Voice does burn up a lot of band width . Then their are the ones that do not remember part 97. 3. 13 Some forget run with minimum power than necessary. To much power and over modulated Microphone does tear up a lot of room on the band. Bleed over. TNX For your input, 73' 47 CFR § 97.313 - Transmitter power standards. | CFR | US Law | LII ... § 97.313 Transmitter power standards. (a) An amateur station must use the minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired communications. (b) No station may transmit with a transmitter power exceeding 1.5 kW PEP . (c) No station may transmit with a transmitter power output exceeding 200 W PEP: (1) On the 10.10-10.15 MHz segment;
Single Sideband was once the Devil Incarnate. Now, apparently, it is FT8 that we have to treat as such.
I disagree with the "good work" comment. This has become a annual hurricane ritual and ongoing joke. And the joke being their own claim to be “The National Association for Amateur Radio.” Why boast this if if you cannot work with the FCC to get such commonsense, minor adjustments to Amateur Radio regulations completed. Nothing bad happens when they are granted and Pactor 4 is used on HF. Yet these temporary waivers apparently aren’t considered proof that Pactor 4 (and other advanced data communications technologies) should be made permanent in US Amateur Radio regulations. The backstory on Pactor 4 and how we got stuck with these inane rules is worth reading as suggested by K0IDT. Mandatory reading before supporting the ARRL in my opinion.
"...seems there is a blurred line between a Ham radio Op and a computer Geek in some cases, setting on the fence so do speak, and can not decide if they want to be a Radio Ham or a computer Geek, Which is ok with me as long as it does not get out of hand where we wake up one day and wonder where all of the Ham's have gone." My sentiments exactly. Pheel
I agree. The FCC issuing waivers on this with such regularity and without complaint should be a clue that the rule isn't all that important to enforce. Reminds me of someone pointing out that NASA would ask the FCC for waivers on the rule that licensed Amateurs had to be General or higher to operate a radio station in space. At the time the FCC also required proof of Morse code proficiency to get a General or higher license, and NASA wanted to have astronauts on Amateur radio to talk to schoolchildren. The FCC eventually changed the rule on needing more than Technician to operate an Amateur radio station in orbit. Then the FCC changed the rule on needing to prove Morse code proficiency for any Amateur radio license. Maybe NASA astronauts were just too lazy and ignorant to upgrade their license. The FCC should have higher standards among licensed operators than to waive or change such rules.
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, if so I apologize in advance. The Winlink crew has used the "no complaints" under waivers as justification for eliminating the baud rate restriction, but here's the kicker - little to no use of the desired Pactor 4 leads to no complaints of interference. Most hams couldn't identify P4 anyway, decoding is difficult, so what little use there is during waivers flies under the radar. The baud rate restriction is useless today and needs to go, but a corresponding enforceable band plan needs to be written into Part 97 to contain the wide band digi and protect narrow bandwidth modes.
The theory was always if you wanted to see change in a regulatory rule, apply for a STA to make your case. And if no one complains while you have that STA then in theory you have establish precedence for permanant change. I hear what you are saying though. And I agree that there needs to be two parts to the symbol rate removal. And even with that there is never really any enforcement anyway. It seems to me in order of resolution on this whole matter; Emcomm at the QST level needs to downplayed as mentioned above. Open Source communications should always be encouraged and likely take center stage over Emcomm. There should be a regular column in QST promoting these concepts and growing the makerspace and open source ham radio communities as well as pointing out such projects. This has been the core of ham radio since day one. Open Source is not always possible, however when regulatory issues are being proposed to accommodate such, then naturally the motives behind that are scrutinized so transparency on who, and what that is imperative. Automated and unattended stations on HF where spectrum is crowded should likely be curtailed when a proprietary mode is used. If you are a ARRL member you need to be very vocal that they be VERY adamantly trying to modernize the regulations with detailed accounts of their attempts.
The part where you want to make sure "... the motives behind that are scrutinized..." Alongside your other point: ".. you need to be very vocal that they be VERY adamantly trying to modernize the regulations with detailed accounts of their attempts." In this case, the troubled history of Winlink is more provocative than helpful in the public Comment arena of an FCC regulatory proceeding. The commercial service that can be achieved among Winlink users does not belong in the Amateur Service. They are using the hobbyist spectrum to avoid the cost of appropriate services. Those who push for changes in Part 97 on this topic often seek to legitimize what has been an unenforced gray area that has gone against the practices and technical standards the majority prefers. Thus, you're correct in noting how a series of STAs can form a basis for a permanent Rules change, but it is a specious strategy that sidesteps the risk of public scrutiny, and in this case, to express Opposition.
