[SEDXC] Bandwidth

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

On 9/14/2016 11:41 AM, Paul Newberry wrote:
 > Come election time, our current SE Director will hopefully be gone....

Replaced by the Director who was at the helm hen ARRL *proposed*
*RM-11708* and failed to prevent the first step in this debacle?

One is as bad as the other.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 9/14/2016 11:41 AM, Paul Newberry wrote:
> Come election time, our current SE Director will hopefully be gone....
> pn
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Tom W8JI
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 10:15 AM
> To: sedxc at contesting.com ; Joe Subich, W4TV
> Subject: Re: [SEDXC] Bandwidth
>
> Any of us who work HF should get involved in this.  This could be a
> complete
> disaster for HF operation.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists at subich.com>
> To: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>; <sedxc at contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 8:56 AM
> Subject: Re: Bandwidth
>
>
>>
>>> You have to be kidding me! The ARRL actually did something like this
>>> and the FCC is on board for something this stupid?
>>
>> Read WT 16-239 where FCC proposes to eliminate the symbol rate as
>> originally proposed by ARRL in RM-11708 and indicates that it will
>> not apply a bandwidth limitation.  Add to that a separate proposal
>> by ARRL (at the instigation of the current Southeastern Director)
>> to allow Technician licensees to use digital modes on HF.
>>
>> You have all of the ingredients for the scenario I have outlined.
>>
>> Comments on WT 16-239 are open until the first of October ... any
>> amateur who values CW and traditional narrow bandwidth digital
>> modes should make themselves aware of the situation and file
>> comments in opposition to this dangerous development.  My own
>> comments will be filed at the end of this month:
>>
>> 1) eliminate the designations "RTTY/DATA" and "VOICE/IMAGE" in
>>    §97.305 (c)
>>
>> 2) Replace §97.307 (f) (3) with §97.307 (f) (4) and modify §97.305 (f)
>>    (4) to specify a maximum bandwidth of 400 Hz.
>>
>> 3) Modify §97.307 (f) (2) to specify a maximum bandwidth of 2.8 KHz
>>    Except that 6K0A3A (traditional double sideband AM) shall also be
>>    permitted.
>>
>> 4) Modify §97.307 (f) (3) to specify a maximum bandwidth of 20 KHz
>>    and replace §97.307 (f) (2) with §97.307 (f) (3) at 50 - 224 MHz
>>
>> 5) Add a requirement that all ACDS stations implement and use effective
>>    "channel busy" detectors capable of preventing transmission if any
>>    signal greater than -135 dBm is present within a 3.5 KHz channel
>>    (maximum bandwidth plus a 25% "guard band").
>>
>> 6) Add a requirement that any emission not intended for reception by
>>    ear (e.g., CW, AM, SSB, FM) include a visual means (audio spectrum
>>    or "waterfall") for determining that the frequency is in use *and*
>>    that display must be used.
>>
>> 7) require an Amateur Extra class license to be the control operator
>>    of an ACDS.
>>
>> 8) require that the data randomization code and compression tables of
>>    all data protocols be public.
>>
>>
>> 73,
>>
>>    ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>> On 9/14/2016 6:55 AM, Tom W8JI wrote:
>>>> Why bother at all?  ARRL have made the Amateur Radio Parity Act moot
>>>> by their support for unlimited bandwidth data signals in the "CW and
>>>> RTTY" bands as well as their proposals that would allow Technician
>>>> class licensees to run data modes including automated data stations
>>>> (WINLINK).
>>>>
>>>> The rules as proposed by the FCC in response to ARRL's RM-11708
>>>> (WT 16-239) will eliminate any limit on symbol rates with no limit
>>>> on occupied bandwidth.  The traditional "CW/RTTY" sub-bands could
>>>> be overrun with 2.8 KHz (STANAG/MS-110 and PACTOR 4), or wider
>>>> (D-STAR, System Fusion) data/file transfers in a matter of months.
>>>
>>>
>>> You have to be kidding me! The ARRL actually did something like this and
>>> the FCC is on board for something this stupid?
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SEDXC mailing list
> SEDXC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/sedxc
>