[AMRadio] ARRL has filed its bandwidth proposal with FCC


Patrick Jankowiak recycler at swbell.net
Thu Nov 17 21:02:14 EST 2005


It does not seem as though they deliberately relegate AM to a footnote, it 
looks more like the effort is only to give AM its due, while keeping the 
"hi-fi SSB" stuff at bay. That's what I see anyway, between the lines.

They could have as easily put the AM exception statement in each cell of 
the table, then it would not be a footnote, but that would have messed up 
the table and beaurocrats like nice orderly documents. VE VILL HAFF ODAH!!

I think we should be glad for the '9K' limit on AM and not make too much 
noise lest they decide 6K00A3E is the legal limit!

problems, however:

No ISB. why? maybe because of the 3.5KHz rule.. So much for the Harris 
Monstrosity I am trying to obtain. It can do voice on one sideband and data 
on the other. I know it's a military specialty, but it's nice!

And I would like to see the rules for AM go back to the traditional "KW 
input". It's no good for a 4-1000 to operate at 2000V and boil off all 
those electrons from the filament and not use them! Wishful thinking I 
suppose. -but the upside is I can use the absolute worst pulls!!

> 
> http://www.arrl.org/announce/regulatory/bandwidth/Bandwidth-Minute-64-Petition-FINAL.pdf
> 

Who's running the ARRL and FCC anyway? :)

PJ



More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 11 Dec 2017.