ARRL and AM. minute #64, July 19-20, 2002

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by W0TDH, Aug 15, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
  1. K2PG

    K2PG Ham Member QRZ Page

    The recent ARRL proposal reeks of Docket 20777, the 1976 proposal which sought to "deregulate" amateur radio by defining subbands by bandwidth, rather than by emission mode. The narrowband subbands proposed under Docket 20777 remained the same as the CW/RTTY subbands then in existence, so nobody really gained any priveliges. This proceeding would have "deregulated" certain modes, such as DSBSC and AM, out of the 160-15 meter bands. It was vehemently opposed and the FCC never adopted it. In dealing with the FCC, one must watch for unintended consequences. The League's proposal may give us some relief from current overregulation of our radio service. But it may spawn some new, originally unintended restrictions.

    Even if such "heritage" modes as AM and wide-shift RTTY are protected under the League's proposal, this proposal still calls for the micromanagement of amateur radio that has been the hallmark of FCC regulation in this country for decades, in that it continues to call for the division of our bands into subbands.

    A far better solution would be to petition the FCC to simply delete most of Sections 97.305, 97.307, and 97.309 from the Rules, substituting the liberal provisions of Part 5. Part 5 governs the Experimental Radio Service, in which I also hold a license. Eliminating 97.305 eliminates the outdated emission subbands. This would eliminate the de facto "American-free" zones on our DX bands and on 40 meters, where hams in the rest of the world can and do operate voice while Americans do not dare to. As a result, Americans do not use those frequencies and they go to waste in this country (although the 40 meter frequencies in question are used by CW and data stations during the day. The CW activity slides down the band at night, as the frequencies fill up with foreign SSB stations.) The United States is one of the few countries, if not the ONLY remaining country, still prescribing such subbands. Canada abolished subbands several years ago. Eliminating the other two sections eliminates the need to seek Special Temporary Authorization if one wants to try a new emission mode. It would also eliminate the asinine restrictions on data communications. While teenage kids may send text, voice, and images digitally over the Internet, we hams are limited to sending 300 baud text on HF radio, with the FCC even dictating the type of code that we may use! This is a disgrace, an embarrassment, and it totally contradicts Section 97.1, which calls for amateur radio providing a pool of trained radio operators who can advance the communications art. 300 baud ASCII and slow-speed Baudot do nothing of the sort! The British are experimenting with OFDM for digitally transmitting voice in a 3-6 kHz channel. Quality approaches that of FM broadcast radio! OFDM was invented in New Jersey by Bell Laboratories. Yet, the current straitjacket of FCC regulations precludes us from using that mode here. While the ARRL proposal may provide some relief, the elimination of the offending sections of Part 97 would be much better. Suppose someone develops a new emission mode that does not conform to whichever limits are ultimately imposed under any rule changes that result from the League's proposal? Then we are "back to square one", hobbled once again by outdated rules. True deregulation renders Part 97 future proof.

    Of course, there is nothing wrong with our "heritage" modes, either. I work and enjoy both CW and AM. The beauty of CW is its simplicity and the way in which it transcends language barriers. Even though AM is old fashioned, there is an AM subculture on our bands that is highly technically oriented. Some of these AM'ers are actually using cutting edge technology! An example is WA1QIX, who has designed and built several transmitters using Class E solid state PA sections. These transmitters achieve over 90% efficiency! The broadcast industry is just beginning to market such equipment. Unlike the "plug and play" crowd that purchases "plastic radios" to see how many QSL cards they can collect, these AM'ers work on their own equipment. They build their own equipment. And they help one another. This is far more in keeping with the spirit of traditional amateur radio.

    We need to get rid of subbands, period. I am thoroughly sick and tired of being a second-class citizen relative to my Canadian and European colleagues.
     
  2. KA1OGM

    KA1OGM Ham Member QRZ Page

    I get the distinct impression that Bob Hare expected no slightest opposition here.  I get the impression that he thought anything and everything he might feel like saying in this thread would be agreed with and accepted with no problem.  The weight of Bob's technical reputation is something that I will never take issue with, but the things I have taken issue with in this thread have yet to be addressed by him.  

    Yes, I'm sure that there are lots of places that Bob Hare can escape to, where everyone will be polite and never take any strong or emotional opposition to anything he may choose to utter.  But this is the world outside the "Ivory Tower", and I'm only one person...

    There have been other opposing viewpoints posted in this thread by people that have chosen to expound upon politely and calmly, and with a sense of much more gentlemanly exposition than myself.  But if Bob leaves in a snit at this point, I, along with many others, would only have to assume that anything that has been said in opposition is just simply too overwhelmingly on the mark for Bob to feel he could ever rebut successfully.

