Al,
Thank you for that link! I now understand the dangers.
--
Thanks and 73's,
For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
www.nk7z.net
for MixW support see;
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info
for Dopplergram information see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info
for MM-SSTV see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info
On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 21:32 -0500, Al Kozakiewicz wrote:
> A Google search returns lots of discussions of this proposal going back more
> than a decade.
>
> Some of the arguments against contain the same spittle flecked invective
> hurled against the ARRL on a daily basis in the general class portion of the
> 80M phone band (a.k.a. "CB") because it's from the ARRL and contains the
> letters "A", "R" and "L"; and the second shooter/9-11 inside job conspiracy
> fans that believe the HF bands would be overrun by millions of yacht owning
> hams checking their email.
>
> I'm all for dropping symbol rate restrictions. But allowing 2.8 kHz
> bandwidth signals anywhere RTTY is allowed would be detrimental during
> contest weekends, when you can find RTTY operators well into the .100+
> segments of the bands that are forbidden to SSB in the US but nowhere else in
> the world (a tangent I won't belabor here). How many RTTY signals can
> coexist cheek to jowl in any 10 kHz segment of spectrum? How many 2.8 kHz
> wide modes?
>
> W8JI has a good explanation of the practical problems of intermixing wide and
> narrow bandwidth modes at http://w8ji.com/mixing_wide_and_narrow_modes.htm
>
> I'm not saying don't do it at all, but if you're going to allow 2.8 kHz wide
> digital modes, you have to restrict them to sub-segments, and not the entire
> digital segment.
>
> Al
> AB2ZY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Cole
> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:49 PM
> To: rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL attack on current RTTY users
>
> Hi,
>
> That would help me as well, I do not see how this harms RTTY, and if it does,
> I would like better understand.
> --
> Thanks and 73's,
> For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
> www.nk7z.net
> for MixW support see;
> http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info
> for Dopplergram information see:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info
> for MM-SSTV see:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 16:18 -0800, Bill Turner wrote:
> > Ben, could you post a brief summary of the proposed action including the
> > pros and cons?
> >
> > This is just the kind of thing that should be debated here.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > 73, Bill W6WRT
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTTY mailing list
> > RTTY@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|