I agree that there were positive aspects to the ARRL's "regulation by
bandwidth" proposal. However, expanding the range of frequencies available
to unattended stations without including a requirement that they verify
their frequency to be clear before transmitting was a showstopper, in my
opinion.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]on
Behalf Of John B. Stephensen
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why would anyone
I meant any frequency where RTTY/data is allowed. The objection that people
had then seems to be that a wider bandwidth was allowed for semi-automatic
stations in the proposed 3 kHz bandwidth segments.
However, the proposed rules would have pushed the wideband semi-automatic
stations up in frequency and out of the areas where people were complaining
of interference to narrowband RTTY/data QSOs. They also allowed RTTY/data
QSOs to occur anywhere in the band which would seem to provide even more
flexibility to avoid interference. I liked this feature of the proposal.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave AA6YQ
To: [email protected]
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 is incorrect. See §97.221
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/news/part97/c.html#221
With a bandwidth of 500 hz or less, such stations can can only operate
wherever RTTY or data emissions are authorized.
With a bandwidth of more than 500 hz, such stations are limited to the
sub-bands enumerated in §97.221(b).
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]on
Behalf Of John B. Stephensen
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 4:30 AM
To: [email protected]
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 and these were eliminated below 28 MHz in
the ARRL proposal. The current rules allow for an automatic station that
only responds to queries by a manually-controlled station to operate on
any
frequency and that was unchanged in the ARRL proposal.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave AA6YQ
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 07:48 UTC
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] 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 it.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
