[AMRadio] hecklers


Mike Sanders K0AZ k0az at corpranet.net
Sun Jan 29 14:53:00 EST 2006


Thanks Pete, I also can answer Yes and Yes. Plus I suspect that the digital
modes
would end up in the CW sub band if such an animal continues to exist. That
would be
OK as long as it is for the most part shared as on 20 meters. As CW winds
down the
needed protected spectrum will be less and less of course. As the new modes
continue
to come and improve there will obviously be more demand on spectrum for them
as
you suggest 5 or 10 years on.
I have known for years that CW was gone as a license requirement but for
those who
do not use CW to make decisions for us who do is a bit much. AM is a tough
choice to
make in this same environment. We are going to get bashed with the intent of
some to
get rid of it totally. What a shame that we have to stop something so
someone else can
do something else. And next week their ham ticket may be gathering dust
while they take
up knitting or whatever.
I just don't understand why it cannot be understood that a transition over
time to manage
the spectrum in a logical fashion to accommodate all interests (modes) is
the right thing to
do. Why does it have to be all or nothing right this minute? Does anyone
have an answer
to that?

K0AZ  Mike Sanders
18169 Highway 174
MT Vernon, Missouri 65712-9171
k0az at k0az.com <mailto:k0az at k0az.com>



-----Original Message-----
From: amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Peter Markavage
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 12:57 PM
To: amradio at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] hecklers


Yes; Yes; currently in the CW subbands.

Where should I (we) transmit digital voice or digital multimedia when it
becomes more of a part of the amateur radio's arsenal of modes to use.
I'm not talking about today or tomorrow but 5 to 10 years down the road
which is what the ARRL proposal is targeting. Of course with the CTT
proposal, it's "jungle law", any mode any where, subject only to your
class of license.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:00:52 -0600 "Mike Sanders K0AZ"
<k0az at corpranet.net> writes:
> Do you work CW? Do you work HF digital Modes? What do you think?
>
> K0AZ  Mike Sanders
> 18169 Highway 174
> MT Vernon, Missouri 65712-9171
> k0az at k0az.com <mailto:k0az at k0az.com>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Peter
> Markavage
> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 11:50 AM
> To: amradio at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] hecklers
>
>
> Where do you want to put all the current and future digital (voice
> and
> data) type modes on 75/80 meters; in the CW subband or the phone
> subband??
> Pete, wa2cwa
>
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:31:46 -0600 "Mike Sanders K0AZ"
> <k0az at corpranet.net> writes:
> > I agree. The 75 meter band needs to be opened up to voice lower
> in
> > frequency. The
> > current allocation for CW only makes no sense. Even running a CW
> > subband
> > from 3500
> > to 3600 would be a help but I suspect it could be smaller than
> that
> > and
> > still be no problem
> > for CW ops.
> > Just because I intend to use CW forever I am not in favor of
> > protecting a
> > larger than
> > needed subband. I am in favor of subbands though.
> > 73
> >
> >
> > K0AZ  Mike Sanders
> > 18169 Highway 174
> > MT Vernon, Missouri 65712-9171
> > k0az at k0az.com <mailto:k0az at k0az.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> > [mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Donald
> Chester
> > Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 8:26 PM
> > To: amradio at mailman.qth.net
> > Subject: RE: [AMRadio] hecklers
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "Mike Sanders K0AZ" <k0az at corpranet.net>
> >
> > >The low end of 6 meters is used EXTENSIVELY on CW for weak
> signal
> > >intercontinental DX.
> >
> > I don't find this so much a problem.  I believe there is a
> similar
> > CW
> > subband on 2 m. as well.  That represents only 1/40 of the 6m
> band.
> > It
> > would be the equivalent of a 12.5 kHz kHz CW band on 80m.
> >
> > The real problem is with the outdated subband restrictions we
> have
> > on HF.
> > For example, 50% of the 3.5-4.0 mHz band is restricted to
> > accomodate
> > communications that could easily fit into less than 20% of the
> band,
> > even
> > during CW contests.
> >
> > Don k4kyv
______________________________________________________________
AMRadio mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net
AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami, Paul Courson/wa3vjb
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/06

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/06




More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 21 Oct 2017.