There are many of these regulations that are really open to interpretation
by the reader. What exactly is good amateur practice? I know how I was
taught and as a broadcast engineer again the term "good engineering
practice" is rather vague and quite broad. Yet in that regard, my thoughts,
my actions and my direction was frequently questioned and challenged by
those more of my senior. While I often disgust at specifics, certain
things do need to be defined. For us pilots there is a clear and stated
minimum vision standard. The idea of "generally good vision" is quite
frightening.
We had a radio provided at Field Day last year that proved to be a problem.
When it was keyed, every radio a the site got noisy regardless of the band,
mode or frequency it was on. Yes, my spectrum analyzer confirmed that the
radio of question transmitted broadband noise in the order of -73 dBm
covering the range of 0.5 MHz to 30 MHz. Yet the radio met the
"certification" to be sold in the USA. This is basic pollution and add
enough of them on the air and we have lots of pollution. In other words, if
one auto is polluting the air in Los Angles at rush hour that is not an
issue. Yet if 300,000 are driving at rush hour and all of them are
polluting, that is a serious issue.
As to the operator issues, with radios being mis-adjusted and mis-used, this
is an education issue and not an enforcement issue. That simply says that
we have not done a good job of bringing new members into the ranks. And we
have not done a good job of guiding these new members to higher standards.
There is simply too much of the attitude of "it is my radio, I paid good
money for it, it's mine and I'll use it any way I wish". I view this is
much the way society thinks and acts today.
We as older, senior, experienced persons have not done a good job with our
students. If the teacher teaches then the students learn. If the students
don't learn then the teacher has not taught.
73
Bob, K4TAX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Gulseth" <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Cc: "Richards" <jrichards@k8jhr.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] RF Speech Processor "TX IMD"
Actually, there is already a government mandated "clean transmitter
standard."
It's called "Sec. 97.307" (as in FCC Part 97) and is titled "Emission
standards." Might an update of this section of Part 97 to address the
issues
raised in this discussion perhaps be in order?
Although, the "spirit" of 97.307 already addresses several of the items
you
mention: concerning "a limit on bandwidth," note, for example, that it
says
(a) No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than
necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted,
in
accordance with good amateur practice.
My reading of this section would seem to indicate a mandate for "clean,
narrow
banded signals with minimal splatter" is there already. While needless to
say
improper equipment design is responsible for some of the "garbage" on the
bands, many more of the poor on-air signals we hear are due to
misadjustment
by the operator and/or simple failure to follow "good amateur practice."
73, Al
On Sun June 16 2013 1:02:39 pm Richards wrote:
OK. You need a page about this on your web site, with one of your world
famous spread sheets (ala your tuner spec report) and that will be a
start. I forget how many Arlo Guthrie says makes a "movement" ... ;-)
In retrospect,... maybe Bob has a better idea than we first thought.
Although I favor laissez faire economics, and less gov-mt intrusion
overall, perhaps it would not exactly hurt if the FCC promulgated a
clean transmitter standard, something like the amplifier purity
standards ... you know... like the German (Reinheitsgebot) beer purity
law... that mandates transceivers must meet a minimum, but sufficiently
strict, standard for spectral purity and accuracy - like they do with
linear amplifiers - and maybe provide a limit on bandwidth (yep, that
should start a fist fight...) and mandate clean, narrow banded signals
with minimal splatter. (I am speaking generally here - I am not an
expert on this... sure got kicked on the processor issue...) :-)
So, perhaps, a new regulation on the matter might be helpful - it would
elicit a more prompt response from manufacturers than our market
pressure plan.
Again, while I don't favor gov-mt action, perhaps it couldn't hurt in
this case. Let me know when you get your new clean transmitter page on
the web site.
-------------------- K8JHR ------------------
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|