT allowed to interpret anything at all.  Your reference must be world for word, punctuation for punctuation.


Logged
N5LRZ
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2009, 01:54:59 PM »

You are cordially invited to also inform of any specific active International Treaty as mentioned above should you be able to find one.  Same terms of course, no interpretation allowed, and no preamble or statement of principles.

I will be more than glad to look up the treaty on the web and read your site of treaty content.
Logged
N5PVL
Member

Posts: 210




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2009, 07:54:43 PM »

Goober:

Get someone who has basic reading skills to read my post for you. - Then ask them which regulatory agency I refer to.

N5PVL
Logged
KC5CSG
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2009, 07:11:29 AM »

LOL...I guess this guy really doesn't like winlink. You should see his posts on other sites.

I guess I have to be fair though, if I were the one getting stomped on I guess I'd be pissed off for the amount of time it takes to turn that BIG knob on the front of my radio.

I guess all that static will be the next thing we complain about next huh?

73

KC5CSG
Logged
WA7NCL
Member

Posts: 625




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: February 25, 2009, 07:40:23 AM »

Don't feed the troll.
Logged
N5PVL
Member

Posts: 210




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: February 25, 2009, 02:45:19 PM »

You're right, replying to N5LRZ is a waste of time.

About WinLink:

SailMail and other commercial HF eMail outfits limit the size and number of eMail attachments, and charge extra for them... WinLink doesn't.

It's nice to know that the commercial outfits understand the value of THEIR spectrum... Too bad the ARRL lacks that attitude about OURS.

SailMail makes swapping porn and documents from their businesses at sea too expensive for them, I suppose.

WinLink does it for free! - On your and my HF spectrum.

Totally lacking in character, the WinLinkers insist upon using the ham bands to move their filth and business communications around.

If what they were doing were legitimate, it wouldn't be such a closely guarded secret. - So private.

The ARRL headquarters staff from Sumner on down are "A-OK" with this, they think it's great.

That's the ARRL's idea of representing the best interests of US hams.

73 DE Charles, N5PVL
Logged
KC5CSG
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: February 25, 2009, 10:13:15 PM »

Sir,

Assuming that they're using our bands to move what you assume is filth based on the fact you can't intercept and review it is......well......just not cool man.

I would assume all the people using this "winlink" service, sorry I don't know much about it, are licensed operators correct? I don't see a problem with them using the spectrum. Back to the "filth" thing though........

I send email to my wife all the time from here in Iraq. I wouldn't want it read either by the people that run the web servers but I have to deal with the fact that it can be read by them if they really want to read it. If some hams have figured out a way send junk to each other and keep it private.....well....more power to them. If you suspect they're all sending porn well the crap can be intercepted at some server somewhere. Report your suspicions and leave it at that. After all, it does use the internet.......SOMEONE has to have the ability to intercept it and review it on their server.

Af far as being a bandwidth hog, I'll honestly say I've never encountered a problem with it. Really, not one problem. If the FCC thinks it's a non issue then I'm inclined to think it's a non issue too. I do have to adimire you for your stamina though and just think of what you could do if you put that amount of energy and time into a realistic project that could actually bear fruit...............

73

KC5CSG
Logged
N5PVL
Member

Posts: 210




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2009, 05:25:28 AM »

KC5CSG:

I'm glad you stepped up to admit your basic lack of a clue about what's being discussed. It looks like you are not too familiar with PART97 either, or amateur radio in a general sense.

Kind of makes one wonder why you are hanging out on the digital forum, at a ham radio website.

There is a report that was put out in 2002 concerning terrorist communications via HF eMail. WinLink was specifically mentioned in the report. A few years later, there was an amateur who reported that kiddie porn was being transported over WinLink's 'private' system. Then a Dutch marina operator reported terrorist communications found in a WinLink-equipped boat there in the Netherlands.

Privacy has no place on the ham bands, period. Your apparent confusion between amateur radio and commercial carriers puts the reason for this into high relief.

We are specifically prohibited from transporting inappropriate material over the ham bands, and are expected to monitor each others transmissions ( self-police ) to ensure compliance with this.

Kind of hard to monitor WinLink's 'private' system. - That is one of many reasons it should be immediately shut down, and moved off to the commercial frequencies it was designed for.

When it is discovered that terrorists have utilized WinLink in order to arrange an attack upon the area where your family for example lives in the United States, in what way do you think this will reflect well upon amateur radio?

How do we know that WinLink is transporting terrorist commo and kiddie porn? - The real question for ham radio operators is, how do we know it is not?

73 DE Charles, N5PVL



Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 12990




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2009, 05:43:53 AM »

Heck Charles, we can all intercept the filth that goes on on 75M in the open every night and nobody does anything about that. It appears to me that it doesn't make much difference whether hams can "monitor" the traffic or not.
Logged
KB5WBH
Member

Posts: 20




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2009, 06:38:26 PM »

Whats wrong Charles, didn't get enough of this over at the zed? How about another mindless poll?

73
mike kb5wbh
 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!