[RTTY] QRM to W1AW/0 (MO) RTTY

[Terry Gerdes]

The ARRL "Considerate Operators Guide"  <http://www.arrl.org/considerate-operator> says 

"Nothing in the rules recognizes a net's, group's or any individual's 
special privilege to any specific frequency. Section 97.101(b) of the 
Rules states that "Each station licensee and each control operator must 
cooperate in selecting transmitting channels and in making the most 
effective use of the amateur service frequencies. No frequency will be 
assigned for the exclusive use of any station." No one "owns" a 
frequency.  It's good practice--and plain old common sense--for any operator, 
regardless of mode, to check to see if the frequency is in use prior to 
engaging operation. If you are there first, other operators should make 
an effort to protect you from interference to the extent possible, given
 that 100% interference-free operation is an unrealistic expectation in 
today's congested bands."

Unfortunately when stations become channelized  (like ARRL bulletins and Winlink)  the attitude changes where its my frequency and everyone else is a intruder.    Now add in the additional fact that the transmissions are automated with no human operators, and they simply do not care who they QRM.

Terry   AB5K


> Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 22:35:15 -0600
> From: w0mu at w0mu.com
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] QRM to W1AW/0 (MO) RTTY
> 
> I see where one way bulletins are allowed.  I do not see anywhere in the 
> rules that allow the ARRL or anyone else to just fire up on top of an in 
> use frequency.  It one entity is allowed, doesn't that open the door to all.
> 
> Shouldn't the ARRL be the leader in this area.  Do as I say, not as I 
> do.......... is not very appropriate.
> 
> 
> Mike W0MU
> 
> On 6/2/2014 10:01 PM, Jay WS7I wrote:
> > No they are a broadcast service and have special rights.  Coded in 
> > Part 97 actually.  Nothing new to their schedule.  Nor is it manned 
> > its an automatic operation.
> >
> > On 6/2/2014 3:35 PM, David Tanks via RTTY wrote:
> >> This is amusing. The ARRL is touting RM 11708 as being helpful, while 
> >> at the same time QRMing an on-going operation on a frequency without 
> >> checking to see if it is busy! The ARRL does not have a right to a 
> >> frequency if it is occupied already. They are supposed to move to 
> >> prevent QRM, correct?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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