[RTTY] Fwd: RE: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations

[Paul Stoetzer]

But if they pay the control operator, they have to follow the rules of
47 C.F.R. § 97.113(a)(3)(iv). Since they MUST follow their published
schedule, implicitly 47 C.F.R. § 97.101(d) does not apply in that
circumstance.

If the Commission had intended it otherwise, they should have made
that clear. I suggest you either follow the FCC procedures for
obtaining a clarification of how the regulations are applied or file a
complaint. However, I am quite confident that the ARRL has a sound
legal basis for their operations of W1AW.

73,

Paul, N8HM

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:15 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:
> Willful or Malicious Interference Complaints
>
> Section 97.101(d) of the Commission's Rules prohibits amateur operators from
> willfully or maliciously interfering with or causing interference to any
> radio communication or signal. 47 C.F.R. § 97.101(d).
>
> They cannot ignore the other rules Paul.
>
> This rule was put in place so they could pay a control op.  It is a special
> interest rule that probably no longer serves a purpose today.  It does not
> say that rule 97.101(d) can be ignored.
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> On 6/5/2014 9:11 AM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>
> W1AW can operate as per it's published schedule and you can too If you
> can meet all the requirements.
>
> You must:
>
> 1. Be a club station that is paying the control operator for their services.
> 2. Make one way transmissions for telegraphy practice or informational
> bulletins.
> 3. Publish your schedule 30 days in advance (this would generally have
> to be a written publication under normal interpretations of "publish"
> in the CFR).
> 4. Transmit for at least 40 hours a week.
> 5. Schedule your operations on at least 6 MF or HF amateur bands at
> times meant to maximize coverage.
>
> In practicality, the ARRL is the only organization that can actually
> meet those requirements.
>
> 73,
>
> Paul, N8HM
>
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:02 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:
>
> FYI.  Read the entire chain.
>
> Apparently, the ARRL feels that it does not need to adhere to the all the
> rules that the rest of us do and they effectively own or have the exclusive
> right to their bulletin and practice frequencies.
>
> All you need to do is publish an operating schedule and you too can own
> whatever frequency you want?
>
> I am aghast at his response,  that it is ok for W1AW to maliciously
> interfere with another amateur using a frequency.
>
>
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:        RE: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations
> Date:   Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:12 +0000
> From:   Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ <dsumner at arrl.org>
> To:     'W0MU Mike Fatchett' <w0mu at w0mu.com>
>
>
>
> Mike, data modes with bandwidths of about 2.4 kHz have been in use on HF for
> at least 13 years. RTTY/data and phone/image have separate subbands.
> Changing that would be a major change. RM-11708 proposes a minor change to
> prevent the use of much wider data bandwidths and more efficient use of the
> bandwidth now in use. Why is that a bad thing?
>
> W1AW does not operate under automatic control. There is a control operator
> on duty at all times the station is in operation. Transmissions are made on
> published frequencies and at published times, and have been for decades. If
> you follow your logic to its natural conclusion then somebody could just
> shut down the bulletin and code practice function by squatting on those
> frequencies.
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett [mailto:w0mu at w0mu.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 10:42 AM
> To: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ
> Subject: Re: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations
>
> Dave,
>
> 113 a 3 iv talks about compensation for the control Ops.  That was not my
> question.
>
> My concern is with any station not just W1AW firing up on a specific
> frequency without checking to see if it is busy.  No where in the rule above
> does it say that all the other rules can be ignored.  Transmitting on a
> frequency without checking if it is busy is contrary to all the
> published operating guides by the ARRL and contrary to the FCC rules.
> Where in the rules does it give any station the authority to fire up on any
> frequency without checking?
>
> The rule says you may pay your control op if you have to have a schedule and
> it has to be published.  It does not mean that the schedule must be followed
> at all costs.  The FCC has stated many times that no net, organization or
> otherwise own or control any frequency unless they are using it.  When I
> stop using a frequency it if free to be used by the next person.  If I am
> using a frequency I should be able to continue to use that frequency until I
> am finished.
>
> Are you saying that there is a control operator on duty at all times when
> the bulletins are being sent?  I always thought it was an automated process.
> If there was a control op in charge at the time of this issue why did he/she
> allow the transmission on top of a frequency in use?
> This behavior would be in violation of the rules would it not?
>
> Any proposals could and should have moved the wideband transmissions into
> the wideband area ie SSB and SSTV.  The proposal could and should have set a
> much lower limit on signals in the cw portions to something much less than
> 2.8khz.
>
> Pactor 4 and winlink will take over our cw bands with transmissions much
> like the W1AW broadcasts.  No need to check if the frequencies are busy,
> just transmit, wipe out the cw or rtty that was there and do whatever it is
> they do.  These wide band data modes can easily deal with narrow band noise
> which was why the proposal moved them into the cw bands.  They cannot deal
> with wide band noise like SSB ans SSTV.
>
> If W1AW does not have to check if a frequency is in use then why should
> anyone else?  These so called automated systems either ignore frequencies in
> use or just don't care.  There are many complaints about many of the other
> modes just coming on and causing interference.
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> On 6/5/2014 6:50 AM, Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> The bulletin transmissions must conform to the published schedule in order
> to comply with 97.113(a)(3)(iv). 18 MHz is problematic because the band is
> narrow, but it provides excellent coverage.
>
> 2.8 kHz HF data signals are permitted now and have been in use for more
> than a decade. What RM-11708 would do is to limit the bandwidth to that
> rather than to continue the status quo, which allows much wider bandwidths.
>
> 73,
> Dave K1ZZ
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett [mailto:w0mu at w0mu.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 8:49 PM
> To: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ
> Subject: ARRL W1AW Bulletin Operations
>
> Dave,
>
> Apparently in the last few days it was reported that W1AW came up on
> 18.100 and started the Bulletin.  Unfortunately, one of the W1AW/X
> stations was on that frequency.
>
> I have been going over the rules and I would like to understand why
> W1AW does not check for a busy frequency prior to firing up.  Where in
> the FCC rules is this allowed.  I am sure that I would be subject to a
> pink slip if I decided to fire up on top of W1AW or face much peer
> retribution wouldn't I?
>
> Sadly if RM-11708 passes we will all be subject to 2.8khz signals
> firing up on top of people using a frequency just like W1AW does.
> Maybe you can explain the difference to me.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>