5 Mar
2016
5 Mar
'16
1:49 a.m.
Is this how STAs now work?
When we were implementing packet radio in Canada in the late seventies,
American hams claimed that the STA process was slow and difficult, the
equivalent to getting an act through Congress that was difficult and slow
Was this real at the time? Is it better now?
I may have to go through this to push a new mesh protocol through as STA
(yah, gotta do my local exams first!) and what to know what I'll be up
against.
- Richard
On 3/4/16 10:30 PM, ve1jot wrote:
> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
> _______________________________________________
> +1
>
> On 16-03-04 08:16 PM, kd6oat wrote:
>> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Regarding an STA for higher data rates experimentation: I would think a
>> well written proposal accompanied by the signature of a number of
>> licensed
>> operators willing to participate in experiments would go a long way.
>> Count
>> me in as one who would be willing to sign on.
>> Ken - KD6OAT
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Brian Kantor <Brian(a)ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> In the FCC arena, one of the better ways to get technical restrictions
>>> removed is to apply for and operate under an STA - Special Temporary
>>> Authority, a document from the FCC that basically allows you to operate
>>> an exception to the normal rules. Typically the only requirement is
>>> that you make a good case for it technically and that you write up a
>>> report afterwards. In the past, STAs have been the basis for
>>> changes to
>>> the rules. Someone who writes well may want to consider submitting
>>> one to
>>> allow higher data rates based solely on bandwidth and then
>>> experimenting
>>> with it.
>>>
>>> Another possibility is to apply for a Experimental Radio Service
>>> license
>>> which basically allows you to do just about anything if you can make a
>>> good case for it. They used to be a little expensive and they require
>>> a written report on what you found out with your experiments but it
>>> does
>>> allow nearly anything you can think of.
>>> - Brian
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 07:42:09PM +0200, Demetre - SV1UY wrote:
>>>> Not good for US though, "thanks" to FCC's 300baud symbol
rate
>>> restrictions of HF.
>>> _________________________________________
>>> 44Net mailing list
>>> 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>>> http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
>>>
>>