Newbie Question: High Speed Packet Radio (mm bands) in US?

[interfect]

Hello all!
I'm very new to amateur radio; I don't even have my license yet. However, I do have a question about packet radio: why is it so slow?

I can't find anything describing amateur packet radio operating much above the speed of a dial-up modem. Perhaps relatedly, I can't find much about amateur packet radio in higher-frequency bands, which theoretically have the bandwidth to support higher data rates.

According to http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Hambands_color.pdf, all license classes except Novice are authorized to operate on all modes in, say, the 76.0-81.0 GHz band. Since "3G" GSM phones operate around 2 GHz, and new "4G" WiMax wireless broadband services operate around 5 GHz, shouldn't broadband-speed packet radio be possible in this band or higher bands? If so, why is no one using it? It seems like it would be useful to be able to do things like streaming video and multi-player gaming over packet radio, without going through the Internet.

Have I missed some important regulation limiting the bit rate of packet radio in the US? Or the type of payloads that can be transmitted? Or the maximum FSK frequency shift allowed? (If that's the problem, couldn't you use like an 8 GHz carrier on an 80 GHz channel and shift that?)

Also, what is legal and/or socially acceptable with regards to sending encrypted data using amateur packet radio? Is it impolite to prevent other hams from listening in on your conversations?

Advice and helpful pointers from people who actually know what they're doing in the field of amateur radio would be greatly appreciated.

[5B4AJB]

packet radio: why is it so slow?

We have a limited bandwith on 1200 Baud packet - it's a balance between reliability and speed.
9600 Baud packet is faster, but only really suitable for links, multi user channels might as well use 1200 Baud.

encrypted data

We are not allowed to encrypt transmissions, if we do, it's to save bandwith and must be generally decodable.

Digital TV is allowed as a streaming medium on the higher bands - you could always inject a data stream with the video stream.
Most of this kind of kit is a bit specialised, so only a handful of users play with it.

Commercial modules are available, which seems to be the easiest way to get involved with these modes.

Here's the first ones Google posted:-
http://www.d-atv.nl/datvpcb.php

[Battlespeed]

We have a limited bandwith on 1200 Baud packet - it's a balance between reliability and speed.
9600 Baud packet is faster, but only really suitable for links, multi user channels might as well use 1200 Baud.


We are not allowed to encrypt transmissions, if we do, it's to save bandwith and must be generally decodable.

Digital TV is allowed as a streaming medium on the higher bands - you could always inject a data stream with the video stream.
Most of this kind of kit is a bit specialised, so only a handful of users play with it.

Commercial modules are available, which seems to be the easiest way to get involved with these modes.

Here's the first ones Google posted:-
http://www.d-atv.nl/datvpcb.php

Sorry for resurrecting an old thread, but I find this topic interesting.

Prohibitions against encryption are patently silly for the simple reason that there are many ways to encrypt open-channel communications which have nothing to do with the manipulation of bits or bytes.

It is only necessary, for instance, for two parties to share a code of some sort, and such codes can be extremely sophisticated.

Consider the common exchange of signal information, or RST code. "You're 5 by 9" can mean anything that you and I have previously decided that it will mean. A whole set of meanings ("ciphers") could be developed using the RST code. Even a government agent parked outside your home would not be able to dispute that your signal was NOT "5 by 9" on MY rig and therefore must have been a cipher.

An infinitely large cipher space can be developed around the ordinary (or "trivial") communications allowed for ham operators:

"Just finished straightening up the shack" could mean....??

...and tomorrow it could mean...??

...or, coming after "Gotta lotta chores to do around the house" it means....?? while coming after "I'm thinking about moving my tower" it means....??

Of course, this sort of cipher has vulnerabilities - but we shouldn't be fooled into thinking that it doesn't have strengths as well. Plain-language ciphers can be, and I'm sure are being, used successfully.

And there are even more subtle forms of open-channel ciphering. A keying "error", a request for retransmission, a device that introduces subtle shifts in the "fist" pattern, etc. would be conceivable examples and I'm sure there are many others. In other words, there is absolutely no way to prevent determined parties from "cloaking" their communications in such a way that it can be slipped right under the nose of an eavesdropper.

So - given that there are perfectly legitimate reasons why ham data protocols need encryption, and given that denial of encryption capabilities hamstrings (pardon the pun!) the ham community from advancing in very useful and legitimate ways, I have to ask "What's the point of the prohibitions?"