ARRL - Interactive

I don't recall wearing a sign saying: 'vent spleen here'. Please: if you are mad at someone else, then contact them directly. Your comments have absolutely nothing to do with the one I said.

Have a happy day!

 

QUOTES FROM the results of FCC NPRM RM-10740, Wednesday November 24, 2004.


"4. Voluntary band planning allows amateur stations that desire to pursue different operating activities to pursue these activities by dividing or segmenting the amateur service spectrum. Voluntary band planning also allows the amateur service community the flexibility to 'reallocate' the amateur service spectrum among operating interests as new operating interests and technologies emerge or operating interests and technologies fall into disfavor."

"Discussion. As an initial matter, we note that one of the purposes of the amateur service is to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.[1] We believe that amateur radio operators using amateur service spectrum to develop new communications systems are using the service in a manner that is consistent with the basis and purpose of the amateur service. We also believe that our Rules should not be an impediment to amateur radio operator’s development of new or improved communication systems. In this regard, we note that the reason amateur radio operators currently may not transmit communications that combine image emission types and data emission types on HF frequency segments where data emissions are authorized is not a technical reason, but rather is because our Rules do not authorize stations to transmit both image and data emission types on any HF frequency segments.[2] We also note that amateur radio operators apparently have developed communication systems and technologies that transmit both image and data emission types, and that they are using these systems for communicating. For this reason, we are persuaded that our Rules are not in harmony with current emission and operating practices and that our Rules may be impeding amateur radio operators in advancing the radio art."

 

Post #13 of the same old stuff for those who did not see it the first twelve times.

Have you anything original to post Steve?

 

Discussion. As an initial matter, we note that one of the purposes of the amateur service is to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.[1] We believe that amateur radio operators using amateur service spectrum to develop new communications systems are using the service in a manner that is consistent with the basis and purpose of the amateur service. We also believe that our Rules should not be an impediment to amateur radio operator’s development of new or improved communication systems. In this regard, we note that the reason amateur radio operators currently may not transmit communications that combine image emission types and data emission types on HF frequency segments where data emissions are authorized is not a technical reason, but rather is because our Rules do not authorize stations to transmit both image and data emission types on any HF frequency segments.[2] We also note that amateur radio operators apparently have developed communication systems and technologies that transmit both image and data emission types, and that they are using these systems for communicating. For this reason, we are persuaded that our Rules are not in harmony with current emission and operating practices and that our Rules may be impeding amateur radio operators in advancing the radio art."

Everyone should note that this does NOT, I repeat *NOT* say that automatic (be they fully automatic or semi-automatic) robots should be allowed to mix on an unrestricted basis with other operational modes.

It does NOT, I repeat *NOT*, say that the amateur bands need to have bandwidth limitations applied to the signals being used on the bands nor does it say that allocation methods on the bands needs to be changed.

What it *DOES* say is "we note that the reason amateur radio operators currently may not transmit communications that combine image emission types and data emission types on HF frequency segments where data emissions are authorized is not a technical reason, but rather is because our Rules do not authorize stations to transmit both image and data emission types on any HF frequency segments." This is a *CONTENT* limitation only.

The problem can be fixed by a small change to the rules concerning *CONTENT*. It does not require a major upheaval in the ham bands based on *NO* objective data such as interference studies, spectrum efficiency studies, technical efficiency studies, but instead on a "seat-of-the-pants" recommendation of a small ad hoc committee exceeding the scope of their charter.

tim ab0wr