Five days ago (6/18), Eric declared this off topic and asked the discussion to end. This was his post.
Folks - please take this thread off list immediately. In general, please do notdiscuss amateur policy issues here. That is a deep rabbit hole that can and will generate voluminous OT traffic. End of Thread. Eric List Moderator elecraft.com https://www.mail-archive.com/elecraft%40mailman.qth.net/msg170708.html wunder K6WRU On Jun 23, 2014, at 7:59 AM, Sandy Blaize <[email protected]> wrote: > think my comments on RM-11708 went thru. > > This is very serious to ANYONE who wants to retain "narrow band" digital > communications like JT9 and PSK31 and RTTY!! Also to CW Dxers and > contesters! If this passes, it will change amateur radio as we have known it > forever. There will be no "weak signal" operation possible with the onset of > digital noise in the analog receiver. > > IF THIS IS REALLY A "NECESSARY" DIGITAL MODE, it belongs somewhere in a > segment of the phone band sub-band and NOT THE narrow band digital and CW > band. > > I think this is REALLY a "back door" attempt to silence "Continuous wave" > telegraphy......really! > > I hope the old timers and the "newbies" who are still hanging on to CW will > write comments against this "sneaky move" ARRL is backing to satisfy mostly > the "Yacht crowd" who want to access the internet via HF radio! It will > violate the "300 baud or less" rule of keeping wideband digital OUT of the > narrow band "digital" space! > > Don't rely on the FCC to "nix" this RM as there isn't any "real" engineers at > the FCC anymore, just lawyers, "bean counters" and political hacks > running things there now. Proof of this is higher authorities bypassing FCC > and making rules that stand now in the new 60 meter band. > > Please add your voices to the protest against RM-11708! > > 73, > > Sandy W5TVW > > > On 6/23/2014 8:13 AM, [email protected] wrote: >> Perhaps others like me are unaware of this proposed FCC rule that would allow >> digital communication modes 2.8 kHz in width to be used robotically in the >> CW and data >> sub-bands without regard to interference. ARRL supports this and evidently >> initiated it. >> http://www.arrl.org/files/media/News/RM-11708%20Briefing%20Memo.pdf >> However, information on websites savecw.com and saveRTTY.com indicates >> it would cause grave interference with CW and narrow digital modes. >> There is evidently a short window of opportunity to submit comments to the >> FCC >> about this, and there are instructions on the noted websites for how to do >> this >> online within just a few minutes. >> >> If you google for RM-11708 you can read some well-reasoned comments >> submitted by other hams to the FCC electronic docket. >> I can't evaluate the claims being made about ARRL's motivation but it seems >> important not to allow such bad interference, so I submitted a comment. >> Julie KT4JR >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[email protected] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to [email protected] > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[email protected] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [email protected] -- Walter Underwood [email protected] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [email protected]
