[AMRadio] arrl band change proposal


Rob Atkinson ranchorobbo at gmail.com
Fri Aug 28 13:15:13 EDT 2015


1.  ARRL can't do anything except propose stuff to FCC.  Only FCC can
really do something.  Wait and file comments with FCC.

The outrageous thing in my opinion is the lumping of "phone/image" in
with any analog voice sub-band in the U.S.  Any digital, any at all
that is other than traditional analog or FSK machine code (i.e. analog
SSTV, and RTTY) should be segregated from analog voice.  I'd support
the change involving 3650 band-edge if the digital LIDS who use
slopbucket rigs to QRM AM had to move to below 3650, but if ARRL
insists on conflating "phone" with digital pictures transmitted with
slopbucket rigs to "phone/image," then I'm out.   Digital and analog
anything should be segregated,

By the way, since digital stations don't have to furnish any kind of
analog ID, I have no way of determining if the noise I hear is a ham,
an intruder, or a leaky cable TV line.  Therefore, I elect to ignore
the noise and carry on with my operations.

2.  A lot of contester CW ops are incapable of genuinely operating CW,
i.e. sitting and having a ragchew QSO copying CW in their heads.  The
old timers can do it but many of these new contest operators can only
manage a few bits and pieces of CW, and a lot of them now have
computers for sending and receiving.  Work them with a bug, even in a
contest and they can't handle it.

73

Rob
K5UJ

On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Bernie  Doran
<qedconsultants at embarqmail.com> wrote:
> I am puzzled by the arrl wanting to change the lower end of 80 meters yet
> again, taking away 50 kc of phone. I see arguments that CW nets had to move
> below 3,600, why? They could operate anywhere!
>
> Wed. a bit before 10 AM EDT I turned on the rx to 40 meters and was
> surprised to hear  dozens of high speed CW stations then realized they were
> calling cq test. Another contest, then at 10 AM the entire CW portion went
> dead, only hiss and crackle. Nothing to be found any where.   Seems like
> some only operate contests.
>
> Also concerned that the arrl will propose a band width limit to conserve
> space.  What are we saving it for?  Most of the day there is little or no
> activity.    Bernie W8RPW


More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 22 Nov 2017.