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


peter markavage manualman at juno.com
Thu Jan 19 15:49:11 EST 2006


Jim wrote: "Since CW & digital modes are acceptable on all parts of the
band, why can't phone modes be acceptable on all parts of the band?  The
greatest risk we run is reducing QRM in the phone portion."

Cause they're wider, and with RM-11305, there are no bounds to
"wideness". If you think you have QRM now, can you picture in the future,
AM, SSB, FM, CW, digital voice/data/multimedia, SSTV, maybe even a form
of ATV, etc. all trying to operate adjacent to each other on the bands.

:"would make more of us gentlemen"  - I guess by osmosis. I see no other
way it could happen. Of course then, why doesn't it currently happen on
the bands today. Why would any mode, any bandwidth, anywhere, all of a
sudden, make amateurs nicer than they are today??

:"Mode or bandwidth restrictions simply promote special interest groups"
- AM, SSB, CW, digital, SSTV, etc. etc. operations are all special
interest groups that form the backbone of the amateur radio service. Some
are just larger than others.

Pete, 

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:58:47 -0600 "Jim Wilhite" <w5jo at brightok.net>
writes:
> Since CW & digital modes are acceptable on all parts of the band, why
can't phone modes be acceptable on all parts of the band?  The greatest 
> risk we run is reducing QRM in the phone portion.  I believe that would
make more of us gentlemen.  Despite what some think, most amateurs are 
> considerate of others, RM 11305 would give us extra space to do that. 
Mode or bandwidth restrictions simply promote special interest groups
against the majority of us who choose not to use digital or CW as a mode
of operation.
> 
> 73  Jim
> W5JO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > With no legal rules holding a band together, RM-11305 actually 
> encourages
> > "bad boy", "animalistic", and "maverick" type behavior. The only 
> legal
> > rules are license class and band edges. Starting up an 20 KHz wide 
> FM QSO
> > on 7010, while maybe not considerate operating procedure (based on 
> some
> > defining mind set), will not be illegal. The best you can do is 
> wave a
> > "Shame on you" finger at them.
> >
> > If you haven't read W3MIV's comments on RM-11305, I would suggest 
> that
> > you do. Albert paints a very good picture on where this proposal 
> would
> > lead us. Amateur radio service and "jungle law" come together.
> > http://www.w3miv.us/bandwidth_2.html
> >
> > Pete, wa2cwa
> >
> > On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:36:47 -0500 "W1EOF" <w1eof at hamnutz.com> 
> writes:
> >>
> >> There is a difference between LEGAL and considerate Don. There 
> are
> >> many
> >> activities
> >> that I COULD legally participate in I don't. Because it would be
> >> inconsiderate and rude.
> >> I would be ashamed of myself to win points in a contest while I
> >> stepped all
> >> over my
> >> fellow hams enjoyment of the hobby.
> >>
> >> I guess that's my point exactly and why I find myself in a 
> quandry
> >> about
> >> RM-11305. In
> >> theory it sounds good but I wonder how many hams will take the
> >> attitude
> >> "It's perfectly
> >> legal for me operate SSB on 7002, so I will."???
> >>
> >> 73,
> >>
> >> Mark W1EOF



More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 13 Dec 2017.