I am fairly naïve to this situation, but have been a ham for the last 35 years. I wonder, which narrow band modes do you refer to for use in a dire emergency?
CW? How many CW ops do you think there will be left in 50 years, or even 10 years? And, if you are 500 miles out at sea, and need to make a contact or log your position, no cell phone, and with crappy band conditions, how effective do you really think voice or RTTY will be? I can tell you, useless. Of course, one can make the point that sailors can use commercial sailmail systems, but what a great way to encourage sailors to become hams. How many hams do we think will be left in 50 years? Less or more than today? A friend of mine re-entered the hobby when he voyaged across the pacific and used Winlink and HF voice along with other modes just to stay in touch. He had no other communication modes available. Maybe there is a better way than to abolish higher bandwidth digital in the HF spectrum. How about further band segment segregation? My $0.02 Michael _____ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of W2XJ Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 12:44 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Will You Let FCC Kill Digital Radio Technology? Fine, I agree lets kill them all. At the end of the day only narrow band modes will work in a dire emergency. expeditionradio wrote: > --- In digitalradio@ <mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com, W2XJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>I agree. anytime a wideband mode is interfering with narrower band >>modes, there must be an investigation. > > > You will need to start with the widest modes... > how about 80 meters AM interfering with SSB. > What about vice-versa? > Should there be an "investigation" when a narrower mode > interferes with a wider mode? > > The petition is not about interference. > It is about killing ALL digital data modes wider than 1.5kHz. > Manual or auto. End of story. > > Bonnie KQ6XA > > > >
