[AMRadio] Web page appears in opposition to RM-11306

Jim Wilhite w5jo at brightok.net
Mon Jan 16 22:21:19 EST 2006

I am sure there will be violators to this plan.  The sad thing is people do 
not respect others.  However, all things considered, I believe the overall 
effects of RM 11305 will be positive.

When not very many people make contact with stations as low as the example, 
they will move to a more active part of the band.  At least I hope, but the 
fact remains, more space is needed for phone operation and the lower half of 
80, 40,and 20 are under utilized.

73  Jim

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "peter markavage" <manualman at juno.com>
To: <amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Web page appears in opposition to RM-11306

> Maybe the CATT people can detail how they expect their proposal,
> RM-11305, to work then. That's the only glue ("gentlemen's agreements")
> that holds it together. Without it, it's total anarchy. i.e. any mode,
> any bandwidth, anywhere.
> Pete, wa2cwa
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:15:08 -0500 "Brian Carling" <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
> writes:
>> In the last contest I listened to, there were non-U.S.
>> stations running SSB pile ups all the way down to 7002 KHz.
>> Yes boys, 7002! SO much for foretelling how the "gentlemen's
>> agreements" are going to work on all of the bands when the
>> ARRL gets their absurd bandwidth scheme in place!
>> "Gentlemen's agreements" only work among gentlemen.

More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 17 Dec 2017.