Then why do the dark-blue sections of the band plan say "All ACDS"? Doesn't that imply that ONLY remote-controlled stations are allowed? Maybe I'm reading this the wrong way. Apologies if (as usual) I misunderstood.
CW is allowed anywhere, anywhere including the phone bands. The problems will come when the usual cw occupants of the proposed ACDS segments get flattened by a deaf, dumb, and totally clueless slug that has to get his email and lights up a gateway on top of an existing QSO. You should know that cw signals, or any signals for that matter, are only there to block the gateway and since the frequency is published cw shouldn't operate there anyway. Winlink excuse # 101, 102, 103 for crushing your QSO, and more that I can't think of right off hand. Also one of those excuses is a direct quote from the Winlink sysadmin. Try asking the arrl for help when it happens to you, on second thought maybe not.
Even if the Technician license granted all the privileges of General then the incentive to upgrade would still remain because there is (at least in theory) an incentive to get to Extra for the privileges granted there. This is far from granting everything that General offers, it's some added voice and digital modes on three bands. These are bands that the Technician was already tested over in order to get their license (at least in theory) and adding a privileges on mode that they were also tested on. If someone wants to make the argument that someone holding a Technician license is unprepared for the privileges gained in this band plan then I can be convinced to agree. So, what's the solution then? If they are unprepared for these additional privileges then they've been unprepared for the privileges they already have. How can we fix this? The FCC has stated numerous times a reluctance to add or remove privileges to any existing license class. That tells me that the solution is to create a new license class that replaces Technician. I'd propose those with Technician now could keep their license, and continue to renew it, but they'd have to pass a more comprehensive Element 2 exam to upgrade to this new license class. Or, they can take the Element 3 (which should also be more comprehensive) to get to General, or another different class of license that replaces General. Make the new Element 2 and 3 exams 40, 50, or even 60 questions each. If we do this then whatever license class replaces Technician should have some phone and image privileges on 15, 40, and 80 meters to satisfy what the ARRL is trying to do in allowing a bigger "taste" of phone privileges on HF to encourage upgrading. So long as there remains significant gains in privileges from these new license classes to Extra then there will be an incentive to upgrade.
That does seem to be the trend based on the numbers I've seen on Hamdata.com. The numbers of people with General are dropping while there's gains in numbers of those with Extra. If this continues then at some point there will be more people with Extra than General. It will be interesting to see what the "steady state" of this trend will be. Can we say the same for anyone else that has stagnated in one class for "too long"? What of someone with Advanced, General, or Technician for just as long? Give them a date they have to move up or move out? It's not that I disagree, it's only I have questions on how this argument would be made to the FCC to make this a rule. I thought the goal was to create an incentive to upgrade. Eclectic Boogaloo?
That is correct. So, when the computer digital folks completely take over the lower parts of the bands, the logical move is for the CW folks to start encroaching into the SSB parts of the bands. Ya, that'll work well. I'm just suggesting that we mark the bottom 25 Khz for CW only right now and we'll have CW folks a bit longer in the future. But that's assuming we want to keep CW ops in the ham bands in the future. It has become quite clear now that's not a correct assumption any more. It's been my experience that the digital folks don't even listen before they transmit. And when I fire up my amp on CW, I get told I'm maliciously interfering with them even though I'm outside their band pass (if they have it adjusted correctly) by a factor of at least 4X. The digital folks aren't even turning up their volumes any more because it doesn't make sense to listen through a speaker any more. Can you imagine how the SSB folks are going to respond when they start listening to CW come through their band pass? (Do you see a pattern yet?) It used to be a goal. I don't think that's the goal anymore. It's looking like the goal is to completely push CW ops out of the ham bands since it's more efficient to send computer to computer emails... in support of 97.1(a) (...providing emergency communications) After all, we're a "service", not a "hobby", right? And, yes, sure, give Advanced and General classes a date they expire, too. Why not? Novice classes used to expire after one year/non renewable. Why not Advanced and General? Why keep it complicated? (that's actually a rhetorical question... I know why they're keeping it complicated.) You either only want VHF/UHF (Technician) or HF (Extra) to push emergency communications from computer to computer. Why have anything else? The difference between Extra, Advanced and General is already minuscule as it stands today. Where's the incentive? A few extra Khz for SSB? Sure... When are we all going to wake up and realize we live in a different time now? (Another rhetorical question... I know exactly what's happening and why... can't talk about it in these forums, it's against the rules.) CW "5NN TU" contests are in the way. And this is how you get rid of something that's "in the way" and has been around since the founding of amateur radio. Simple as that. (My apologies. I really wish I could be more specific.) It's still hard to say right now how much longer I'll remain active on the ham bands before I wake up one day and realize it's just another thing on God's green earth that just doesn't really matter any more.
