The FCC could make part 97 more understandable if they adopted regulation by
bandwidth but that effort died. EZPal on 14.233-14.237 MHz is OK as there
are very few restrictions on image transmission.
73,
John
KD6OZH
- Original Message -
From: John
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
, AA6YQ
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on
Behalf Of John B. Stephensen
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 2:43 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why would anyone
The FCC could make part 97 more
] Re: Why would anyone
Had the ARRL's regulation by bandwidth proposal been accepted, the range
of frequencies available to automatic stations without busy frequency
detectors would have significantly increased, which was why so many amateurs
opposed it, which was why the ARRL abandoned
, October 30, 2009 4:30 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why would anyone
I just reread it and it seems to be more restrictive than the current
rules.
The current rules establish segments for automatic forwarding between
digital stations on all HF bands
- Original Message -
From: Dave AA6YQ
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 08:54 UTC
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Why would anyone
Your assertion below that current rules allow an automatic station to operate
on any frequency
.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on
Behalf Of John B. Stephensen
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:47 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why would anyone
I meant any
According to the terms of our licenses, each of us is supposed to have read and
understood part 97 of the FCC rules and regulations. Here's a summary of the
upper limits for RTTY/data emissions in 97.305 and 97.307 as I read it:
1.8-24.99 MHz: 300 baud with 1 kHz shift or facsimile with 500 Hz
