--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Hatzakis Jr MD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For what it is worth, this is what I typed in my response to this > proceeding. We should be focusing on finding ways to encourage more use of > this spectrum, lest we lose it. With the elimination in the licensing > requirement for CW, how crowded do we really think the bottom ends of the > band will really be in 50 years with CW operators? > > > > I oppose this proceeding and a step backward in innovation for > > ham radio. > > I strongly oppose limiting digital automatic transmission on > > the HF bands. > > I strongly suggest leaving the bands as they are unchanged for > > the following reason: > > 1.) With the number of hams declining, and a decline in the use > > of CW modes, there really is no substantial risk of overcrowding > > in this spectrum.
Well Pactor III is already crowding out the other modes and they want more space. They tried that already. Remember RM-11306? > > 2.) The automatic PACTOR II & III modes are an invaluable service > > to nautical hams in urgent situations when no other communication > > may be available, i.e., cell phone or available HF phone operators. > > This is an innovative method of safety of operation for nautical > > operators. So you are saying that sailors are more important than other hams? There is a service called Sailmail that they can pay for that does the same exact thing? Why do you have to put this garbage on the ham bands? It is because they are cheap and want their free email. I guess Yahoo and Google have really made us cheapskates lately. > > 3.) If limitations in the use of automatic PACTOR use were really > > necessary, why not just band segregate their usage rather than > > completely ban them. Ok we give Pactor III it's own spectrum then we have to give packet, psk31, psk125, RTTY, CW, SSB, SSTV....etc all their own spectrum. Now would this not kill innovation faster than limiting bandwidth of pactor III? Besides this RM does not ban pactor III as you seem to think it does. It only limits the Speed Level to SL1 and SL2. > > 4.) The hobby of ham radio would be better suited to increase > > the number of available operating modes to encourage further > > hams use of HF spectrum. > See #3 above about giving each mode it's own slice of the amateur radio spectrum. Greg KC7GNM
