[AMRadio] Trouble Brewing in AM Window

Steven Harrison n5yrj at sbcglobal.net
Fri Dec 13 12:23:43 EST 2013

Agree with 100%.....

73 de N5YRJ

Long live AM....

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 9:05 AM PST W5AMI wrote:

>Bottom line here is; we have been given more room for phone operation, and
>this should be getting better instead of worse.  To heck with the so called
>AM Window.  We should spread out and operate where we want.  I do however
>suggest we be careful and listen above and below within your transmitted
>bandwidth and not start up knowing you will interfere with another QSO.
>AM has as much right be to on the "Phone" portion as any other voice mode.
>Just do your thing and ignore the nuts.
>Brian / w5ami
>On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Donald Chester <k4kyv at charter.net> wrote:
>> I started this  thread hoping to instigate a few more "tall ships" to
>> operate in the vicinity of 3885 during the evening hours.  One of the
>> reasons the miscreants on 3892 have moved down to 3890 was because of a
>> dearth of AM  activity there lately. Whenever I have checked the "window"
>> in
>> recent weeks, most of the activity seems to have gravitated towards 3875...
>> USE IT OR LOSE IT! Remember, the SSB ops have just as much right to be
>> there
>> as we do.
>> For many years, we have thought nothing of operating AM with other AM
>> signals only 5 kc/s away, often with simultaneous AM QSOs for hours at a
>> time on 3875, 3880 and 3885. If we can routinely tolerate the monkey
>> chatter
>> from other AM signals only 5 kc/s away, certainly we can tolerate the
>> monkey
>> chatter from a SSB signal that same distance away from our frequency. If
>> the SSB ops choose to operate that close to an ongoing AM QSO the QRM is
>> mutual; they have to suffer from our monkey chatter just as much as we
>> suffer from theirs, while they still have the option of enjoying a more
>> QRM-free channel on their original 3892 hangout.  Operating a little too
>> close for comfort to another QSO in the ham bands is not an FCC matter,
>> since  no rules were broken. Amateur radio by its  very nature operates on
>> an interference-expected basis.
>> The deliberate jamming with SSTV and other garbage is a separate issue, but
>> like monkey-chatter from stations 5 kc/s away, this is nothing new. If we
>> STRAP AND IGNORE, the culprits will eventually go away in frustration. I
>> doubt that FCC agents are going to take a lot of time doing detective work
>> to trace down the origin of unidentified signals that are causing
>> interference to a group of radio  hobbyists. Just keep your ears open in
>> case the culprits slip up and leave a clue to their identity. Once some
>> reasonable evidence of the source is discovered,  that would be the  time
>> to
>> contact the FCC.
>> Instead of wringing our hands over the "invasion" of the mythical "AM
>> window", we need to simply make it a point to operate more AM in the
>> vicinity of 3885, while avoiding any over-the-air mention of the situation
>> but making sure we observe good operating practice at all  times.
>> As Rob said, we now need to focus our attention on the Baud Rate petition.
>> We have only about a week left to file comments before the deadline. Last
>> night I skimmed over some of the 400-odd comments  submitted so far, and
>> see
>> many submissions pro- and  con. One comment grabbed my attention in
>> particular; the writer suggested that AM phone be limited to a maximum
>> bandwidth of 8 kc/s. Many of those on both sides of the Baud-rate issue are
>> suggesting that a "better"  solution to the problem might be to revive the
>> regulation by bandwidth proposal, instead of further revamping  the present
>> system of regulation by mode-of-emission. I think many will agree  with me
>> that we should be extremely leery of any move towards  specific bandwidth
>> limits to signals of any kind on our HF bands.
>> Don k4kyv
>> ---
>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
>> protection is active.
>> http://www.avast.com
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>"Who feeds a hungry animal feeds his own soul" - Charles Chaplin
>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 21 Feb 2018.