    What about it, Bob?  Are you really going to go back to the safety of the Ivory Tower because you think EVERYBODY here is full of "petty nonsense"?   I mean, really, you get one guy on your case and now you're going to run away with your tail between your legs?  How utterly and completely out of touch that would be.

    I understand that you've had your disagreements with things ARRL has done in the past.  I understand that you're not some wayward intellectual cretin with stupid ideas.  And I understand what a pain in the neck it is to suddenly find yourself being railed against because of something you posted on an internet bulletin board or forum.  

    Where's your backbone?  Where's the defense of your position?  I expected a worthy opponent in a public forum, and what did I get?  Fluff?  

    Jeff Barnard
    KA1OGM
     
  3. W8FAX

    W8FAX Ham Member QRZ Page

    I would like to ask a couple of questions. WHY does the ARRL have to constantly "dabble" in regulating or arbitrarily change Ham Radio ?? They have obviously do NOT listen to what members they have. They send out these polls and then do the opposite of what the results say they should do. They "seem" to try to be sneaky about some of the things they do, or try to pull off. For what?? Shouldn't they be concentrating on trying to get some of the existing hams to join up, rather than trying to make it a "walk in" for new hams?? Since the ARRL does NOT have the majority of licensed hams as members, is it possible they are worried about the survival of themselves, and place their own existance ABOVE the survival of ham radio? The use of stupid words like "re-farming" do not bring support from hams, most of whom are of above average intelligence. I am an ARRL member, but they way things have been going the last few years, I do not think I can conyinue to support a group who wants to put our hobby under the "micromanagement" of the government. For what??? I think the instant and vigorous protest from the ARRL when questioned about this latest attempted move, only proves the arrogance they have, and that they did NOT expect to get caught with the ol' fingers in the jar....ONCE AGAIN.  Al/W8FAX
     
  4. VA3ES

    VA3ES Ham Member QRZ Page

    As a Canadian, I have “No dog in this fight”.  But as a long-time AM’er and one who is also concerned with the future of Amateur radio, I thought I’d chime in with  my 3.2 cents (Canadian).

    The Amateur Radio Service is a noble and beneficial service with much history and accomplishment.  Whenever changes are made to it’s structure or it’s technical requirements and qualifications, care must be taken to ensure that the intentions and purpose of the service are not adversely affected. Such changes, when poorly implemented, or thoughtlessly imposed can often lead to the original aims and objectives of the Service to disappear.

    Today, there is much emphasis in our society for “progressive” change. Old ideas and ways are swept aside in an effort to make room for more modern state-of-the-art technologies and methods. This clamour for the “new” is unabated and sometimes deafening.  Though swept aside, and rendered silent, the old technologies and methods still maintain useful application, both as practical techniques and as important links to the heritage of the service.  

    AM is outdated, and not spectrum efficient.” , shouts the masses!  This contention is based on the evidence on the numbers of users who have abandoned this mode for SSB, as well as the advances in more "efficient" voice technologies, in the last forty years.  But, as Jeff, KA1OGM has very astutely stated,
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">“…Spectrum &quot;efficiency&quot; is completely antithetical to any and all of the actual activity that takes place on the ham bands, day in and day out.  The rhetoric of &quot;spectrum efficiency&quot; is the basic argument AGAINST the amateur service, and anyone who doesn't take a firm stand on this ploy has got their head in the sand.”[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    Too many bureaucrats, both professional and amateur,  seem to miss one crucial aspect about Amateur Radio – the criteria of “spectrum efficiency” and it’s associated issues are actual stumbling blocks to the true purpose of Amateur Radio.   As Amateurs, we aren’t concerned with cost effectiveness,  channel-loading, or users-per-kHz, but rather we should be concerned with the pursuit of the art and science of radio, without prejudice or reservation.

    Since these criteria, (spectrum efficiency, cost-effectiveness, etc.) do not apply for the Amateur Radio Service; they can be dispensed with as an argument.  What is applicable in Amateur Service, is technique and the basic understanding of radio technology.


