Actually I would like to see this silliness from ARRL stop once and for all.
The petition was introduced by one director, approved by a committee
of 5, of which the director was one, with no input from the outside. I don't
know if you were around for episode 1 of this but this may help understand
why everyone is upset. http://www.zerobeat.net/bandplan-dissent.html
Same tune different year. There are good recommendations in the article
that would be worth persuing.
I wouldn't be too sure the petition is a slam dunk for ARRL.
Ron
K0IDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Adams" <mda@n1en.org>
To: "rtty-contesting.com" <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL board of Directors meeting this week
I've kept my mouth shut because I'm a fairly new subscriber to the list, and my own views on the subject probably wouldn't be
particularly popular here....but I've never been that successful at self-censorship. So, here's my $0.02 worth.
Something that you might want to consider, even though it's late in the game.... if the League were on the level about wanting to
remove the symbol rate limitation (without giving license to spectrum-consuming attempts at HF broadband) while otherwise
maintaining the status quo, perhaps they would be agreeable to a tweak to the proposal:
In my comments to the FCC, I suggested that it would be less disruptive to authorize 2.8kHz ONLY for the automated subbands and
above. Below the Pactor playgrounds, it would be reasonable and somewhat in keeping with current practices to set the bandwidth
limit at 500Hz.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|