Phil,
I would guess that everyone here agrees that this is "bad for
business", but unless you all badger your section managers and get
your point of view escalated, it won't do much good here.
Would that it was as easy as asking the Section Manager to escalate
the matter within the ARRL. The ARRL Board of Directors appears to
have closed ranks behind the two rogue directors who are representing
the maritime and recreational boating interests over the broader good
of amateur radio. At this point the only likely solution is to make
the United States Federal Communications Commission (our regulators)
understand that permitting SSB bandwidth data in the spectrum they
have set aside for nearly 90 years as a refuge from interference by
wideband modes is very bad for the long term health and vitality of
the Amateur Service.
Most of us who are vocal about this are life long ARRL members and
supporters. However, we believe this is the wrong approach for the
wrong reasons and that the Board and Staff are not being honest in
the matter.
As I have said often, wideband (high symbol rate) data is essentially
indistinguishable from digital voice or digital image (digital SSTV)
- the only difference is the content of the bits sent to the modulator.
As such, data emissions greater than 500 Hz (high data rate emissions)
belong in the same spectrum as other wideband emissions. The ARRL
should have proposed a reasonable solution based on that principle
to replace the flawed "regulation by bandwidth" proposal that they
withdrew from consideration a few years ago.
A reasonable starting point would be to allow data on all amateur
frequencies (as is the case with CW) and restrict the bandwidth of
*all* emissions in the so called "CW bands" to 300 or 500 Hz. It
might take some tweaking of the rules on unattended data operation
to move the so called "automatic control subbands" to spectrum that
would allow all classes of license to access the unattended RMBS
stations - but that would be far less controversial that destroying
CW, RTTY, PSK31/63/125, JT65/JT9 and other narrow band data modes
with wideband emissions that can wipe out 14 (RTTY) to 100+ (TJ9)
signals at once.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 2014-06-11 2:15 PM, Phil Cooper wrote:
Hi all,
I am saddened to see so many respected RTTY ops deserting this reflector.
While I understand their frustration at the number of emails concerning the
ARRL/FCC debates, I have a perfectly adequate delete key which copes with
this.
Having said that, I think it would be a good idea - for now - to move it to
a new reflector, and leave this one for which it is really intended.
This new act may well have an impact on everyone, not just those in the USA,
so I do have a sneaking interest.
But, the nub of the thing is that putting your personal point of view to
everyone on this reflector seems to me to be a complete waste of time.
Would it not be far more productive if you were to send these opinions to
your section manager, and then make sure he understands your feelings?
I would guess that everyone here agrees that this is "bad for business", but
unless you all badger your section managers and get your point of view
escalated, it won't do much good here.
Just my own thoughts..........
73
Phil GU0SUP
---
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
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|