[AMRadio] bandplan thoughts

Peter Markavage manualman at juno.com
Sat Dec 15 22:08:59 EST 2007

You said: "Explain to me why CW is no longer a requirement for a Ham
Radio license"

This question really should be addressed to the FCC since they were the
ones that passed the ruling to remove CW requirement from the testing.
ARRL fought to have the CW requirement test retained for at least the
Extra Class, and the FCC rejected it. I see no indication from present
ARRL actions and W1AW activities that CW is a mode out of the "support"
category. Their CEO is a very active CW enthusiast on the HF bands along
with several other of their management people.

How "regulation by bandwidth" plays out over the next several years, if
at all, remains to be seen but I doubt you'll see any FCC proposal to
limit traditional AM to 3 KHz. Of course, some enterprising hams might
develop a "black box" item that goes between the mike and the rig to
compress and digitize the audio, send it over a 3 KHz carrier, and at the
receiving end, the receiver has some sort of digitized uncompress
detector to reconvert it back to "full-body" AM audio. I bet the SSB
crowd would love to hear carriers with digital signals riding over them.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 07:04:14 -0600 Geoff/W5OMR <ars.w5omr at gmail.com>
> Are you saying that the ARRL, while saying they'll support the 
> 'special 
> interest groups' as long as their used?
> Explain to me why CW is no longer a requirement for a Ham Radio 
> license.  CW is -still- being used on the ham bands.  Removing CW 
> from a 
> Ham Test doesn't sound, to me, like it's a mode that the ARRL 
> supports. 
> What's next? 3kC AM?
> And, really... what's all this hoopla about, anyway?  Haven't we 
> already 
> discussed (to death) the lack of enforcement on existing rules and 
> regs?  So, someone is running 2.5kW on positive peaks on his AM rig. 
>  As 
> long as the rig is as spectrally clean as possible, and the station 
> is 
> run with good 'common sense', no one is ever going to say a word 
> about it. 
> There's been -so- much discussion about how to properly measure PEP, 
> and 
> there are those 'hams' out there that SWEAR their 
> (_insert_mfgr_here_) 
> SWR/peak-reading/ohm/volt/amp/watt meter is the absolute -best- but 
> the 
> bottom line is, if there is still so much controversy about HOW to 
> measure PEP, who's going to set the standard as far as figuring how 
> -wide- an AM signal is?  More importantly, 'who cares'?  6kc of AM 
> for 
> hams is the 'standard'.  Sure, you can generate a 15kc wide signal, 
> but 
> if the remote receiver is only set to 3, or 4.5kc to remove adjacent 
> channel interference, who's gonna hear it?
> -- 
> Driving your AM Rig without a scope, 
> is like driving your car at night, without headlights. (K4KYV)
> --
> 73 = Best Regards,
> -Geoff/W5OMR/5 New Orleans

More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 16 Dec 2017.