[TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"

Tue May 27 17:46:49 EDT 2003

I understand the implications of this to our hobby, and I understand the
frustration of those involved, but what makes this an issue for this list?
I read about this on the general lists, and on QRZ, also hear about it on
the air.  I don't see what makes it on topic for the Ten Tec list.  I would
think it is rather fully covered elsewhere.

Keith Lodahl

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Ron Notarius WN3VAW
> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 3:46 PM
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"
>
>
> Just FYI:
>
> According to the ARRL Web page's FCC Enforcement Letters posted earlier
> today (http://www.arrl.org/news/enforcement_logs/2003/0517.html?nc=1), on
> May 6th, the FCC withdrew one of the Advisory Notices issued in the
> "Enhanced SSB" matter... specifically to W4NSG.  The posted letter simply
> stated that the Advisory Notice "was issued to you in error."  And Riley
> apologized for it's being issued.
>
> No further information available, though one wonders why this was
> withdrawn
> (ie what was the error?), and if anyone else who received one of the
> Advisory Notices also got a withdrawl letter.
>
> 73, ron wn3vaw
>
> "I would like to do 3000 more" -- Sportscaster Guy Junker on his 3000th
> "Sportsbeat" show.
> The next night, after his 3001st show, for reasons left unclear,
> Fox Sports
> Net Pittsburgh declined to renew his contract & fired him.
> (Source:  Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Saturday, 17 May 2003)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Christensen, Esq." <w9ac at arrl.net>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 8:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"
>
>
> Note that I, W9AC, am one of four culprits named in the article.
> Absolutely
> fascinating considering the fact that I have not operated on SSB
> of any kind
> since October, 2002.   I am primarily a CW operator and spend less than 1%
> of my time on SSB.   The fact that I authored some of the audio
> enhancement
> mods may have contributed to the issuance of the official Notice.
>  So, where
> is due-diligence on the part of the FCC when and where it's needed?
>
> I am an advocate of the mode (one band, on one frequency), but not the
> manner in which the FCC is arbitrarily issuing Advisory Notices
> based on one
> man's personal opinion rather than on a Notice based on a legal memorandum
> of law.  I have challenged the FCC to produce any case law, particularly
> appeals to that effect.
>
> The "Notices" were issued, because the FCC realizes that a citation based
> solely on a violation of "good operating practice" as prescribed under
> 97.307 et. seq., will never, ever, pass Constitutional scrutiny as it will
> not meet the two-prong procedural due-process test.
>
> That said, his time and for that matter, tax-payer dollars are
> better spent
> on enforcing clear violations of the rules (e.g., 75M obscenities, 2M
> repeaters that do not identify, etc.), rather than arbitrary and
> capricious
> personal "opinions" on how to operate a station.   Note that no specific
> reference to a rule is applied against the operating practice in question.
> Disseminating a letter that tells us to "read the rules" is a bit
> silly when
> no convincing violation is occurring.
>
> In the future, you will see action taken to the League, for the League is
> the most appropriate place in which to add this activity to the existing
> ARRL band plan....the same band plan the FCC uses to judge other
> mode-related operating practices.  AMI successfully added a calling
> frequency to the band plan and soon enough a new calling frequency will be
> added.  The logic is axiomatic: if AM transmission falls within "good
> operating practice," then taking an AM signal (from which we derive SSB),
> cutting it in half, and eliminating the carrier, must also represent "good
> operating practice.  The argument I often hear is "Because that's
> the way it
> is," or  "because that's the history of AM and SSB."  But if we
> examine the
> issue for what it truly is, a matter of bandwidth, then the FCC's logic
> simply fails.
>
> Quite honestly, the FCC does not care about the root issue.  Recall, that
> the FCC's Bill Cross, W3TN has repeatedly stood before a group of
> us and may
> I paraphrase: "The FCC will no longer rule the amateur radio service by
> fiat."  The FCC is reaching out to add, alter, and delete rules.  The FCC
> currently places weighted emphasis on the League's band plan as the
> appropriate place in which to reference all operating modes....and I
> maintain this is where reconciliation is required.  Codifying bandwidth
> rules will only hurt the amateur radio service.
>
> So, what does any of this have to do with Ten Tec?  Well, if
> you're an owner
> of a Jupiter, Pegasus, or Orion and your SSB transmit menu indicates
> anything more than 2.4 kHz audio bandwidth, guess what?  That Advisory
> Notice could have had your name on it instead of mine.
>
> 73,
>
> -Paul, W9AC
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman at spacetech.com>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 20:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"
>
>
> > Excellent !
> >
> > 73 de Gary, AA2IZ
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "W2AGN" <w2agn at w2agn.net>
> > To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 3:55 PM
> > Subject: [TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"
> >
> >
> > > The ARRL Web site notes that several "widebanders," a wide SSB
> > > emission that has bothered HF-Pack operations on 17 meters, have been
> > > put on notice by the FCC's Riley Hollingsworth:
> > >
> > > " 'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely Inconsiderate,' FCC Says (Apr
> > > 17, 2003) -- The FCC has sent advisory notices to four enthusiasts of
> > > what's become known as 'enhanced SSB'--the practice of engineering
> > > transmitted single-sideband audio to ..."
> > > Complete article at
> > > http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/04/17/102/?nc=1
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > +-++-++-++-++-+   John L. Sielke
> > > |W||2||A||G||N|        http://www.w2agn.net [UPDATED]
> > > +-++-++-++-++-+    Ex-K3HLU,TF2WKT,W7JEF,W4MPC,N4JS
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>