3 Mar
2016
3 Mar
'16
11:24 a.m.
Richard,
The simplified changes that I am aware of make Amateur Radio
Experimentation easier in
Canada in as much as the regulations^[1][2] limit the bandwidth use and
input power. The rest
is left to coordination with neighboring frequency reuse (such as
repeater councils) and
agreed band plans[3] (RAC/ARRL/etc).
Canadian link references follow:
[1] http://wp.rac.ca/study-guides-2/regulatory-info/
[2] http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf01226.html#t1
[3] http://wp.rac.ca/rac-0-30-mhz-band-plan/
Michael Durrant VE3PNX
ve3pnx at andier.com
www.packetradio.ca
.
On 2016-03-03 (W10) 11:04 AM, Richard Chycoski wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
I just went digging into the Canadian regs that I can find online -
and they seem to have been massively simplified compared to earlier
releases. This one:
<http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10650.html> shows only
bandwidth limitations on most of the bands (including most HF bands) -
mode of emission and data rate is not mentioned at all.
I know that this was the eventual intent when the regs were redone in
the late '70s, but is that what actually happened?
Is there something I've missed from there, or from
<http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-96-484/index.html> ?
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 3/3/16 7:33 AM, Mark Phillips wrote:
_______________________________________________
I don't know how it is up there in the Frozen North but here in the
US our
"300bd restriction" is very often misunderstood. We are allowed a symbol
rate of 300bd. Not a data rate. If we can jamb 1.2mbps into a 300bd
symbol
rate we could use it.
Mark
NI2O
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:56 AM, ve1jot <ve1jot(a)eastlink.ca> wrote:
> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
> _______________________________________________
> And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being
> deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as
> folks have
> mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software
> modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and
> options
> that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho,
> uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are
> actively being
> maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is
> alive
> and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very
> inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of
> fun and
> I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there
> *has*
> been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws
> prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is*
> doable on
> HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi!
> (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b
> restriction)
> Cheers,
> John
>
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net