You are so right about that, The ARRL must now hate CW just by allowing wideband Automatic Controlled Digital Stations in the Old CW slow speed area on 40. There are always a few newbies trying their hand at CW there and old timers getting their straight keys out and working with them, I guess this will probably end because of the frustration. Sad Probably just as bad is allowing these modes in the narrow WARC Bands Due to their relatively small bandwidth of 100 kHz or less, there is a gentlemen's agreement that the WARC bands should be utilized efficiently, that's why contest are not allowed (wide modes/ especially automated unattended type links, violates the total Spirit of this agreement).
Well, just what other "findings" would you expect from an arrl hand picked committee? The "arrl" front end loaded this concept after their RM's were stopped. Its about the ACDS stations and designated band segments,...................... not the Techs. Some of the comments (read Tech privileges) in this thread is exactly what the arrl wants to be said.
Huh? Who do you expect to be on an ARRL committee? Members of the Bass Masters Club or the first five people to pass by on the sidewalk?
Gee, I don't know who should be on an arrl committee tasked with 3 specific items, 1. recommending how voice-bandwidth data modes should be introduced on the ham bands, 2. Internet Interconnection and Section 97.219, and 3. Automatic Operation and Section 97.221, but here's a great idea let's put the father of WInlink, Vic Poor, W5SMM, in charge as the chairman and toss in a few of his accomplices. Just for show to give the impression of a totally impartial committee let's add a few digital modes stake holders; Peter Martinez, G3PLX, Google if you don't know who he is, was on the committee (Resigned 2/28/03) along with Skip Teller, KH6TY, who produced a dissenting opinion to the final report This is worth a read, and also the fact that an unamed committee member(s) threatened legal action if the report was issued. The final report only benefited Winlink, wonder how that happened? While we're in here mucking about with digital stuff let's also exceed our mandate and produce a band plan in our (Winlink's) favor and at the same time we can kill Packet auto forwarding to be replaced by our most superior marine email delivery system, we need the room. The ink was barely dry on the final committee report before a few of the same Winlink affiliated committee members, including their network administrator, went on to corrupt the ARESCOM Committee, who's stated purpose was to "Develop a proposal for an improved national emergency digital communications network capable of moving served agency and public traffic anywhere in the country within an hour --- under autonomous ARRL control." With the once again WInlink stacked committee the outcome was preordained, just adopt WInlink---easy out and no meetings required. The total corruption of the arrl to serve the WInlink agenda goes back much further than these two instances, try 1992 and the first digital committee where Vic Poor was the Recording Secretary, subsequently advanced to a chairman position. Should have put Bass Masters members in charge, it would have been a better outcome.
I've read the document once, and need to read again more closely but, -I've never had any bias against Winlink, other than the previous lack of transparency of the traffic. However, this plan just outrageously carves unnecessarily large sections for it on every band. I have specifically listened for their traffic this spring and summer and find it pretty sparse with present allocation. I see absolutely no justification for the larger segment sizes proposed. -I have supported giving Technicians allocations on lower bands in view of the severe low propagation in this solar cycle. I have have also supported giving them a slice of all the various modes so they can have experience and motivation (i.e. fun) as incentive. So, I"m glad to see that included in the proposal. b.
