[RTTY] Rebuttal comments filed to objections to RM-11708

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Boy is that guy a fool ... efficiency is not how fast one can send
data but how much total data can be sent in a given bandwidth in a
given amount of time.  If one 2.8 KHz CRAPTOR signal can move 2000
character per unit time and one can put 75 PSK31 signals each of which
moves 50 characters per unit of time in the same 2.8 KHz, the PSK31
system is nearly 250% *more efficient* than the CRAPTOR system.

However this issue isn't about symbol rates *or* efficiency.  If ARRL
can *prove* through a preponderance of *objective data* that the
*individual licensees* need to use 2.8 KHz bandwidth for data at HF
in order to fulfill *the basis and purpose* of the amateur service
*and* that the basis and purpose *can not* be fulfilled without 2.8 KHz
bandwidth data (as opposed to enabling a quasi-commercial messaging
service in the amateur spectrum), let ARRL present that proof and
propose that RTTY and data up to 2.8 KHz bandwidth be permitted in the
spectrum in which other 2.8 KHz bandwidth modes are *already*
permitted.

ARRL's goal of eliminating an outdated "symbol rate limitation" is
worthy of consideration but their prescribed "cure" - by eliminating
the separation of narrow and wide bandwidth mods - is worse than the
disease itself.  The proper response to this proposal is to eliminate
the symbol rate and substitute a 500 Hz bandwidth limitation as is
*already in place* with respect to digital image (facsimile) modes
and is de facto observed by 99% of all amateur activity in the bands
that would be impacted.

It makes absolutely no logical, technical or regulatory sense, to
overthrow 80 years of historical precedent and effective, proven,
accepted regulatory practice by eliminating the protection afforded
to narrow bandwidth modes of all kinds - from CW to narrow bandwidth
RTTY, FAX and data - against interference from wide band width modes
of any type.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 1/3/2014 3:22 PM, Ron Kolarik wrote:
> Actually that's the 5th submission of almost the same thing.
> There's a couple in there where he takes shots at specific
> individuals then cleans it up, must think it's an eHam forum
> and he's trolling for suckers to take the bait.
> Some of his points make no sense and a few are self-contradictory.
> A bit of searching turns up the fact that he's part of the HFLink
> group that have been strangely quiet on the PRM, could be because
> the founder of that group got busted a few RM's back stuffing
> the comments. Some of his comments may be a personal vendetta
> by the number of times a certain call is singled out....don't know for
> sure.
>
> I'm still not getting all the posts from contesting.com so may be behind
> the curve on this.
>
> Ron
> K0IDT
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Hoge" <knowkode at verizon.net>
> To: "Ben Antanaitis - WB2RHM" <wb2rhm at wb2rhm.com>; "RTTY"
> <rtty at contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 1:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Rebuttal comments filed to objections to RM-11708
>
>
>> Just did a quick search..... NT0A is his callsign.
>>
>>
>> Jim W5QM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, January 3, 2014 12:48 PM, Ben Antanaitis - WB2RHM
>> <wb2rhm at wb2rhm.com> wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>> If you haven't revisited the FCC lately, they continue to accept and
>> publish comments on the ARRL jihad RM-11708 against narrow bandwidth
>> signals........
>>
>> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/proceeding/view;jsessionid=vWQHSHGLScXSWQn3bMTs7cXGgQGCFgG12Hz2VC0PlrF6w92nyS2K!-1864380355!1357496456?name=RM-11708
>>
>>
>> The latest posting batch is interesting.... there are 4 comments
>> (they seem to state identical reasoning phrased in 4 different ways)
>> from the same individual (maybe representing some group, I don't
>> know) where many of us are mentioned by name and callsign and we are
>> ridiculed for our ignorance.
>>
>> 73, HNY,
>>
>> Ben - WB2RHM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
> protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>