RM-11828: FCC invites comments on ARRL petition to give Technicians HF phone privileges.

Discussion in 'Amplitude Modulation - AM Fans' started by K4KYV, Mar 15, 2019.

ad: Subscribe
  1. KM1H

    KM1H Ham Member QRZ Page


    I dont know about your neck of the woods but car shows, auctions, and cruise nights are more popular than ever out here. Young people are quite visible. Plus I keep meeting new locals with a vehicle; last Sunday a 71 Chevelle with a well built 454 (675 hp on the dyno) and frame off restoration rumbled by on this dead end road while I was walking and we had a nice chat. I regularly see new "toys" (cars and trucks from the teens to 70's) driving around town, in driveways, garages, etc and we are only about 12K population.

    The disturbing thing is that the full service machine shops are shutting down or consolidated, since the modern engine work has pretty much gone away but the upside is that the often abandoned/auctioned equipment is dirt cheap and small speciality shops are doing well often as a home business with low overhead and much lower costs.

    Im no longer building Ford Flathead and Y Block engines (getting too old) but still do some custom wiring from antique show car to rat rod.

    Carl
     
  2. K4KYV

    K4KYV Subscriber QRZ Page

  3. K5UJ

    K5UJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's nice but unless I misunderstood it, it calls for digital xmissions to be formatted with protocols in the public domain. I'm not as concerned with that as I am being able to ID a ham station that's transmitting digital information with commonly available equipment, namely any old analog shortwave receiver with a BFO. I think they should be required to automatically run a CW ID at the end of each transmission. It would be simple to implement nowadays, and it would be unintrusive if sent at 30 wpm.

    Another one or two petitions address this nonsense with folks being able to get call signs for U.S. districts they don't reside in.
     
  4. AC0OB

    AC0OB Subscriber QRZ Page

    In Paragraph 13 the author says:

    "Because the protocols defined in § 97.309(a)(4) are outdated and no longer widely used, simplifying the language would remove ambiguity about what constitutes “publicly documented technical characteristics” by requiring any protocol to be freely decodedable.

    Proposed language simplification: § 97.309 RTTY and data emission codes.
    (a) Where authorized by §§97.305(c) and 97.307(f) of the part, an amateur station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using the following specified digital codes:
    (1) The 5-unit, start-stop, International Telegraph Alphabet No. 2, code defined in ITU–T Recommendation F.1, Division C (commonly known as “Baudot”).
    (2) The 7-unit code specified in ITU–R Recommendations M.476–5 and M.625–3 (commonly known as “AMTOR”).
    (3) The 7-unit, International Alphabet No. 5, code defined in IT–-T Recommendation T.50 (commonly known as “ASCII”).
    (4) An amateur station transmitting a RTTY or data emission using a digital code specified in this paragraph may use any technique whose technical characteristics have been documented publicly, and the protocol used can be be monitored, in it’s entirety, by 3rd parties, with freely available open source software, for the purpose of facilitating communications."


    These words are stricken through, "CLOVER, G-TOR, or PacTOR," to show they should be deleted.

    Some are saying (4) means that CLOVER, G-TOR, or PacTOR would be deleted as acceptable digital modes.

    The way I read this, that is not the case as some say. The author is simply removing some language, not modes, and attempting to clarify by substituting:

    "...may use any technique whose technical characteristics have been documented publicly, and the protocol used can be be monitored, in it’s entirety, by 3rd parties, with freely available open source software, for the purpose of facilitating communications."

    Freely available to me means: publicly available (i.e., in the public domain) to upload and or reproduce.

    So some of these criticisms seem to be unfounded.


    Pheel
     
  5. K5UJ

    K5UJ Ham Member QRZ Page

  6. AB2RA

    AB2RA Ham Member QRZ Page

  7. AC0OB

    AC0OB Subscriber QRZ Page

    My apologies, I should have stated that these comments apply only to RM-11831


    Pheel
     
  8. K4KYV

    K4KYV Subscriber QRZ Page

  9. K5UJ

    K5UJ Ham Member QRZ Page

  10. K4KYV

    K4KYV Subscriber QRZ Page

    The deadline for filing comments was Friday, the 12th of April. 1079 filings posted so far. Let's see how many come in "Date Received" after that date. Some petitions and NPRMs still get comments years after the deadline and the FCC posts them on ECFS.
     

Share This Page