[AMRadio] FW: IARU Band Plan

Jose HF Silva zehelmer at yahoo.com
Tue Nov 13 23:35:15 EST 2007


Si Señor !

*** MY HAT OFF ***

73 ^^^^

Joe / ct1axg

--- W6OM <w6om at cox.net> wrote:

> Letter below is from the ARRL President Joel
> Harrison W5ZN in response to my
> letter below his.  Almost amusing transparent
> rhetorical response to my
> letter and still acceptance to go live with a
> webinar to explain themselves,
> not the IARU.
> Enjoy the read, this is only the opening round of
> what plan to make a
> significant even until accept my offer. 
> All the Best
> Ron Weaver   W6OM
> www.qsl.net/w6om
> From: Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn at arrl.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 4:38 PM
> To: 'W6OM'
> Cc: n6aa at arrl.org
> Subject: RE: IARU Band Plan
> Ron,
> Thank you for letting me know of your concerns with
> regard to the band plan
> adopted recently by the member-societies of IARU
> Region 2. You sent your
> message to a number of individuals; because the ARRL
> is the representative
> organization in the IARU for radio amateurs of the
> United States, I am
> replying on their behalf.
> IARU regional band plans have been in existence for
> many years. They are
> developed, reviewed and approved at regional
> conferences of the IARU
> member-societies. The band plans provide voluntary
> guidelines that are
> intended to assist amateurs in making the most
> effective use of our limited
> frequency allocations. They are not restrictions and
> carry no regulatory
> authority. On behalf of the ARRL, I can assure you
> that there are no plans
> to propose incorporating any IARU band plan into the
> FCC rules. One virtue
> of voluntary band plans is that they are more
> flexible and can be amended
> more easily than the FCC rules; writing them into
> the rules would be
> counterproductive.
> The new IARU Region 2 band plan was developed by
> delegates to the Region 2
> Conference from a number of countries. It does not
> align in every respect
> either with the FCC rules or with operating patterns
> followed by US
> amateurs. Unlike the United States, most countries
> do not have regulations
> setting out subbands for different types of
> emission. Even in the US the FCC
> rules do not provide much detail with regard to
> frequency use. As FCC
> amateur licensees we are obliged to cooperate with
> one another in selecting
> transmitting channels and making the most effective
> use of amateur service
> frequencies, and to follow good engineering and good
> amateur practice.
> Your message objects to the Region 2 band plan for
> "suggesting limits that
> are more severe than regulations from the
> governments in the region."
> However, the band plan does not contain "limits." As
> voluntary guidelines
> the band plan cannot by definition be "more severe"
> than regulations. And
> finally, if the band plan did not suggest an
> operating pattern that is a
> subset of the regulations it would serve no purpose.
> Your message refers to IARU President Larry Price as
> wishing "to discourage
> footnotes among the various regional plans he
> oversees." First, the IARU
> President does not "oversee" regional band plans.
> Each regional plan is
> developed by the member-societies of that region, in
> accordance with the
> constitution, bylaws and rules of the regional
> organization. The regional
> organizations are autonomous entities and do not
> answer to the IARU
> President. Second, Mr. Price's observation with
> regard to footnotes had
> nothing whatsoever to do with IARU band plans.
> Footnotes are not by their
> nature either good or bad; it depends on what they
> say. Mr. Price's
> observation had to do specifically with footnotes in
> the ITU Table of
> Frequency Allocations that prohibit amateur
> operation, or authorize sharing
> by additional services, in certain countries in
> certain parts of the bands
> that are allocated in the ITU Table to the amateur
> service. One of the goals
> of the IARU is to minimize such footnotes. On the
> other hand, there are
> other footnotes to the ITU Table that are extremely
> beneficial to Amateur
> Radio, such as the ones permitting amateur-satellite
> operation. In any case
> this is totally unrelated to IARU band planning
> activities, which are
> internal to the amateur service and to each regional
> IARU organization and
> have nothing whatever to do with the ITU.
> I hope this has reassured you that nothing will
> happen on January 1 that
> will in any way affect your use of AM. We are always
> seeking ways to improve
> the process of revision of the IARU Region 2 band
> plan and the ARRL Board of
> Directors, who determine the policy for ARRL's input
> to IARU Region 2, are
> always open to member input on future revisions that
