Topband: Why no CW segment?

[Arne Gjerning]

Tom

Well stated.  From the simple thought comes the eloquence of design.

73 de Arne N7KA

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji at contesting.com>
To: "Arne Gjerning" <gjerning at flash.net>; "W0UCE" <W0UCE at nc.rr.com>;
<wrt at dslextreme.com>; <topband at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: Why no CW segment?


>
> > Instead of a 160M band plan, how about a 160M CW segment
> and Phone segment
> > similar to other amateur bands.
>
> Actually we need a narrow mode segment,  NOT a CW segment or
> a DX segment. We need a narrow mode segment for new modes
> like digital modes, and for people who like all forms of CW
> operation. The future of amateur radio is in reducing
> bandwidth, and nothing about the present rules encourages
> that.
>
> Most people don't realize how wide SSB rigs really are. Look
> at any test, and you see IM3 is sometime only about -30dB
> PEP, and now we have more and more tetrode amplifiers that
> are in that same area!!
>
> I have some stuff about TX bandwidth at:
>
> http://www.w8ji.com/transmitter_splatter.htm
>
> This isn't a problem on other bands because of a large
> buffer area between narrow mode and wide mode areas. On 160,
> they butt right up together and so it is more problematic.
> SSB to SSB is less of a problem because receivers are wider
> and that raises noise floor at several times over CW noise
> floor.
>
> There are very good engineering reasons why narrow modes
> (not just CW) are protected from wider modes. I think the
> non-technical nature of the FCC and ARRL management is what
> feeds the increase in poor decisions.
>
> As for the problem continuing, there haven't been changes at
> the ARRL. The people truly at the top have been at the top
> for many years. The ARRL is no different than any other
> political organization alleged to represent people. It works
> the same way.
>
> Common sense, long term future, good planning and
> engineering, and the opinions of the majority never drives
> the opinions of the people who actually make decisions in
> any political organization.
>
> All we can do is express our dislike, but it better be at
> the top. I suggest people contact Bill Cross at the FCC and
> Dave Sumner at the ARRL. I'd bet that's where the decisions
> are really made.
>
> I'd make it a point that this is not a CW or DX issue, it is
> a wide band vs narrow band issue. Either they need to get
> some realistic pressure on manufacturers to conform to part
> 97 (see  http://www.w8ji.com/fcc_97_307.htm   )
>
> or we need to keep wide and narrow modes separated.
>
> 73 Tom
>
>