[RTTY] BoD votes LoTW initiatives

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> It is legal today for a signal with multiple carriers, each with
> multiple-bit-per-symbol modulation, to be considerably wider than 2.8
> kHz.

Dave is full of it ... such a modulation would constitute a narrow band
spread spectrum signal (e.g. ROS) which would be illegal under the 
rules.  This is nothing more than an another attempt to (1) find a way
to make PACTOR III legal in the US and (2) find a place for digital
voice operation where it does not face competition from analog voice.

If ARRL succeeds in ramming this garbage past the FCC, it will spell
the end for CW and most traditional person to person digital modes.
It will be a bigger fiasco than *Incentive Licensing* and will likely
result in losses to amateur allocations similar to those in response
to the UPS "grab" for spectrum at 200 MHz for their ill-fated "narrow
band voice modulation" boondoggle.  Note UPS never built their system
but amateur radio in the US permanently lost access to 2 MHz between
220 and 222 MHz.

Allow 2.8 KHz digital data and commercial interests will be all over
wanting the suddenly valuable lower 100 KHz of EVERY amateur HF band.

The ARRL Board of Directors can't seem to learn from history ... and
as they say, those who refuse to learn from history and condemned to
repeat it.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 7/24/2013 3:58 PM, Ben Antanaitis - WB2RHM wrote:
> All,
>
> FYI----  Here is the response I received today, 7/24/2013 from K1ZZ, the
> CEO of the ARRL Re my strong objection to the ARRL 2.8KHz bandwidth
> proposal for digital modes in all the HF bands.........
>
> Here is the ARRL (but, we are working for your best interests)
> position...........
>
> 73,
> Ben - WB2RHM, WB2RHM/4, WB2RHM/2
> ARRL Life Member
> ARRL 50 yr Member
> Active RTTY Contester
>
> **************************************************************************************
>
> Ben, I will forward your comments to your Director, Dennis Bodson, W4PWF.
>
> However, you should welcome a limit being placed on the bandwidth of HF
> digital data signals. At the present time there is no bandwidth limit
> whatsoever on digital data signals as long as the 300 baud limit is
> observed. It is legal today for a signal with multiple carriers, each
> with multiple-bit-per-symbol modulation, to be considerably wider than
> 2.8 kHz. The 2.8 kHz value accommodates digital emissions now in common
> use while putting a cap on the bandwidth that a station could occupy in
> the future.
>
> 73,
> David Sumner, K1ZZ
> Chief Executive Officer, ARRL
> **************************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>