Bulletins from the Pacific Packet Radio Society - page 079

and/or a Symposium on satellite techniques (including digital communications) prior to the AMSAT annual meeting. Tom needs input into this one, as well as participation from the rest of the country read between the 1ines, we need your participation').

Lastly, Tom is one of us - a packeteer. He is going to be instrumental in the planning, and allocation of AMSAT resources to satellite packet radio activity. Let's try to get him on prnet. How about it?

73, Steve w2fpy


TO : Steve, W2FPY

Re your msgs of May 19.

1. Concerning the existing 1200-baud Bell 202 'standard,' I think that I agree with your basic point that we should not keep it any longer than we have to. One problem, of course, is that the FCC Rules presently limit us to that speed on 10 meters thru 1 3/4 meters, so we can't toss it overboard until that restriction is lifted. Also, the problem breaks out into backbone vs. local area nets. For the backbone net, I think that we should graduate to something faster as soon as possible. Local area nets will probably be slower to convert until they get some hosts running local services which use some appreciable part of the channel capacity. On paper, the FCC situation is as follows:

a. In PR Docket No. 81-699, RM-3788, the FCC proposed that "Sending speeds as great as 19.6 kbps may be utilized on those frequencies between 50 and 225 MHz provided that the bandwidth of such emissions does not exceed 16 kHz."

b. AMRAD's comments which were filed January 12, 1982 recommended that between 220.5 and 221.9 MHz the speed limit be raised to 56 kb/s. The ARRL agreed with us and supported our comments in their reply comments of February 16, 1982.

c. Also involved is that the FCC proposed changing the Rules to specify "bits per second" rather than "baud." Bob Carpenter, W3OTC and AMRAD recommended that the FCC stick with "bauds.11 However they come down on this may affect our choice of modulation.

2. Yes, we are interested in the MSK encoder/decoder, as well as anything that you might have comparing MSK and PSK.

3. The rumor that someone in AMRAD has the VADCG TNC boards is probably just rumor. We've asked the most likely people and haven't located it. The main problem that we see with the VADCG board is the limited memory. Terry Fox's article in the June AMRAD Newsletter is one way of temporarily getting more memory for the purpose of developing network-level software. We'll be

Click for Original Graphic Image of this page.

Previous Index Next