[RTTY] RM-11708

[Jim Sharp]

I disagree Bill,

I hear and am interfered daily by unattended auto stations on multiple
bands.
Of course everyone tries to stay away from their frequencies much like SSTV
on 14230,
but they are a nuisance and they are appearing on more and more frequencies.

73, Jim - W5AP

On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Peter Laws <plaws0 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Lee - N2LEE via RTTY
> <rtty at contesting.com> wrote:
> > Right now all data modes on HF are limited by 300 baud symbol rate.
>
> 1200 bauds on the 10-m band.
>
>
> > Also, by removing the 300 baud symbol rate the US would be brought
> inline with every other
> > country. For example Canada and Mexico use the same HF frequencies we do
> but are not
> > limited by symbol rate. So if this were and issue it would already be a
> problem. Which it isn’t.
>
>
> If all your friends jumped off the bridge, would you jump too?  Dumb
> argument.  If you are going to argue in favor of something, argue on
> its merits, not that "everyone else is doing it".
>
> 750k licensed hams in the US.  What is Canada?  1/10 of that?  Mexico
> is probably, what?  1/100?  So just because "they already do it"
> doesn't mean much.
>
> Now, that said, regulation by bandwidth makes much more sense.
>
> Unfortunately, that will make the HF bands useless because of the
> unattended automatic stations.  Those are the real problem.  Fix that,
> first then do what you want.
>
> I haven't read the latest version - is the ARRL still trying to
> "harmonize" all of HF with the odd-ball 60-meter band?  And where are
> we in the FCC process anyway?
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>