[AMRadio] Phone band expansion


Jim Wilhite w5jo at brightok.net
Thu Oct 12 15:11:25 EDT 2006


Pete in this case, I don't plan to follow the ARRL's suggestions.  As a 
member, I see good and bad, but I sure don't see them having any official 
say over where we can operate.  As Todd has said, phone is phone.  If we 
start protecting this and that, then the AM operator will have 10 Kcs and 
that is all.  It is pretty clear to me the FCC believes the CW, RTTY, and 
digital modes can co-exist between 3.5 and 3.6

The new part is to eliminate congestion.  Let's use it.

73  Jim
W5JO
----- 
> You said it, "phone is phone"; AM is phone; Calling frequency was also
> not defined as a "QSO" frequency but I know what you mean.
>
> Since all these changes to FCC's Part 97 Rules were actually accepted by
> the FCC  two years ago, the ARRL has had that much time to formulate a
> revised band plan to take the changes into consideration. Will probably
> also include some of the stuff they presented in their Bandwidth
> Proposal.
>
> Pete, wa2cwa
>
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 13:27:11 -0400 "Todd, KA1KAQ" <ka1kaq at gmail.com>
> writes:
>> On 10/12/06, Peter Markavage <manualman at juno.com> wrote:
>> > Don't make the same mistake "they" did 25 to 30 years ago by
>> defining an
>> > AM pen area. AM is phone; use it wherever your license class
>> allows.
>> > Or, maybe all can wait for the ARRL Band Plan.
>>
>> I agree with your approach Pete, except for the AM band plan part.
>> The
>> ARRL doesn't even respect its own band plan on 40m and fires up its
>> bulletin service right smack on the AM calling frequency, so I
>> don't
>> hold out any hope that their way will be anything but more of the
>> same.





More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 20 Oct 2017.