[AMRadio] FCC Proposal on BANDWIDTH

Peter Markavage manualman at juno.com
Wed Jan 9 21:40:50 EST 2008

It probably would be more enlightening to view the actual petition and
many of the comments up on the FCC electronic comment page. It's also
surprising that your Director said, "It is at the early stages where the
ARRL rarely would comment on it". This petition directly impacts the
position the ARRL took in their regulation by bandwidth proposal unless
the ARRL is really stepping back to reflect on its own position on
Although his petition might be considered somewhat skewed in proposing an
actual maximum bandwidth number for some of these digital type modes, the
petition does seek to solve some on going, and possibly some future,
problems. However, it's the views of some of the people posting comments
that should be more cause for concern.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 18:39:09 -0600 "Bob Peters" <rwpeters at swbell.net>
> I have had some e mails with the South Gulf Dir of the ARRL about 
> this
> AM e mail on the bandwidth proposal in front of the FCC. He was not
> aware but checked it out today and the following are his comments.
> "On the other question you had, it deals with RM11392 that was filed 
> by
> N5RFX.  It mostly deals with the RTTY portion of the band.  It is at 
> the
> early stages where the ARRL rarely would comment on it."
> That is from Coy Day N5OK. Lets all keep an eye on this N5RFX His 
> web
> site is at
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~mdmiller
> Looks like he is in Arlington, TX...
> The petition is at
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~mdmiller7/arrl_alt/MarkPetition.pdf
> His E mail adr is on QRZ... Does not look like he is trying to put 
> it to
> AM operation. But always good to keep an eye on these things
> Very Best 73's
> Bob W1PE
> The Voice of Mesquite
> www.w1pe.com

More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 16 Dec 2017.