    The very perceptive K2PG states:

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">&quot;Even though AM is old fashioned, there is an AM subculture on our bands that is highly technically oriented. Some of these AM'ers are actually using cutting edge technology! An example is WA1QIX, who has designed and built several transmitters using Class E solid state PA sections. These transmitters achieve over 90% efficiency! The broadcast industry is just beginning to market such equipment. Unlike the &quot;plug and play&quot; crowd that purchases &quot;plastic radios&quot; to see how many QSL cards they can collect, these AM'ers work on their own equipment. They build their own equipment. And they help one another. This is far more in keeping with the spirit of traditional amateur radio.”[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    This technocratic fetish that drives this bureaucratic zeal to regulate every technical aspect of Amateur Radio, will kill it in the end.  AM'ers are among the last bastion of true radio amateurs; let's give them the breathing room they need to continue their efforts.

    Ed, VA3ES
     
  5. N7CPC

    N7CPC Ham Member QRZ Page

    Isn't Bob's name Ed? Or has Ed forgot Bob's name ain't Ed? And who the devil is Bob anyhoo?

    If your going to flame an intersting poster, at least get his name right. Or do you write for the Post&copy;?

    73 [​IMG]
     
  6. KA1OGM

    KA1OGM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Oops!  There goes another brain cell!  It's ED Hare, not BOB Hare...  hmmm, is it Hare?  Oh well, either way he's no fun, he fell right over.

    Jeff Barnard
    KA1OGM
     
  7. AE4MR

    AE4MR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Most of the posts here seem to not understand exactly what is being proposed by the ARRL.

    It is not about the old beloved modes such as CW and AM.  They are not mentioned or threaten.  They will be able to continue to live on hopefully forever.

    What it IS about is new modes in the CW/digital portions of the band.  Such modes as Clover 2000 and Pactor 3.  It is refered to here as the subbands.  The subband for 20 meters, as an example, is between 14.0 MHz and 14.150 MHz.  It is has nothing to do with the phone sections of the bands.

    Now if you have some objection to using new modes such Clover 2000 or Pactor 3 WITHOUT eliminating ANY old modes then flame away.  I for one am listening, if we can get back to the topic.

    Dave Armbrust - AE4MR
    ARRL Section Manager
    West Central Floida
     
  8. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    dave, ae4mr...let's take this one at a time ...
    &quot;most of the posts here seem to not understand exactly what is being proposed by the arrl.&quot;

    i think dave they are able to understand exactly what they read in qst and on the arrl web site, you seem to have been able to obtain all this detailed information you relate....why can't arrl members do the same.

    &quot;the subband for 20 meters, as an example,is between 14.0 mhz and 14.150 mhz.&quot;
    dave, did you forget about the &quot;subband&quot; between 14.150 and 14.350

    this is a clear case of not spelling out what the objective is to the membership ....you can see it in the business world where the folks at the top know what is going on or what the objective is....but fail to properly relate it to the folks at the bottom .....if you want every one in the organization to buy into your plan.....make sure you give them sufficient, and complete,  information.
    dan k3xr
     
  9. W8FAX

    W8FAX Ham Member QRZ Page

    Mr. Direktor, ae4mr, if that is true then WHY didnt the ARRL say so in proposal 64[​IMG] (#64.....&quot;AT THE NEXT PRACTICAL OPPORTUNITY, THE ARRL SHALL PETITION THE FCC TO REVISE PART 97 TO REGULATE SUBBANDS BY SIGNAL BANDWITH INSTEAD OF BY MODE) I see no referance to digital here. ALL modes except CW operate in sub bands on HF. An earlier post said no one operates phone in sub bands. WHERE ELSE do they operate then??Check it out. If it is so clear, how come you guys have to keep telling us &quot;what we said is not what we meant.....trust us&quot; Sure......... [​IMG]
     
  10. AE4MR

    AE4MR Ham Member QRZ Page

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Mr. Direktor, ae4mr, if that is true then WHY didnt the ARRL say so in proposal [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    What proposal?  Clearly there is no proposal at this point.

    It simply states:
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...at the next practical opportunity the ARRL shall petition the FCC to revise Part 97 to regulate subbands by signal bandwidth instead of by mode.
    [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    You are reading minutes from the ARRL board meeting.  While I am not a director and was not present at the board meeting I am confident that everyone there understood what the &quot;subbands&quot; are in this context.

    When the petition is filed I am confident that it will spell this out in detail including specific frequencies by band.  Also before the FCC decided to do this it will invite ALL amateurs to comment on the proposal.  But until then do not read too much into these short 25 words that were extracted from the board meeting.  These 25 words will be replaced by hundreds of words in order to make it clearly understood.

    Also just because the ARRL asks the FCC to change something is no guarentee that it will happen.  It must also have the support of all amateurs as well.

    Dave Armbrust - AE4MR
    ARRL Section Manager
    West Central Floida
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: QSLcardEU-1