[AMRadio] trouble Brewing in AM Window


kc9cdt at aol.com kc9cdt at aol.com
Wed Dec 11 22:18:24 EST 2013


The real issue is the Dxxm FCC!
It used to be if you pulled that crap, for a while, you would get a pick slip, and later loose your license if it continued.
Now they are just like all aspect of out current government. Suits that only care about money.

My comment on the code was a short version of what I really meant.
It used to be a challenge to get a license, most of the types that we are dealing with just stayed with CB as they were too lazy to put in the work, which fits their personality.

The comment about code in no way was meant to be a slap on anyone that currently got a license in the no code world.
But relaxing the requirements on the tests including no code allowed SOME to get a license that would not have one today otherwise.

But, in all honesty I also have found QSO's on 75 where no one used call signs for a very long time. Embarrassed to admit who there were I guess.

What we really need is FCC to step back to the plate.

73,
Lee


Lee Simmonds
Summit DCS LLC
 
260-799-4077 Office
260-403-6936 Cell



-----Original Message-----
From: Donald Chester <k4kyv at charter.net>
To: amradio <amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wed, Dec 11, 2013 8:14 pm
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] trouble Brewing in AM Window




> From: W5AMI <ars.w5ami at gmail.com>

> Much of that (14313) has to do the the "Language issue/1st amendment", 
> and
> a Canadian issue.  I know that has been frustrating for a lot of 
> folks, as
> well as me, but I can tell you the FCC has recently "gotten" to a lot 
> of
> the USA ops on that freq.  Unfortunately foul language is a very gray 
> area
> in the courts now.

One thing we must remember is that no-one has claim to any specific 
frequency, so the slopbucketeers have just as much right to a frequency 
as we do. Just because they have moved closer to the usual AM operating 
frequency, obviously just to antagonise the AMers, doesn't mean they 
don't have a right to operate there. Contacting the FCC on that issue 
would probably result only  in more scrutiny on our own operation.

Deliberate interference is another matter. The slow-scan TV signal 
dropped on top of an ongoing AM QSO is just that. Unfortunately, the 
rule that once required modes like SSTV and RTTY to ID in voice or morse 
code has apparently been dropped, so unless we have the proper decoding 
equipment, we have no way to tell who is transmitting one of those 
modes, even if they  legally ID in the mode they are transmitting.

Last night I was monitoring in the vicinity of 3885, and the SSTV jammer 
dropped a signal on top of the ongoing SSB QSO on 3890. This may have 
been only a smokescreen to throw any AMers off who might be listening, 
or else the miscreant might be getting his jollies out of interfering 
with anyone, regardless of mode or whatever group one associates with. 
This afternoon, I was listening to a QSO between a couple of AMers in 
the northeast on 3885 with no interference or adjacent channel QSO. 
After they signed off, the frequency was perfectly clear. I listened for 
a while, and no-one else appeared on the frequency. I tuned up and made 
a brief test, and almost immediately, the SSTV signal appeared, centred 
on about 3888 kc/s. I ignored it and called CQ, and Roy, KB5MD 
responded. We started our QSO, and then the SSTV moved to the opposite 
side of us, to about 3882. With the synchronous detector and selectivity 
in the 75A4, I was able to read Roy 100% and completely null out the 
interference. Then a couple of other stations, one in AL and the other 
in TX called in, and I had no problem receiving, although the SSTV was 
still there; pretty obvious that the interference was intentional.

My suggestion, to paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt: "Strap softly and turn up 
the wick".


Don k4kyv
______________________________________________________________
Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
AMRadio mailing list
Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/
List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
Post: 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.

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

 


More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 19 Nov 2017.