> ARRL delegates may take
> to future Region 2 Conferences. I encourage you to
> communicate with the
> Division Director in your ARRL Division.
> Sincere 73,
> Joel Harrison, W5ZN
> ARRL President
>   _____  
> From: W6OM [mailto:w6om at cox.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 12:44 PM
> To: iaru at iaru.org; leandror at bellsouth.net;
> w6rod at iaru.org; hp1dj at sinfo.net;
> 9y4ned at tstt.net.tt; ve2ka at iaru.org;
> co2rp at jovenclub.cu; gudiel at comtelsa.com;
> pt2adm at pobox.com; lu2ah at szama.com; LPrice at iaru.org;
> tellam at iaru.org;
> rleandro at cantv.net; dsumner at arrl.org
> Cc: w5zn at arrl.org; n3kn at arrl.org; k5ur at arrl.org;
> w6rod at arrl.org;
> k1zz at arrl.org; w4ri at arrl.org; k1ce at arrl.net
> Subject: IARU Band Plan
> As a professional CEO with twenty years experience
> and two publicly traded
> companies that I started from scratch  I am appalled
> at the continued
> subterfuge and lack of professional ethics at the
> highest levels of the
> ARRL.  The ARRL's most recent initiative to limit
> bandwidth by mode in
> specific segments of the spectrum by posturing with
> the IARU to make it look
> like an IARU initiative is an insult to  everyone in
> the amateur community.
> If those of us who lead public firms with thousands
> of share holders around
> the world conducted our business activities in the
> manner the ARRL does, our
> shareholders would remove us from office and an SEC
> investigation would
> follow.
> ARRL senior management has been and  continues to be
> immersed in secret
> agenda politics regardless of what the membership
> wants. The sooner the
> membership votes to remove the officers and
> directors and elects
> professionals to lead the organization the better
> off Amateur Radio will be.
> The ARRL's bandwidth initiative came under scrutiny
> domestically and was
> withdrawn with the usual condescending rhetoric that
> we the membership did
> not understand it.  It is the ARRL's responsibility
> to write initiatives
> clearly so everyone can understand them.
> After reading through the ARRL's financial reports I
> see where the revenue
> streams come from and why the ARRL fundamentally
> does not care about
> "Leading" a professional organization which
> represents the membership. The
> ARRL is in business to sell advertising and to
> promulgate any initiative
> which increases advertising revenue regardless of
> how it affects the
> membership.
> ARRL Senior management pays lip service to various
> groups,  but due to the
> ARRL's ineptitude it is incapable of mounting any
> sustained effort to
> achieve anything substantive. The ARRL stone walls
> letters like this using
> "framing techniques" to construct answers which
> devalue the original content
> and ad credibility to the ARRL's distorted view of
> Amateur radio.  I too
> have been well schooled in the art of public
> speaking, debate and press
> corps techniques for deflecting truth and creating
> subterfuge so I see
> through the ARRL's methods.  I invite the CEO and
> officers of the ARRL to a
> live World Wide Webinar wherein you must answer the
> memberships questions
> clearly while everyone watches.  
> I will have my engineers set it up,  IT WILL COST
> YOU NOTHING, all you have
> to do is log in with a web cam and accept my
> questions and countless others
> who deserve clear unbiased explanations.  I suggest
> a quarterly webinar
> wherein the membership participates and requires
> ARRL to provide credible
> clear explanations on all initiatives.
> This is a communications activity and ARRL
> management must be open and
> willing to come under scrutiny and explain its
> position for all to
> understand. 
> Many have sat silently for too long saying the ARRL
> is the only
> representative body we have in Amateur radio, but
> the body has long been
> dead. It is time to revitalize Amateur Radio with
> aggressive unrelenting
> professional leadership. 
> Forward this to your legal counsel so we can all be
> clear about what is
> about to take place.  I fully intend to ask the
> world ham Community through
> my own opt- in mass mailing PR firm why the ARRL
> will not go live and
> explain its actions to the membership. 
> Ron Weaver   W6OM
> www.qsl.net/w6om
> Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
> AMRadio mailing list
> List Rules (must read!):
> http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
> List Home:
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> To unsubscribe, send an email to
> amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
> the word unsubscribe in the message body.

Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. 
Make Yahoo! your homepage.

More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 23 Jan 2018.