[RTTY] [DFWcontest] Please forward this far and wide, its important if you care about CW and RTTY

Fri May 2 10:30:51 EDT 2014

Dan,
You are missing the point. Most of us are not against raising the 300 baud
limit, WHAT we are against is adding 2.8K signals in the Digital and CW
potions of the bands. Keep wide band signals in the SSB portion. The other
thing we are against is Winmore and Pactor being used by non-hams in the
ham bands

Dave N3BUO

Thank You!
Dave Greig N3BUO
*801 Tactical*
Phone: (682) 422-6667
http://www.801tactical.com
 Google Plus: gplus.to/801Tactical
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/801Tactical
Twitter: @801tactical

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Dan Bates <n5tm at katytx.net> wrote:

>
>
> I’m sorry, but I have disagree with these arguments.  Only the US is stuck
> with this archaic baud rate rule.
>
>
>
> The other thing I must laugh about is cw advocates embracing the RTTY
> community.  RTTY is every bit as wide and annoying to a cw station as any
> proposed 2.8KHz digital signal.  The reason RTTY falls under the 300 baud
> limit is that it is so inefficient in use of bandwidth.
>
>
>
> Amateur radio has always been on the forefront of technology and a leader
> in exploring new techniques and propagation modes.  To try and limit the HF
> bands 300 baud is similar to trying to maintain spark gap.
>
>
>
> The new proposed rule will allow us to experiment with some exciting new
> modulation modes and keep amateur radio a leader in the progression of
> radio communications.
>
>
>
> Oh, by the way, I’m a CW Ops member and run a CW class every week.
>
>
>
> Dan n5tm
>
>
>
> *From:* Terry [mailto:ab5k at hotmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, May 02, 2014 7:31 AM
> *To:* ctdxcc at kkn.net; DFWcontest at yahoogroups.com; rtty at contesting.com
> *Cc:* 'Ted Rappaport'; 'Dan White'; 'Joe Subich, W4TV'; 'Hal Kennedy'
> *Subject:* [DFWcontest] Please forward this far and wide, its important
> if you care about CW and RTTY
>
>
>
>
>
> CTDXCC, RTTY reflector and DFW Contesters,
>
> Many of us know Ted, N9NB, and his contributions to amateur and the
> engineering world. For those who may now know Ted, here is a link to a
> page on the ARRL site where you can get a feel for Ted's credentials.
> Here is a quote off the ARRL site: "Ted Rappaport is one of the most
> renowned professors in communications engineering and is widely known from
> his textbooks, research centers and products,".
> <
> http://www.arrl.org/news/ted-rappaport-n9nb-named-recipient-of-ieee-educati
> on-award<http://www.arrl.org/news/ted-rappaport-n9nb-named-recipient-of-ieee-educati%0bon-award>
> >
>
> Ted is right on target and RM-11708 needs to be STOPPED! The ARRL is WRONG
> and ramming this thru the FCC without any input from low bandwidth CW and
> Data users. If you have not filled a FCC comment please do so. There is
> still a short time left.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Terry AB5K
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CTDXCC [mailto:ctdxcc-bounces at kkn.net <ctdxcc-bounces at kkn.net>] On
> Behalf Of Ted Rappaport
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 9:30 PM
> To: CTDXCC
> Subject: Re: [CTDXCC] CTDXCC Digest, Vol 136, Issue
>
> Please forward this far and wide, its important if you care about CW.
>
> I hope all who care about the future of CW and RTTY will file thoughtful,
> rationale comments AGAINST RM 11708. We desperately need more AGAINST
> comments to overturn this dreadful proposed rulemaking!
>
> It takes only a couple of minutes, and here are clear instructions how to
> do
> it:
>
> http://64.128.19.154/RM11708.pdf
>
> In making this flawed rule making, the ARRL is essentially declaring war on
> all CW and RTTY users of the HF bands, and it is as if they filed a law
> suit
> against incumbent hams in that spectrum at the FCC.
>
> This is a pure and simple spectrum grab at the expense of CW and RTTY hams.
>
> First, the ARRL did not seek broad approval, this is a back room dealing
> and
> a rule making that attepts to strip a decades-old protection on
> human-to-human protection of CW and RTTY/PSK31 users. 300 baud is ESSENTIAL
