ARRL Board Adopts Modified Novice Band Refarming Plan

I answered mine.


I'm ok with the end result although I am one of those few that hang out in the 40m Novice section. Not because of speed, I would just like to help someone learn code. I've had a few CW QSO's there that were very satisfying. Nice and slow, well spaced code. EVERY time that I look the call up I find that the "Tech-plus" that I thought that I was talking to is a fellow Extra. Probably just trying to help someone too. As an Extra, I don't get quite as caught up in the band plan stink as some people do. Not that I think that they are wrong. I'm just saying that I never think about it. I have no need to.</P>


73</P>


Mike,
WM5LL

 

ok, I will agree with you that the lower portion of the 75M band is crowded, but I think the problem is not one of not enough bandwidth, but as you also state, just one of intentional qrm by people who dont want to move up the band, as there is bandwidth up to 4.0Mhz, and it isnt crowded all the way up. every night all the time. There is room, people just settle in on a frequency and then stake a claim, and dont use good amateur practice. I will also agree with you that there is lots of unused bandwidth in the cw portion, which may be true or not, but I do not hear much cw work there from my qth. I would consider your argument from the point of view that the cw portion is underused instead of the point of view that the phone band is overused.
Maybe more of the phone users should just use cw, (just kidding).
kc6ufe
thanks for the comments and considerations, I appreciate a good honest difference of opinion.

 

I was gonna join the arrl but didnt because they raised the dues and I think the price is too high.

 

why not just pass the test and upgrade, its about as easy as tying your shoe.

 

OK, if you really want a peek at the books, go to http://www.kr4uq.org/ARRL_Tax_Returns/arrl_tax_returns.html to see the unedited returns. 73

 

The ARRL action does away with the identified Novice spectrum for the very reasons you cite and allows those currently holding that class license to continue to exercise the privledges granted by their license over a slightly larger piece of the band. In the mean time, other licensees get a little more spectrum to use for SSB. Nobody's really hurt and General, Advanced and Extra licensees gain some.

 

If it's proposed to re-allocate part(s) of a band should not the proper term be re-allocate or revise? We aren't raising hogs on the air are we?