You still don't get it it's not me you need to be
talking to go post
this on 6 meter user groups
websites .... and see if they agree with you
.
--- John Champa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]com>
wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> The segment 50.5 - 51 is too small.
Remember we
> need something 200 kHz wide
> to achieve the data
rate objective for the test per
> Shannon's Rule. To get
> to 240
kbps with OFDM modulation we need 200 kHz of
> bandwidth.
>
> Again, it is just a TEST and with a temporary
> EXPERIMENTAL
ticket. This is
> NOT a permanent band change. If the FCC does
allows
> for continued use,
> however, where in the 6M band do
you or SMIRK
> suggest we set up
> housekeeping?
>
>
John - K8OCL
>
>
> >From: bruce mallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]com>
>
>Reply-To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>
>To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>
>Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Don't ignore
> proposals/local HF net
successes
> >Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> >
> >Rick....
> >
> >If someone had
proposed 50.5-51.00 ( NOT 50.300 -
> >54.000 ) for SS 99% of us could
have lived with
> that.
> >That part of the band is very
lightly used except
> for
> >some psk digi radios that are
already there.
> >
> >No one I know of is opposed to digital
anything
> unless
> >it is going to interfere with all other
modes. The
> >ARRL did at best a very poor job of informing
band
> >users and if your not a league member and don't get
>
>qst you were not informed at all .... and I agree
> >SMIRK which
should have done more seems to have let
> us
> >down.
>
>
> >What I see here is a lack of concern of the "
>
>EXPERIMENTER HAMS " in what what they seem
> important
>
>and indifferent to what it would do to all other
> users
>
>..... get out of our way you LEGACY modes ...... we
> >are what
this band needs ......
> >
> >Myself I have bought a new
TS-2000 and have psk-31
> on
> >my older ft-100 that i can use
over a wide range of
> >bands so I'm not a SSB ELITE type ham and
open to
> new
> >modes on any band as long as that mode
doesn't
> >displace modes already there .... displacing other
>
>hams does nothing to build interest in this hobby.
> >
>
>As for 220 MHz we lost 220-222 because the ARRL
> failed
>
>again to act and with a CLASS E CB proposed they
> >fought that
plan which was modded to allowing UPS
> to
> >have the band
anyway. I was one of only 5 users
> within
> >100 miles of
Tampa on that band in 1974 and was
> >running stack KLM 9 elm beams
at 50 foot here in
> >Tampabay and getting to Orlando and
Brooksville
> every
> >night . I was quite active on 220 before
i got
> married
> >and had to get rid of it back in 1980
HOWEVER it is
> a
> >wonderful band and SS should get very good
results
> as
> >good as 2 meters with much less interference.
A
> GOOD
> >CHOICE ON THE PART OF THE FCC !
> >Unlike
6 or 2 Meters the 220 mhz band is almost
> unused
> >nation
wide but remember it is A GREAT BAND FOR
> TROPO
> >and it DOES
get E-Skip! just like 2 does.
> >
> >In the future any wide
changes to 6 or 2 needs to
> be
> >well thought out with input
from the USERS.
> >More proposals like 50.3-54 and 144.3 to 148
are
> >doomed to failure since they impact all ready
>
existing
> >modes and set band plans and do nothing to
increase
> >usage of these bands.
> >
>
>Bruce
> >
> >
>
>__________________________________________________
>
>Do You Yahoo!?
> >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best
spam
> protection around
> >http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do
You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