> to keeping a bandwidth containment on all low band users. The RM 11708
> attempts to STRIP this vital protection, and make the baud rate UNLIMITED.
> Then, they proposed to widen the bandwidth for any data signal to 2.8 kHz,
> wider than today's SSB Signals! Today's CW and RTTY signals are no more
> than
> a few hundred HZ wide......now the ARRL wants to fill the lower HF bands
> with data users that are 2.8 kHz wide!
>
> If we don't speak out against this, at once, we are in jeopardy of losing
> our FCC-protected status, as the 300 baud limit protects narrowband users,
> like CW and RTTY operators, from harmful interference! And the low bands
> will be populated with machine-to-machine automated stations that do not
> properly identify themselves or listen bvefore transmiting! Ham radio as we
> love it and know it will be gone! WE MUST SPEAK OUT!
>
> Please spread the word- we MUST get hundreds of more AGAINST comments at
> the
> FCC if we want to stop this thing and enjoy CW in our retirement years! I
> have done the analysis, I have tried talking logic to the league. I have
> done much expert witnessing in my career on spectrum.
>
> THIS IS A PURE AND SIMPLE SPECTRUM GRAB BY THE ARRL AND WE MUST SPEAK OUT
> AGAINST THE ARRL AND AGAINST RM 11708 IF WE CARE ABOUT USING CW AND RTTY!
>
> Please spread the word, we must get public comments on file. This is not
> the
> time to sit back and do nothing! Educate yourself- See that the ARRL has
> put
> up a red herring, where they 'make up" some bogeyman wideband signal that
> could not exist practically, only to strip away the 300 baud limit that
> protects the narrowband CW and RTTY users.
>
> Please speak out, we must save our hobby if we care about enjoying the
> human
> to human modes of CW and RTTY.
>
> Ted
>
>  __._,_.___
>    Reply via web post<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DFWcontest/conversations/messages/4538;_ylc=X3oDMTJxdjllMGhqBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzc2MTA5Mzg2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MzEwOARtc2dJZAM0NTM4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTM5OTA0MDY3Nw--?act=reply&messageNum=4538>
> •  Reply to sender
> <n5tm at katytx.net?subject=RE%3A%20%5BDFWcontest%5D%20Please%20forward%20this%20far%20and%20wide%2C%20its%20important%20if%20you%20care%20about%20CW%20%20and%20RTTY>
> •  Reply to group
> <DFWcontest at yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5BDFWcontest%5D%20Please%20forward%20this%20far%20and%20wide%2C%20its%20important%20if%20you%20care%20about%20CW%20%20and%20RTTY>
> • Start a New Topic<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DFWcontest/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMHR2cjloBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzc2MTA5Mzg2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MzEwOARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzEzOTkwNDA2Nzc->
> • Messages in this topic<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DFWcontest/conversations/topics/4537;_ylc=X3oDMTM1dTJudHJ2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzc2MTA5Mzg2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MzEwOARtc2dJZAM0NTM4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTM5OTA0MDY3NwR0cGNJZAM0NTM3>(2)
> ------------------------------
>  Visit Your Group<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DFWcontest/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmczZxNTM4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzc2MTA5Mzg2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MzEwOARzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEzOTkwNDA2Nzc->
>
>
>  [image: Yahoo! Groups]<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMnExNGplBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzc2MTA5Mzg2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MzEwOARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM5OTA0MDY3Nw-->
> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
> Unsubscribe <DFWcontest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>• Terms
> of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>
>    .
>
>  __,_._,___
>