[AMRadio] ARRL bandwidth scheme not accepted

Bob Scupp rascupp at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 8 14:16:50 EST 2005

Paul and Everyone-

I am a former ARRL Rocky Mountain Division
Vice-Director who served two terms (1990-1994). My
main issue with any League proposal is that they do
not site research through membership and/or Amateur
Radio community surveys for their rule-making
petitions. They also are usually the same on other
Board, Executive committee reasoning's and decision
making. As a League member since 1969 and Life Member
since 1976 I feel that my membership plague makes me a
sort of stockholder. How about more emphasis on ARRL
membership surveys on these issues? Even magazines
like CQ are more into that than the ARRL. The answer
has been obvious since the League was founded in 1914.
Keep the control behind the doors of their meetings in
their own hands. Sorry if this upsets anyone but I
have had the pleasure of looking at it on the inside
out for four years. I however have chosen to stick by
them only because they are the only national
organization to represent us of it's kind. It does not
mean I disagree with everything they do. I certainly
do agree they could have done better than the
regulation by bandwidth proposal as it now stands.
Especially when it comes to the long-term classic,
traditional modes like AM.

Best 73's,

Kilowatt Five Sporadic E Propagation

More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 16 Dec 2017.