[VHFcontesting] VUAC

[Jim Worsham]

I guess I don't understand why you feel that we don't represent the
VHF/UHF/Microwave community.  I certainly feel that I do.  The point I was
trying to make is that our role is advisory.  We don't set the agenda or
make the decisions/policy. As far as the spread spectrum thing is concerned,
I will admit I don't know much about it.

73
Jim, W4KXY

-----Original Message-----
From: vhfcontesting-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:vhfcontesting-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Alex
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 7:55 AM
To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] VUAC

Jim Worsham wrote:

> As an advisory committee we do not set our own agenda.  We can propose 
>topics for study but in the end the Programs and Services Committee 
>sets the agenda and makes the decisions.

In other words, you (the committee) are not representing the VHF/UHF
community, but are representing the ARRL. There is a big difference. I guess
that's where part of the confusion comes from. The committee is just there
to study whatever is mandated by the ARRL. The ARRL decides what is
important to them with regard to VHF/UHF operations, not the community.

Thanks for that clarification. It's just another ARRL special interest
committee, just like the Digital Advisory Committee. Of course one may
wonder of what importance such a committee is for the a group they do not
represent (the VHF/UHF Community). So far it seems that the committee is
only brought to life to give the appearance of representation and is given a
non-issue to study. One on which there is already consensus.

>If there is something you think we should be studying we would 
>certainly like to hear from you and we can propose it to the Programs 
>and Services Committee but you might also want to consider taking it 
>directly to that committee.

There are far more important things to study then what goes on on 144.200.
Take for instance the impact of Spread Spectrum modes on traditional VHF
operations. Now that's and issue with some beef to it. Of course, the ARRL
has clearly a stated position on this issue (proven by a recently obtained
experimental license to operate in 300kHz wide Spread Spectrum mode right
next door to weak signal portion on 6m, their FCC filings, and their support
of the development of a modem that uses the same modulation scheme as BPL(!)
on VHF), all this with almost total disregard to weak signal operations on
VHF. 

>Another question that was asked was who is on the VUAC.  The following 
>is a list of all the members.  I didn't include any contact info 
>because of the open nature of this forum but I am sure if you want to 
>talk to your representative you can find a way.

See, and this is confusing again. They are not "your" representative, they
are ARRL representatives. They have no constituents (they are not elected),
and their agenda is not set by "you", the VHF/UHF enthousiast. They are more
like sales representatives.

It's disappointing that the ARRL didn't choose to take nominations from the
VHF/UHF community for the seats on this committee.

73,
--Alex KR1ST
http://www.kr1st.com

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting