Here's an example of the kind of opposition we may be up against, who
may file comments in opposition to the NPRM, since Lindgren Pittman Inc.
likely won't want to recall and re-program units they have already
sold. This makes it all the more imperative that the amateur community
come up with some good well thought out responses to the FCC. What I
wonder is why they didn't program the units sold in the US to operate in
1705-1800 in the first place, since that segment appears to be
completely vacant, rather than risk being overpowered by hams who might
not even hear them, in a shared band.
http://www.blueoceantackle.com/longline_reels_and_equipment.htm
But this is encouraging:
http://www.ominous-valve.com/hyperfix.html
Another comment has come in supporting hams in the NPRM. Notice that
this one is simple and to the point, no gobbledygook legalese. He should
have included his name and address instead of just a call sign, though.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022074440
I urge everyone to formulate comments and send them to the FCC, even if you
work CW DX and contests at the low end of the band only. If radiolocation
interests ever were to start placing beacons in the 1900-2000 segment again,
much of the displaced amateur phone activity would QSY below 1900, increasing
congestion and would put more pressure on the informal CW portion of the band,
exacerbating conflicts between wide and narrow band modes.
Don k4kyv
_______________________________________________
Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
|