[AMRadio] bandplan thoughts


Peter Markavage manualman at juno.com
Fri Dec 14 21:48:36 EST 2007


Sorry Chuck but I'm not a spokesperson for the ARRL They have their own
people to do that when they feel it's appropriate. As a member, the ARRL
is my representative and spokesman in arenas where I have limited or no
access.

You said:  "I'm a simple ham who knows how to make a transmitter and
receiver work and who is not afraid to experiment to improve that
process.  I wish to continue in the mode/emission manner  that works well
for me and many other hams worldwide.  I don't think  the ARRL leadership
is even remotely aware of the operating pleasure/challenges that many of
us encounter daily on the active ham bands."

In my opinion, I don't see anyone stopping you from continuing to what
you like to do as part of your ham radio activities.

You said: The "real" (ed. "real" I'll assume this is your own personal
definition) ham who can build a transmitter and receiver is ignored.  CW
is archaic!  A.M. is simply  a  bunch of guys who reject change.  To me,
there is something inherently wrong with this." 

Lovers of homebrew, CW, AM, Digital, QRP, Packet, Contesting, traffic
nets, etc. are all "special interest" groups of ham radio operators. The
ARRL has said on a number of occasions that as long as there is interest
in these activities, the ARRL will continue to support them. The "etc"
probably includes dozens and dozens more. Trying to maintain an equitable
support for all them at the same time can be a monumental task even for
the ARRL.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 18:57:49 -0500 cemilton at aol.com writes:
> Well, Pete:
> 
> You're a great spokesperson for the ARRL, IMHO.
> 
> You make the case I speak of.................  The ARRL will, in 
> conjunction with their advertisers, promote a mode/band plan 
> schedule 
> that will alllow the manufacturers to profit nicely. (Insert 
> here.....more QST ad revenues)  They will allow enough time for 
> firmware/software adjustments to be made which will allow, in your 
> words, "regulation by bandwidth probably would be a boom for new 
> manufacturer production.  I would suspect manufacturers would fully 
> 
> support it down the road."  Your words are prophetic for the rice 
> box 
> merchants and fully in line with the suspected ARRL agenda.  
> Personally, I don't own stock in these rice box 
> companies............I'm not interested in their profits or 
> technological gains!   I'm a simple ham who knows how to make a 
> transmitter and receiver work and who is not afraid to experiment to 
> 
> improve that process.  I wish to continue in the mode/emission 
> manner 
> that works well for me and many other hams worldwide.  I don't think 
> 
> the ARRL leadership is even remotely aware of the operating 
> pleasure/challenges that many of us encounter daily on the active 
> ham 
> bands.
> 
> So, here's where we fall off the wagon.................. What about 
> all 
> the hams who are still experimenting, building and operating under 
> the 
> auspices of their current license permissions?  Who, in the ARRL or 
> 
> otherwise, feels it is their place to dictate just what and where 
> the 
> ordinary ham operates?  We, as hams, know this already!  We don't 
> need 
> to be told or advised of what we already know.
> 
> Sure, the ARRL and the rice-box (or similar) manufacturers MUST fall 
> in 
> line with whatever a spectrum plan includes.  Otherwise, they 
> couldn't 
> make money and sell rigs.  Why wouldn't they agree with the ARRL?  
> They 
> are interested in bottom line profits.............not in Amateur 
> Radio. 
>  To think otherwise is naive.
> 
> And the ARRL?  It's interested in contributions to it's 401-C3 IRS 
> CODE 
> status....................
> 
> Manufacturers can help them maintain this status if THEY can make 
> the 
> market support their products.  Simple economics here!  Or 
> politics!
> 
> Dumbing down everything from no-code testing to proficiency exams 
> that 
> are nothing more that memory exercises is but one simple way to 
> "enlarge" the ranks of membership.  However, I suspect this is a 
> failed 
> mission.............just an extension of the prior agendas the ARRL 
> has 
> supported. (remember incentive licensing?)
> 
> Have you noticed the ARRL is "strongly" promoting Emergency 
> Communications as the prime reason Amateur radio even exists?
> Simply because it has the attention of 9-11 and Katrina.  The "shack 
> on 
> a belt crowd" is highlighted.  The "real" ham who can build a 
> transmitter and receiver is ignored.  CW is archaic!  A.M. is simply 
> a 
> bunch of guys who reject change.  To me, there is something 
> inherently 
> wrong with this.  The first thing to die in an emergency is 
> bandwidth 
> provided by cable companies.  I live in Hurricane Alley in 
> Florida..............I know!
> 
> When will it end?   Who knows!   Maybe it won't............. But I 
> think it's important to quit kissing he ARRl's ass just because they 
> 
> exist.  I, for one, will make my views known to whomever in the ARRL 
> 
> structure is necessary  in an effort to stop the madness.
> 
> I don't object to the development of new technology.  In fact, I 
> like 
> it.  But I don't want it shoved down my throat.  And I sense there 
> are 
> many others out there who feel the same way.
> 
> But, in fairness, it's always YMMV.
> 
> Put the afterburners in full thrust.........................flame 
> suit 
> is intact.
> 
> Best 73 to all, es Merry Christmas  ( If this greeting is offensive, 
> 
> simply insert your preferred greeting from me.  I will not take away 
> 
> from it's meaning to you and my sincerity is the same)
> 
> 
> 
> W4MIL
> 
> Chuck


More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 23 Oct 2017.