|[AMRadio] Proposed AM 9 KHz BW limitation|
w5omr at w5omr.shacknet.nu
Sun Aug 15 23:02:22 EDT 2004
> >Coud you please specify where you saw a band-limitation to AM Signals?
> >73 = Best Regards,
> If you look at the page http://www.arrl.org/announce/bandwidth.html
> then look at the proposed § 97.305 Authorized emission types. First look
> at the table in (e), then look at (f) (1) The 3 kHz maximum bandwidth does
> not apply to double-sideband amplitude-modulated phone A3E emissions which
> are limited to --26 dB bandwidths of 9 kHz.
> Everywhere you see a (1) in the table under (e) AM is limited to 9KHz
> bandwidth. Just wondering if this is ok with you guys?
> Mark N5RFX
But, Mark... given the verbiage of:
There are certain incumbent amateur operations that should be allowed to
though they may not comply with the above-referenced bandwidth limitations.
Principal among these is double-sideband AM, which has a significant following
in the Amateur community. The proposed rules accommodate continued DSB-AM
operation in the high-frequency bands without additional restriction.
...would you agree that quite possibly the tabled information might be
And, just for the sake of me knowing, why would you (or ANY AM'er for that
matter want to have audio that was 9kc wide? Commercial AM Broadcast stations
are spaced at 10kc. What's wrong with 9kc? The 'typical' Amateur AM signal is
onlyaround 6kc wide, anyway. I can say that I have heard SSB stations that were
wider. BECAUSE of them, I believe, there needs to be some limits.
Although, Jim has a point; We're non-professionals. We're Amatuers.
We're experimenters and tinkerers. I'm thinking; "Why -can't- we experiment
a mode in it's properly designated area on the band? Digital signals, at the top
the CW bands, where there's typically not much CW usage?
9kc? I -wish- I could get my highs up to 3.5kc ;-)
73 = Best Regards,
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 17 Dec 2017.