If they QRM'd those CW stations then they deserved the citation. There is no excuse for that behavior.
--... ...-- de WAØSTX John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Chester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:36 PM Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Subbands and FCC > > > > >From: "Jeff Edmonson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > why did Riley, et crew give > >OO notices to three hams for "operating phone in the CW sub-band of 160m"? > > > >Dennis Clouter(sp?) was one of them, and the three are listed in the > >archives > >of the "FCC Enforcement" logs. > > > > There are no government-mandated subbands on 160. There is a "band plan" > published by ARRL. The story I heard was that the stations in Houston were > firing up on top of existing cw QSO's in the "dx window" and either ignoring > calls that the frequency was in use, or actually saying over the air that > they didn't care if they QRM'ed the cw stations. Riley sent them a letter > saying they could be cited for deliberate interference, and not following > good amateur practice, since it appeared that they knew the cw stations were > there. > > This incident instigated a petition to the FCC to create a cw subband on > 160. So far, the FCC has not acted on it, and at the FCC forum at Dayton, > they left the impression that they would not be inclined to adopt the > proposal. > > Don K4KYV > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > _______________________________________________ > AMRadio mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
