Pat,
This is one of the reasons for the proposed rule change. To start
screwing around with limits for "three weekends a year" would be
an invitation to gut the rule. 157 KHz out of 200 KHz is plenty
for SSB ... and I haven't seen a SSB contest that comes close to
filling 160 all the way to 2.000 MHz in over 25 years.
Keeping the US phone alligators out of 1800 to 1843 will benefit
everybody, particularly those west of the K3LR by giving the
weaker DX stations a place to be heard operating split during the
contests.
73,
... Joe, K4IK (ex-AD8I, W8IK)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: topband-admin@contesting.com
> [mailto:topband-admin@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Pat Collins N8VW
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 2:44 PM
> To: topband@contesting.com; cq-contest@contesting.com;
> mrrc@contesting.com; 160m@qth.net; ncc@contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: Re: rm-10352
>
>
> Jeff, Bill & others,
>
> In an effort to be far. Please support the attached amendment to
> rm-10352.
> RM-10352 data backs up the facts that SSB usage of 160 is increasing and
> during SSB contests the FCC will have additional complaints to process due
> to split frequency operations of DX stations.
>
> EU seems to do a fine job with 40 meters in the SSB vs CW during
> contests.
> Why can't we do the same with 160.
>
> Pat N8VW
>
>
>
> January 23, 2002
>
> Patrick L Collins
> 114 E Schreyer PL
> Columbus OH 43214
>
> Counterproposal to RM-10352
>
>
>
> In RM-10352 Jeff Briggs proposes to make a narrow mode and wideband mode
> split of the Amateur 160 meter band. This split would occur at 1.843 MHz
> and follow the standard FCC regulations for band segmentation.
>
> I would like to amend the proposal to grandfather in existing
> wideband usage
> of below 1.843 MHz for 3 weekends of the year where existing sponsored
> operating
> events would be impacted. These weekends would be the weekends
> of the CQ WW
> SSB
> contest, the ARRL DX SSB contest and the CQ WW SSB 160 contest.
>
> These contests are well established uses of the band and like the
> exemptions on
> 40 meters for use of SSB below 7.1 MHz for US Amateur stations operating
> outside
> the contiguous 48 states this would not negatively impact the 160
> meter band.
>
> The following facts back up my proposal.
>
> (1) These weekends greatly increase the number of SSB users of the band.
> (2) These weekends would allow US stations to contact on SSB Amateurs in
> other parts of the world whose allocations are below 1.843 MHz.
> (3) This would prevent the additional problems related to US Amateur
> stations trying to contact stations in other parts of the world would
> now be required to operate using split frequency techniques. Use of
> split frequency on 40 meters has caused numerous complaints
> to the FCC.
> (4) This would not impact narrow mode usage of 160 meters during the rest
> of the year. SSB would only be allowed during these contest
> periods.
> This in only 1.5% of the calendar year.
> (5) RM-10352 shows that SSB usage of 160 meters during SSB contests is
> increasing at a similar rate to CW usage.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Patrick L Collins N8VW
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|