If the argument is people should be using something other than Amateur radio when a different radio service can perform the same function then 99.99% of all current Amateur radio traffic does not belong on Amateur radio. It's likely my estimate is too low. What does Amateur radio offer that other radio services cannot? One thing that comes to mind is Amateur radio allows people to practice Morse code on the air. I've seen plenty of people that would prefer Amateur radio be left to only Morse code, they'd be especially pleased to see people learning that one and only mode on the air to build up their confidence and sending speed. Of course many would be quite outraged about this, they would demand that we should instead require people to demonstrate they know Morse code to 20 WPM before being permitted to transmit. Of course Winlink can be used on some other radio service, but then so can nearly everything else we do on Amateur radio. I find it a bit rich that the ARRL gets away with broadcasting inside the Amateur radio bands. They can pretend this is a public service provided to the Amateur radio community but it appears to the opponents that this is on-air advertising for their club, directed at not just other licensed Amateurs (like we'd justify a one-way transmission like a "CQ" call) but is directed at the general public. These stations should be moved to a broadcast band. Because broadcast stations are required to use different modulation than is allowed on Amateur radio then those receiving might have to modify their receiving process a bit, such as switching to AM instead of SSB. Maybe the ARRL could switch to operating on a maritime band, which might require some small changes in their content and process, but unlikely enough to fail in reaching their intended goals. Maybe people would not be so upset with ARRL broadcasts if they were more open and specific on their goals. It's been a while since I followed this so, wasn't the plan to regulate by bandwidth than bit rate? That sounds great to me, it incentivizes putting more into the space and time occupied, meaning more space and time available for more people. It's like creating more spectrum for Amateur radio. If the argument is a need to update Amateur radio regulations to better match the needs of today then I can certainly comment on the sad state of "incentive licensing". Where's the incentives again? What is being incentivized? What means do we have to measure success or failure of the goals? What are the goals? Maybe we need to rethink Amateur radio priorities. Borrow ideas from Amatuer radio in other nations, and commercial licensing in the USA. We license based on the equipment, RF power, and modes, not the spectrum. We'll borrow a name from Canada and call this new license "Basic". Limit power to something like 200 watts, much like Novice. We can put in other restrictions, perhaps no same band transmitters, crossband is Okay. No operating on experimental bands. No Morse code on-air until passing a Morse code proficiency exam, or upgrade to Extra. Canada does their Morse code testing a bit different as for them there's two paths to HF, Morse code (for Basic+Morse), or a written test (for Advanced or Basic+Honors). I've made proposals like this before but each one has changes depending on what I believe more important at the time. I'd like to borrow quite a bit from commercial radio for Amateur radio testing. The existing written test for Technician would become part one for Basic. This covers Emergency procedures, how to report an emergency, and how to take a report from someone declaring an emergency then respond. This among other standards of on air operation with focus on voice, RTTY, image, and video. The old General exam would be part two for Basic and would focus on safety of operation, technical skills, maintenance, logging, and running a net. Extra would be largely unchanged. In commercial radio one must be an operator before a maintainer so the operator test is light on technical details but heavy on operational skill. The maintainer is then a better maintainer for knowing operations, and as a maintainer is a better operator. Amateur radio is built on every operator being a maintainer, so they should have a passing score on both to get a license. I see plenty to fix in Amateur radio. It seems my ideas aren't all that popular on QRZ. In a way I'm fine with that. Given the average age of this crowd compared to mine, I'll be here to petition the FCC while the majority of my opposition would be spinning in thir graves, or so set with senility that they only petition among themselves and the community living staff for control over the common area TV each evening. One last thing I thought of is ARRL appears to have concern of a loss of government funded terrestrial radio stations used for timekeeping and navigation being lost to NavStar and other GPS systems. Perhaps the ARRL could offer some kind of public private agreement to share some of the cost and manpower needed for these stations. Maybe even get in the maritime radio business. The first A in ARRL isn't for "Amateur" but "American". They started as a system to relay messages around America, and they can do that on a number of radio services. If the people are trained in this well then it should be a standard taught to Amateurs and those in cooperative radio services. Amateur radio is apparently supposed to compete with these services. I say they should cooperate whenever they can. Maybe keep cross service traffic to paper forms that get filled out and passed along off-air, or maybe we amend some rules to allow cross service communications on air beyond formally declaring an emergency. The training for an emergency needs to happen before the emergency is declared. These beacons for navigation and timing can carry ARRL bulletins, weather reports, and transmissions useful to augment and provide redundancy to GPS/GNSS systems. I know that's a long list of things we could bring to the ARRL and FCC. I can predict the typical response. The response will be to get this written up in form for the FCC to "drop in" to the current regulations so their work is minimized. To get make a cause for support among the community. Then use this support and rewritten regulations as a basis for a petition. That's what I am asking for here. I want support. I want help writing the petition. But instead I get more heat than light, and a realization that those most opposed are those with the least chance to be able to oppose me in a few years. I can just wait them out. Then those that remain can get meaningful rules put into effect. The FCC appears ready to make changes but not if that only means a flood of complaints by old curmudgeons that would rather Amateur radio "die with dignity" than become useful in contemporary times. They can die how they like, Amateur radio will live on, likely much better without them.
Most EmComm by ARES or AUXCOM is pretty much done with Winlink. With some Winlink modes, yes it drags (its slow) I.e. ARDOP and as a result you can lose connection with the other station during the transmission, which sucks, cause you then need to start over...particularly problematic if propagation sucks and it’s a real emergency transmission for health and welfare of the public. Pactor 3 is the best we got which is a bit more robust than ARDOP and VARA, and in some cases P4 is authorized as long as you kiss the booty of the Feds and become a MARS or SHARES station with their additional rules for those whose intent is to help them, the public and Emergency Management! So, my opinion, for EMCOMM, when there are state or regional Executive Orders in place due to emergency, the order(s) themselves should authorize P4 automatically for all REAL support agencies (ARES, AUCCOM, State and federal Agencies). For crying out loud it’s about trying to help people in a disaster. When the Executive Order expires, so does the use of P4. You shouldn’t have to kiss big FCC booty to get permission, extra rules, paperwork, site inspection...blah blah blah, to help save lives.
I agree. Their transparency has been atrocious over the years. I am willing to bet that's so they look good when they succeed and are covered by a veil when they lose.
If you get a waiver, and you never use the waiver, what was the point of the waiver? How many reports of "ham data" saving lives were there in the Hurricane Ian disaster?
So was the AMARS as they imposed encryption standards that even we who design and control military weapon systems found ridiculous. But agree if they are participating in regular US Army exercises as amateur radio is now a part of the NDIA line items. In case of emergencies or war, Hams are under the DoD.
