<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2658.2">
<TITLE>So you think you can't loose the Internet...</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>For those who think that you can't loose the Internet...see this URL.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2><A HREF="http://www.fcw.com/article90545-09-01-05-Web&newsletter%3Dyes" TARGET="_blank">http://www.fcw.com/article90545-09-01-05-Web&newsletter%3Dyes</A></FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>This may be only a little slice of the pie; but from where I sit, I can see the majority of the military network and a huge portion of the Internet itself being taken down for days, perhaps even weeks at a time.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>The Coast Guard has Mil-STD-188-110 modems and HF on some vessels and a few aircraft as well as at some shore stations...at least they used to. The last I heard they weren't using it because it wasn't robust enough nor fast enough to meet anything but their very minimum needs.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>So why do hams think that that PSK31 is "enough", fast enough or Pactor III is robust enough to meet even our amateur radio basic needs?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>There is a GREAT need for a high speed (many pages of output per minute), robust (works down near the noise floor) data mode as well as an equally robust digital voice mode. A digital data mode that can be the center of a nation-wide messaging system that does not use the Internet.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>My only comment is that what ever we do, we MUST do quickly. We must prove to ourselves and hams across the nation that we can provide high-speed, robust HF data and digital voice modes.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>There are those out there that can do this...we need to do it and if there are special legal requirements, then they need to be identified. If there are technical specification within Part 97 now or that might be in the future, we need to identify them and show, either by actual demonstration or technical papers, that we cannot provide what is needed with current or future legal/technical restrictions.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>I still believe that specific and reasonable short term and long term goals for throughput and robustness will help focus our efforts on an end product. This has certainly been shown to work in the past.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>I am sending to several lists as this needs to be a concerted effort.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>As Bill O'Reilly says..."What say you."</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Walt/K5YFW</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>