[RTTY] ARRL Bandwidth Proposal - FCC Invites Comments

[Art Searle W2NRA]

The last draft I saw had the following language in:

ARRL >  30 m band: This proposes 200 and 500-Hz bandwidths but does not 
propose 3 kHz,
ARRL >  which would open the band to phone operation or other 
voice-bandwidth modes. It
ARRL >  is ARRL's view that voice-bandwidth emissions should not be 
permitted in this band
ARRL >  because of this relatively narrow secondary international allocation 
and the need to
ARRL >  avoid interference to the primary service in other countries.

Then Dave Sumner said in "Narrowing the Bandwidth Issues"

"A segment for 3-kHz bandwidth (no phone) of 10.135-10.150 MHz to 
accommodate existing and planned future digital operations."

I see in the final version the language has been weakened to:

ARRL >  30 m band:  This proposes 200 Hz, 500HZ and 3.5 kHz bandwidths. 
While
ARRL >  telephony is not encouraged in this band due to the relatively 
narrow, secondary
ARRL >  allocation status of the Amateur Service, this can best be regulated 
by voluntary
ARRL >  band planning.

The ARRL's stated position is against phone on 30 meters.  Who will have 
control over developing a band plan?

73 Art W2NRA

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Coleman" <aa4lr at arrl.net>
To: "Art Searle W2NRA" <w2nra at optonline.net>
Cc: <rtty at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL Bandwidth Proposal - FCC Invites Comments


>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 9:21 PM, Art Searle W2NRA wrote:
>
>>> From: Bill Coleman <aa4lr at arrl.net>
>>>>   4) the wideband allocation on 30 meters.
>>
>> The proposed wideband is "no phone".
>
> What part of the proposed regulation states this? I looked for it and
> couldn't find it.
>
> Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
> Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
>             -- Wilbur Wright, 1901
>
>